They used fear and lies. They managed to cast "Obamacare" as a government takeover and blame Obama for Tarp, shouting about how much it cost, and ignoring how it got paid back. Then, with the birther issue, they used the issue of the President's race in a very subtle and crafty manner. They managed to convince a large number of people of one or more lies, that he wasn't born in America, that he's really a Muslim. They took over the original Tea Party and steered it to the voting booths all pissed off at Democrats.

Talk about fear and lies. This post is full of fear and lies, the true hallmark of Dems and the Obama administration. Fact is, Obama is a failed, incompetent president who cares less for the average American, unless they pay no taxes whatsoever or else they are on the government dole. Obama is the cause for expanding poverty in the US and his policies and programs will lead us fully to a socialistic state unless he is voted out of office. Yes, we are all pissed off at the moronic Democrats, but we are really pissed off at Obama, the worst president ever in US history.

unabridged, why don't you live up to your name and include some facts and figures and not just a rant about what you 'believe' to be true.

Hard to do when reality doesn't square with the BS that you want to believe like religion.

wait... the party of no like Harry Reid refusing to bring up over 15 republican jobs bills? (because they don't raise taxes on the rich) The party of no like Obama signing the pipeline bill which would create over 20k totally shovel ready jobs but wants to delay till after the election for POLITICS?

bahaha

ya, dems, the party of no

You blame the Republicans? They're the ones with the finger plugging the hole in the dike preventing this country from being awash in ruin. You think Obama cares about the middle class or the poor. He'd be happy if we're all poor, then we'd have to all vote democrat to keep out gov paycheck.

Obama has had to resort to scapegoating 'the rich' to convince useful idiots to support him. He can't run on accomplishments. When did we sink so low as a country that we let our politicians single out a group of the population as the source of the nations problems? What's next? The Jews?

Dennis.... no one blames Pres. Obama for TARP that is being paid back. TARP is on Pres. Bush. Everyone blames Pres. Obama for 800 billion wasted in his stimulus bill.

Fox has more viewers than all other cable news combined because they tell both sides of the story, not just the leftist propaganda that the progressive news networks show. Thank God we still have a first amendment.

Bush/republican congress 5% average unemployment, $230 billion average deficit

Obama/democrat congress 9% average unemployment, $1.3 trillion average deficit

If that doesn't spell incompetence I don't know what does. And don't give me that inherited crap, Obama was part of the democrat congress that destroyed the economy in the first place.

As far as the tax cut, it comes directly out of SS so you want no cut in SS but you don't want to pay for it? Yea, that makes sense. People really need to stop believing in something for nothing, you have to pay the piper some time.

Either raise taxes substantially or cut services substantially, there is no other solution. How sane is it to take in $6000/mo but spend $10000/mo and borrow the rest? That is what our government is doing. Anyone who believes we can fix this without substantial pain is an idiot.

We need to raise taxes not cut them. Unless we come up with true government cuts there should be no tax cuts.

@Ricky Banks, it was the House that PASSED the payroll tax cut continuation and Democrat Harry Reid probably won't let it get to a vote in the Senate.

Also, has there been any analysis of what this cut is doing to the solvency of Social Security down the line?

@p111

"Fox has more viewers than all other cable news combined because they tell both sides of the story, not just the leftist propaganda that the progressive news networks show. Thank God we still have a first amendment."

I can't believe anyone can say that with a straight face. MSNBC does tend to lean left in much of its coverage, that's true, but to say Fox News is fair is seriously delusional. Fox News veers so far to the right that any views that are even remotely viewed as "leftist" are immediately ridiculed and dismissed. There are SO many examples of this, that it boggles my mind that anyone could still defend the news organization by claiming their impartiality.

Either way, your arguments are also flawed. The economy was already on its downward spiral during Bush's last term, and Obama and the dem congress got left holding the bag. As such, your use of numbers is ridiculously misleading. True, the Congress run by Pelosi didn't help matters, but they don't hold all the blame for the fact that the economy is in the toilet. In fact, economists have said that things could have been considerably worse without some of the actions that the Obama administration took. Of course "could have been worse" is a hard sell to people with attention spans as short as those of today's average voter. If they don't see immediate improvement, they assume you haven't done jack...it's sad.

This was a tax "cut" to help Americans; but it was a tax to help fund SS. Are we saying that reducing funding for SS is good? Willing to bet many will say yes until they want to receive SS.

I see that the bill now wants to give the break to the employees and not the companies that employ- maybe this will motivate them to increase jobs.

have a good week!

The stimulus did not created the jobs as they were touted, but it did stop the global economy from collapsing. This is something you'll never hear a republican admit.

Separately, Obama hasn't exactly lit the world on fire either. He did inherit quite a mess as created by previous administrations, so it didn't really matter if he or McCain were on the hot seat, it was coming down just the same.

Any solution will not be an easy one. We need revenues, we need to cut out crap expenditures, we need dignity, honesty, integrity - things that I frankly don't see in any of the current candidates or president.

Is there not one person in the entire U.S. that has the balls, wit, intelligence and drive to get this country back on track. Anyone?

Here's a though, why don't our elected officials do what the hell the elected to do and perhaps all this nay saying would stop. Perhaps this country will get back on the right path. Perhaps the salary inequalities will get better. All this bickering between parties doesn't do a damn bit of good.

The only truth I see is all this BS needs to stop. Both parties are screwed beyond belief and I really don't see it getting any better. There are a lot of things the government can cut spending on to keep the tax breaks going so it doesn't impact the economy.

Dennis.... no one blames Pres. Obama for TARP that is being paid back. TARP is on Pres. Bush. Everyone blames Pres. Obama for 800 billion wasted in his stimulus bill.

Gday, are you aware that TARP was paid back because Obama insisted on a payback clause? Bush was just going to give it away... do some research next time, okay?

Also, has there been any analysis of what this cut is doing to the solvency of Social Security down the line?

No, of course not - not with an election coming up! Seriously, $920 over 52 weeks = $18, and most of what that guy being interviewed was talking about were luxuries, like fresh blueberries (nice, but frozen works) or Christmas vacations (again, nice but you'll live). Yes, health ins. is a bummer, thank Obama for that one - rates have gone up 20% since Obamacare got passed, is anyone REALLY surprised about that? But this will KILL social security, which is already in trouble. Robbing Peter to pay Paul is NOT a good policy! Save now (full SSA tax) or SPEND LATER - less retirement, or maybe NONE:(

funniest thing i heard all day... "MSNB-HEEHAW!!!" obama singles out people who call him on his BS just like the chinese do their dissidents. i'm sure there is a rich guy out there somewhere to blame for this poor teacher not making ends meet.

Brian 1.3

Unabridged seems to have the facts and figures right to me. Rather it is you that rants about what you believe to be true according to your warped ideology.
As further proof of this, you feel compelled, for some unknown reason, to introduce religion into your post, for no rational purpose other than to continue your inane rambling.

We are all Effin suckers in the game of politics. Here we are fighting with each other about something that affects all of of us. This should have been a separate issue taken up by both the Dem and Repubs, but it's not thrusted in the spotlight and is being punted around. Note: that tax break is us (the regular folk) and that pain you feel, is a boot right to the arse. We have 1%ers running our government and they are working for their corporate handlers and giving them what they require, while we defend them like the lemmings we are. Just disgusting.

GDP in America is HIGHER than it was before the recession hit - thanks ENTIRELY to the productivity (read: hard work) of American workers.

The problem is that ALL of that increase in GDP has been stolen by the top 1%. The workers who earned it have shared in NONE of the profits.

If they won't pay it in wages, tax it back.

Here's the other impact. Social Security goes bankrupt faster and millions of retire folks starve... The choice was drawn by a spend crazy Congress added the last few years by a President who doesn't know how spell responsible let alone act it.

one problem with taxing it back - you and the productive American worker will never see a dime of it. if you feel like you are somehow getting even by taxing it back, then you are a jealous incomplete person.

If any of those pretend patriot GOPers are elected, those who vote for them, vote against common folks and what's left of the middle class. We can afford an increase in defense spending, but say, "NO" help the average American? Any member of Congress that has signed a pledge to a SuperPac ran by Norquist is a traitor. The pledge includes not allowing loopholes to be closed. Many corporations pay no tax and receive Federal tax dollars as subsidies.

Give the corporations a taste of Eisenhower Era rates until they bring the jobs back.

There are SO many examples of this, that it boggles my mind that anyone could still defend the news organization by claiming their impartiality.

Give just one example. Just one.

Blame Obama for the stimulus package? the package that cost between 25 to 40 billion, not the 800 billion that the republicans claim? the stimulus package that was 36% tax cuts for businesses (there are your jobs)? the stimulus package that halted the skyrocketing unemployment? blame him! i'm sure he'll be happy to take the credit. Next you'll blame him for the auto bailout.

Just like clockwork. It took only 6 posts for someone to throw out the "Fox News" insult. I was waiting for it. You liberals never let me down.

Oh, yeah and the name calling, too.

and it only took 3 posts for someone to call Obama the worst president in history. Just like clockwork, a story with his picture, or name in the title and all of the reich wing trolls come running like hogs at sloppin' time. Yep, you baggers never let me down.

OH, and name calling? You guys perfected it.

jon, how does any of that effect the tax rate, the rate that is comming in is never enough, for any politician.

loose the party line. comrade, we need to vote ALL of them out. they need to know they work for us, not the other way around.

ALL politicians are the problem, the sooner the sheeple realize this, the sooner we can turn this mess around and make this country a great nation again

and yes the obamanation IS the worst one we've had in decades. he was givien the nobel peace prize FOR NOTHING, spent more in the three years he's been in office than the rest of them combined in all the years of this nation. FACT.

all you suporters of the obamanation still deny the FACT that in his speaches during his campaign he said, and this is an accurate and dirrect quote, "this is the greatest country in the world, help me change that."

Wait a second... I know why the Republican Party took control of the house! About a year ago people were fed up with Obama and the Democrats spending all of our money for two years, not to mention the whole health care plan few (fewer than the majority) wanted. So then Americans did what they should have. They put a bunch of Republicans in to say "NO!" and they booted all the Dems who pushed the health care bill through even though a majority of Americans did not like it.

It's called a Democracy. When your elected officials don't do what you want, or are busy spending all your money, you vote them out and put new ones in their place.

Those Republicans were placed there by the voice of the American people. Their job is do say "NO!" to the Democrats when they propose that spending more money is the best way to get out of debt. They are doing their job well.

Frank, how do you know what is the truth and what is not? The only thing you have proved is that you do not like FOX news. You have been brainwashed by the media, every article you read here is an opinion of the author, and they spin it quite well. George Soros would be proud.

I am having a hard time with this. The Democrats and the liberal posters here have been ranting and railing for years how the Bush tax cuts havent done a thing for the economy and should be allowed to expire and yada yada yada. Yet, here they are trying their best to argue that THIS tax cut is so sorely needed!

The Bush tax cuts have given the people back a few hundred per month on average. This payroll tax cut gives people who benefit the most about $38 more per pay check yet this is the one the liberals are fighting for. How dumb!

@Julkie = You do realize that GDP also includes GovCo spending right? GovCo spends more, GDP goes up with that spending. Delusional numbers at best.

frank:

Your long rant not withstanding, FOX news is clearly the choice of a huge majority...crushing not only the other cable stations' ratings, but the network news venues as well. Does the fact that your opinion represents such a tiny minority make you think that perhaps you're not as all-fired right as you think you are?

Frank, when you quote from a source from democraticunderground.com, it doesn't exactly add credence to your statement. I googled Pensitore Review and it didn't return any creditable sites except where good ol' bipartisan folks like yourself quoted them. You comments are no more credible with this source than asking Rachael Maddow how she feels about Fox or asking Sean Hannity how he feels about MSNBC.

All that is going on now is politics and Obama and Reid are only interesting in trying to make the Repubs look bad. The problem for the libs is that the American people, aka the "voters", know exactly what is going on and are not impressed.

Hey Ricky, kind of hard to knock one party as being the 'party of no' when Harry Reed has refused to present bills forward to the Senate from the House. I believe that the House has passed the Payroll tax cut in conjunction with the oil pipeline from Canada, but Harry will not present the bill and the president has promised to veto it if it gets to him. Seems to me that NEITHER party can play in the sandbox at teh same time. I agree with a poster above who said that we should elect them all out until they put country above party - ALL OF THEM.

KevinT, although I trust sites like Media Matters who keeps track of Fox News lies, no one has to depend on anything other than their own eyes and ears to know they lie if one has the stomach to listen to the sh!tfests they call news.

Yes, I saw it when they put a big "D" next to Mark Foley's name, and never saw a retraction. I saw the big Tea Party rally on Fox that didn't match what my friends in DC who saw it first-hand said it was. I have repeatedly witnessed graphs they show to make a point that make no sense mathematically.

Those Republicans were placed there by the voice of the American people

and those same Republicans will be replaced by the voice of the American people next year. A 9% approval rating proves that.

Obama and Reid are only interesting in trying to make the Repubs look bad.

I think they're doing a good job on their own. Pledging to Grover Norquist and the 1% and dismissing the middle class as lazy folks wanting handouts has really helped them to achieve this.

If he can't afford Salmon and Blueberries it's more likely due to his health insurance premiums going up by 15% I thought Obamas health plan was supposed to at least slow this kind of increase. So now we're giving a small percent SS tax break so that middle class families don't feel totally violated by that debacle.

21stcenturypatriot, yeah it's a good thing the other networks don't misrepresent data or facts. Unless you consider CBS and Dan Rather who blatently made up lies against the sitting president at the time. Keep believing Media Matters and other left wing jounalism and you will be no better informed than those who get their information solely from Fox News. Correct me if I'm mistaken, but isn't media matters trying to get Fox News and other talk shows removed from the air?

Those Damn Republicans! They're blocking a "payroll tax cut" that gives 60% of it's benefit to people making over 100K per year? They're blocking a tax cut that targets FICA, that means Social Security and Medicare? Thse damn Republicans are blocking a cut that will mostly benefit people making over 100k, and that will defund further SS and Medicare?

Those Heartless Bastards!

Get a grip Obamanites, He is a cheap charlatan who is perfectly willing to play politics with your SS and Medicare JUST TO GET VOTES!!!!!!

PS - I wonder how much salmon and berries they will have to give up when Obama's Health Care kicks in and they have to pay another 4-6k per year in taxes!

*Cadillac plan = 8k+ for single, 12.5K+ for family, taxed at 40%, plans may go up but the threshold does not.

This article is a puff piece. Interviewing this guy who is a whiner, with "some" credentials sounds like a person that doesn't follow his own advice.

Bottom line, what we are receiving now will lessen what we "might" receive later, if you are fortunate enough to retire. Claims have been made that the losses to SSI will be made up with "spending cuts" elsewhere. This from a Congress who can't create a budget and a super committee who couldn't make cuts either. This plan is bad for SSI and bad for future retires to be able to receive what they put into SSI. A plan they were forced to contribute to. A plan destroyed by Politicians who "borrowed" the money to buy votes.......

P.S. There are some really crazy comments this morning, yet the most logical ones are those most likely to be collapsed.....typical

I consider myself fairly conservative and I think that this is a good tax cut. SS needs to be looked at to revamp eligibility. How many people do you know that are on SS that shouldn't be? Those of us that are paying in are entitled to those benefits when we retire or to our children if we should pass. Perhaps we need to increase the max salary amount to over $125k. I'd rather see SS fixed rather than raise taxes.

After posting for days, now answer the question. How many of you Obama supporters either pay no taxes whatsoever or else you are on the government dole. I guarantee that at least 80% of you are in one of these two categories. These are the main two reasons why Obama has any supporters at all. He is incompetent and he has failed totally as our president and leader.

Well, let's see, about 11% Fed Income tax and 20% overall on my three and a half month contract job. 10% of UI before that. And about 27% Fed Income tax alone when I was working. And not on the dole, but spending down my savings. How interesting that you would characterize well over one third of the population as either being tax dead-beats or on the non-existent Federal dole. Is everyone one ele's money less precious than yours? An attude that I frequently see a Tea Party gatherings. If you could figure out how the rich pay the same or less, by percentage, in taxes as those making much less, and do the same for yourself; you would be much happier. You don't give a damn about other people's tax bills or the governments health, only about YOUR money.

I am happy as hell. I don't worry much about the rich, since I figure they can worry about themselves. One thing I know for sure. Before Obama, no one seemed to worry much about the rich either. Obama has convinced us that we are in a war among the classes. Just like the French revolution. He wants you guys, who consider yourselves deprived and poor, to go to war against the rich, to kill them all, and to take over the government operations. However, you won't get their money. He will. He has lied to you, used you, and manipulated you for his own purposes. And you are too stupid to figure this out for yourselves. Bush was a terrible president. We haven't had a good president since Reagan, and chances are we never will have a good president ever again. We may have another civil war, and I am ready for it. Bring it on. Are you ready to give your life for Obama?

We were far worse off just after WWII. Ike used Government Spending to spur the economy and gave us a great roaring economy. We paid it down quite nicely for decades.

Please get your facts straight if you insist on posting your opinions as facts.

The Federal Reserve does not print US currency. that is done by the Bureau of Engraving and Printing which is a division of the US Treasury. The Federal Reserve is not even a government agency for that matter.

The only thing you even came close to being right about in your post is that the Federal Reserve does monitor and attempt to control inflation.

I know it's an effort but please try to look intelligent when you post.

Facts and Truth have no place in the republican party.

It should make one wonder about the quality of Kofke's ability to write a book regarding financial planning. If the $70/month reduces him from fresh blueberries and salmon to a couple of subway sandwiches that means he spends $60/mo on blueberries and salmon. That sounds like a typical American - My standard of living should not have to adjust to the economy. He is looking forward to the tax break so that he can have the extra $100/mo. He won't save that money but will spend it and then cry the blues when the tax break goes away because then he will have to reduce his budget by $100.

He will cry even harder when he retires and finds his benefits cut because he chose to steal from his future now.

First of all, this tax break shouldn't have come from SS. It should have been an income tax cut. Secondly, this teacher must not know as much about financial planning as he thinks since apparently his books don't sell which explains why he's whining about this tax cut going away.

Underwhelmed

The Fed Reserve managed to funnel $1.4 trillion out without any disclosure until sued by recently by Bloomberg for financial disclosure or the lack thereof. This money went to major national banks including Chase, BOA, Citi, Goldman Sucks, Wells Fargo etc. and some foreign banks. All this was separate from the first bank bailouts and in secrecy.

Bernanke the Pinocchio he is, he squirmed and side skirted when initially asked for an independent audit of the Fed Reserve and now we know why. So don't even think the Fed Reserve is playing on a level field in our best interest only.

Google the Fed Reserve and their major shareholders then go figure.

TJ yea the house passed the extension on the tax cut...BUT added a pipeline for Big OIL !!!HUH??? Harry Read will stop it if it comes with more BIG OIL PORK. The oil co. have had a record year of profits...let them figure it out AND pay for it. Read past the Fox headlines..you may have less Egg on your face. :)

Shows how much you know about harry,if they were running that pipeline across the land he or his mormon mafia buddies own in Nevada it would be half built already.

Praysalot,

Check your facts, they did not add a pipeline but are asking for the President to make a decision on it in 60 days, and we are not paying for the pipeline the Canadians are but it is the Americans that are getting the jobs.

If people really want to worry about what Congress is up to right now, they should look up the National Defense Authorization Act that is about to be signed. This act will allow the government to detain US citizens indefinitely without a trial or formal charges. Look up the official petition on whitehouse dot gov and sign it, asking to repeal the act. I tried to post the link but MSN blocked it.

By the way, Obama threatened to veto this bill UNLESS Congress added the wording allowing detaining citizens, so don't think for a second that Obama has our freedoms at heart. And of course, mainstream media won't report on it enough to really inform us of how unconstitutional and flat out treasonous this bill is. This payroll tax issue pales in comparison to the problems we'll have on our hands if this gets passed. Time to WAKE UP!!

The Gov't is trying to ban everything. Cell phones, oil from Canada, national helmet law. All this is crap and if Obama gets reelected there will be HELL to pay.

Why, with 2 wars, did that dumb ass Bush cut taxes? If that trickle down works so well, eliminate taxes all together---we'd be out of debt in no time, (per the GOP and Papa Norquist.)

Roy,

Why do you randomly put words and phrases in bold? It's visually annoying. I sometimes read your posts for the unintended humor, but all you lobbyists are trying to sell us on a bunch of bull@!$%# with catch phrases, (i.e., class warfare). Taxes are at their lowest rate in 60+ years, coming out of one war and another still going on, corporations have exporting the manufacturing jobs. The voters are going to wise up and demand a tax increase in line with Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford, & Reagan charged the nation's top earners.

GOP philosophy--don't tax, but spend like hell on the military. If a glass of wine is good for the heart--imagine what a few liters a day can do. Tipping points.

Dennis, Ike became President almost 7 years after WWII.

Let's cut out the 'fog' and look at the net result.

Workers will get an extra $900 per year, which will reduce the amount that goes into the Social Security Trust Fund, which leaves that much less for the government to 'borrow' from the trust fund, which means that much more of an increase in the Deficit, and the SS Trust Fund runs out of money even sooner than expected.

Bottom line - It just means more money the government will have to collect in taxes to pay our Social Security benefits in the future - for the second time.

The first time we paid the SS taxes was when it was deducted from our payroll. The second time we'll have to pay those same taxes again will be when we have to raise new taxes to repay the SS funds that the government 'borrowed' and spent.

What's wrong with this picture?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Reserve_Note

The Fed is responsible for "issuing" the notes. Yes technically the Fed does not "print" the money but it is responsible for adding excessive amounts of dollars to our economy thus devaluing the dollar so much that a gallon of milk now cost $4 and bread is $3. That is the Democrats imposing a tax directly on the middle and lower classes and hiding it all behind lies and twists of words.

gday67 - it should have come from income tax?

Wow that is funny since over 45% of people don't pay income tax, if you cut income tax, they you will bitch about the rich getting tax cuts.

sandtrich - since you didn't like the extra money from the Bush tax cuts (now the Obama cuts since he extended, also without paying for them)

did you give that extra money back to the Federal Government? Or are you just a whining hypocrite?

Economists have been warning for weeks that letting the payroll tax cut expire at the end of the year will deliver a blow to the economy, consumer spending and job creation

So they are admitting that taxing more hurts the economy....Shocking!!!!!! What about all the poor old people that you are throwing under the bus with this SS slash of funding?????? OMG!!!! Old people are eating cat food for Christ's sake!!!!!

You libs are just too much

sandtrich "Roy, Why do you randomly put words and phrases in bold?"

Like you just did? lol

Catches your eye, doesn't it?

As for 'taxing the rich', I have no problem with raising the tax rate on upper income people, but only if it's accompanied by similar cuts in spending (including the wars). The last thing we need is raising taxes just to give the politicians in Washington more money to spend.

I happen to think that the biggest problem facing America is the DEBT (Sorry, I did it again), so we need both higher taxes (doing away with loopholes should be 1st) and cutting spending. We are all too close to the 'tipping point' where the task will be hopeless. Personally, I'd be OK with just letting ALL of the Bush tax cuts expire. That alone would cut the Deficit by about $4 Trillion over 10 years, but the first thing we would hear is "That will disproportionately hurt the poor and middle class", despite the rhetoric from the same people about "The Bush tax cuts disproportionately benefited the rich". The truth is that over 80% of the Bush tax cuts benefit the middle and poor classes.

I guess it's time for MSNBC to trot out lots of 'sob stories' to support Obama's 'class warfare' rhetoric.

How predictable.

My first thoughts exactly Korn when i first read that. Dems sayinig a tax increase would hurt the economy. Rail constantly about raising them. Had a veto proof congress and didn't raise them. Had a chance to let them expire and didn't. Constant cries to raise taxes but when given the chance to legislate it in when the R's couldn't stop them they don't. Scratching my head.

All you Fed critics, exactly how has the Fed's monetary policy devalued the dollar? Relative to which other currency? Please be specific and use facts to support your arguments. Do any of you really think our economy would be better off if interest rates were a lot higher than they are today?

LaVall, where do you buy milk at $4/gallon, at Whole Foods or some niche organic market? I just bought milk yesterday for $1.57/gallon, although I admit the price last week was $2.29 and yesterday's price was a special.

If the Fed's monetary policy has created rampant inflation and devalued the dollar, I haven't noticed it. Even gasoline is cheaper now than it's been all year.

Facts please.

After demanding bipartisan solutions, Obama ordered to " dirty" Harry to hijack the extension of the budget that would be apply until the end of 2012, revised by both parties and ready for your approval in the senate, Obama is demanding Republicans to pass the Payroll tax cut on his terms. Obama is not ready to come to an agreement with the Republicans for approval the extension of the payroll tax reduction , because he wants it on his way, The House already pass a bipartisan bill including some provisions (very common parliamentarian practice )focus in job creation in the Energy industry. Obama treat to veto because he has to take sides, losing some support hither from Unions or from enviro wackos if he pass the bill. Obama got the ball in his side and he can't blame Republicans this time, like he does all the time.

how about keeping the social security tax just as it is and lifting the limit of $106,000 to taxing everyone the same.

@Dennis-816242: and others who protect the corrupt government. The difference between WWII and now is that most to almost 85% of the jobs, factorys, Steel mills and more have either shut down or been sent overseas, Mexico, thanks to the Bushes and Clintons, Obamas and so on. Until you wake up and understand you all have been sold out to the corporations, big money wall street and the federal reserve things can and will only get worse. As long as this Administration or the past Administrations are still in power we have only one hope. That hope is that the tax payers of this country wake the hell up and start putting all these corrupt crooks in prison and some to death for Treason. Strip them of all their money, no retirement plans for the congress/senate/and presidents. They are already millionaires to multi-millionaires thru corrupt deals, lobbyist and special interest groups.

Why keep paying them money and insurance when they can afford the best already? The tax payers pay for their vacations, hair cuts, make-up, one of a kind dresses and clothes, medical, insurance and on and on and on. Why are they paid after they leave office? It is an Honor to be called on to be a congressman/woman, senate and president by the people. It does not mean a free ride for the rest of their lives which also means 24/7 security watching over them. We the people don't have personal body guards at tax payers expense now do we. We have to pay for everything and that includes our own insurance, medical, gas, food, aid to countrys that hate us in the billions for which now they want a war with these same countrys and so on. These false flags for wars needs to be addressed and the people who started them all need to be held accountable. Congress/Senate and so on act like a bunch of spoiled brats fighting over a piece of candy, but their candy is greed and power.

Congressman on the tube are saying the conference committee has been finished to fund the govt through sep 30 next year. One senator confirmed but Reid won't let the Dem senators vote on it. Wonder why? The same Reid that made the wackiest statement i have heard ........ "We looked for millionaire job creators and couldn't find any. Us and NPR couldn't find those mythical millionaire job creators". LOL

@azdad48,

This goes back to the whole Tea Party thnig about the Fed. They do not seem to understand that the Fed does NOT print money --- the Department of the Treasury does that. The Fed regulates the money supply --- and the only way it can do that is by taking money out of circulation and releasing money they have previously been holding. They can't print more. The problem with the Fed during the Bush Depression is that of deflation. Deflation is when a dollar gains value because too few dollars are chasing too many goods. The goods have to drop below the cost of production, the dollar then appreciates in value, further contracting the economy. The Fed has led a so-far successful campaign against deflation. Inflation is something to fear, but a deflationary cycle is devastating and the Fed has done well combating it.

Another Pro-Obama article.

Why is it the Liberal media continues the onslaught of Main Street's comprehension of "political" FACTS ?

As for Mr. "Party on No-bipartisan" Reid, he can go back home and count his shares of mineral stocks. Maybe the OWS will show up at his multi-million dollar home doorstep during his Christmas break.

Chris, the Feds balance sheet has tripled. Where did that money come from? They don't "literally" print money but in effect they do. They monitize debt which is not good for the country.

@Chris-749391: The Federal Reserve is nothing but a pack of liars and thieves. You think the fed has done a good job (lmao) and these are the same people who say they lost over 11 trillion dollars or they don't know where it went! How the hell do you lose or misplace that much money? You don't, it was stolen plain a simple by the same crooks you defend but guess who has to pay it back, yeah thats right the tax payer has to pay back the money that was stolen by the same people who printed it.

I agree with Roy 100%. Why are we paying for tax cuts with revenue. We shouldn't be. The Republican's have always said that tax cuts stimulate the economy. I have to say I am in my worst situation yet EVER. Despite the guy and this article I am cutting back ASAP. I have just taken out 250.00 a month out of the economy. I paid that because of my business for services. Those are cut out completely and now not being renewed because my company relies on services I need to make that up another way. I have also almost stopped construction on a home I am building. I can't afford it anymore. If my taxes continue the way they do I won't be able to afford my home. That is sad. I purchased my house years ago. I have afforded it till today when I might no longer afford my home. Forced to sell it. Not for a loss. Because I had some sense. I don't want a handout. But I am NOT pouring another dime into useless issues about defense. Every tax cut is a little more out of SS which is my money anyways. I would rather take some out now if the economy turns around the fund will boost back up for sure.

Daily for three yrs now it just gets more and more clear to me that there has not been anything more unhonorable walk modern american soil than a republican. Shameful and disgusting. Truly not a rightous american amoung them.

Let's raise taxes. ... on EVERYBODY

BigATC... "Veto Proof Congress"? OH REALLY??? Is that all the better you know your Constitution and how your Government works? Art 1, Section 7 describes how Vetos work and it says BOTH HOUSES must REPASS the law by a 2/3rds majority. Obama didn't even have a "FILIBUSTER" proof Senate which only requires 60 votes to overturn. (2/3 of 100 is 67 in case math isn't your strong suit). IN FACT, he had enough GOP opposition (41 votes) to filibuster and block EVERY MEANINGFUL bill that didn't somehow reward and protect the wealthy and elite.

It's no wonder this nation is going to the dogs, there are far too many people complaining about how their government works who haven't a clue how it's SUPPOSED to work. They'd rather listen to some hate jockey on Faux Noise or GOP HATE radio than take the time to actually read anything. Copies of the Constitution can be found ONLINE, At your public Library, in MOST reputable Encyclopedias and EVEN from that Conservative hated ACLU, heck THEY send them out FOR FREE, just for the asking. I have probably 14 copies they've sent me over the years, just perfect for debunking uneducated Conservatives and "Constitutionalists"

First, I agree with Roy Wilson regarding the specific diversion of Social Security.

However, as a baseline stimulus, it is effective. Tax rebate checks, like GW Bush sent out will go to bills or savings, but an extra $15-20 per week will go to food, a movie, or as I overheard today, a wrist corsage for a young man's date. These all have a local component, and a national component to their hiring, distribution and marketing. A similar $900 dollar rebate check invested in a 401k or IRA will do little to establish or maintain a market, only reward a domestic or foreign investor with renewed funds. Or worse, provide a bank with billions in aid, more funds not to lend locally or nationally where returns are low.

BTW, the article did mention canned salmon, the basic ingredient in salmon patties, one of my all-time favorite dishes. A dish that I occasionally had as a youth. and less frequently since. Salmon was about $0.40-0.49 then, close to $ $2 now. A can of tuna. ready to eat is $0.85-0.95 and not other ingredients or cooking required. Salmon patties, at 6-8 per can will cost nearly as much per patty. Who stocks your local store? Who wholesales the cans? Who packs the salmon? Who catches or farms the fish? And where do those dollars go?

Kornfed

So they are admitting that taxing more hurts the economy

BE CAREFUL! Comments like this will get you labelled a racist, xenophobe or grandma-hater by the Libbies.

The problem is the Libbies have painted themselves into a corner. Statistically raising the Social Security rate by 1% causes a 0.1% increase in unemployment.

Those Damn Republicans! They're blocking a "payroll tax cut" that gives 60% of it's benefit to people making over 100K per year? They're blocking a tax cut that targets FICA, that means Social Security and Medicare? Thse damn Republicans are blocking a cut that will mostly benefit people making over 100k, and that will defund further SS and Medicare?

Those Heartless Bastards!

Get a grip Obamanites, He is a cheap charlatan who is perfectly willing to play politics with your SS and Medicare JUST TO GET VOTES!!!!!!

PS - I wonder how much salmon and berries they will have to give up when Obama's Health Care kicks in and they have to pay another 4-6k per year in taxes!

*Cadillac plan = 8k+ for single, 12.5K+ for family, taxed at 40%, plans may go up but the threshold does not.

Mr. Kofke, in referring to blueberries and salmon, was simply noting that buying healthy food becomes much more difficult as the food budget constricts. This is because Big Ag gets such huge subsidies for grain, which goes into less healthy food. This has the result of compounding obesity and health issues.

Our situation is something new-I don't think wehave ever had this severe a recession during wartime. That it should result in record deficits should surprise no one. What should surprise people is that Congress refuses to raise the money to pay the bills it generated. The money is there, and it is not generating jobs. It is generating dividends for the few at the expense of the rest. The redistribution of wealth over the last 30 years is part of the reason we are in our current mess. For the economy to thrive, the lower echelons on the wealth scale must gain ground, because in a consumer economy, that is the only way to have a healthy economy. As the unions have been attacked and weakened, wages and benefits have stagnated across the board. With banks making credit ever easier to get, and no increases in income, the economy has been based on borrowing for years. We now have the consequences of that scenario, compounded by the repeal of Glass Steagall, which has allowed the banks to engage in behavior so risky that we came very close to complete economic meltdown.

This is not going to be fixed any time soon unless we get our Congress to stop squabbling and get to work. The refusal of the GOP to enact meaningful reform endangers the economy. The next time, there may not be any pulling the economy bac from the brink. If the obstructionist behavior continues, there is a real danger of losing what little ground we have gained.

The exportation of jobs will have to stop. Living wages will have to be paid to all workers. Otherwise, we are heading for third world status.

Tom - Plymouth

sandtrich - since you didn't like the extra money from the Bush tax cuts (now the Obama cuts since he extended, also without paying for them)

did you give that extra money back to the Federal Government? Or are you just a whining hypocrite?

I'm a semi-retired organic avocado farmer in Hawaii that has given and taken as a citizen--but I strive to give back more than I take. I'm not bad at it either. I do not apply for subsidies, I have no intent of applying for Social Security--as I don't need it. My wife has early onset Alzheimer's and I refuse any outside funding. I paid a substantial tax rate by operating a business for years, and always said, "don't look for loopholes" to my accountant. I employed people that, in the sale of my businesses, were given loyalty bonuses and a guarantee that they could keep their positions without relocation. I paid for skill and talent and I thanked them generously when I bowed out.

Yes, I benefitted financially from the Bush Tax Cuts, but even a person such as Warren Buffett would be whiners in your book. He pays at a rate of 18% and his employees are hit with 35%. I believe we that can afford it have a shared responsibility to pay more and ask for less.

Tom---you're shilling for the 1% that 72% of the people think should pay higher taxes. The party is over for the top earners.

Why does this common sense question always end up in the comments and not in the article?

Hint: There is no logic of cutting the payroll tax on SS. It's just the first step of dismantling the system altogether.

You can't just raise the cap. This would affect business negatively as they would be on the hook for 6.2% of any payroll tax increase for all employees. That is a big tax increase on business (especially small businesses). I would propose a 3 step plan to do this.

First, businesses should not pay the current 6.2% to the government. This should go directly to the employee instead, in the form of a pay raise. The employer side of the tax was implemented just to hide the fact that the people were paying so much anyway. If the employer had not been paying it, it could have been paid to the employee in the first place.

Second, the employee would pay the entire payroll tax to the government, like self-employed people do. This would be a net 0% increase on the employee, since the employer gave the above pay raise to them.

Third, eliminate the cap. This would affect no employee making less than $106,800 gross income per year. This would affect no businesses, since they are out of the payroll tax game, due to step one.

This would affect individuals, self-employed or employee, making more than $106,800/year (like me).

This is the only fair way to do it.

JDawg, not even worth a response.

Bluegrass, It's simple. The extra money in peoples pockets helps to stimulate the economy. He spends it at a restaurant. The restaurant owner might buy gas, etc.... And on it goes. $1000-$1500 per worker adds up to a big chuck of change flowing thru the economy. This helps the recovery.

Except you are just stealing from your future. If you want stimulus, cut the tax rates across the board by 1%.

Don't they teach the parable of the grasshopper and the ant anymore?

No.

Hey Stan...stop making sense. Common sense has no place here, only angry stereotypes ;)

While you're at it, disconnect health insurance from an employer. That never made any sense to me.

Yeah, LB, I know. I'll try to refrain from making sense in the future ;-)

Wouldn't it be great if everyone tried to make logical arguments and proposals without all of the partisan chest thumping?

It looks like the Republican/Tea Party is at it again. With these %*@^^&s it’s all politics all the time and the hell with the American people. Until we kick their worthless butts out of Washington they’ll keep playing their little right wing games no matter how much damage and pain it causes.

no but taxing corporations um like GE thay made 14 billon in profet and got back 6 billon in a tax rebate over 30 corporations running that lagal scam thats a lot of money

Jimmy,

Punctuation helps people read your posts.

In 2010, GE did make $14 billion in profit and paid $0 in taxes. But, they only received $3.253 billion in IRS tax credits.

Yes, that's still too much. If you paid $10,000 in taxes last year, it took 325,300 people like you to pay for GE's credits.

And Verizon, Boeing, Wells Fargo, and a bunch of others did the same.

How many peoples tax payments disappeared into corporate pockets this way?

And it is not a Republican or Democratic Party problem. It's both of them that allow their corporate masters to do this.

Republicans are not the party of NO any more than Democrats are the part of tax-and-spend. They are both the party of division.

All politicians work together to keep the public divided, blinded and fighting amongst themselves, so their shady deals for their rich masters can continue.

Wake up, America. See these things for what they are. Then you will understand how they play you and steal from you. They steal your money and your country.

Stan and others,

Employers are currently paying 8.2% to make up for the 2% reduction in the employee contribution. The tax that is supposed to go to social security should not be effected by this because the end result is the same 12.4%.

Wrong. No, employers are not making up the difference. The 2% was a straight up cut from SS funding by workers and given to them to spend

Absolutely the tax should be expanded. There shouldn't be a ceiling on the SS tax. That's the only way you're ever going to get anywhere close to making ends meet on SS in the future.

Stan, telling corporations just to pay their share of the tax to workers and then having workers pay 12% + tax won't work. The corporations would just pocket it. If not immediately they'd work it out over time by offering less in initial contracts and in raises ect.

Would be much easier just to CAP the employer portion of the tax, but leave the employee portion of the tax uncapped.

Sloppy Joe is exactly correct.

Obama was all for the pipeline and now wants to put it off I wonder why, the heck with the tax cut we need cheaper gas which will in turn bring down the cost of most everything, I am tired of paying over 3 dollars a gallon, I cant afford to buy most of what I use to like new clothes and foods I use to buy because I spend it on gas now.

The President wants all of us to stop using those bad oil based products .The products that fueled the greatest nation on earth.Those fuels that helped us win WW2 and the Cold War. He wants us to pay more taxes so he and his cronies can redistribute it to the needy. He wants you the fifty one percent who pay income taxes to pay more sohe can give more to those forty nine percent who pay no income taxes will get more and vote for him in November 2012. He doesn't want to build the pipeline because it will bring cheep oil that can be refined and sold in the U.S. He talks about raising taxes on the so called rich but his rich friends pay no taxes. (G.E.) And how does he want to spend our hard earned money?? He and his cronies are going to bypass Congress and spend $16.00 per gallon on fuel for the Navy fuel that normally cost $4.00 per gallon. enough is enough!!!!

The departments of Agriculture and the Navy announced plans Monday to buy 450,000 gallons of non-food biofuels-- at a cost of $16 per gallon -- in what will be the largest federal purchase of biofuels in U.S. history.

The purchase is being authorized by an executive order under the Obama administration's "we can't wait" campaign

Read more: #ixzz1gYulJu1n

The departments of Agriculture and the Navy announced plans Monday to buy 450,000 gallons of non-food biofuels-- at a cost of $16 per gallon -- in what will be the largest federal purchase of biofuels in U.S. history.

The purchase is being authorized by an executive order under the Obama administration's "we can't wait" campaign

Adam,

You can make the employer pay the money to the employee instead. Whether or not the employer reduces compensation to new hires is irrelevant. Take the job or not. At that point, it matters not to the employer what the payroll tax is.

In your scenario, though, only the self-employed (who already pay the full 12.4% tax) would shoulder the entire raising of the cap. Employees would still only pay 6.2% (currently reduced to 4.2%) and the rest would be lost.

That would not be fair.

Yeah the only problem is that most people only have change in their couch because they weren't being taxed so much, and the change in the couch doesn't last forever. once you've turned the couch out once, its empty for a long time. This is going to affect people's abilities to save money every month for emergencies. It's not a good thing.

xtina, everything is relative. What's not a big deal to you....

You can't just kick the payroll tax back up. that increase would be on obama's watch and that would reduce him even farther in the polls. There is a reason that he has threatened and cajoled congress about extending the payroll tax break while simultaneously pushing for the cessation of other tax breaks.

He wants tax breaks for the dems but wants the repubs breaks to end. And there is a very big reason. If any tax breaks end for either party there will be hell to pay because next year is an election year. There are jobs on the line - political jobs. The politicians aren't as concerned with our jobs as they are their own.

thinker, shh! No one is supposed to figure that out!

This is not a tax increase. This was Obama saying lets reduce the normal rate from 6.2% to 4.2% for one year to stimulate the economy. The net effect was to shortchange the social security program by ~200 billion dollars and the economy obviously was not stimulated as much as advertised. This was never meant to be a permanent reduction. The same people who are slinging hate and discontent about the possibility of losing this proposed one time, one year tax break will be the very same people complaining that their SS benefits are reduced in the future when SS system runs out of money even sooner. The Democrats are hyping this as the Republicans want to raise your taxes, when in fact this 6.2% rate is the same as it has been for many years. So now I guess the Republicans can say the Democrats are raising taxes when they let the G.W. Bush tax cuts expire. That is the problem with any tax breaks that are not permanent in the first place. Why don't they let the SS rate go back to 6.2% as it should to fund SS and pass separate legislation to stimulate the economy. The reason they don't do this is that nobody would be able to use the SS tax rate as a talking point and they would actually have to come up with real solutions to problems without depleting the SS system even more. Politicians (Democrats and Republicans) only care about getting re-elected and staying in power. It is never about helping the so called little people. They will all say whatever they think sounds good for the benefit of getting re-elected.

Yeah, thinker - keep thinking of ways to screw the American economy even further so that you have a snowball's chance in he11 next November.

Visit friends & have a look in their couches. Problem solved!

Ped in SF - do you really believe OB considers looking out for your best interests is more important than getting re-elected?

Have you ever stopped and pondered why OB can raise $100M in campaign funds from big businesses?

If you would put away the political hate for a few minutes and look at things rationally you may find there is more going on here then just rules for the good of the people.

MSNBC its a very big deal for those who are on Social Security and Disability. Payroll Tax is the money we put into the retirement and disability account. What Obama has done is reduced that to extreme dangerous very low levels as a result of these dangerous and harmful cuts. Obama stop holding the Elderly and Disabled Hostage and allow the Payroll Tax cut to expire.

Shame on MSNBC for making this seem like a big Tax Raise its not its just putting money back in the system that the Elderly need. Shame Shame Shame!!!!

Some people NEED all the money they can come up with. I'm old (but too young for SS), long term unemployed (lost my benefits already), and we're now trying to get by on just my husband's income. I have many preexisting health conditions, take 13 medications daily and that $920/year can make the difference in whether I can afford the copays on all of them. Forget entertainment or eating out, that is no longer an option. We're in survival mode.

Let us all understand something:

SOCIAL SECURITY IS SOLVENT AND WILL BE LONG INTO THE FUTURE.

If congress quits robbing it for every little thing they want to do that they think is more important.

Bill Clinton has written a terrific book on this topic as well as job creation. I would advise some of you to read it remembering that this president, William Jefferson Clinton not only dug us out of the Regan deficit but left office with a budget surplus and a roaring economy.

Some of you need to realize that they are paying the SS TRUST with the money from the general fund, nothing is being taken out of the TRUST. its ridiculous that you guys keep touting this nonsense when its been disproven time over. And for all of you who live anywhere but nebraska and want this pipeline answer this question.

Did congress write into law in this plan that these tar sand oils must be sold in the US first before being put on the world market?

The answer is no, so for all of you claiming somehow that this magically lowers oil prices and magically lowers the price for gas you are delusional. Tar sands oil is dirty and costs more to refine so to make up the lost margins it will cost more to sell, secondly the amount of co2 it will produce is more dense and more lethal to the environment then crude oil. Thirdly the United States produces enough oil each month for its own supply the problem is that major US companies took US crude off the US markets and pegged it to the Euro market so that they could amass massive profits. And we export 20% of our oil to japan and other asian nations which is funny because how much do we import? oh yeah 20%. ergo this pipeline will create the 2,000 temporary jobs, destroy the ozone, poision peoples water and you guys are happy about it. But none of you live in either canada or nebraska, so typical.

there is no ss trust fund! it does not exist.

because the ones with the highest salary are carrying everyone else...I love the middle class republican goon who is convinced they pay half of their pay to taxes...its hilarious because they can only dream of those tax rates...

"the ones the highest salary are carrying everyone else" . . . . Really?

Ask ANY business owner, Corporate CEO, major league ball player, famous actor, etc . . where the bulk of their wealth came from origionally. If they are honest, they will tell you it came from selling something to the masses. The masses are the middle and low classes. The wealthy are wealthy because of the middle class and low classes in this country. I think that it would bode well for everyone to consider that.

Peter, do the math! If you got 100 people in the room and one guy get $2000 and the rest get $920x99 which number is bigger?

@underwhelmed

the wealth are wealthy because they worked to aquire that wealth by providing a value to the purchaser. the nice thing about capitalism is if you don't like the product simply do not buy it.

they are not wealthy because they took advantage of the middle or lower classes, like your indicating.

stop the baseless class warfare rhetoric

Because this tax is to pay for Social Security and Medicare. Since the cost for each taypayer in these programs are not based on income the tax is not progressive. Income tax is progressive. Please think before posting!

Peter - It isn't as much about the size of each individual paycheck increase nor the amount of money put back into the economy. It is about the number of votes that disappear when the tax break disappears. Don't be fooled by his concern for the common citizen becausse he doesn't have any. The money not being paid in now will come back to haunt everyone. The amount of taxes will have to be repaid at tax time. If the money comes out of the SS fund then there will be reduced money going in and the fund goes defunct sooner.

But either way, it will not impact obama if the tax break gets extended. He will use it for political fodder. If it wins him a second term and then is abolished he will say he tried but the repubs shot him down. If it lasts through a second term then ends, it will be on somebody else's term. If it doesn't get extended and he loses he will use it as an excuse - he tried but there were too many against him.

the wealth are wealthy because they worked to aquire that wealth by providing a value to the purchaser. the nice thing about capitalism is if you don't like the product simply do not buy it.

they are not wealthy because they took advantage of the middle or lower classes, like your indicating.

stop the baseless class warfare rhetoric.

lol @ Brendan. Yeah, they worked - like Mitt Romney (opps, inherited wealth, make a killing killing US jobs though, hasn't had a job since 2006), or perhaps Donald Trump (opps again, inherited wealth, filed bankruptcy a few times to save some money).

With this latest effort from the House, once again the wealthy and their GOP comrades conspire to stick it to the middle class and let them carry the tax burden. They're not going to be throwing you any crumbs for shilling for them either.

@ Pedestrian

if im not mistaken its harry reid that is being the obstructionist to save obama some political points?

open your eyes... democrats are the party of the rich( look at wall street campaign contributions, no argument there, obama is the man of the hour on wall street!!), always have been and always will be..

democrats also just happen to be the party of chrony capitalism, picking winners and losers, but thats discussion is for a different day

Did romney not create wealth with his money? Why should he have to employ people? A business's job is to make profit not make sure your neighbor has a job and can feed his children. if you want socialism go move to europe

I find it amusing that the brainwashed followers of the left STILL claim that the Repubs are the party of Wall Street. Here's how Wall Street campaign contributions were dispersed by party in 2010: Dems received 62%, Repubs only 37%. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20003083-503544.html Now how exactly is it that the Repubs are the party of the 1%???? Nothing like the facts to drive a lefty insane...

actually Romney laid off a ton of workers to get his wealth beside other nefarious dealings but lets not bother with any real facts shall we? Better look up his true record pal in 'job creation"before you spout clueless GOP rhetoric.

DP, you said...

"Because this tax is to pay for Social Security and Medicare. Since the cost for each taypayer in these programs are not based on income the tax is not progressive. Income tax is progressive. Please think before posting!"

This 2% has nothing to do with medicare. Social Security and Medicare were separated several years ago. Back when they were combined they were collectively referred to as FICA. When they were separated there remained a cap on Social Security Tax but there is none on Medicare. The fact that these are flat percentages does indeed make them pregressive taxes. The more one makes, the more one pays.

SS is not progressive. Income Tax is progressive

What a jello head.

@ B-Realistic

Im not spouting ant rhetoric, its not an employers job to employ people. Its an employers job to make money for the company and owners. Considering when he was a major part of "Bain" Capital, he did create many startups and other business's. Layoffs are part of the natural business cycle.. not all business just keeps growing and growing it doesn't work like that.

I find it funny how the left always brings up the fact that he laid a lot of people off. So what? so did every other company.. what is the difference?

Sloppy Joe,

How nice that you feel the need to call someone a "jello head."

If you will read the entire post or go back to DP's post that I was responding to; he said "these programs are not based on income." Being a percentage of income makes them "based on income."

This tax break is for the Social Security tax. Social Security taxes are flat taxes that are capped at $106,000 of income. So if you look at them across the entire income spectrum, they are regressive. That means that wealthier people pay a lower percentage than folks who make less. The intent of this tax break was therefore to give some extra money to lower and middle class people who are much more likely to spend the money versus saving it, which wealthy people would tend to do. Thus, it is a stimulative tax break.

The bill was written so that the tax break was refunded to the Social Security trust fund from the general fund, so this will not impact the long-term viability of the Social Security system. It is classic stimulative government spending. It does add to the debt, but is designed to kick-start the economy and result in higher revenue as a result over the mid term. That may or may not work, of course, but most economists consider this type of tax break to be far more stimulative than providing tax breaks to wealty people.

the wealth are wealthy because they worked to aquire that wealth by providing a value to the purchaser. the nice thing about capitalism is if you don't like the product simply do not buy it.

This is one of my favorite Republican lies.

In reality most of the rich are rich because they rode the backs of the "little people" robbing from them, using them, degrading them, and humiliating them so they could get ahead.

Many of the rich are greedy useless b***rds who believe they are entitled. When really they are parasites that feed off the will and sweat of the workers. They create nothing and take the best of everything simply because they are more ruthless.

Noblese Oblige - it's a lost notion, but coincidentally, a revolution began because another country once forgot what it means.

The 1.4 million Americans in the IRS' top taxpayer category in 2009 reported nearly 17 percent of all the country's taxable income. From those filers, the IRS collected $318 billion or almost 37 percent of all the individual taxes paid in 2009.

Read more: Top 1 Percent: How Much Do They Earn? | Bankrate.com #ixzz1gYo8pkoG

Based on 2009 tax year filing data, the Internal Revenue Service says an adjusted gross income, or AGI, of $343,927 or more will put you in the top 1 percent of taxpayers.

Read more: Top 1 Percent: How Much Do They Earn? | Bankrate.com #ixzz1gYkLqhRe

A gentle reminder to all those who speak of a Social Security Trust Fund.

There is no such thing as a Social Security Trust Fund!

Social Security taxes go directly into the "general fund". Social Security payments to retirees come from the general fund and of course from the sale of Treasury Bills (which are necessary since we spend more than a trillion more than we take in.)

1 guy came up with an ideal which is interesting (with a twist). He said to have the employer's 6.2% contribution paid directly to the employee (who would then pay it to the govt).

Why not just pay it directly to the employee ... in an IRA or fund owned directly by the employee ... not subject down the road to means testing, or tampering with in any way. Whatever is there is owned by the employee ... if it's a lot then great, if not oh well. Chile has had this in place for 30 years now and they have accumulated much more wealth than we have in our SS accts. Since we don't actually have anything in our accts ... just a number signifying what we've paid in and what we should get. The amount paid in now just goes into the general fund and gets spent. Nothing is invested for our benefit.

Did you even READ the article? The entire article was about him discussing his budgeting options and how they were affected by the taxes.

Geesh!

Again, reading the article and actually commenting on it's content would be too close to all that truthy, facty stuff.

This article isn't about living within his means as much as it is about his standard of living. When he got the "temporary" tax break he raised his standard of living. But now that the "temporary" break is in danger of expiring, he is dreading having to reduce his temporarily increased standard of living.

While nobody wants to go backwards, it brings to question how realistic and knowledgeable he was when he authored books on budgeting. Maybe some of that "extra" money should have been squirreled away.

If he's living on $50K/yr then apprently his books aren't all that great

I for one am pretty fed up with Teachers complaining about how much money they don't make. Teaching is an honorable profession but everyone knows it does not pay that well until you get into management. But if you look at what Teachers are paid and divide that by actual hours worked they make a hell of a lot more per hour than most of us. My company provides me with four weeks paid vacation plus nine payed holidays off every year. My neighbor the Teacher is off four month's a year counting paid holidays and doesn't make that much less than I do!

The goverment never lives within its means they just rob the taxpayer or print up more money , just think if a family printed up more money when they needed, prision time, but not the goverment they spend money like it were going out of style. Remember the goverment that can give you every you want can also take everything you have and they wont spend time in prision. If we got rid of all the dead beats that work for the goverment and their realitves we wouldnt be broke.

That's what it is in your head.

Now what is it in reality? Do you know the answer to that one?

SS is going broke. If you pay in even less and don't allow any change to the system it will just go broke even faster. That IS fact, prove otherwise.

Brain, cannot handle the truth????

Common has head on his shoulder...

have a good week.

Common sense does not work in Washington nor with the sheep in America. NEVER should this reduction into SS been started to begin with. The absolute absurdity that you take a system on the verge of blowing up and DEFUND it by adding less money essentialy means that anyone that voted for this needs their head examined (both parties). Now you want to revert back to the normal rate (which is how SS gets funded) so all the people whining about SS and it being their entitlement can get their money.

It is clear you could literally market anything to the masses and they would buy into like the sheep they are. Sorry, if this guy cannot adjust the rest of his spending to balance the SS deduction going back to WHAT IT was he has bigger things to worry about in life. Perhaps in his part-time job as a teacher (sorry working 180-days a year is not full-time) he can work summers and save us all the trouble of listening to his whining.

Social Security has been frozen for 10 months, no extra has been given out. Add civil service retirees who paid social security for years at the 6.2 rate, only to have Reagan take 53% of their paid in social security because they are "double dippers" If you get only half, you should pay only half, this effects millions of us. Now the republicans will block the social security reduction and raise it back up, after 106 thousand, there are no additional charges, not even the 6.2 %, so kiss the rich one more time, seems their votes are for sale. The rest of us are asked to bend over and touch our toes.

Just like the last budget debacle when they said "its the entitlements that are going to get cut." Yet there was not one congressperson urging to cut any entitlement program (Republican or not). It was a 3rd stimulus that the President and his economic dumb team are/were advocating. Very few people actually know the truth about the budget problems in Washington and how they are brought on by the Democratic party refusing to cut back on spending, demanding more taxes (saying its only on the rich), yet offering up multi trillions of dollars to corporations that supported their candidates (Solara).

And that's the propaganda the liberals have gotten away with. NOBODY is talking about true cuts, only a slowdown in increases. When you grow government by 7% instead of 8% that's not a cut in my book.

"Obuttheadcare" . . . . "Dumbassocrat"? Really?

Do you realize how uneducated statements like that make you look?

My favorite is Libaterd.

I don't think it's limited to JUST those statements.

Is that the best you have? Insults and name calling? Let's just debunk some of your statemnts:

What tax increases are you talking about? Tax rates are at their lowest in 60 years.

By taking our "medicine" 3 years ago, do you mean letting the economy collapse and having unemployment at around 25% like during the Great Depression?

Democrats had control of Congress, but not a filibuster proof majority because of anti-American morons like Joe Lieberman.

As far as OWS is concerned, they did get the conversation turned to the ridiculous level on income inequality in this country.

But you know what? You just keep listening to what Hannity and Limbaugh tell you. Since obviously you are to stupid to think for yourself.

By the way, thanks for serving. And I mean that with all sincerety.

No it's not limited to those statements but it is like a big red "MORON" tattoo across their foreheads. At least you know you can skip the rest of the post when they start it like a third grader.

OWS has been a disaster for democrats. They made the mistake of disrupting the average persons life, not too smart. Also, the latest poll shows big government almost three to one over big business as our greatest threat, (64% vs 24% if I remember). When OWS protests business and NOT government, they only marginalize themselves even further.

Let us not forget "Republicrats" "teabaggers" and "Rupukes". Just to name a few. You liberal hypocrites sure have a lot of room to talk about name calling. And then someone above (1.2) has the nerve to call someone on Newsvine a moron. Excuse me while I go vomit.

And Repugs and Rethugs and all the wonderful names for Pres. Bush and VP Cheney. Pot, meet kettle.

P111,

Show me that poll. Do you really think anyone will believe that?

what the hell you smoking, you've been taken in by the republican BS machine if you believe what you just wrote. I feel sorry for you.

All you have to do is open your eyes to see our socialist gov't taking over. I don't belive either Repubocrats or Demosocialist. Lets start all over. Lets get rid of Obama and the Congress!!! Our country is going to Hell and will soon be a time for taking our country back.

Lumpy, the dems did hold a filibuster proof senate.

http://washingtonindependent.com/74033/the-four-month-supermajority

The one thing that people had better realize and this article fails to mention is where the payroll tax cut comes from. Do you know it takes away from Social Security? Do you realize that SSI in 2011 for the first year ever, is paying out more than it is taking in. It is projected to become insolvent in 2036, before this tax cut. What do you think the results of taking an additonal >100 billion out of Social security will do? Obviously, move the insolvent date/year up. What are people going to do when it is insolvent? You will not get any money. The dems kept saying that Freddie and Fannie was sound. A few months later, the mortgage market collapsed. Do you remember barney and maxine?

This guy is a veteran so he's exempt...yeah DA because you have the veterans affairs office and the VA hospital and VA Loans and the GI bill heaven for bid the rest of us civilians get anything from our government.

Did you ever think that this is the democrats plan? Everything they do, makes people dependant on the government. Everything. This is how they figure on getting the votes. Make people rely on the government, then bring granny out when there is talk of taking it away.

Both parties are the parties of NO. No cuts to entitlements for the Dems. No tax cuts for the Republicans.

Reagan and Bush (Sr) both agreed to tax increases during their terms. Spending cuts promised by the Democrats were to come later. Never happened. Bush raised taxes and was taunted by the Democrats during the campaign.

Cuts and tax increases have to be simultaneous to be taken seriously. :)

Both parties are ignorant in their own way(s)

Think about where this oil will go once the pipeline is built with Canadian supplies. Why must we pipe Canadian oil from our northern border to ports on the Gulf Of Mexico? So it can be shipped to China as all the profit goes to the oil companies. We risk our aquifer and American soil so China gets more oil and Exxon gets richer.

If this oil were to be used by Americans to lessen our dependence on Middle Eastern oil, there would be no need of a pipeline. Build a refinery on our northern border. We would then ship that oil to American cities by rail and by truck. Just as we do now. The one and only reason to pipe it to a far away port is to ship it overseas.

Commonsense. I'm not being a hater, but pipelines currently crisscross the country, piping oil from refineries to the Northeast, Southeast, Midwest and the West.

Yeah, maybe some thought might be given to the route the Keystone Pipeline is to take. But to say, that the extension of unemployment benefits and a 2% "temporary" cut in the withholding for SS will create far more jobs, just seems ingenuous.

BTW, I voted for Obama. Once :)

Jim B-3885087, I appreciate your sentiments. Could you please name those crude oil pipelines and their general locations? I know of the Alaskan pipeline with it's many environmental problems. I know of many natural gas pipelines. Please pardon my ignorance, but I am not aware of other extensive American crude oil pipelines.

I understand that the latest proposal demands the use of Canadian produced supplies exclusively. I find no fault with these Canadian demands. If we were to pipe American oil from the southern border of Canada to her most northern territories, such demands would seem reasonable. Would such demands require American experts to supervise that implementation? I would think so.

Our soil and our aquifer would face great risk to promote wealthy Canadian and American oil company interests with minimal effect to impact American economic troubles . We will furnish the ditch diggers as Canada and Exxon provides the highly paid engineers. All of this to ship Canadian oil overseas. This a win, win situation for wealthy speculators and a colossal loss to Americans led to believe the result will be lower energy costs.

It's not our oil. The pipeline leads directly to the ports of the Gulf of Mexico to be shipped to China and other developing nations. Our only advantage is employment of a few unskilled American workers to support the escalating economic rise of Communist China and our dearest neighbor. I love Canada as our dearest friend. I would never accept the greatest risk to handsomely reward my best friend that risks nothing as I risk all.

You liberals sound like parrots. Fair Share, Fair Share, Gwawwww, Fair Share.

I guess its better than sounding like fools--give it all to the rich, give it all to the rich, give it all to the rich--we dont even no why--but hey give it all to the rich because they need it more than they poor.

You wouldn't know a 'fair share' if it hit you face! The oil industry is responsible for an already 'unfair' share of gov revenue. Its the proverbial piggy bank for gov.

RoadWarrior! Ouch! Words like fair and share. Cutting!

How about a few for the other side. Like uncaring, selfish, greedy, ignorant. I could go on but I know they are not as cutting as 'sharing' and 'fair'. I'll have to give you the nod there. Well done.

"Like uncaring, selfish, greedy, ignorant"

I know but we can't vote out democrats for another year so we'll just have to live with it.

Uncaring is passing Obamacare instead of focusing on jobs. Selfish is rewarding your friends and punishing your enemies, greedy is laundering money through Solyndra so it comes back to your campaign coffers at taxpayer expense, ignorant is thinking you can spend your way out of debt.

P111,

Actually uncaring is focusing on ousting the President at the expense of the economy just so you can make it look like he did nothing.

Selfish is exactly what you say, and the Right is great at it. See Bil Clinton's impeachment.

Greedy is taking money from Fannie and Freddy then blaming them for everything.

Ignorant is thinking you can fix the economy by just cutting anything to make the way for more tax cuts for the rich. It hasn't wiorked in 30 years and won;t now, regardless of what Hannity and Limbaugh say.

Actually, I want most of the energy deductions, exemptions and special depreciation schedules to expire. That segment seems to be doing fine. I do want the payroll tax restored to fund Social Security. I have no problem with a 17-20% capital gains tax. Or higher income taxes.

Ike taxed $million dollar+ incomes at 90+%. It wasn't called justice or called fair, it was called required to get back on our feet.

Now "true" Americans who have NOT been rationed, "wage frozen" or "price frozen" want to play the USMC Band in their background while they spout ME, ME, ME. They have NOT sacrificed they way the "Greatest Generation" sacrificed or the way demanded by the Great Depression. They claim to bet all and risk loss, but actually have been protected by bankruptcy laws past after the Depression. Now, they dismantle those laws, which protected their wealth, to sieze that of others. They decry Social Security, based on the payroll of the nation, as a Ponzi scheme, while promoting GOLD as an investment, based on the momentary acts of unknown speculators (manipulators?).

Restoring budget balance AND preserving world standing AND our standard of living will require decades and a progression of Presidents. I leave it to you to try and figure out how much incremental pain you want to suffer, and how much you want to pass on. Remember this, however, the old and the young still outnumber those in the middle. And some day, they may forget about distractions like "Christian" rights, "Christian" definitions of marriage, and "Christian" definitions of human life; and return to the definition of their own concerns.

Um...17% approval rating for congress is not exactly crowd pleasing performance. If the republicans were actually willing to work there would have been many more options. But that might have worked and we can't have the economy getting better while Obama is in office. What kind of message would that send to the nation!

It is fascist democrats that want to rule EVERYTHING that are blocking progress. When was the last time democrats passed a budget? They table every good idea republicans have because they can't take credit.

Time to face reality, democrats were such a disaster the first two years they suffered the worst loss in 70 years, yet they still refuse to change course. I guess you can't fix stupid.

p111, correct, you can't fix stupid. The problem is, it's also not easy to fix fascism, which you erroneously attribute to just one party.

Go ahead and do as you're told, and vote for your slave masters next year. Like many of the American Sheeple, you will honestly believe that you are making a free choice in your own best interest, when in fact you will only be doing as you've been told, voting to allow yourself to be robbed and raped. But you are an American citizen, and I will respect and defend your right to express your opinion at the ballot box...even if you choose to vote for your own demise.

Its not that they hate working class America--its just that they know there is a little more money they can steal from them before they wont be able to steal anymore.

Bush/republican average unemployment 5%

Obama/democrat average unemployment 9%

Who hates the working class??

Facts trump liberal lies every time.

p111,

The unemployment rate under Bil Clinton was 4.2% in 1999, whwen he took office it was 7.5%, under Bush 1. Clinton had the lowest unemployment rate in 30 years.

You are entitled to your own opinions, not your own facts, bu tthen again you right wingers always get your facts and opinions confused.

It was 7.5% under Goerge W and now 9% under Obama??? What happened to putting our faith in him ... that he would make things better. What a crock that was .... NEXT!!

LUMPY, thought this was about B.O. and G. W.! Let's see, W's unemployment started going up soon after Dems took back the house in '07-FACT.. Clintons unemployment went down shortly after Repubs took over the House. Funny thing about facts, they don't change but dems do try to rewrite them!

Unemployment is certainly measured subjectively--lets talk about who is really causing the unemployment--the coorporations.

You honestly think the democrats are for the middle class? Here are some facts for you. Let's start with the healthcare bill. If you healthcare premiums are over $8,000, you are taxed. This means middle class. How about the New York union that dropped coverage for children?

http://www.laborunionreport.com/portal/2010/11/karma-seiu-drops-health-care-coverage-for-members%E2%80%99-children/

How about AARP and others raising their HC premiums because of the HC bill?

The democrats want to tax you for each mile you drive.

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/03/25/democrats-still-trying-to-push-new-mileage-tax/

How about the cap and trade? This will increase costs for fuels for middle and lower class.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2009/jun/25/your-guide-cap-and-trade/

Can any of you look at yourself in the mirror and honestly say that the democrats are looking out for the middle and lower classes? I can not see how you can. Again, let's not forget where this payroll tax cut comes from. It is Social Security, which this article fails to mention. In 2011, it is the first year that SSI will pay out more than taking in and now you are taking another >100 billion per year out of it. Let's see, is this looking out for the middle and lower classes? Tell that to the people who will no longer receive SSI when it is out of money, which is projected with in the next 25 years, no including taking money away from it, as the payroll tax cut. For people who will still be around, remember, it was the democrats who wanted it.

Im not a democrat.

Love and politics, the problem is that the Republicans do not want to take away from what you have earned, they do not want to give to those who have not earned it. By redistribution of wealth. The democrats want to take away from people that have earned it and give to the people who want to take.

The payroll tax cut only affects the first $106,000

Hey Tex's Do you even have to pay any Sociay Security tax after $100,000

jw, you and other liberals need to understand what you are talking about before you talk about the Bush tax cuts. It will not raise taxes on the wealthy, only. It raises all tax brackets by 5%, not just the top tax bracket. If you and other liberals or americans get their way and these expire, everyone's taxes go up by 5%.

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/pf_article_110005.html

You are living with Alice in Wonderland if you think anything else. Please read.

The job creators all live in Shanghai and Beijing. Keep up!

They don't. I live next to a natural gas pipeline pumping station. They only have 12 employees working there responsible for 300 miles of pipeline. You have to have a pumping station every so often, but around 100 employess will probably all they need to maintain the engines and pipeline.

So the pipeline pumps far more profit to the company than it benefits maybe 100 workers?

Sure does, that is how any business operates, employ the least amount of employees as you can, a good business model. Probably heavy oil will require a pumping station every 200 miles or so, unlike natural gas.

Oh, and I forgot. Probably 1 pilot in a Cessna will be employeed, to fly along the pipeline maybe once a week, to check the pipeline for safety reasons, etc.

It's not the pipeline that will create jobs.

Not for the pipeline at least.

I have to be amazed at the stupidity of some liberals. The pipeline will do something. It will bring the oil from Canada to refining stations in Louisiana. Well, once the oil gets there, someone has to run the refinery. (jobs), then someoen has to take the refined oil and distribute it. (jobs). You might even need some additional sales/marketing people (jobs). And since those jobs are in Louisiana there's more money there and that means people with homes who need to purchase food (hey grocery store jobs), and houses (construction, landscaping jobs), cars (maybe from a US auto factory, more jobs). Etc.

Its funny that liberals talk so much about Keynesian stimulus spending and how $1 spent by government will be $400 in stimulus to the economy [note: not really that much, but its clear some wish it was that powerful.] But they refuse to admit that business spending would have exactly the same effect, and be more lasting since a business isn't going to possibliy vote to raise taxes next year and take all its money back.

CS,

But the construction will employ thousands both directly and indirectly. You want stimulus only if it's taxpayer funded government stimulus. You hate stimulus if it's private funded. I think you need a sanity check.

Open up new refineries away from the hurricane prone Gulf states. Eliminate the pipeline, use that money to build refineries up north, create jobs up north, distribution hubs up north, lowering the price of gas since hurricanes don't shut down these refineries.

No new refineries keeps the cost of gasoline high. Plenty of land up north not developed away above the tital basin. Get it away from the coastline!

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot, THIS SHOULD BE A NO BRAINER TO ANYONE. Pull your head out of the oil soaked sands of the gulf coast, and take a deep breath.

to "Not so common sense"

Refining oil requires a certain level of skill. Refining think black crude like the oil sands of Canada requires a lot of skill, a ton of experience and special equipment that is expensive.

The funny thing is that the refineries in Louisana are already well set up for this.

Texas crude and the oil produced by Venezuala are both thick black crude. They are sent to the refineries in LA because its one of hte few places they can get the oil refined. The pipeline acutally solves one huge problem. Building a new refinery (which would never happen in the US, the EPA and the environmental lobby has blocked all attempts for 25 years and even fights refinery expansion.) is expensive and won't bring in the experienced workers. The pipeline brings the oil to the workers with the experience to refine it, at facilities already built to handle this kind of oil and is probably a ton safer than putting it on tankers and sending it over an ocean.

Of course, the alternative is to try to pipeline the oil to Canada's west coast and then ship it to China where less efficient refineries with less skilled workers will produce more carbon for less usable oil than the US facilities will.

The oil is going to get sold somewhere. You can either work to keep it in the US where there are environmental protections and skills workers, or you can continue to show your complete lack of sense and fight to allow China to pollute the atmosphere even more.

I prefer to build a sensible pipeline. You appear to want more pollution and higher energy costs.

Mvargas, that is an excellent point about the EPA blocking refineries.

Mr Common Sense-if the refineries are built up north how do you purpose the refined products get to their destination? Pipeline? It is by far the most inexpensive method of transporting fuels. I'd rather have heavy crude flowing by my house instead of highly combustible refined fuels.

To cover the government shortfall of income, tax rates will have to go up. 401K is not a good idea anymore. Google for "PENSION PLAN KONDRATIEFF WAVE" to learn why. Save after tax money. Pay tax now. Tax is on sale. You never know what the tax rates will be by the time you retire. Government can find other ways to confiscate your retirement savings as well!

Austerity measures across the world will be deflationary. Keep your dollars safe. Do not go into excessive debt. This is not the time to buy things with credit.