Poisoned Xmas ‘gift’

[WillowTree]

The fact is the program is broke — its own trustees estimate that its “trust fund” will run out of money in 2036 — and the “payroll-tax holiday” is only making it broker. That “trust” holds nothing but federal IOUs; the government’s been spending the money for decades.
This wasn’t obvious until last year, when Social Security started paying out more than it took in. Bookkeeping legerdemain can disguise the fact, but even the trustees know the jig is up. Says Republican Charles Blahous, one of the six trustees for Social Security and the even-more-broke Medicare: “This could be the beginning of the end of the idea that [Social Security] is an earned benefit.”
Adds Nancy Altman, the Democrat co-director of a Social Security advocacy group: “To have a Democratic president proposing to undo the dedicated revenue . . . it’s a fundamental change.”
It sure is. But it gets worse. Obama not only wants to extend the 2 percent holiday; he also wants to increase the “tax break,” fully halving the employee’s share to 3.1 percent, all in the name of “tax relief.”
Yet unlinking Social Security from its dedicated funding turns it into a welfare program. After all, the Supreme Court ruled in 1960 that recipients have no inherent right to their Social Security benefits and that Congress can change or rescind them at any time. Imagine what they can do when it’s just another federal giveaway.


Read more: President Obama & the payroll tax—Michael A. Walsh - NYPOST.com

The trust fund will not run out of money in 2036, it will simply not be able to pay out 100% of benefits. Social Security has a 2.6 TRILLION dollar surplus and can pay out 100% of benefits for the next 25 years and 81% of benefits beyond that...without any fixes.

Now, Social Security definitely needs some fixes...for example, lifting the payroll cap.

As to paying for the payroll extension for the next year, a small tax on the wealthiest Americans would not hurt them in the slightest. They likely wouldn't even realize it. The rest of us, on the other hand, would be very aware of a $1000 a year cut in what we bring home. (not you of course Willow, just those of us that work for a living)

Your nasty little digs are not working on me. I worked for a living for 40 years. You're going to have to work 60.. Get used to it.

 

[spectrumc01]

Listen to all these conservatives whining about how their entitlements are getting cut.

Willow... get off your lazy ass and get a job, instead of whining how the government is cutting your entitlement.

Shit, your usually on your back anyway, you might as well get paid for taking it in the ass. Sorry, I forgot your ass is for the family dog.

 

[Full-Auto]

Listen to all these conservatives whining about how their entitlements are getting cut.

Willow... get off your lazy ass and get a job, instead of whining how the government is cutting your entitlement.

Shit, your usually on your back anyway, you might as well get paid for taking it in the ass. Sorry, I forgot your ass is for the family dog.

Can you specific? Thanks

 

[WillowTree]

Listen to all these conservatives whining about how their entitlements are getting cut.

Willow... get off your lazy ass and get a job, instead of whining how the government is cutting your entitlement.

Shit, your usually on your back anyway, you might as well get paid for taking it in the ass. Sorry, I forgot your ass is for the family dog.

Can you specific? Thanks

he gay, he mad.. heee hee

 

[WillowTree]

The fact is the program is broke — its own trustees estimate that its “trust fund” will run out of money in 2036 — and the “payroll-tax holiday” is only making it broker. That “trust” holds nothing but federal IOUs; the government’s been spending the money for decades.
This wasn’t obvious until last year, when Social Security started paying out more than it took in. Bookkeeping legerdemain can disguise the fact, but even the trustees know the jig is up. Says Republican Charles Blahous, one of the six trustees for Social Security and the even-more-broke Medicare: “This could be the beginning of the end of the idea that [Social Security] is an earned benefit.”
Adds Nancy Altman, the Democrat co-director of a Social Security advocacy group: “To have a Democratic president proposing to undo the dedicated revenue . . . it’s a fundamental change.”
It sure is. But it gets worse. Obama not only wants to extend the 2 percent holiday; he also wants to increase the “tax break,” fully halving the employee’s share to 3.1 percent, all in the name of “tax relief.”
Yet unlinking Social Security from its dedicated funding turns it into a welfare program. After all, the Supreme Court ruled in 1960 that recipients have no inherent right to their Social Security benefits and that Congress can change or rescind them at any time. Imagine what they can do when it’s just another federal giveaway.


Read more: President Obama & the payroll tax—Michael A. Walsh - NYPOST.com

Take a listen.



The Bob Rivers Show with Bob Spike and Joe

I can't get it to play. what does it say?

 

[Full-Auto]

The fact is the program is broke — its own trustees estimate that its “trust fund” will run out of money in 2036 — and the “payroll-tax holiday” is only making it broker. That “trust” holds nothing but federal IOUs; the government’s been spending the money for decades.
This wasn’t obvious until last year, when Social Security started paying out more than it took in. Bookkeeping legerdemain can disguise the fact, but even the trustees know the jig is up. Says Republican Charles Blahous, one of the six trustees for Social Security and the even-more-broke Medicare: “This could be the beginning of the end of the idea that [Social Security] is an earned benefit.”
Adds Nancy Altman, the Democrat co-director of a Social Security advocacy group: “To have a Democratic president proposing to undo the dedicated revenue . . . it’s a fundamental change.”
It sure is. But it gets worse. Obama not only wants to extend the 2 percent holiday; he also wants to increase the “tax break,” fully halving the employee’s share to 3.1 percent, all in the name of “tax relief.”
Yet unlinking Social Security from its dedicated funding turns it into a welfare program. After all, the Supreme Court ruled in 1960 that recipients have no inherent right to their Social Security benefits and that Congress can change or rescind them at any time. Imagine what they can do when it’s just another federal giveaway.


Read more: President Obama & the payroll tax—Michael A. Walsh - NYPOST.com

Take a listen.



The Bob Rivers Show with Bob Spike and Joe

I can't get it to play. what does it say?

Bummer, the title is

whiny sappy people.

 

[peach174]

It's a political gimmick played by the Dem's that was passed by them in 2010
For the year 2011, the employee's contribution has been temporarily reduced to 4.2%, while the employer's portion remained at 6.2%
workers are getting a 2% tax break

 

[WillowTree]

Take a listen.



The Bob Rivers Show with Bob Spike and Joe

I can't get it to play. what does it say?

Bummer, the title is

whiny sappy people.

oh demoncraps.. oh my

 

[WillowTree]

It's a political gimmick played by the Dem's that was passed by them in 2010
For the year 2011, the employee's contribution has been temporarily reduced to 4.2%, while the employer's portion remained at 6.2%
workers are getting a 2% tax break

wait til they try to retire. they'll think "break"..

 

[Kiki Cannoli]

The baby boomers should have planned better for their futures, worked more and harder and saved every dime. Now they are dependent on government entitlement programs and it is sad.

 

[WillowTree]

The baby boomers should have planned better for their futures, worked more and harder and saved every dime. Now they are dependent on government entitlement programs and it is sad.

I think you have that wrong. The government happily picked their pockets all their working years and made them promises and now obamie and demoncraps have shit on that promise. They'll remember that shit when they go to the polls too. count on it.

 

[spectrumc01]

The baby boomers should have planned better for their futures, worked more and harder and saved every dime. Now they are dependent on government entitlement programs and it is sad.

I think you have that wrong. The government happily picked their pockets all their working years and made them promises and now obamie and demoncraps have shit on that promise. They'll remember that shit when they go to the polls too. count on it.

What's the matter? you can't afford your gay porn anymore? The batteries in your dildo died and you have to gum dick for extra cash? Quit whinning and get a FUCKING JOB!!!!

 

[Kiki Cannoli]

The baby boomers should have planned better for their futures, worked more and harder and saved every dime. Now they are dependent on government entitlement programs and it is sad.

I think you have that wrong. The government happily picked their pockets all their working years and made them promises and now obamie and demoncraps have shit on that promise. They'll remember that shit when they go to the polls too. count on it.

Yeah, but if they worked harder and were smarter with their money and invested it they would have money and not need handouts. Or did I miss something? Isn't that what we tell people who need assistance today? It is their faults.

 

[WillowTree]

The baby boomers should have planned better for their futures, worked more and harder and saved every dime. Now they are dependent on government entitlement programs and it is sad.

I think you have that wrong. The government happily picked their pockets all their working years and made them promises and now obamie and demoncraps have shit on that promise. They'll remember that shit when they go to the polls too. count on it.

Yeah, but if they worked harder and were smarter with their money and invested it they would have money and not need handouts. Or did I miss something? Isn't that what we tell people who need assistance today? It is their faults.

maybe that's what you tell them.. can i quote you on that?

 

[Conservative]

you are perhaps the most easily manipulated human on the planet

That is quite possibly the most completely insanely stupid and inaccurate comment in the history of message boards.

unless of course you were talking to yourself again... then it's spot on.

 

[Kiki Cannoli]

I think you have that wrong. The government happily picked their pockets all their working years and made them promises and now obamie and demoncraps have shit on that promise. They'll remember that shit when they go to the polls too. count on it.

Yeah, but if they worked harder and were smarter with their money and invested it they would have money and not need handouts. Or did I miss something? Isn't that what we tell people who need assistance today? It is their faults.

maybe that's what you tell them.. can i quote you on that?

You may quote me paraphrasing the Right wing sentiment on this board.

 

[WillowTree]

Yeah, but if they worked harder and were smarter with their money and invested it they would have money and not need handouts. Or did I miss something? Isn't that what we tell people who need assistance today? It is their faults.

maybe that's what you tell them.. can i quote you on that?

You may quote me paraphrasing the Right wing sentiment on this board.

really? link it.

 

[Seawytch]

The fact is the program is broke — its own trustees estimate that its “trust fund” will run out of money in 2036 — and the “payroll-tax holiday” is only making it broker. That “trust” holds nothing but federal IOUs; the government’s been spending the money for decades.
This wasn’t obvious until last year, when Social Security started paying out more than it took in. Bookkeeping legerdemain can disguise the fact, but even the trustees know the jig is up. Says Republican Charles Blahous, one of the six trustees for Social Security and the even-more-broke Medicare: “This could be the beginning of the end of the idea that [Social Security] is an earned benefit.”
Adds Nancy Altman, the Democrat co-director of a Social Security advocacy group: “To have a Democratic president proposing to undo the dedicated revenue . . . it’s a fundamental change.”
It sure is. But it gets worse. Obama not only wants to extend the 2 percent holiday; he also wants to increase the “tax break,” fully halving the employee’s share to 3.1 percent, all in the name of “tax relief.”
Yet unlinking Social Security from its dedicated funding turns it into a welfare program. After all, the Supreme Court ruled in 1960 that recipients have no inherent right to their Social Security benefits and that Congress can change or rescind them at any time. Imagine what they can do when it’s just another federal giveaway.


Read more: President Obama & the payroll tax—Michael A. Walsh - NYPOST.com

The trust fund will not run out of money in 2036, it will simply not be able to pay out 100% of benefits. Social Security has a 2.6 TRILLION dollar surplus and can pay out 100% of benefits for the next 25 years and 81% of benefits beyond that...without any fixes.

Now, Social Security definitely needs some fixes...for example, lifting the payroll cap.

As to paying for the payroll extension for the next year, a small tax on the wealthiest Americans would not hurt them in the slightest. They likely wouldn't even realize it. The rest of us, on the other hand, would be very aware of a $1000 a year cut in what we bring home. (not you of course Willow, just those of us that work for a living)

Your nasty little digs are not working on me. I worked for a living for 40 years. You're going to have to work 60.. Get used to it.

Nah...I was smart and stayed in the military for 20 years. Another 20 at my "bloated government job" and I'm "good to go"...maybe sooner, but thanks for your concern.

Just wait, you special little dear...you'll be able to neg rep me again in no time. God bless your little heart.

 

[bripat9643]

The Social Security Trust Fund was created in 1939 as part of the Amendments enacted in that year. From its inception, the Trust Fund has always worked the same way. The Social Security Trust Fund has never been "put into the general fund of the government."

Most likely this myth comes from a confusion between the financing of the Social Security program and the way the Social Security Trust Fund is treated in federal budget accounting. Starting in 1969 (due to action by the Johnson Administration in 1968) the transactions to the Trust Fund were included in what is known as the "unified budget." This means that every function of the federal government is included in a single budget. This is sometimes described by saying that the Social Security Trust Funds are "on-budget." This budget treatment of the Social Security Trust Fund continued until 1990 when the Trust Funds were again taken "off-budget." This means only that they are shown as a separate account in the federal budget. But whether the Trust Funds are "on-budget" or "off-budget" is primarily a question of accounting practices--it has no affect on the actual operations of the Trust Fund itself.

Debunking Some Internet Myths

There is no money in the so-called "trust fund." The government spends every dime the minute it comes in.

The reason people are confused about the "trust fund" is because lying weasels like you constantly make claims about it that are flat out lies.

The "trust fund" has always been a scam. Any government official who claims there is money in it should be arrested and put in jail for fraud.

 

[Kiki Cannoli]

maybe that's what you tell them.. can i quote you on that?

You may quote me paraphrasing the Right wing sentiment on this board.

really? link it.

You are kidding right?

http://www.usmessageboard.com/general/194999-america-before-the-entitlement-state.html