How many people are aware that they are going to get hit with a 2% bite out of their paychecks

The solvency of SS is calculated upon that 2%. It was only cut as a temporary measure, it can't remain permanent.

To me, it is a no brainier. It has to be let die in order to assure the viability of Social Security.

Turn down the heat, combine trips, maybe look around for a few "economies." I can't not help family.

If we have to hop off that silly "cliff" (or run down the slope) in order to make people "get" that the GOP would rather hold regular people hostage so they can curry favor with their rich pals, well, let's go Thelma...!

nt

Go over the cliff! Get that Bush tax crap out of here, sick of saying the name Bush.

Go over the cliff -- and learn to itemize. Why just take what the "forms" deal out. ITEMIZE like the 1% and never pay taxes again -- or at least pay less

Most of the things the working class used to be able to deduct are gone since St. Ronnie

It has to involve making money. You could sell homemade jam by the side of the road and deduct a portion of your front yard, tons of mileage, some car repairs, a trip to jam country , internet, computer and such if you create a jam blog, a portion of your house as office. The possibilities are endless and it adds up. You get my drift...

we can afford it. Made it before and we will make it again. At least it isn't 10-20%,it's just the cost of a free society with bennies.

My position on this is the same as Obama's:

The tax cuts should be made permanent for incomes under 250,000. Let every dollar over that amount go back to Clinton-era tax rates.

It'd be hard for Republicans to argue around the fact that the Clinton years were remembered as good years despite the higher tax rates on top income earners in the 1990s. They'll struggle to paint those tax rates during those years as being disastrous to the US economy. They weren't.

That can only happen if we let it happen. Where are our townhalls? Where is our movement against what the teaparty is doing? We need to get VOCAL. A speech here and there won't cut it!

The worst part is that I suspect many town hall meetings where you saw a bunch of protesters arguing against the health insurance reform law were paid to protest.

The left wishes it had a paychecks-to-protest apparatus like the right does.

Then right wing news outlets and radio stations picked up on this and made it out as if most Americans were against health insurance reform because they were all stacked with Tea Partiers.

The 2% won't seem like much compared to the 30% increase in health insurance deductions.

I would really rather keep social security healthy than have that extra 2%.

lifestyles to their take home pay and that the reduction was a bad idea at the time (I got criticized on this board about that conclusion). I knew it would be real painful to go back. Remember this is 2% of almost everyone's income. Rich folks are complaining about less than 5% on their income over $250,000.

2% is a lot of money especially for those in lower incomes. For me it represents a $1,600 hit. That is money that I will not be able to save for my children to go to college. That is an easy give up for me. Someone who made the decision for more expensive housing will have a more difficult time adjusting to this change.

It has to go back for solvency, but it should never have been adjusted downward to begin with. It set a bad precedence by taking money from the general fund to cover the shortfall. It sent the message that Social Security and General Fund taxing/spending are part of the same big pool.

I wish Obama would adopt my suggestion. Lift the cap on all income and adjust withholding rates to pay as you go. Make the income over the $105K that was not previously taxed, taxed at 2% rate lower than the income which was previously taxed. The income above $105K will not count towards calculuating future benefits (this approximately puts that higher income on an equivalency to those making over about $50K the breakpoint for calculating the lowest level of benefit). Eventually draw down the Trust Fund by not raising rates as S.S. benefit payments increase. Eventually adopt a total Pay as You Go with a 1 year buffer (like it used to be). Raise rates as necessary to continue benefits at current levels (no reduction, no later date to retire, no additional means testing). Rates should cap at 7.5%/7.5%. If funds are insufficient then reduced benefits should be paid out on a sliding scale with a formula similar to the current benefits distribution.

... or further undermine SS as a whole. There is no free lunch.

If the kick it down the road one more time, that will make people forget and that 4.2% would be the new norm. Granted, the employer still pays the 6.2%, but look at how much money is being siphoned out of the program.

once upon a time when hubby had a fabulous job, he met the SS deduction before the end of the year and his paycheck increased because requirement was meant. but, we were accustomed to paying the deduction all year, so it was just an added bonus in the paycheck at year's end. we wouldn't have missed that money, because we always budgeted for the SS being taken out at all times.

Not aware, thanks for the heads up. The GOP can go to hell.

THey jacked up our taxes by 2%.

I support the tax hike.