Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

tabatha

(18,795 posts)
3. That is the real reason this particular tax cut was set up as it was in the first place,
Reply to RC (Reply #1)
Fri Dec 23, 2011, 11:50 AM
Dec 2011

Proof ?

The Payroll Tax Cut opens a door between the General Fund and the totally separately taxed fund for RC Dec 2011 #1
That is the real reason this particular tax cut was set up as it was in the first place, tabatha Dec 2011 #3
Why the money shuffle? grantcart Dec 2011 #9
How is "no cap" more progressive in this economy? phleshdef Dec 2011 #18
Thats an empty "slippery slope" argument. The "open door" is a product of ideological imagination. phleshdef Dec 2011 #16
Just to be clear, you're siding with Michelle Bachmann on this? MilesColtrane Dec 2011 #19
You are seeing what you want to see. RC Dec 2011 #21
There is already a maximum yearly payout for SocSec eridani Dec 2011 #24
Which is funny because creeksneakers2 Dec 2011 #29
No, it wouldn't. The rich would still get benefits eridani Dec 2011 #32
That's not possible creeksneakers2 Dec 2011 #28
Who exactly is behind this conspiracy? creeksneakers2 Dec 2011 #27
The Neocons are. They want to make the general fund a sacred cow that cannot do social spending. joshcryer Dec 2011 #37
Thank you. They want to be able to say that the Government has to fund SS turning it into a sabrina 1 Dec 2011 #31
So the "general fund" should be untouchable? joshcryer Dec 2011 #38
The general fund has been giving iou's to the social security fund for years. shraby Dec 2011 #43
Why cut payroll taxes, then? PETRUS Dec 2011 #2
I think it is because it helps businesses. tabatha Dec 2011 #4
That's a reasonable supposition. PETRUS Dec 2011 #6
Yes, there are better options. But they would not be passed by the House. tabatha Dec 2011 #8
Tabatha, what you seem to fail to realize is that the coupling of GF and SS is the real problem ThomWV Dec 2011 #5
"The problem is that by following our current practice of using Social Security System income" tabatha Dec 2011 #7
The trust fund represents *future obligations* ("DEBT") to US taxpayers--there is no Romulox Dec 2011 #10
Social Security Trust Fund - the facts tabatha Dec 2011 #11
None of that contradicts anything I posted. The "Trust Fund Surplus" must be collected in NEW TAXES Romulox Dec 2011 #12
The Trust Fund Surplus has been accumulating since the days of Reagan. tabatha Dec 2011 #14
Nope. Every penny has been spent. SS is 100% Pay-As-You-Go. nt Romulox Dec 2011 #15
Wrong. The trust fund was built up starting in the 80s to PREPAY boomer retirement eridani Dec 2011 #25
Every red cent has been "lent" to the US government, and spent. It's sad, but true. nt Romulox Dec 2011 #26
In the form of T-bills. If those are imaginary, then so are the ones that China-- eridani Dec 2011 #33
No. They aren't "T-Bills" (they're "special issues".) But that's not the point. Romulox Dec 2011 #39
Future taxpayers are the third party creeksneakers2 Dec 2011 #30
Nonsense. SS is supposed to be INTERGENERATIONALLY SUSTAINABLE. Future taxpayers Romulox Dec 2011 #40
I don't get what you mean creeksneakers2 Dec 2011 #42
Social Security is an entitlement program by virtue of the fact that participants are entitled to it lumberjack_jeff Dec 2011 #17
You don't have a right to receive any specific amount of SS. So that logic is off. nt Romulox Dec 2011 #41
I'm sorry but that argument doesn't really add up at all. phleshdef Dec 2011 #20
..and after the economy recovers... kentuck Dec 2011 #22
Let everything revert, including all the Bush tax cuts. Or completely redo the entire code. phleshdef Dec 2011 #23
Indeed, and that will happen, people don't get this. joshcryer Dec 2011 #35
SS has been part of the unified budget since 1969. joshcryer Dec 2011 #34
I understand the fear of changing the assets from 'SS' to the General Fund. freshwest Dec 2011 #13
I don't understand it unless we're to believe the "general fund" is untouchable. joshcryer Dec 2011 #36
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Factcheck - on Tax Cut, S...»Reply #3