E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSRep. Joe Wilson, R-S.C., joins msnbc to explain why he feels raising taxes should not be among the options considered by the supercommittee to slash $1.2 trillion from the deficit.
The Associated Press
By Andrew Taylor
If the deficit-cutting supercommittee fails, Congress will face a tough choice. Lawmakers can allow payroll tax cuts and jobless aid for millions to expire or they extend them and increase the nation's $15 trillion debt by at least $160 billion.
President Barack Obama and Democrats on the deficit panel want to use the committee's product to carry their jobs agenda. That includes cutting in half the 6.2 percent Social Security payroll tax and extending jobless benefits for people who have been unemployed for more than six months.
Also caught up in what promises to be a chaotic legislative dash for the exits before the holidays next month is the need to pass legislation to prevent an almost 30 percent cut in Medicare payments to doctors who treat the elderly. Several popular tax breaks also expire at year's end.
A debt plan from the supercommittee, it was hoped, would have served as a sturdy vehicle, immune from Senate procedural rules requiring 60 votes to advance legislation to a final vote, to tow all of these expiring provisions into law. But if the panel fails, as appears likely with Wednesday's deadline nearing, a dysfunctional Congress will have to sort it all out.
There's no guarantee it all can get done, especially given the impact of those measures on the spiraling debt.
Instead of cutting the deficit with a tough, bipartisan budget deal, Congress could pivot to spending enormous sums on expiring big-ticket policies.
If lawmakers rebel against the cost, as is possible, they would bear responsibility for allowing policies such as the payroll tax cut, enacted a year ago to help prop up the economy, to lapse.
Last year's extensions of jobless benefits and first-ever cut in the payroll tax were accomplished with borrowed money.
The 2 percent payroll tax cut expiring in December gave 121 million families a tax cut averaging $934 last year at a total cost of about $120 billion, according to the Tax Policy Center.
Obama wants to cut the payroll tax by another percentage point for workers at a total cost of $179 billion and reduce the employer share of the tax in half as well for most companies, which carries a $69 billion price tag.
"The notion of imposing a new payroll tax on people after Jan. 1 in the midst of this recession on working families is totally counterproductive," said Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, the No. 2 Democrat in the Senate.
Letting extended jobless assistance expire would mean that more than 6 million people would lose benefits averaging $296 a week next year, with 1.8 million cut off within a month.
Economist say those jobless benefits — up to 99 weeks of them in high unemployment states — are among the most effective ways to stimulate the economy because unemployed people generally spend the money right away.
"We will have to address those issues," Durbin said.
Extending benefits to the long-term unemployed would cost almost $50 billion under Obama's plan. Preventing the Medicare payment cuts to doctors for an additional 18 months to two years would in all likelihood cost $26 billion to $32 billion more.
Lawmakers also had hoped to renew some tax breaks for business and prevent the alternative minimum tax from sticking more than 30 million taxpayers with higher tax bills. Those items could be addressed retroactively next year, but only increase the uncertainty among already nervous consumers and investors.
This time, Obama wants them to be paid for. But a move by Democrats to try to finance jobs measures with hundreds of billions of dollars in savings from drawing down troops in Iraq and Afghanistan has gotten a cold shoulder from top Republicans.
"I've made it pretty clear that those savings that are coming to us as a result of the wind-down of the war in Iraq and the war in Afghanistan should be banked, should not be used to offset other spending," said House Speaker John Boehner. He did not address whether war savings could be used to extend expiring tax cuts.
Those savings are the natural result of national security strategies unrelated to the federal budget. Deficit hawks say tapping into them is simply an accounting gimmick.
"It's just the worst of all worlds if that were to happen," said Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget.
But without the war money at their disposal, lawmakers simply can't pay for the payroll tax cut and jobless benefits. Liberals such as Durbin are fine with employing deficit financing, especially if the alternative is playing Scrooge just before the holidays.
"Many people will hate to go home for Christmas saying to the American people, 'Merry Christmas, your payroll taxes go up 2 percent Jan. 1 and unemployment benefits are cut off.'"
Rep. Joe Wilson, R-S.C., joins msnbc to explain why he feels raising taxes should not be among the options considered by the supercommittee to slash $1.2 trillion from the deficit.
Leave a Comment:
And the other so called trigger, the cut to the defense budget? Well, the GOP already has that figured out and have bills ready to go so the Pentagon doesn't get hurt. Yes sir, gotta keep those defense contractors happy. But Grandma and the kids - aw, who needs 'em anyways. (Sarcasam on the last part)
Our government currently borrows 40% of what they spend each and every day. Only a politician and the BSDNC would call borrowing less each day "savings". Why not call it what it really is? Stealing from future generations to enrich the current greedy one. "Savings"?????Totally absurd!!! Enjoy yourself now at the expense of turning America into Greece and the PIIGS for future generations.
"Grandma got run over by the contractors" will be the new song. She wishes it WAS a deer, at least she could eat that--or wrap up some of the meat and give it to the grandkids.
The Super Committee will be sending you their Christmas Greetings this year with a card that reads:
THINGS ARE TOUGH, TIMES ARE HARD, HERE'S YOUR F-ING CHRISTMAS CARD ! !
I love this spin by the Democrats too. Where is the money coming from to pay for this? Is it being borrowed from China or Japan? Nope! Is the government issuing bonds and paying interest to the creditors? Nope! Is it being paid for by revenue? Nope! So how is it being paid for? Social Security is being underfunded and will have to be paid back in the future or cut benefits. In essence they are borrowing the money interest free from your Social Security funds instead of paying for it out of the general fund and counting it as part of the deficit. That is much more palatable for their liberal sheep.
When you reel in the defense contractors they will have less money to spread around their sold-out politicians in Washington. Starve a contractor and starve Boehner - sounds fair to me - especially if he didn't go short on their stocks.
Nothing can be passed without votes from both sides of the aisle - period.
Hmmmmm...........Did you miss this ORB?
The fix for social security is simple--raise the income cap from the current $106,000 all the way to $1,000,000. Problem solved! Way less people will be paid the maximum, and there would be enough money for more than the projected 37 years until benefits would have to be cut.
SHOCKING that no one here sees the political theater that is being played out. The Democrats will fold at the last minute, cutting Social Security, Medicare/aid and agree to massive spending cuts with little or no additional tax revenue from corporations and the extremely wealthy. This is all nonsense. Write it in stone.
The Democrats are the Washington Generals to the Republican Harlem Globetrotters. The game is, and has been, rigged from the start. As soon as they announced who would be on the "Super Committee", it was already over. A little Kabuki theater, and the middle class and poor get royally screwed again, the rich strike gold again, and the deficit soars.
The solutions are not that difficult to ascertain:
1. Get the rotten, filthy, corrupting money out of our politics and oust the corrupt politicians that have been roosting in Congress for term after term- public financing is the only silver bullet.
2. Slash the defense budget in half- immediately, and then start whittling it down from there year after year.
3. Eliminate ALL subsidies for the oild & gas industry, farm subsidies, telcom companies and every other corporation that is not in the national self interest.
4. Return to Eisenhower (a Republican) tax rates for everyone: a top effective rate of 90%- minus deductions= around 72%
5. Pass a Constitutional Amendment eliminating corporate personhood
6. Prosecute and eliminate corporate off-shoring of profits, and enact legislation that mandates tax revenue on all U.S. based corporations, regardless of where they earn, and hide their income.
7. Mandate that China (and any other trade "partner") revalue their currency and stop subverting the rules with the threat of tariff imposition
PROBLEM SOLVED. No deficit, no national debt after less than a decade. Re-invest in America and protect our economy from Wall Street and the other corporate vultures that have been feeding on the carcass of the U.S. economy.
I agree with you , congress is ahead of us on that one.
And as we all know they are not about to do the wright thing and cut their own throats . No problem , I already have a great cardboard box to live in and am currently looking for a bridge to put it under.
bob
TAJ623251 is absolutely correct on this fix for Social Security as well. I would take it one step further and eliminate ALL caps on SS contributions. It would secure the program indefinitely. Good point- well said- and it will NEVER happen while our politicians bathe in the filthy corrupt money of their corporate masters.
George Carlin was right- as was George Orwell. We should have statues of both of them in ever American city. There really isn't a major difference between the parties. One is the "top" and one is the "bottom" in their little love fest that f*cks the rest of us. It's tough to get legislation passed that helps the middle class when almost every member of Congress is a millionaire.
You gotta love the dems for their insight. They rant and rave about how the repubs got gobs of money allocated to an "illegal" war but now are trying to use those funds to finance other programs once the troops are withdrawn. Their version of saving is mot spending money on one program but spend it on the other. "Look at the hundreds of billions of dollars we are saving from not fighting those 'illegal' wars."
the thinker-318752 - not sure if that's a good choice for your tag. Got to love these Republican talking points.
Proposed social and infrastructure program spending is a fraction of the cost of these wars, and more importantly, represent an investment in AMERICA, not some 3rd world country that hates our guts. Not all spending is bad. Investments MAKE money, wars just dump the money in the desert. I do agree that these accounting tricks are dubious, and that the case for investment here in the U.S. should be made on it's own merits, not through tricky accounting maneuvers.
i really hope the super committee fails. it will be because republicans won't give an inch on protecting the wealthy from taxes. let the tax cut's expire and the defense cuts happen. those two things will go a long wat to reducing the deficit. i'm not willing to starve the middle class for these to groups. enough. then when it fails the voters can't point to the republicans once and for all and get rid of their azzez.
I posted this before, but it is my proposal to the SuperCommittee
Both sides should give. The Republicans need to increase revenues on Capital gains, which are transactional and controllable, and estate taxes, which pertain to the very wealthy. Earned income should not be taxed at a higher rate.
The Democrats need to give on spending. Cut welfare, medicaid, unemployment insurance, etc. Dump national healthcare.
The medical profession needs to cut charges. Universities need to lower tuition and spend endowments.
We need trade restrictions with ALL countries, not just China, get rid of NAFTA. Close the borders and get rid of the aliens that take jobs and cost money.
Don't pay benefits to people who can take lower paying jobs, but give them a supplement if they take lower paying jobs.
And for G-d's sake, stop letting politics take precedent over common sense.
Let everyone suffer. The person most to blame for this mess is the person in your mirror. We all need to take blame. Stop blaming others.
I will add that I like the above suggestion (Taj 1.7)to take off income limits for Social Security contributions.
I for one am embarrassed for the lack of professional contribution by members of Congress, most of whom are in close proximity to my age and and social era. This once dynamic country, land of the free and all that crap is a lost memory. We are the laughing stock of the world. Our leaders, one and all for the last 30 years have loaded us with wet dreams and debt, nothing else to show for their efforts.
I don't see how we will make it to the elections before circling the drain. If we do make it and do not make the necessary changes we will surely be the rubbish heap of Greed and Avarice.
Obama will be the one who goes down in history as losing 2 wars in his presidency over a campaign promise.
Iraq may have been wrong from the start, but that doesn't matter now. Afghanistan bred nothing but haters of America and in a short time they will breed more.
Weaken the military now and you too may be slaves to Islam latter. Enjoy.
Glass half empty Bob? He will also be known as the President that caught Bin Laden, killed more terrorists with Drones, and actually the one who ended two unfunded wars to try and get this economy back on it's feet. If I light a match that burns down a house, the fireman that puts out the last ember is not known as the arsonist. It only works that way in a world of insane minds.
Democrats continue to chip away from entitlements. Every time a vote is up they put up another entitlement that they give in on while Republicans continue to use taxes as their leverage. Yet, the Republicans have not given in AT ALL on taxes.
It's like it is a set up!!!!!
Democrats playing good cop bad cop with Republicans in order to strip the American people of their wealth!!!!
That's OK though, because we are moving towards a significant shift in our society where we the people will look to force this government and corporations into transparency.
Republicans can take away from entitlement but every
Ron Paul's son wants to cut unemployment benefits in this recession!!!!!
Remember this if you live in his state and voted for him.
Remember the way he takes the food off of your CHILDREN'S DINNER PLATES as you become weary about how you will feed them in the future.
Remember how he forces you onto the street because their is not a job in sight!!!
Remember, Remember Remember.....
It's the same old story that got our National Debt bloated beyond repair;
"We can't stop spending because it will 'hurt the poor'."
So we keep spending more money we don't have, and the problem keeps getting worse.
"When does the nonsense stop". Do we keep spending our childen's future for our own edification now? Do we care so little about the debt we're piling onto our children's backs for our current convenience?
That's the epitome of selfishness.
Every politician that says "We need to spend money now, and forget about the future" is pandering for votes, and is more irresponsible than our children who get stuck with the bill.
Here's the ultimate irony.
Politicians say "We need to keep borrowing money to spend on the children - they need our help".
And where do we get the money? We borrow it now to make our life more comfortable, and we expect our "children" to repay it, plus interest.
So "Are we borrowing the money FOR our children, or are we borrowing it FROM our children"?
The reality is that politicians are borrowing the money from our children to finance their own re-elections.
what--
I'm tired of hearing the falsehoods about leaving debt for our children and grandchildren! What seems to be being proposed by the repubs is to do nothing and leave crumbling infrastructure, contaminated water tables, lack of funding for the education of our children and grandchildren and no real means of attaining the dream of the middle class. What we need to do is decide which is the greater of the two evils. Even with the actions proposed be the repubs there is nothing there to change things for our children and grandchildren, saying NO doesn't solve anything!
Roy Wilson-- How is doing nothing helping our children or grandchildren? We have been passing debt onto our children and grandchildren from the days of the Great Depression to now. It is expected to bear the weight of debt passed on by our predecessors. Freedom isn't free, we all must pay! America is made up of working class folks which carry the burden of building and rebuilding the country. I'm tired of folks making fortunes on the sweat of main street. Wall Street makes money off of money, they don't make anything. They live the life of privilege from those of us who really toil. Manipulation of the system doesn't work for 99% of the people who shower after work but it sure does for those who don't.
Maynard-3102805 "what--I'm tired of hearing the falsehoods about leaving debt for our children and grandchildren!"
So who's going to pay it off - you?
Let me guess - You're getting public assistance, and you like getting benefits that someone ELSE has to pay for.
Great comment Scot
I would add 2 things. End congressional pensions and give them 401K and Social Security
Give congress the standard medical benefits of any federal employee. When they retire they get Medicare.
It is all too easy for the political class to balance the budget on the backs of the dying middle class when they feel no personal impact from their decisions
Scot - You missed my point. I wasn't saying that the repubs got it right by spending money on the wars instead of on U.S. infrastructure. My point was that the dems voted for the war also and not that the spending of the money is "acceptable" they want to "save" by not spending it on the wars but on other efforts. It is not "saving" money when it is redirected.
If one gets out a $1500/mo house payment and spends only $1200/mo and spends the other $300/mo on a car payment, that is not saving money.
When Clinton cut military spending and balanced the budget we had one conflict.....In the former Yugoslavia that was a perfect success even though the GOP Congress was against it.
So why can't we cut the biggest department with the biggest waste to help balance the budget?
Is anyone really worried about China invading us?
GOP Congressmen beholden to defense contractors are.
So really, if you are serious about this deficit thing then let's do what needs to be done, otherwise man up and say that the GOP are big spenders like they've always been.
Remember...We wouldn't be here if Bush took his surplus and kept it going in a fiscally responsible manner.
But he didn't.
For the life of me, I don't get why you are still bringing up Bush. Was it really Clinton that balanced the budget? I thought this is the job of the House (which I believe during that time was held by republicans). Really need to get past the "bush" thing.
Because he gave tax cuts to the wealthest that were finance by borrowing money from our kids. Cheney was the one that said "deficits don't matter". You can have it both ways. Republican are liars, they well say anything to protect the rich and get your vote.
LaParks, Let's not forget the plan to attack the Occupy movement by that Lobby org. that loves Boehner. It must scare the heck out of the banks and corporations that Occupy has changed the conversation from the republican produced debt to joblessness and income inequity.
Sadly, the defense contractors paid Congress for a war that has no end.
Also look at the job growth during Clinton's terms. How does any conservative say that we were not better off during those times and it sure wasn't a Republican President in office. I heard people (Rush, etc.) saying when we had a surplus that the Govt needs to give back the surplus not pay down the debt. It was clear that Bush never learned anything from the nineties. It's also sad that he thought he could fund two wars without raising taxes and did just the opposite. Then again he thought that Iraq would pay us back in oil!
go-getter seriously? Bush squandered the Clintonian surplus and drove our economy into a ditch for 8 years, and you wonder why we continue to highlight his influence on our current state of affairs? You can't expect to be taken seriously if you don't acknowledge that it might take more than 3 years to dig out a hole it took 8 years to dig.
lapark, everybody got a tax break. I think EVERYBODY should give it back, increase revenue and cut spending, including the defense dept. I know that many will agree with taxing the rich only, greed is found in ALL income class......
Bush did squander away a yearly budget surplus but we were still in the hole. Two tax cuts, that famous 250.00 check we got after he took office and then two unpaid wars. Oh we also have the prescription drug entitlement that cost us billions and the insurance companies got most of that benefit. His last year in office our economy was in a free fall that he tried to hide until after the election but he couldn't hide it that long. Yes he really screwed it up and helped the fat cat corporations. Things were so bad that McCain decided to pick Palin for his Vice President so he wouldn't be elected and have to deal with Bush's colossal failure.
Obama was naive enough to believe that given the dire circumstances the Republicans would work with him. The Republican leadership decided to make it their goal to make Obama a one term President instead of getting the United States back on track. Mitch McConnell the Republican Leader in Senate has not made this fact a secret he has said it several times in public.
The corrupt Corporations and the politicians that they have bought on both sides of the isle got the right to hate the left and vice versa so we wouldn't realize how bad we are being screwed. You can see it in all over these posts. There are paid posters on this site right now that make sure that people hate each other and call each other names like idiot, your stupid, your ignorant.
The Supreme Court which now has at least one felon on the bench a man that has broken the law for over a decade. Clarence Thomas failed to report his wife's income on legal documents required by law. Come to find out she was working for far right groups several of them that wanted Corporations to have the same right as living United States Citizens and they won. Now Corporations have more control over Corporations than they ever have. So much for Campaign Election Reform, the Supreme Court ruined all the effort to get money and corruption out of our elections.
It's a huge mess folks and instead of wasting your time calling each other and perpetuating hate we need to spend our time to let our Government know that we will not stand for Corruption on either side of the isle.
Joe one of the best post I have read so far Along with Scot H and Lar. Yup we are in a mess alright.
Joe, right on target - run for president as an independent - got my vote.
There's no "crummy choice"; only the obvious choice we taxpayers face every day. If you don't have the money don't SPEND the money. Yes we need to dramatically reduce military spending by a lot and no - it won't harm our national security if done right. We don't need troops stationed all over the world. In a similar vein - the Big Three Entitlements must all be reformed - now. Social security, Medicare and Medicaid all need to be revamped.
The whole thing about tossing granny over a cliff when it comes to Medicare and SS is nothing more than a huge scare tactic. Nobody is seriously talking about stripping seniors of current benefits in any significant way. Over time, however, things will need to change. These structural reforms in so-called "entitlements" have to be made. Otherwise we are nothing more than Greece writ large. Period.
Really? Rick are you sure of that? Seniors and the handicapped have already lost a huge amount to both federal and state cuts. Time to bring in income from the top..they won't go hungry for it and the old folks will. Many more cuts to social services and you won't have to worry about the old and the poor..thy'll be gone.
The fair approach is to produce $1 in entitlement cuts in reform to $1 gain in revenue through reforms. Then you have a $2 dollar difference which brings things into balance way before this nonsense we're going through right now.
Nope- you are just plain wrong. The only crummy choice is the one we have to make between Republicans and Democrats- all of them bought and paid for by the rich.
On entitlement reform, No one is carping about current recipients. The politicians wisely excluded them from the cuts as they know it would be political suicide to include them in the cuts because if it's one thing seniors do- it's that they VOTE. They are called entitlements because we are ENTITLED to the money that we paid into the system our entire working lives, and through the power of compound interest, will afford us a comfortable retirement.
We own that money. It is ours. If the politicians created a problem by extending ridiculous tax cuts for those who frankly do not need them, we will not suffer for it. Tax the hell out of the rich and the most profitable multi-national corporations to make up the deficit, and remove all caps from Social Security and Medicare caps- PROBLEM SOLVED
you can not cut a social compact with the people that have paid all their life into the system maybe you are rich and can afford to have those cuts but the VAST majority aren't. lifting the caps on taxes fixes the problem. what about this don't you seem to understand? the GOP want's to end these programs and we won't let them. no privatiztaion or anything elese. let those that are wealthy pay more. get over this anal idea about taxes.
You can cut a social compact if you don't have the money - and we don't. We borrow $.43 out of every dollar we spend. Talk about unsustainable. We address the problem now, incrementally, or it grows much larger and then the consequences of not having acted now will be catastrophic.
Incidentally - I'm 65 and recently retired so please don't deign to lecture me on the topic of "seniors".
There is plenty of money to pay our obligations to people that have paid Social Security taxes for years if we cut about $400billion a year from payments to arms dealers like Boeing, Lockheed Martin & Ratheon.
rick
Actually there are a lot of people talking about throwing granny over a cliff. Do you think privatizing social security is good for the people that pay into it or for the bankers that will get the money to play with?
If the answer isn't 100% obvious than I'll refer you to a painful taxpayer experience known as TARP.
Let's just be real here, the military can be cut by $200 Billion and we'd be safe.
But there's a reason why certain Congressmen need the military budget to be through the roof.
Common Sense > We won't be close to safe even by cutting the military budget by $200 billion. The math doesn't even come close to working out and as far as SS is concerned...........look to Chile. Their system was completely revamped something like 30 years ago - privatized. It's thriving and not with money borrowed from the citizens via increasing suspect IOUs.
President Dwight Eisenhower, a Republican, warned us about the Military Industrial Complex and he, you may recall, was the Allied Commander during WWII and obviously familiar with the military.
Anyone wanna bring out a stop watch and see how long it takes before they start talking about making the Bush tax breaks to the rich permanent again??
The 2 wars and the Bush tax cuts made this deficit and its time that the politicians start taking responsibility for this. Let the tax breaks expire and cut military waste. We dont need so many weapons that just sit in warehouses (just in case)...we already got more then we will ever use.
The Bush tax cuts were for everyone, not just the rich. They do need to be allowed to lapse, though. We are all going to be feeling the pain of this mess for years, so we might as well get used to it.
elaine-2138913 you are dead right- unfortunately your stopwatch will only have to run into this coming Monday. Wright it in stone. They are going to cut entitlements, and social programs to the bone, and cut taxes for corporations and the top tax bracket. I believe that they will not only make the disastrous Bush tax cuts permanent, they will cut them further, perhaps to as low as 28%. Also be looking for that corporate tax holiday for a repatriation of the money they have been hiding off shore- that will come back at around 8% rather than the 35% they owe. And we all get screwed again. Time for a bloodless revolution- it really is.
I agree with Sheila -#5.1. All taxpayers saw a reduced tax rate. But there is no argument as to who actually benefitted the most. Hare's why.
A taxpayer making $20,000 a year getting a 4% tax cut will have an extra $800 a year to spend on essentials, which is all someone with that income can afford. That works out to $16.38 additional money in his/her weekly paycheck, or about $67 a month. The fact of the matter, it all gets spent. All of it. The extra $15 a week / $67 a month is insignificant. But it does help the economy in the sense that there are a lot of people in the lower income ranges spending their extra pittance on daily living. Having said that, to take that extra $15 a week / $67 a month back by eliminating the Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 will not appreciably impact the low-wage earner, since it is such a pittance.
What about a more affluent taxpayer? Somebody making $500,000 a year receiving a tax cut of of $20,000, or about $385 a week, or $1667 a month. Consider that the affluent worker already has more than enough money coming in to take care of his/her basic needs and a lot of discretionary items, such as jewelry, nice house with chandeliers, an in-ground pool, jacuzzi, and other baubles. The responsible affluent worker will have plenty of money to invest even without the Bush tax cuts giving him/her that extra. An extra $1667 a month along with other discretionary money the affluent party chooses to invest, compounded over ten years, yields yields an enormous windfall.
So, yeah. Everyone got a tax cut during Bush's first term, and it certainly didn't hurt the economy, in fact, it probably helped it some. The fallacy that the Bush tax cuts were "tax cuts for the rich" is out there because the rich benefitted from them the most.
I think the best thing that the politicians can do is let ALL the Bush tax cuts expire. That will settle some of the class warfare rhetoric, which is not helpful, in fact, is creating a poisonous atmosphere that pits Americans against each other. Both parties contribute to it. Cable news channels contribute to it, and talk radio also adds fuel to the fire.
I agree, the Bush Era tax cuts need to expire. Along with tight guidelines on tax loopholes. It's simple: everybody needs to pay their fair share of taxes to the government. the top tax bracket needs to be 39 percent of adjusted gross income. If a taxpayer earns $200,000 a year then they should pay 39 percent of that in federal taxes. NO EXCUSES.
If we just taxed the "job makers" (who aren't making any jobs) we would have enough money.
That's "Job Creators," bro.
Gotta show the proper respect.
Here we go again, another budget stalemate.
Let all the automatic cuts go into effect, even for the military. End of story.
And allow the Bush tax cuts to expire...
Agreed!!!
Agreed, cut it all, especially the most wasteful dept of them all. We all love tax breaks but we all need to realize that taxes pay for things like roads and schools and national defense.
Bombs don't grow on trees, either do electric fences to keep illegals out or an educated workforce to compete in the world economy.
The Bush tax cuts were like giving your teenager a 6 month bump in allowance and when the 6 months are up he complains that you're reducing his allowance.
Sorry, we can't afford your college tuition or national security on that allowance.
There are only crummy choices. But why put the burdern on the backs of those whose backs are already broken? Someone will cry that they are getting the worst crumbs. We can't have a budget that removes a few crumbs from those who have little, and not touch the whole loaves that the 1% have.
I remember the days before Nixon when average Americans could write off interest from credit cards and car loans and the usual house interest, property tax and you didn't have to claim interest from savings. The Republicans want to take away the only write-offs many people still have. Take a cut in pay Congress and buy your own health insurance and by the way, make all your buddies pay their taxes. I can't for the life of me figure out which "small business" job creators they keep talking about. Most of the small businesses in my town have maybe 7 to 10 employees and I don't see them getting all these huge tax breaks the biggies do.
They need to cut and tax 10x that, but they can't even get to the first 10%, can you spell Greece, Italy? American voters are all selfish and stupid, what more can I say?
Seems to me that , that comment covers you, as well. Unless of course you are ...1. A non voter, if so shut up you have no say. or 2. you are not a citizen. if so shut up. If you are, then I will acept your apology for calling me stupid. I hold three Degrees, have lived for 81 years, have voted since age 21, am NOT a 1% er, I spent 20 years serving MY country and am proud of it. Doubt that you have done anything except complain. Get a Life
Have a Nice Day
For the life of me, I can't see why we just don't increase REVENUE by employing more taxpaying people!
They created THOUSANDS of jobs in North Dakota, almost overnight, by opening up drilling! This is just one location out of many that could be opened up! On top of that we would start KEEPING money in OUR economy by not paying it to Canada, Mexico and OPEC for resources we have an abundance of! The EPA and TREE HUGGERS are out of control with Obama in the lead!
We have millions of people out of work... thousands of which are in their 50's and 60's because the older folks were laid off first. You really think these are the types of people who could make a living drilling for oil? Sure, maybe a hundred thousand could find work but the issue for most retailers is the lack of demand for their products. The EPA can not change the supply/demand equation to benefit our retailers so they could in turn hire more manufacturers.
Congress created this so-called "Super Committee" to foist off their responsibility to solve our country's financial crisis. How appropriate is it that they should toss it right back in the laps where it belongs in the first place!?!? Our representatives should receive no pay, since they can't do the job we elect them to do- and pay them to do. Nothing but a bunch of rich folks trying to figure out how to keep their wealth- get more- and dump it on the middle class and poor to pay for it all. When is America going to wake up to the fact that the wealthy are keeping their tax breaks and wealth on the backs of the rest of us??
Ghe blame needs go to both political parties for the financial mess we are in. This is why our system is broken and needs repair. First we need to look for better ways to govern by finding a way to repair Congress. The House and the Senate are no representing the people, they are representing themselves to gain wealth at our expense.
The country debt is massive and growing and there has been no improvement in the last 30 or 40 years because the massive spending continues without any attempt to balance the budget. They do not want to balance the budget because this way they can continue the insider trading, the cheating, stealing, lying and whatever else they can get away with by passing laws and regulations that continue to let them screw us.
We need a change and need it soon. Either we limit terms for them or we replace the whole lot with a new system of rule! The age of technology is here and we can have more input from the states by town hall meetings, secure internet voting on bills, regulations, representatives who will sign pledges, etc. This may sound bizare, however, what the hell are they doing for us now? Nothing the government is being controlled by self interest groups, lobbyists, powerful and rich people who can buy just what they want to control our government. The representatives of the people are playing the same ole game of taking our money and our children's future to build up their own wealth. Lets work on establishing a better system because the current one is useless.
Rick Colo:
This whole mess belongs in the lap of King Harry! He is sitting on (last count I heard) a dozen or so bills to fix the problem. He won't bring them to the floor for a vote because he is afraid he can't muster the votes to kill them. If they passed he'd have to send them to Obama to veto over the desires and will of the people.
What Harry and Obama don't realize is they win, either way! If they get passed and work Obama can take credit for it, just like he does for everything else. If they get passed and fail he has a huge leverage at election time to keep a Republican from defeating him.
Yeah but what are these bills about anyway. Everybody keeps talking about all these bills sitting, but no one ever mentions that when the Democrats try to bring bills to the floor they get filibustered. I think we need a majority rule in the Senate and if the Democrats keep control then they should do just that. That is if the crooked redistricting doesn't kill fairness in voting.
In short, it isn't the REPUBLICANS, at all, that are the party of NO! It is Harry Reid who is failing to do his duty!
The HOUSE did its duty and passed bills and sent them to the SENATE to vote on! Like it or not, the American people are demanding the Senate to bring these bills to the floor for a vote! The Democrats still have a majority in the Senate so they can vote them down if their constituents want them voted down. It isn't up to Harry Reid to make this choice! He ONLY represents 1/2 the people in Nevada, not the whole country!
If they pass the Senate Obama can, at his own political peril, veto them...
Maurice-387309:
This time the Republicans aren't bringing anything to the floor! It is HOUSE passed bills that are being held up!
The Super Committee was a stupid idea, since everyone knew from the beginning that the two sides would never agree and draconian spending cuts would automatically go into effect. That way, neither side has to take responsibility for cutting medical care, food assistance, jobless benefits and social security in the worst economy since the Great Depression. Naturally the military budget will somehow be exempted but all the social programs will take a big hit as usual. Maybe they will make the argument that they need the military resources to attack the peaceful protesters who take to the streets to be heard, since Washington is a bunch of bought and paid for corporate whores.
If they aren't throwing gramma from the train,then why don't both sides come right out and say that NO person over the age of ...let's say 65...are not subject to any cut ever. They paid their share,they should be exempt.If we can't take care of the people who took care of us,then we ARE "throwin mamma from the train"!! I mean seriously,how about we start by cutting congressional retirement benefits,that's who put us here for God's'sake !!!
Stalemate again, surprised?
What you need is a third party. As it is now the glass is either halve full or halve empty. It doesn't matter what party is in power because that is an automatic stalemate.
But both the republicans and the democrates will never allow that because they will loose all their power and priveliges.
Best that can come out of this, the stalemate will than get the automatic 23% cut.
Bet you that the politician will scramble to pass an other law to stop that automatic 23% cut
If they fail, everyone of them should be fired and not allowed to be in public office for 10 years. There should be penalties for sitting around and getting absolutely nothing done. In private business, if you sit around and don't accomplish anything, you lose your job. Same should be true here.
The next time you are sitting in the never ending waves of traffic that are moving about 1 mph for hours,costing us all tons of fuel,ask yourself this....If I could borrow a bunch of money at a real low rate of interest,and rebuild that highway or freeway,putting tons of people to work,saving countless gallons of gas,saving us hours a day of being in a parking lot instead of being at home with your family,why in the hell wouldn't you!!!! If that is considered wrong by the gop,then I don't want to be RIGHT !!! (wing)
and better yet,you could pay for all of it by getting rid of the BUSH tax cuts,that, by the way true patriots in the 1% are asking the congress to do...
cowboy17:
It has been shown OVER AND OVER that if you taxed EVERYONE who makes over $250k at 100% it wouldn't make a dent in the deficit!
If the Democrats were so concerned about money, why didn't Princess (down from Queen) Nancy fly commercial while she was Speaker of the House? I'm pretty sure they have direct flights from DC to San Francisco....
What a crock. Take 100% of the 1%ers income and you still want have enough money. These politician thurst for money is never ending. They have spent and spent and spent for so long they don't have the slighest idea how to stop.....
These politicians are crooks, plain and simple... they take these offices and turn them into money makers for themselves... then leave office super rich with the best health plan and retirement plan on earth....
It's called treason.... nothing but treason... hang everyone of them.........
Well the rhetoric concerning Pelosi is swell,the fact of the matter is there is no one silver bullet,but if those tax cuts are so insignificant why did they hold the unemployment payments hostage over them and all sign a PLEDGE with a lobbyist to protect the rich. I see hundreds of millionaires and billionaires BEGGING congress to take thier money,begging to do their PATRIOTIC DUTY. Something many politicians on both sides have failed so terribly to do.
cowboy17:
Damn! You must really get around in the "high cotton" circles! I've heard of 2 or 3 BILLIONAIRES who have made noises to that effect!
In case you didn't realize, they don't have to wait! There ARE provisions in the tax code for them to pay all they want!
Well, of course, they can wait to be forced to do it... Doing what the law demands isn't exactly "patriotic" though... Until then, it is just "so much hot air"!!!
As an "aside" note: Bill Gates and several other Billionaires have signed a pledge to give most of their money to CHARITIES when they die, not the wasteful Federal Government!
Yea, that sounds good. Except for they are saying make the rich pay more towards SS and at the sametime say lets means base the amount you will recieve when it's your time. Another words you rich people pay more and we are gonna give you even less when you retire.
What BS. I've worked hard and saved money. Now I'm hearing since I did without for so many years and saved for retirement, my neighbor thats spent every penny has earned on a place at the beach, a place at the lake, three golf carts, three boats, 5 sport cars, and the many vacations will now get SS because he's broke. But I'm not gonna get any because I was smart and saved for retirement. And now you want me to pay even more to SS so my neighbor will have plenty when he retires.... Something is wrong here.
If you really did plan and save then the paltry SS would be a nice little gravy on top of your savings AND you should get every dime!
If you THINK your spend thrift neighbor is going to live "high off the hog" on SS or even pay for the gas for all of his toys you are living in a DREAM!
However, I do think we need to quit paying DEAD people and people who aren't entitled to it.
Spoken like a true 1% er'. People like you are what makes people like me not trust people like them...the gop !!!
Cowboy.....you speak like a lazy greedy person. We shouldn't get in the business of trying to fund others retirement programs because one group was lazy and dumb.
As much as I know I'm wasting my time...I had an Aunt who worked for a big power company for 35 years,during the pillaging under Bush,they stole her ^&%$(* pension,leaving her to live at a near poverty level. You are asking me to trust big corporations,thats what the gop always wants us to do,whether it be through deregulation or tax breaks. They lie cheat and STEAL from our seniors and then you call me lazy and greedy...I would rather they were serious when they say PutAmericaFirst......otherwise its just another stupid catch phrase.....get it !!!!???
Who stole what? If the big corporation stole the pension, they should be put in prison and forced to pay double or triple for the people that they hurt. Most corporations don't work that way though. One of the differences between liberals and conservatives is that conservatives will give people (or corporations) a lot more leeway, but when they do something wrong, the conservatives are much more likely to push for a harsher punishment. On the flip side of that, there are also several corporations that have had their pensions cut in half because of the union management never relenting. (this happens in corporations as well as municipalities).
The way I figure this is that No Member of the US Congress, (the so called Super Committee) should be allowed to go home for the holidays or have time off due to the holidays. We have to work, why shouldn't they? They have had all this time to come up with some kind of a proposal, good or bad, and they can't even agree on that?? And they wonder why we don't trust them, please!!!
We could have a balanced budget tomorrow, with no need to touch SS and Medicare, and no need to raise the debt ceiling if we zero-fund useless stuff, and half-fund half-useless stuff.
The only reason we don't have a balanced budget , is that the politicians refuse to give up the pork barrel spending that gets them elected.
This isn't even clost to accurate, unless you consider education, defense, EPA, transportation, all pork barrell.
Actually PAF, it is accurate. In addition to eliminating foreign aid to Pakistan, we have possibilities like:
• Corporation for Public Broadcasting Subsidy. $445 million annual savings.
• Save America's Treasures Program. $25 million annual savings..
• International Fund for Ireland. $17 million annual savings.
• Legal Services Corporation. $420 million annual savings.
• National Endowment for the Arts. $167.5 million annual savings.
• National Endowment for the Humanities $167.5 million annual savings.
• Hope VI Program.. $250 million annual savings.
• Amtrak Subsidies. $156.5 billion annual savings.
• Eliminate duplicative education programs. H.R. 2274 (in last Congress), authored by Rep. McKeon, eliminates 68 at a savings of $1.3 billion annually.
• U.S. Trade Development Agency. $55 million annual savings.
• Woodrow Wilson Center Subsidy. $20 million annual savings.
• Cut in half funding for congressional printing and binding. $47 million annual savings.
• John C. Stennis Center Subsidy. $430,000 annual savings.
• Community Development Fund. $4.5 billion annual savings.
• Heritage Area Grants and Statutory Aid. $24 million annual savings.
• Cut Federal Travel Budget in Half. $7.5 billion annual savings
• Trim Federal Vehicle Budget by 20%. $600 million annual savings.
• Essential Air Service. $150 million annual savings.
• Technology Innovation Program. $70 million annual savings.
• Manufacturing Extension Partnership (MEP) Program. $125 million annual savings.
• Department of Energy Grants to States for Weatherization. $530 million annual savings.
• Beach Replenishment. $95 million annual savings.
• New Starts Transit. $2 billion annual savings.
• Exchange Programs for Alaska, Natives Native Hawaiians, and Their Historical Trading Partners in Massachusetts .. $9 million annual savings
• Intercity and High Speed Rail Grants. $2.5 billion annual savings.
• Title X Family Planning. $318 million annual savings.
• Appalachian Regional Commission. $76 million annual savings.
• Economic Development Administration. $293 million annual savings.
• Programs under the National and Community Services Act. $1.15 billion annual savings.
• Applied Research at Department of Energy. $1.27 billion annual savings.
• FreedomCAR and Fuel Partnership. $200 million annual savings.
• Energy Star Program. $52 million annual savings.
• Economic Assistance to Egypt. $250 million annually.
• U.S. Agency for International Development. $1.39 billion annual savings.
• General Assistance to District of Columbia. $210 million annual savings.
• Subsidy for Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority. $150 million annual savings.
• Presidential Campaign Fund. $775 million savings over ten years.
• No funding for federal office space acquisition. $864 million annual savings.
• End prohibitions on competitive sourcing of government services.
• Repeal the Davis-Bacon Act. More than $1 billion annually.
• IRS Direct Deposit: Require the IRS to deposit fees for some services it offers (such as processing payment plans for taxpayers) to the Treasury, instead of allowing it to remain as part of its budget. $1.8 billion savings over ten years.
• Require collection of unpaid taxes by federal employees. $1 billion total savings.WHAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
• Prohibit taxpayer funded union activities by federal employees.. $1.2 billion savings over ten years.
• Sell excess federal properties the government does not make use of. $15 billion total savings.
• Eliminate death gratuity for Members of Congress..
• Eliminate Mohair Subsidies. $1 million annual savings.
• Eliminate taxpayer subsidies to the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. $12.5 million annual savings
• Eliminate Market Access Program. $200 million annual savings.
• USDA Sugar Program. $14 million annual savings.
• Subsidy to Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). $93 million annual savings.
• Eliminate the National Organic Certification Cost-Share Program. $56.2 million annual savings.
• Eliminate fund for Obamacare administrative costs. $900 million savings.
• Ready to Learn TV Program. $27 million savings.
• HUD Ph.D. Program.
• Deficit Reduction Check-Off Act.
TOTAL SAVINGS: $2.5 Trillion over Ten Years
half of defense IS "pork barrel"
gee, kannin - getting down into the minutia much? ANYTHING under 100 million is a speck of dust. So we can see that you are against any ARTS programs ... any other tidbits of information? We COULD tell congress to either eliminate or PAY FOR 3/4 of their STAFFERS THEMSELVES. FORCE defense to live without EVERY "new toy" that comes on the market. Close 90% of the overseas bases. Flat out GET OUT OF IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN (and STOP trying to berthe world's POLICEMAN)
Little things like that...
Kannin....I agree that there is plenty of pork out there, but our problems are so much bigger. If we cut all forms of government spending to $0. That means no government program or money to anythign. Get rid of every single program except defense, medicare, SS, and medicaid. And we also cut defense by 50%, we still don't have a balanced budget.
or a defense system......
Canary - The government does too many things that, while "good" to do, are not the government's function to do. The arts are popular, but not within the constitutional responsibilities of government.
If each member of congress and the senate is responsible for just four "specks of dust", that amounts to a trillion dollars over ten years! That's the thing about pork-barrel spending, the congresscritters try to keep their waste "under the radar" - You have to address the "specks of dust"
PAF - good examples: The programs you mentioned are about 20% apiece of the federal budget. Your proposal cuts the budget by 50%. The deficit is 40%. So we would have a balanced budget ... and a 10% surplus.
If figured Medicare, SS, & Medicaid were 40%, with interest being 10% and defense cut in half being another 10%. I figured that would cut 40% from the budget, but since we are borrowing 42% it would still leave us a deficit of 2%.
PAF - We're not too far apart. I got my numbers from http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=1258, as follows: Defense and security: In 2010, some 20 percent of the budget, or $705 billion, paid for defense and security-related international activities. Social Security: Another 20 percent of the budget, or $707 billion, paid for Social Security. Medicare, Medicaid, and CHIP: Three health insurance programs — Medicare, Medicaid, and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) — together accounted for 21 percent of the budget in 2010, or $732 billion.
Your 42% number sounds right.
Politicians be advised selling out the 99% will have consequences...
Yea when 72% of the people want a balanced approach,and the 1% says UP YOURS....I gotta think their time is coming. So its obvious the the GOP candidates are all incompetent,at least that's what they say about each other,and Obama will win re-election. At that point,if Iam a 1% er,I run for the hills !!!!
Why do you assume that it is the GOP's fault? It looks like the democrats are just as incompetent. The problem here is that for years the democrats have broken their promises when we tried a balanced approach. We will give you spending cuts if you approve the tax increase. The spending cuts, never materialized. The republicans are tired of it and want spending cuts, then we will give you the tax increase.
Apparently you missed it when they asked 10 (at the time) gop candidates if they would vote for a 10 to 1 cuts to revenue increases,and they ALL voted no !!!! I know there are worthless dems too,and I hope they lose their jobs also....but I haven't heard ONE republican say,"if you do this,we will agree to raise revenues",not once,or Grover will come and get em !!!!
First, we don't need revenue increases like we need spending cuts. We are bringing in near record revenues, but our spending in completely out of control. Secondly, I refer to the part about the promised spending cuts never materializing. So what, they get 10 to 1 spending cuts to tax increases and the tax increase will take effect but the spending cuts will never happen.
Yea,God forbid we touch your big pile of money..........10 to 1 are about the same odds of a republican getting back in the White House for another 3 elections at least...for that I am thankful....
It isn't the pile of money that I am worried about. It is continuing to fund this bloated government. If government was remotely close to the size it was during Clinton's presidency, I wouldn't have a problem, but it is 3 times larger and I sure don't feel any better off because of it.
And that's Obama's fault.....yea,that GW sure was a fiscal conservative,...and a compassionate one too...
People,don't forget everyone of these ass holes were elected by us.They work for us.We put them all in Washington and by the grace of God we can put them all out of Washington.We are paying the $170,000 per year for their salaries with our tax money.I don't feel that any of them are doing the job that I wanted them to do.Especially the two Senators from my state of Kentucky.Senator Mitch McConnell and Senator Rand Paul are both going to have serious questions to answer.
These representatives have the balls to say, 'If the unemployment program lapses, over six-million (6,000,000) Americans will lose an average of $296 a month in benefits.'
I have to repeat that number, $296 per month (a partial heating bill payment). It makes me want to spit!
Our current government spending increases the crushing debt on US citizens. That debt now averages over $123,000 on each US household – and on their children. That debt increases every month by $793.
Democrats, Republicans, all of them; are just like TV wrestlers. They do an excellent imitation of angered conflict and pain, but they are really acting in choreographed cooperation. Their objectives are exactly the same: to ensure that the American taxpayer continues to fund their ever-expanding Washington empires.
so throw them ALL out and start over
the politicians FIRST aim is to get elected
ALL other aims fall behind the NECESSITY TO GET REELECTED
Canary - I agree! Originally, the Legislators were part-time volunteers and full time citizens. Now they view themselves as a privileged elite class, like the old-time European nobility. i.e., better than the rest of us.