Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Showing Original Post only (View all)Paul Krugman, Robert Reich, Jim DeMint and Rand Paul on the Payroll Tax Cut [View all]
http://mediamatters.org/research/201109080024September 08, 2011 1:28 pm ET
Memo To Gretchen Carlson: Economists Say Cutting Payroll Tax Would Boost Employment, Economy
<snip>Krugman: Payroll Tax Cut Would Give Money To People "Who Might Very Well Spend It."
An August 30, 2010, CNBC article quoted Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman as saying:
"If you give a temporary tax cut to wealthy people who are likely to be highly liquid, they are not going to spend very much of it at all," Krugam {sic} said. "Give a temporary tax cut to corporations, who are sitting on piles of cash, they are not going to spend any of it."
A payroll tax cut would be better, since it would put money in the hands of people "who might very well spend it," he added. "But basically, I would take whatever we can, except that those high end tax cuts, corporate tax cuts, are going where the problem isn't; it's just a waste of money," Krugman said. {CNBC, 8/30/10}
Reich: Eliminating Payroll Tax Would "Get The Economy Moving Again."
In an August 25, 2010, interview on America Public Media's Marketplace, former Secretary of Labor Robert Reich noted that eliminating payroll taxes would "get the economy moving again." From Marketplace:
But here's an idea that might command everyone's support: Eliminate payroll taxes on the first $20,000 of income. Payroll taxes, you recall, include Social Security, Medicare and unemployment insurance. Make up the revenue loss by applying the payroll tax to incomes above $250,000.
This would immediately stimulate spending by adding to the paychecks of just about every working American. Right now, 80 percent of Americans pay more in payroll taxes than they do in income taxes. And lower-income workers, who would receive the largest proportion of the benefits, are more likely to spend the extra cash than are people with high incomes.
...
So how to get the economy moving again? Eliminate the payroll tax on the first $20,000 of income and apply it to income over $250,000 for two years.
How to keep the economy moving? Do this permanently. {American Public Media, Marketplace, 8/25/10}
---------------------------------------------------
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/12/07/383989/republicans-payroll-tax-undermine-social-security/
Republican Senators Push False Argument That Payroll Tax Cut Will Undermine Social Security
By Travis Waldron on Dec 7, 2011 at 2:10 pm
As some Republicans, including Majority Leader Eric Cantor (VA), are growing worried that opposing a payroll tax cut extension will undercut their message as anti-tax zealots, other Republicans have opposed the extension at every turn. Despite their staunch opposition to raising taxes on millionaires, these Republicans have cycled through the reasons to avoid providing a tax cut to the middle class that would allow the average family to pocket an extra $1,000 a year.
The latest argument to emerge from the GOP has been that extending the payroll tax cut would undermine Social Security, since payroll tax revenue goes directly into the Social Security Trust Fund. Multiple Congressional Republicans have adopted that theory of late, including South Carolina Sen. Jim DeMint (R), who put it to use on CNBC last night:
DEMINT: Republicans are always ready to cut taxes, as you know. We dont think its a good idea to do it by raiding Social Security.
Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul (R) made the same argument on Fox News earlier in the day:
PAUL: Well, you know, Social Security is $6 trillion short of money. So the president is advocating reducing the amount of funding to Social Security when theyre already $6 trillion short. So it doesnt really make any sense and it really argues that hes going to bankrupt Social Security even quicker by reducing its funding.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Out of these four guys which ones do you tend to give the most credibility to?
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
32 replies, 7331 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (5)
ReplyReply to this post
32 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Paul Krugman, Robert Reich, Jim DeMint and Rand Paul on the Payroll Tax Cut [View all]
NNN0LHI
Dec 2011
OP
You're right. The short-term advantages will have a price, and that price will be TOO STEEP.
Chef Eric
Dec 2011
#17
Almost seems like when Krugman or Reich say something even slightly critical of Obama they are smart
NNN0LHI
Dec 2011
#16
You can like that idea all you want. Trying to get it implemented is another story.
cherokeeprogressive
Dec 2011
#28
Ya can see why Rand has been quiet lately...his comments are crap ,,,prolly was told to STFU awhile
opihimoimoi
Dec 2011
#29