The Conservative Agenda: Tax Cuts for the Rich, Cuts for Social Security

[Joanne98]

The House passed a bill last Thursday extending the Bush-era tax cuts for those making less than $250,000 but allowing them to expire for those making over that amount. Conservatives were apoplectic, and they vow to defeat any similar measure in the Senate. With the aid of the filibuster they’ll probably succeed. And by doing so, they’ll be accomplishing two things.

One is showing how utterly uninterested they are in the American public’s preferences on tax issues. Poll after poll shows that only a small minority—about a third—want to keep the tax cuts for the rich while everybody else wants to let them expire. The latest evidence comes from a Roper/AP-CNBC poll. Thirty-four percent in that poll wanted to keep the tax cuts for everyone including the rich, while 64 percent wanted either to just keep the tax cuts with incomes less than $250,000 (50 percent) or end them for everyone (14 percent).

Conservatives’ devotion to tax cuts for the rich also shows their lack of seriousness about tackling the deficit problem. Ending the Bush tax cuts for the rich would save $700 billion over 10 years but those savings are obviously far less important to them than their ideological antitax, pro-wealthy agenda.

So what kind of actions do conservatives favor to rein in the deficit? Why, slashing social programs, of course. That’s why they’ve been giving a warm reception to the Bowles-Simpson deficit commission’s proposals to cut Social Security. The public feels differently, however. In the same poll the public vigorously opposed the proposal to raise the Social Security retirement age to 69. Just 28 percent favored this idea while 64 percent opposed it.

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2010/12/snapshot120610.html


Charts at link

[leveymg]

1. And, Obama and the Senate Bluedogs are about to continue the legacy.

Is this what they had planned, all along?

[NorthCarolina]

2. And the kicker is, they will blame failure on the "Socialist" and "Liberal" Obama. nt

[KansDem]

3. The Congress is a joke.

Sometimes I wonder why don't we just disband Congress and let each of the Fortune 500 companies send a "representative" to the new "CorpoCongress." It would save a lot of trouble pretending we have a Congress that represents Americans...

[OHdem10]

4. Could it be that the Republicans see that big Tax Cut as the best

way to cut the Deficit. $700 Billion not going to
the Government means Government must cut programs
to make up for missing dollars. Small example:
Seniors do not receive a cost of Living Adjustment
for Social Security for 2 years now and more cut
in the future.

Starting in the Reagan Administration, Tax Cuts
have been priority. Why? Sure it makes their
wealthy constituents happy. BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY
it cuts the amount of money the Government receives.
Therefore, little by little they cut Government Programs.
The strategy is to keep lowering the amount of money
the Government takes in. One morning we wake up
and the Government has no money for those entitlement
programs. They have to end them. This is called
Starving the Beast. Ask P. Peterson or G.Norquist.

Republicans look at the world and see one thing.
Democrats look at the world and see another.

Republicans see tax cuts as cutting the deficit.
And getting rid of "entitlement programs".

I find it interesting this never is the topic
of conversation on Talk Shows.