LMAO.... so they are shorting other areas to play their shell game?
Um, no. This is the part where you're supposed to acknowledge that you were wrong, not the part where you keep digging.
LMAO.... so they are shorting other areas to play their shell game?
actually, we're borrowing money to replace the money we would have had to borrow.....
Um, no. This is the part where you're supposed to acknowledge that you were wrong, not the part where you keep digging.
if Obama has a plan at all, why hasn't he mentioned it in the last four years?......
but he wasn't wrong.....
Maybe you missed the Death Panel thing or the Republicans running in 2010 on the $500 billion in Medicare "cuts."
Yes, he was. Social Security and the trust fund are no worse off as a result of the payroll tax holiday.
I certainly missed Obama making a proposal to save Medicare.....if you think he's got a plan point to it....
that's simply a ridiculous statement and you've been shown why its a ridiculous statement......less revenue coming in means there is less in the account....
His plan was already enacted into law. Surely you are aware of the Affordable Care Act. Also, too, I posted a link already. Here it is again:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...-houses-medicare-plan-isnt-that-hard-to-find/
But there isn't less in the account because money is coming out of the general fund (that's the borrowing I mentioned) to cover the lost revenues.
I see your error.....you forgot we were talking about Medicare......now that we have that corrected, perhaps you could point to Obama's solution for Medicare.....
it isn't coming out of the general fund.....there's nothing there but more IOUs.....
The loss of income is being paid out of the general fund. Basically, we're borrowing money to pay the trust fund the amount in tax revenues forgone by the payroll tax holiday.
Actually, no. We're borrowing money to pay into the trust fund money that would have gone into the trust fund.
Yes, he was. Social Security and the trust fund are no worse off as a result of the payroll tax holiday.
???.....probably because there's no truth to that claim whatsoever......
?????....wouldn't we have had the investment income from the SS surplus (if the surplus was actually being invested) even if the premiums WERE collected?.....
actually, we're borrowing money to replace the money we would have had to borrow.....
that's simply a ridiculous statement and you've been shown why its a ridiculous statement......less revenue coming in means there is less in the account....
it isn't coming out of the general fund.....there's nothing there but more IOUs.....
A lot of rank and file Republicans are unhappy that their leaders have vowed to renew the temporary payroll tax cut one way or another. But nearly all of them say that if the tax holiday is renewed (or possibly even broadened) the money will have to be offset with spending cuts elsewhere in the budget.
This stands in total contrast to GOP views about permanent income tax cuts. So they’re cooking up arbitrary distinctions to justify the double standard.
Payroll revenues do finance Social Security. And indeed a lot of progressives are reluctant to support another payroll holiday because it depletes the trust fund which then draws further on general revenue — and thus adds to public debt. But the notion that it ultimately adds to the national debt, while unpaid-for income tax cuts do not is false. In fact, that is the fiscal legacy of the Bush years.
If Social Security solvency was really the Republicans’ key objection to President Obama’s proposal, they could propose to swap out a payroll tax cut with a refundable tax credit for employees, and bypass the trust fund issue altogether. Clearly, then, it’s just a red herring.
Oh, right. I forgot that you are one of those. OK. Again, you can pretend whatever you wish. In reality, SF was wrong.
The tax holiday was repaid out of general revenue