Your opinion on the proposed 2% cut in Social Security tax?

[underpants]

I was wondering.

On the one hand, like the withholding reduction last year, it will put more money in the economy but it stinks of a way to underfund Social Security.

[rox63]

1. They should have raised the SS cap in exchange

Let those who make over $106 K help pay for this.

[underpants]

5. I agree

the cap needs to go away

[bluethruandthru]

9. ding, ding ding!

Why is it that Obama's advisors didn't think of that? Or did they...but they really want to see SS underfunded and dead?

[zigzagzed]

12. I agree

I agree, but at least this will benefit those most in need of help.

[avaistheone1]

16. Obama campaigned on raising the cap.

What ever happened to that?

[saigon68]

22. stick a fork in him

he's done I for one am done with this poseur Like LBJ he's done

[rocktivity]

33. Eliminate the cap altogether

and EVERYONE can pay a LOWER rate.

:headbang:
rocktivity

[PA Democrat]

2. It would be great if they significantly raised or completely removed the cap.

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[PBS Poll-435]

4. It is an idea. Doesn't really bother me except that it makes FICA/MI calculations "interesting"

But if we can make it work in the same tax year I am all for it.

[wryter2000]

6. It worries me, to tell you the truth

The "conservatives" are always screaming that Social Security is bankrupt. Taking money out of the fund could reinforce that, imho. Once it's decreased, it's going to be hard to return to current levels.

[doc03]

7. It sucks, retirees get no COLA for 3 years, at least last year

they got a onetime payment of $400. So now a person making $40,000 walks off with a $800 windfall with the money that is supposed to fund SS and a person making $106,000 gets $2120. What do retirees get, well you can bet we will face even deeper cuts because of this $120 billion handout.

[saigon68]

23. They get CAT FOOD

No fancy feast for them

[Individualist]

25. What do retirees get? The shaft.

[madrchsod]

32. i wonder what that was....ya my 600 a month is breaking the bank!

[sad sally]

51. it was $250 in 2009; no raise in 2009, 2010 nor in 2011...

[shimmergal]

67. Not quite accurate.

We got a one-time payment of $200. Maybe it was $400 for a couple?


I too worry about the 2% cut giving fuel to nay-sayers' charge that the Social Security Trust Fund is depleted.

Has it occurred to anyone that there's a conspiracy to prevent most future senior citizens from being able to live decently at all? We've already seen proof that the two best ways ordinary people could save for retirement--and hopefully build a hedge against inflation-- can no longer be counted on. Stock market craziness and the real estate bubble have really done a number on us. Then destroy Social Security and most people will have nothing left.

W,at's the ultimate plan? Widespread death panels? Or just a pool of desperate old people willing to work for under-minimum wage, because they have no other source of income?

It's Scary!

[Individualist]

8. It reeks of a way to destroy Social Security.

[librechik]

65. +ding ding ding!

[jtown1123]

69. we have a winner!

[bemildred]

10. A ploy to avoid removing the cap. nt

[OZark Dem]

11. Reduce the income to the fund by 2% a year ?

Gee, I wonder? Old mother Hubbard, went to the cubbard, to get her poor doggie a bone. And when she got there, the cubbard was bare ?????????? How does that go anyway ?

[kath]

43. Actually, it reduces the funding by almost a THIRD:

4.2%/6.2% = .677
So, SS will be getting only 68% of what it used to. :grr: :grr:

[kelly1mm]

53. actually it is about a 16% cut - you forgot the employer match. Also,

there is no coresponding reduction for the self employed who pay both sides of FICA or 15.3% of net profit before paying income taxes on the rest.

[Statistical]

58. Actually it is a 0% cut.

The difference is paid by general fund. No change in SS funding.

Still it does suck the SE get slammed. Maybe they can ammend that.

[OZark Dem]

59. SS funding is funding the general revenue fund now

[kath]

61. I thought the employer's portion was being cut as well - as a way to throw a bone to employers. No?

And actually, currently the self-employed don't pay a full 15.3% - they never have. The actual tax is a bit less than that (maximum of 14.13%), and varies depending on your marginal tax rate. (it still does take a BIG bite out of self-employment earnings.)

The tax is calculated as 15.3% **of only 92.35% of profit** (up to the cap), THEN half of that amount is deducted from income on the 1040, so some money is saved on the INCOME TAX.
So, on each $100 (up to the cap), the total FICA is $14.13 (or 14.13%). But half of that (7.065%) is deducted from income -- so for someone whose marginal tax rate is 25%, for each additional $100 of profit, they would pay INCOME tax of 25% of ($100 - 7.065), which is 25% of $92.94 (there may be some slight rounding errors here), or $23.23, plus the $14.13 of FICA tax - for a total tax of $37.36 or 37.36%. Since their regular *income* tax would be 25% or $25.00, they are actually paying $12.36 EXTRA for their FICA, or 12.36% at this marginal rate.

For someone in the zero bracket, ie. who makes too little to be subject to income tax, the effective FICA rate would be the full 14.13% that we came up with in the first calution.
For someone in the 10% marginal tax bracket , the effective marginal FICA rate is 13.42%.
"----------------" 15% "--------------------------------------------------------" 13.07%
"----------------" 25% "--------------------------------------------------------" 12.36%


End of math lesson - WHEW! :-)

[OZark Dem]

64. Thank you for that I think. I love it when you make my head spin.

[jtown1123]

70. Nope, just employee side.

[ThomWV]

13. A fucking idiotic mistake that will be the precedent that Republicans use to gut the system

A year from now the Republicans will also be saying that it was the Democratic Congress that instated the Bush Tax cuts, not them - and they hold it over the Democrats as long as I live

[AndrewP]

75. Bingo

[phleshdef]

14. Its a direct form of middle class stimulus, which strengthens the demand side...

...and thus leads to job creation which leads to more people paying into social security. Its a liberal concept in action.

[Laelth]

15. Bad idea. It will become permanent, and it will make SS insolvent.

All the more reason, then, to destroy SS. Not a good idea.

-Laelth

[underpants]

19. *

LOVE the graphic

on a plate

[lumberjack_jeff]

17. Stimulate the economy by defunding Social Security.

From Obama's perspective, it's a win-win. He can destroy social security and look good doing it.

[doc03]

27. My Union went along with the company and helped them

get a waiver on pension funding to help the company. What was the result? Our pension was declared underfunded and taken over by the PBGC. Guess what? The PBGC is underfunded now and eventually the government will have to bail it out or millions will lose those pension payments.

[phleshdef]

30. Stimulating the economy will inject more funding into Social Security.

You do realize that job = paycheck and paycheck = payments into Social Security, right?

[lumberjack_jeff]

31. Kind of a trickle-down, huh? n/t

[Liberalynn]

40. Yeah and we all know how well that worked.

Its like thinking saliva will put a forrest fire out.

[stray cat]

18. How does it underfund ss? The budget ie china will make up the difference

[jtown1123]

73. It underfunds and gives the Repubs a huge opening to finally take it down. Here's why:

Here is what Bruce Bartlett, a former top advisor for Presidents Reagan and George H.W. Bush recently wrote, "What are the odds that Republicans will ever allow this one-year tax holiday to expire? They wrote the Bush tax cuts with explicit expiration dates and then when it came time for the law they wrote to take effect exactly as they wrote it, they said any failure to extend them permanently would constitute the biggest tax increase in history … If allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire is the biggest tax increase in history, one that Republicans claim would decimate a still-fragile economy, then surely expiration of a payroll tax holiday would also constitute a massive tax increase on the working people of America … Republicans would prefer to destroy Social Security's finances or permanently fund it with general revenues than allow a once-suspended payroll tax to be reimposed. Arch Social Security hater Peter Ferrara once told me that funding it with general revenues was part of his plan to destroy it by converting Social Security into a welfare program, rather than an earned benefit. He was right."

This is serious. We cannot have Social Security dipping into the general fund. The whole point of SS is that it is self sustaining and cannot borrow to add to the deficit. Deficit hawks will not allow SS to redeem these funds and will instead cut the program to make up the difference. Do not be fooled.

[ixion]

20. It helps the working middle class, which really needs the help

in my opinion.

[customerserviceguy]

36. The Making Work Pay credit was much better for that

It started phasing out at $75,000, and really was quite beneficial to the lowest paid workers, who got a full $400.

If a person is working full time for the Federal minimum wage, they would only get about $300 in tax cuts from the 'holiday'. Their rich-ass boss will get over $2,000 from it.

Doesn't sound very progressive to me.

[JamesA1102]

21. The payroll tax cut of 2% will not cut one penny from the Social Security trust fund

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/12/unhappy-dems-mull-obama-gop-tax-cut-deal.php

[customerserviceguy]

39. I found what you're talking about:

"Progressive economists have worried that a payroll tax break along the lines of the one announced tonight could come back to bite Democrats if it undermined the solvency of Social Security. But officials tonight insisted that its cost to the Social Security trust fund will be reimbursed with a credit from general revenue."

Voila! Social Security can now be firmly tied to the deficit.

[JamesA1102]

45. Wow! Great spin! nt

[customerserviceguy]

47. It's a way to weaken Social Security

Even if we had enough money to fund this, it still gives the whole "Social Security won't be there for you" meme some fresh life.

[JamesA1102]

48. More spin nt

[Blue_In_AK]

24. I'm uncomfortable about it.

It seems like it will add to the "underfunded" argument.

[madrchsod]

26. well it really won`t hurt me .....

but with tens of millions not paying into the system my kids are screwed.

2% cut is another nail in their coffin.

[stranger81]

28. First step down the slippery slope.

If Social Security still exists when I retire in 30 years or so, I'll eat my hat. And it will be my own party that took the first whack at the pinata.

[bbinacan]

29. I will increase contributions

to my 401k plan by the same amount of the cut. I like it.

[customerserviceguy]

34. When the Repukes

come along at the end of 2011 with the idea of partial privatization for that 2%, how will the President or any Democratic office holders who vote for this say that it's the wrong thing to do?

If we pass this 'compromise' we surrender so very many of what we supposedly regard as 'principles'.

[Historic NY]

35. Stupid, stupid, stupid, raise the cap, fund the system......WTF is wrong with these people.

I'm beginning to think if there willing to cut it then there isn't anything wrong...I want my money.

[Turbineguy]

37. 2 percent

so what? Wall Street will steal it anyway.

[Liberalynn]

38. Totally and completely against it.

and IMHO is an indicator that Obama plans to continue to concede/compromise with the Pukes until SS is gutted or ended all together.

[AlinPA]

Bad deal long term. When the cut expires, republicans will howl like dogs

"raising taxes on 'Murcans" and a deal will be made to cut SS. It is a slippery slope to start this.

[Hubert Flottz]

41. Would have been nice if they'd stop taxing people's...

Social Security. That would have helped a lot of older Americans who haven't gotten a raise in two years.

[Change Happens]

42. Most excellent....nt

[Gold Metal Flake]

44. Like a cat playing with a lizard.

When the cat gets bored playing with the lizard the cat kills it.

[Gin]

46. bad idea....then when it goes back up people will scream.....back

door to gut the program (IMO)

[Gold Metal Flake]

49. Yup. The time is right.

The people have been marinating in the daily soaking of right wing propaganda on this.

"Entitlements"
"I can invest it better"
"People getting more out than they put it"
"Bankrupt"
"Just a bunch of paper"

This plum is ripe. All you have to do is have enough political and financial power to pluck it.

[lildreamer316]

50. I believe this *is* what we will call the death of SS

I believe when we look back, we will say that this is when it started.

[Luciferous]

52. It's a terrible idea.

[Statistical]

54. It won't underfund SS by a single penny.

The legislation calls for general fund (i.e. the budget) to "replace" the funds not contributed by workers. Thus 2% less paid by worker = $120B. $120B from general fund transfered to SS.

Net-net SS funding at end of the year is exactly the same.

[underpants]

62. Oh

I didn't know that

Thanks

[Hell Hath No Fury]

72. But is is still money we do not have -

that will need to be borrowed tha will have a minimal impact on the overall economy.

[jtown1123]

68. This is simply not true. Please Read:

Here is what Bruce Bartlett, a former top advisor for Presidents Reagan and George H.W. Bush recently wrote, "What are the odds that Republicans will ever allow this one-year tax holiday to expire? They wrote the Bush tax cuts with explicit expiration dates and then when it came time for the law they wrote to take effect exactly as they wrote it, they said any failure to extend them permanently would constitute the biggest tax increase in history … If allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire is the biggest tax increase in history, one that Republicans claim would decimate a still-fragile economy, then surely expiration of a payroll tax holiday would also constitute a massive tax increase on the working people of America … Republicans would prefer to destroy Social Security's finances or permanently fund it with general revenues than allow a once-suspended payroll tax to be reimposed. Arch Social Security hater Peter Ferrara once told me that funding it with general revenues was part of his plan to destroy it by converting Social Security into a welfare program, rather than an earned benefit. He was right."

This is serious. We cannot have Social Security dipping into the general fund. The whole point of SS is that it is self sustaining and cannot borrow to add to the deficit. Deficit hawks will not allow SS to redeem these funds and will instead cut the program to make up the difference. Do not be fooled.

[Cleita]

55. They could fix it by raising the limit, but I don't think

it can be done until we get both houses back with a majority. I'm not holding my breath. It would make it more equitable though by tapping into the rich to make up the difference, who are not paying their fair share percentage wise anyway.

[MadHound]

56. Stupidity, dangerous stupidity at that.

But wait, it's one of those great gifts to the 'Pugs, so all is good.

[Write Left]

57. Call it the Catfood Concession.

[sabrina 1]

60. It is disgraceful. SS has nothing to do with the deficit.

The claims that it is necessary to cut SS in any way whatsoever, is a lie. SS has a surplus, if anything benefits should be raised.

But one thing is for certain, SS should not, in any way, ever be a part of any discussion that has to do with the Deficit. The Deficit was caused by the Financial Collapse, by the Bush tax cuts, by the wars we are spending billions on each and every year.

SS is a separate fund and does not have anything to do with the Government Budget. The SS fund belongs to the American people. Anyone who claims otherwise is a liar.

SS benefits should be raised. That would help the economy and the money is there. Yes, I know, they have borrowed from the fund and they do not want to pay it back. They want the fund to keep increasing so that they can continue to pay for their forever wars.

Our media, our disgraceful media, allows the lie to go unchallenged, that SS ever had or could have anything to do with the Deficit.

If Democrats cut SS in any way, raise the retirement age eg, imho, they are finished.

[eridani]

63. First step in a long-term plan to get rid of Social Security n/t

[Vinca]

66. Someone on Thom Hartmann just said it will become known as

the Obama Social Security Tax Cut (thanks to Republican spin) and the Republicans will take to the floor when it expires to extend it and/or expand it.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

71. Don't like it.

Another reason to sink the stinker of a deal.

[jtown1123]

74. If you think this is a TERRIBLE idea. Please write to Congress using this Leg. Action Center Letter:

http://capwiz.com/ncpssm2/issues/alert/?alertid=20648111

[myrna minx]

76. It's a cynical ploy to destroy Social Security. n/t