General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsBernie Sanders BLOWS THE LID OFF The ‘Bipartisan’ Plan To CUT TAXES for Corporations and the Wealthy

In a letter to his Senate colleagues today, Bernie Sanders exposed the bipartisan Simpson/Bowles plan for what it really is. A scheme to lower taxes on the wealthy and corporations while passing the burden to the rest of us.
Sanders laid out the 5 areas of Simpson-Bowles that he believes Democrats should strongly oppose.
PDF:
http://www.sanders.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/SimpsonBowles.pdf
There is a reason why Mitt Romney and the Republican campaigned so hard for Simpson-Bowles. It is exactly what the Republican Party wants. It slashes entitlements and passes the pain on to the middle and lower classes, while lowering taxes for corporations and the so called job creators. The rich feel no pain and get all of the gain from Simpson-Bowles.
The reason why this plan never went anywhere with Obama is because it violates several of the elements that he believes any deal on deficit reduction should contain. If congressional Democrats adopted Simpson-Bowles as their negotiating framework, they would lose before they even sat down at the table. Simpson-Bowles contains everything that the right could ever hope for. This is why it being championed by corporate America and the Republican Party.
cont'
http://www.politicususa.com/bernie-sanders-blows-lid-bipartisan-plan-cut-taxes-corporations-wealthy.html

democrattotheend
(12,011 posts)I don't see the president and Congressional Democrats agreeing to a lot of it, at least not now that they won the election. And I don't see how things like a territorial tax system would do anything but increase the deficit.
fasttense
(17,301 posts)But when I first read the BS plan (Bowles-Simpson) I thought it was a perfect recipe to destroy the American Middle Class.
I guess 2 classes is all our overlords want. Them and everyone else.
surrealAmerican
(11,546 posts)There is no reason to be pushing for tax cuts for the wealthiest people and companies. That would not reduce the deficit - it would increase it.
donnasgirl
(656 posts)He in my view would make one hell of a president
BainsBane
(55,487 posts)It cuts rates but not revenues. It eliminates virtually every deduction. I think someone needs to crunch the numbers to verify this. If it were just about spending cuts the GOP would have embraced it.
This is not enough information for anyone to form a judgment or plan a march on Washington about.
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)BainsBane
(55,487 posts)Last edited Thu Nov 29, 2012, 05:07 PM - Edit history (1)
Simpson Bowles taxes all income at the same level. There is no lower rate for capital gains. It also raises the cap on payroll taxes. The plan lowers rates but raises revenues. That is the point. I'm not saying it's the world's best plan, but we can't have a fruitful discussion without an accurate understanding of what we're talking about.
And I take NO politician's word for anything. Intellectual integrity requires a more thorough understanding. Believing whatever one hears is exactly why there are so many ignorant right wingers.
BainsBane
(55,487 posts)On distributional effects of the plan. Short story, wealthy pay more, middle class a bit less. The biggest winners are those of us who don't itemize and instead take the standard deduction, because we overpay in comparison to the rest of taxpayers. http://taxpolicycenter.org/taxtopics/bowles-simpson.cfm
Summary of the plans: http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxtopics/Bowles_Simpson_Brief.cfm
savannah43
(575 posts)thick or biased. More republicrap.
BainsBane
(55,487 posts)Before insulting me. Your rudeness shows you have absolutely nothing of substance to say so you rely on feeble insults. Simpson Bowles taxes capital gains at the same level as regular income and raises the cap for payroll taxes. That is more aggressive than what the President has suggested. You may be gullible enough to believe whatever politicians tell you, and without sufficient intellectual integrity to examine the matter yourself, but I am not. Interesting that you insult me for being a right winger when you replicate their lack of intellectual rigor.
Everything is biased. What a bizarre choice of words. Do you imagine every point of view but your own is biased while yours represents absolute truth? I prefer to base my beliefs on actual information. I despise intellectual laziness.
BainsBane
(55,487 posts)The top quintile will see their after tax income decline by 8%. That means they will pay more in taxes. The top tenth of the 1% will see their after tax income decrease by 11%. That's in one version the committee suggested. More are listed here. http://taxpolicycenter.org/taxtopics/bowles-simpson.cfm
I don't think the plan is ideal, but if you don't have an accurate understanding of what you're talking about, any discussion is meaningless. http://taxpolicycenter.org/taxtopics/bowles-simpson.cfm
It's fine for politicians to engage in hyperbole in front of the cameras. What is not acceptable is for an educated person to believe them.
Angry Dragon
(36,693 posts)Last edited Wed Nov 28, 2012, 09:03 PM - Edit history (2)
if they are you and we need to stop using the word 'entitlements'
it is a republican word
we need to come up with a better word
and simplehead-bowels is a republican wet dream and I could never figure out why Obama put the commission together
President Obama has a problem with the people he listens to
If you agree with Bernie give him a call and tell him, I did
202-224-5141
Segami
(14,923 posts)Angry Dragon
(36,693 posts)Do you agree we need to use a different word??
Segami
(14,923 posts)Is there a list of new, fresh terms to choose from?
Sekhmets Daughter
(7,515 posts)republicans to brand everything as they see fit. You are entitled to get what you pay for at the grocery store, the gas station, Best Buy etc. etc. etc. You are entitled to Social Security and Medicare because you have agreed to the social contract and paid into the system.
Segami
(14,923 posts)such terms were pre-targeted by the right in order to 're-define' the term(s) to reflect a negative position.
Republicans have made such terms radioactive.
Sekhmets Daughter
(7,515 posts)that we are "Indeed entitled" We built this country...we pay for those benefits....We paid for Mitch McConnell's mother's medicare, who the f -- k is he to say we are not entitled to it ourselves?
Segami
(14,923 posts)distortions, lies, misinformation & disinformation attempts by rethugs to define the game rules.
" We paid for Mitch McConnell's mother's medicare, who the f -- k is he to say we are not entitled to it ourselves?"
Thats what I call ' pushing back '. We should find out how many other senator's mothers are using Medicare and call them all out on it.
That statement needs to go viral.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)I wonder how many members of Congress are on Medicare and still working.
I bet not a one of them rejects Medicare benefits if eligible.
Segami
(14,923 posts)I would go as far as billboarding the previous comment. The message is quite direct,.. people will associate with it's message, and it hits you like a sledgehammer.
Shock-marketing!
Sekhmets Daughter
(7,515 posts)the assholes in congress. The mother of Charles and David Koch lived until 1990...you can bet the ranch she received Medicare benefits
Sekhmets Daughter
(7,515 posts)The thing is you can plug in just about any name you want...You can be sure Lloyd Blankfein's parents have been on Medicare. The mother of Charles and David Koch lived until 1990... she was getting Medicare no doubt.
As to going viral....I haven't a clue how to start the ball rolling on that.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)midnight
(26,624 posts)"Medicare was there for our family, for my grandma when we needed it then. And Medicare is there for my mom, when she needs it now. And we have to keep that guarantee," Mr Ryan said at a weekend rally in retirement village in Florida."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/us-election/9486109/US-election-Paul-Ryan-deploys-his-mother-in-fight-for-Medicare.html
Plucketeer
(12,882 posts)What's IN a word??? If you use it to insinuate something other than what's really at hand - a lot! It has made the hairs on my neck stand up EVERY FRIGGIN' TIME I've heard a Rethug say "entitlements"! They've been successful in making that word an alternative for "handouts" - which is, of course, FALSE. Dammit! I/WE have PAID for the returns we get. Hell yeah, I'm entitled to them. I PAID for them!
Like I said - I wanna reach thru the screen and clutch the throat of every Republican that uses that word like a soft profanity.
Sekhmets Daughter
(7,515 posts)know that just like Obamacare, we like the word Entitlements as we are, indeed, entitled to those benefits.
Small correction however, you did not pay for returns...You paid for the Medicare benefits and Social Security benefits that Mitch McConnell's parents collected. Or the Koch brothers mother's benefits... she lived until 1990. Think about that.
Plucketeer
(12,882 posts)Heck, when I was working, I was paying on MY parents checks and the checks of so many of my family. Just as MY offspring are contributing to my draws since I've been of age!
Sekhmets Daughter
(7,515 posts)
Which is why you are entitled to those benefits....every dime of them.
savannah43
(575 posts)All you weasels in DC that let Bush embezzle from it, pay back the 1.7 trillion dollars you lent out. It was NEVER your money to loan.
Sekhmets Daughter
(7,515 posts)Response to Sekhmets Daughter (Reply #92)
AnotherMcIntosh This message was self-deleted by its author.
Sekhmets Daughter
(7,515 posts)but it was Reagan who moved the funds into the general treasury....
Angry Dragon
(36,693 posts)FogerRox
(13,211 posts)freshwest
(53,661 posts)union_maid
(3,502 posts)I think it means that those who qualify for a benefit, be it SS, SSD, SSI, Public Assistance, Medicare, or whatever, are entitled to the benefits for which they qualify and the amounts are not subject to change just on the basis of available funding the way that grants might be for instance.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)meti57b
(3,584 posts)I paid for it, ..... it's mine.
99Forever
(14,524 posts)... entitled to these benefits because we have paid into them our entire working lives. They aren't a handout. Hiw about we stop letting the assholes demonize perfectly normal descriptive words instead?
Unless of course, you buy into the notion that being "a liberal" is bad thing. (another example)
Sekhmets Daughter
(7,515 posts)Liberal is NOT a dirty word and being entitled to something is a good thing.
humbled_opinion
(4,423 posts)Sekhmets Daughter
(7,515 posts)humbled_opinion
(4,423 posts)Its not an entitlement its supposed to be a gurantee from my own investment....
Sekhmets Daughter
(7,515 posts)Furthermore, no investment is ever guaranteed to produce profits....investments are bets on an outcome. OTOH Entitled means to
***Give (someone) a legal right or a just claim to receive or do something.***
I am always amazed by how many people haven't a clue for what their FICA and Medicare taxes actually pay. Your 'capital' is used to pay for the benefits of current retirees...period, end of discussion. There is no return on investment. You are 'entitled' to receive those same benefits, in your turn, because you fulfilled your end of the social compact.
You should embrace the word entitlements. What you should be protesting is that someone like Mitch McConnell wants to cut your benefits after you've spent years paying for his mother's.
FogerRox
(13,211 posts)Having a good legal foundation makes a law hard to over turn in court.
Making an argument that goes counter to settled law is
priceless....
TheKentuckian
(26,314 posts)just given up without a question. It is shocking. Once they are allowed to dictate language they have the key to thoughts which tends to not to take away ideas but it does limit the ability to express them in a way that can be processed by others.
Sekhmets Daughter
(7,515 posts)At the heart of it that's the true definition of propaganda...controlling the message through any means possible....perverting the language is an excellent method.
AnnaLee
(1,187 posts)Everyone sit back, relax and recall that Obamacare was a scary word until we took ownership of what was a very good word. Obama-cares, etc.
Now entitlement means that you have done something to achieve a status whereby you are entitled to something. You have earned something. Take ownership of the term; use it as intended; use it as defined:
We want your hands off of our money because we are entitled to it and you are not, for example.
Stonepounder
(4,033 posts)You and your employer entered into an employment contract, he is entitled to the fruits of your labor, and you are entitled to your earnings. I paid into Social Security for 50 years, and I damn well am entitled to my benefits!
If I buy bonds, I am entitled to my interest payments. If I buy an annuity, I am entitled to my money. if I have life insurance, my beneficiary is entitled to collect when I die. It is not like entitlements are the same a freebies!
Sekhmets Daughter
(7,515 posts)it is the bedrock of all contracts, including the social compact.
Junkdrawer
(27,993 posts)You bet I want stuff...I want My Pre-Paid Benefits.
Sekhmets Daughter
(7,515 posts)Social Security and Medicare are not like Pre-Paid college tuition programs. Every dime of your FICA taxes are spent to pay for the benefits of those already retired.
You are entitled to your benefits because you fulfilled your end of the bargain, you paid for the benefits of your parents and grandparents. Your children and grandchildren will pay for your benefits. The reason the GOP goes after them with such impunity is because they won't owe you a dime if they ever gain complete control and kill off both SS and Medicare. Meanwhile you have paid for Mitch McConnell's parents.
Junkdrawer
(27,993 posts)For the last 29 years, I paid for current retirees PLUS a large contribution to what is now a 2.5 TRILLION dollar trust fund.
See:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021768814
Sekhmets Daughter
(7,515 posts)So your savings account is full of IOUs that the government is under no obligation to redeem. As of May, 2012 the Trust Fund was the proud owner of $2.67 trillion in US debt. To make matters worse, have you looked at the interest being earned by T-bills these days?
In 2010 there was a shortfall, due to the high unemployment and the FICA tax holiday, of $40 billion that had to come out of the general fund.
Look, I'm not the enemy here. I don't want to cut Social Security. I just want people like you to fully understand the danger we are in if Republicans ever again gain complete control.
Junkdrawer
(27,993 posts)That should go over big.
For 29 years, the extra FICA taxes went INTO the General Fund. Now it has to come OUT of the General fund. That means we should VASTLY increase taxes on those that benefited most from those earlier 29 years: the recipients of the Reagan tax cuts.
Sekhmets Daughter
(7,515 posts)until it can't...it's that simple. China is already worried. For 29 years the extra FICA went into the General Fund and out again to buy T-Bills. Increasing taxes on the rich , most particularly getting rid of the favorable taxes for unearned income and the ridiculous deferred compensation model used by hedge funds and venture/vulture capital firms....will help, it won't solve the problem. Want to know what would solve the problem? Capping executive compensation, ending the ability of corporations to manufacture their products overseas, bring them into this country duty free and sell them at prices that would support US manufacturing. Think Apple products, or GE products or any number of big ticket items that are no longer made here, but still cost a small fortune. Think about clothing sold in high end stores at exorbitant prices that is made in China or Mexico or Indonesia. Raising the minimum wage to at least what they earn in Australia...$15.51 an hour. Universal, single payer health insurance delivered on the Cleveland Clinic model. These are the things that will solve our problems.
Everyone benefitted from the Reagan tax cuts, including you. It's not like he cut the just the top tax rate. The problem is not that taxes
are too low, the problem is that too many Americans are not earning enough money to pay federal income tax and too many others are not earning what they would/should be had wages kept up with productivity. The tax debate is a freaking diversion...nothing more. Corporations would much prefer to keep us focused on the squirrel running along the high wire rather than the thievery they been involved in for 3 decades. Our government has been complicit in this theft.
LoisB
(9,353 posts)are deducted from my paycheck and I will still have to pay premiums when I start using it; I pay insurance premiums for Social Security (Federal INSURANCE Contributions Act - FICA) therefore I am ENTITLED to the coverage at age 65 and/or upon retirement.
Entitlement = a right to benefits
If we've paid premiums for these benefits, why wouldn't we be entitled to them? No different than paying health insurance premiums and being entitled to coverage when one gets sick.
Just my opinion, but it's a word we need to reclaim. Just like "death tax" instead of inheritance tax, Democrat Party instead of Democratic Party, Progressive instead of LIBERAL...
Someone said "he who controls the language, controls the message"
Sekhmets Daughter
(7,515 posts)Every time some fool say Democrat Party, we should correct them.
FogerRox
(13,211 posts)Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)Help stop the stupid.
Angry Dragon
(36,693 posts)I know perfectly what the word means and I also know that when it is used the majority of the people hear negative. So it is time we frame the debate to our advantage.
Panasonic says 'earned benefits'
Egalitarian Thug
(12,448 posts)No. On second thought, screw it.
Do you know why the republicans have corrupted the word? Do you know why they are able to corrupt words? Because people like you let them. Because you constantly concede, submit, and cower like whipped dogs every time.
And then you wonder why the Democrats major selling point is not being republicans. Because you refuse to stand up or for anything, everything is on the table with you people. I'm one of your allies and I'm thoroughly disgusted with this party and those that represent them. You tolerate, hell you reward a scumbag like Joe Lieberman and marginalize Bernie Sanders.
The Democratic Party leadership are the leading republicans in the nation and you people are telling us that there's nothing wrong with that.
Second edit; Apologies to you Angry Dragon. You are not to blame, you were just the one standing there. It's too late to go see the horse for some therapy, I'm going to watch a film or finish my book.
FogerRox
(13,211 posts)Do you know why the republicans have corrupted the word? Do you know why they are able to corrupt words? Because people like you let them.
And that is the money quote
rudycantfail
(300 posts)The Democratic Party leadership are the leading republicans in the nation and you people are telling us that there's nothing wrong with that.
Why is the greatest defender of the New Deal and most faithful truth teller in American politics an Independent and not a Democrat?
Sanders has virtually no competition!
FogerRox
(13,211 posts)Entitled is in the 1935 law 9 times, BTW
FogerRox
(13,211 posts)Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)freshwest
(53,661 posts)Starting negotiations from the Simpson-Bowles framework would be like negotiating at all. Earlier today, President Obama asked Americans to make their voices heard on this issue. Call or write to your local representatives and senators. Let them know, that you wont stand for any deficit deal that contains the Simpson-Bowles framework.
If you dont stand up now, the wealthys gain will be your pain.
http://www.politicususa.com/bernie-sanders-blows-lid-bipartisan-plan-cut-taxes-corporations-wealthy.html
I posted Bernie Sanders saying Obama is keeping his word. This is part of getting the public to pressure Congress, what Obama has asked people to do and been mentioned in several threads and this link at the end.
From Sanders' website:
Sanders Applauds White House for Taking Social Security Off the Table in Deficit Talks
This news is the follow through, as the other threads with Obama asking the public to pressure Congress, and the ones on the thread below, but I won't link them all here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014319000
Segami
(14,923 posts)
freshwest
(53,661 posts)Social Security funding bill, raising the cap on the payments, also supported by Obama. The corporate media won't tell us, we have to put it together ourselves. These are really good news, despite the right wing fear mongering and distrust they are preaching.
bullwinkle428
(20,647 posts)upi402
(16,854 posts)Oh alright - economic justice and human dignity - but purity troll must be such a rewarding disparagement for some.
NRaleighLiberal
(60,810 posts)upi402
(16,854 posts)This guy's always right and always on OUR side.
Curmudgeoness
(18,219 posts)and they try to mark him as too liberal. That just says so much to me....Simpson-Bowles is a crime perpetrated on the poor, working, and middle classes of this country, and it should be put on a shelf to molder.
Segami
(14,923 posts)Erskine Bowles: the Paul Ryan budget " is a sensible, straightforward, honest, serious budget and it cut the budget deficit just like we did, by $4 trillion"
midnight
(26,624 posts)Why so few have the guts to call this bailout for the rich what it is....
Overseas
(12,121 posts)Something designed before the election of 2012, maybe thinking some of those Top 2% would fund President Obama's campaign.
And what did they do? Poured billions into the other guy's coffers.
So get off the Republican lite plan and give us something truly Democratic, that is far more balanced. The poor and middle class have suffered enough already.
Maybe with a chauffeur, private planes and maid service you can live until 90, but most folks won't even use 20 years' worth of social security and medicare, after working hard their whole lives for those few years of rest.
reteachinwi
(579 posts)A .1% financial transaction tax on derivative trades would balance the budget. Wall Street would pay for the economic mess they created. It's like personal responsibility or something.
http://www.alternet.org/economy/ten-numbers-rich-would-fudged?page=0%2C1
Overseas
(12,121 posts)give a tiny bit to help our country.
That might also help curb the millions of trades by computers.
BainsBane
(55,487 posts)and raises the cap for social security. The only deductions it keeps are for children, Earned Income Tax Credit, and a much lower mortgage deduction. Does that sound like something Republicans have argued for?
http://taxpolicycenter.org/taxtopics/bowles-simpson.cfm
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxtopics/Bowles_Simpson_Brief.cfm
Protalker
(418 posts)I am almost retirement age. I have served others as a counselor in a mental health facility. My savings were halved in the last few years. Medicare is my Insurance policy. Although entitled it is what l think should be a universal right to health care.
Segami
(14,923 posts)Welcome to DU!
humbled_opinion
(4,423 posts)Is there any plans for a March on D.C. to stop this crap?
BainsBane
(55,487 posts)The plan cuts rates but eliminates virtually all deductions, so it increases revenue. It is not simply a plan about cutting spending. It raises effective tax levels, which is more important than the stated rate.
BainsBane
(55,487 posts)That's a substantial tax increase on the wealthy.
Here is the summary from the Tax Policy Center.
The Bowles-Simpson Chairmens Mark Deficit Reduction Plan
Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson, co-chairs of President Obamas Deficit Commission, have released a Chairmens Mark, a broad plan to reduce the federal deficit by cutting spending and raising taxes. The plan includes various options that would impose different changes on the tax side of the fiscal equation. The first option, The Zero Plan, would, among other things, pare away most tax expenditures, devote $80 billion annually to reduce the deficit, and use remaining revenue gains to cut tax rates.
The Tax Policy center has analyzed the distributional effects of three variants of the Zero Plan:
Eliminate all tax expendituresfor both income and payroll taxesexcept the EITC, the child credit, foreign tax credits, and a few less common preferences.
Eliminate tax expenditures only for income taxes, not for payroll taxes.
Eliminate tax expenditures only for income taxesnot for payroll taxesbut cap and restructure the tax benefits for mortgage interest, employer-sponsored health insurance, and retirement saving instead of eliminating them.
A detailed discussion of TPCs analysis is available here.
Tables showing the distributional effects of the three variants are available here.
Details of the Zero Plan:
The Zero Plan in the Bowles-Simpson Chairmen's Mark would:
Eliminate all tax expendituresfor both income and payroll taxesexcept for the child credit, the earned income tax credit, foreign tax credits, a few less common preferences (retain reduced preferences for mortgage interest, employer-sponsered health insurance and reitrement savings in the third variant listed above).
Eliminate the alternative minimum tax (AMT).
Eliminate the phaseout of personal exemptions and the limitation of itemized deductions.
Replace the current six-bracket individual tax rate schedule with a three-bracket schedule with rates of 9, 15, and 24 percent (12, 20, and 27 percent in the third variant listed above).
Tax capital gains and dividends as ordinary income.
Index tax parameters using the chained Consumer Price Index.
Increase the Social Security wage base by 2 percent per year more than the growth in the average wage (making the FICA cap $140,100 in 2015).
Phase in an increase in the federal excise tax on gasoline of 15 cents per gallon (13.5 cents per gallon on average in 2015).
Eliminate corporate tax expenditures and reduce the corporate tax rate to 26 percent (27 percent in the third variant listed above).
Details of Alternative Retaining but Limiting More Tax Expenditures:
The third variant would retain tax benefits for mortgage interest, employer-sponsored health insurance, and retirement saving, but restructure them and reduce their costs to 80 percent of their current levels. It would set higher tax rates to make up the revenue lost by those changes and the changes would apply only to income taxes.
Specifically this option would:
Convert the mortgage interest deduction to a 15 percent refundable interest credit.
Replace the exclusion from income of employer-sponsored health insurance with flat credits of $1,058 for single coverage and $2,433 for family coverage offered by employers.
Reduce the limits on contributions to employer-sponsored qualified retirement plans and individual retirement accounts to 43 percent of their current level.
Cap the amount of tax-free accruals within both defined benefit and defined contribution retirement accounts.
Replace the current six-bracket individual tax rate schedule with a three-bracket schedule with rates of 12 percent, 20 percent, and 27 percent.
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxtopics/Bowles_Simpson_Brief.cfm
Hubert Flottz
(37,726 posts)Bernie Sanders is a patriot!
Pakid
(478 posts)the rest of the so called good guys I am never sure about. As for the Republican I am 100% sure that they would screw over their own mother. What does that say about America? I am not sure anyone out there have an answer
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Selatius
(20,441 posts)zentrum
(9,866 posts)...did Obama ever appoint that snake, Simpson?
you why. It was because the guy was a Blue Dog Democrat and he was with the Clinton Administration part of the second Term. The guy is a North Carolinian, and has lost every race in North Carolina. His alma mata is also the University of North Carolina but that was back in the 60s. You have to consider the environment of North Carolina and the times he grew up. He is a staunch Democrat but not my type.
I've looked at his background, and the guy guy an MBA from the University of North Carolina and went straight to working on Wall Street. He has Wall Street connections. So you had a conservative Democrat and ( Bowles and Simpson) conservative Republican, out of a red State concocting this. And that conservative Democrat came from Wall Street, a red state, and not only that, he started an equity firm. So President Obama just as well selected Romney. This guy also appointed Holden Thorpe and you know what happened to the University of North Carolina's football team. Those guys are peers and elitist. Now you know why Bowles loved Paul Ryan. Don't trust Erskine Bowles at anything. I wouldn't trust any conservative Democrat from North Carolina and I'm a native of North Carolina. He turned down running against Pat McCrory too. They are in cahoots with each other. Bowles also has ties to the Banking Industry.
SammyWinstonJack
(44,191 posts)When it wasn't necessary to do so?
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)To put more money from wages into the Trust Fund so that taxes on capital income aren't raised.
In other words, so that the people who got tax breaks for 30 years while social security money was used to fund the general budget -- never have to pay back what they stole.
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)Response to WinkyDink (Reply #72)
AnotherMcIntosh This message was self-deleted by its author.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)tomp
(9,512 posts)no reason i can see for creating that commission in the first place. he created this shit, put it on the table, and now we're struggling to get it off the table. we should not even be talking about these kinds of cuts. anyone who actually cares about the vast majority of americans should be talking about INCREASES to benefits.
unless these types of cuts were part of the democratic agenda as well. hmmm....
tclambert
(11,153 posts)savannah43
(575 posts)Jakes Progress
(11,196 posts)Screw you and me. Dance for the wealthy.
Anyone with any degree of competence who espouses this travesty is not your friend, is not a friend of America.
AzDar
(14,023 posts)
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)BETRAYAL plans for CURRENT RETIREES---
WASN'T THAT A "NOBODY OVER 55" PROMISE???
Lowering taxes to the mid-20% for the wealthiest??? THIS IS TREASONOUS, EVEN IF NOT AS DEFINED CONSTITUTIONALLY.
Response to WinkyDink (Reply #69)
AnotherMcIntosh This message was self-deleted by its author.
PotatoChip
(3,186 posts)-And- the great state of Vermont for sending him to Washington. Just wish there were more like him.
SHRED
(28,136 posts)SHRED
(28,136 posts)Both are jackass corporate asskissers.
Response to Segami (Original post)
AnotherMcIntosh This message was self-deleted by its author.
savannah43
(575 posts)They are not necessary in his second term.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)The president would have signed it if it had made it to his desk. Thank God it didn't
joy2u2
(6 posts)I don't think there's anyone who speaks 'the truth' any more or better than Sanders. Totally respect this guy and now he's got a petition at: [link:http://democracyforamerica.com/petitions/1?t=bernie
Sanders is basically saying, "Now, is the time to hold Democrats accountable and ensure that we do deficit reduction in a way that is fair, while also protecting Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.
Hope people will sign the petition and help a gentleman who is trying so desperately to help you and me and 300 million other people.
So many times I get frustrated - not knowing what exactly I can do to help 'the cause.' Petitions like this one are some of what we can do.. let our voice be heard, loud & clear.
fascisthunter
(29,381 posts)blackspade
(10,056 posts)Instead of the dynamic douche bags, McConnell and Paul.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)He is what DEMOCRATS used to be!
Simpson-Bowles (The Cat Food Commission) was important in that it Set-the-Stage for the "Compromise" Kabuki Theater we are now watching.
Now, Anything Less can easily be framed as a VICTORY by the Party SpinMasters.
NOW, when the Democrats reach a "compromise" that implements only most of the
Simpson-Bowles recommendations,
they can march in front of the TV cameras
pat each other on the back for their heroism in facing this difficult issue,
and declare VICTORY because:
"Its not as bad as it could have been."
"We HAD to do SOMETHING."
"We couldn't let The Perfect be the Enemy of the Good."
"Look at ALL the Good Stuff we got!"
"Its a Step in the Right Direction."
"We'll Fix It Later."
"Today, we Saved Our Children from The Deficit!"
"Its ALL Joe Lieberman's fault because we don't have a Magic Wand."
We've seen this Kabuki Theater before,
and it doesn't end well for the Working Class.
[font size=4]Hold on to your Memories, SUCKERS!
because we're TAKING everything else,
and ain't NOBODY gonna Stop Us!
Hahahahahahahaha!
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Oh yes, and what are HIS expectations regarding what to expect:
Blankfein and Goldman Sachs don't have to worry about lowering expectations. After receiving a $10 billion federal bailout in 2008, and paying it back a few years later, Goldman Sachs recently exceeded Wall Street analysts' expectations by announcing $8.4 billion in third quarter revenues for 2012. On the heels of a great year, Blankfein is expected to take home an even larger salary than he did in 2011, when he made $16.1 million.
CEO Council Demands Cuts To Poor, Elderly While Reaping Billions In Government Contracts, Tax Breaks
We're not going to get it Floyd? Says who? And who the hell is he to be talking about the People's Money? Has anyone told him to keep his grubby Wall Street Fingers out of OUR fund which the people created?
He and his fellow CEOS have been busy working hard to get Congress to cut SS, Medicare and Medicaid throughout the election season, remember during that time, we were being told to be silent. Leaving the field clear for Wall St. to get the undivided attention of our elected representatives.
I still want to know who is responsible for the attempt to shut the people up during election season? Could it be that Wall Street paid to get that message out?
Initech
(103,416 posts)They've got away with it too long now!!!
redqueen
(115,177 posts)but I'd love a President like Sanders, and a congress full of people like him, so some serious progress could be made.
melody
(12,365 posts)lovuian
(19,362 posts)the greed of the 1% is shocking when you read it
Social security at 69
YOHABLO
(7,358 posts)We have got to put a stop to this. If these spineless Dems allow this to go through if Obama and the Senate don't stop it. I declare fucking WAR !! It just can't happen. Leave Medicare, SS, and Medicaid alone. Washington ain't seen nothin yet!
Stuart G
(38,726 posts)Uncle Joe
(60,606 posts)Thanks for the thread, Segami.