Anonymous
12/27/2011 11:13
Subject: Bachmann and the payroll tax cut extension
It is impossible to truly change SS or Medicare in the ways needed (at least not that will impact the current peopel using it or soon to use it) because old people vote in disproportionate numbers.
Anonymous
12/24/2011 21:33
Subject: Re:Bachmann and the payroll tax cut extension
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:takoma wrote:Anonymous wrote:jsteele wrote:Yes, you are correct. Increased fees on Fannie and Freddie mortgages will pay for the cut.
Great idea, rob peter to pay paul. Why should mortgage fees be used to pay SS.
GOP -- Tax decreases give money back to the people, so they do not have to be paid for.
Dems -- Let's give a tax decrease to workers.
GOP -- You have to pay for it.
Dems -- We'll pay for it from Fannie and Freddie.
GOP -- Great idea, rob peter to pay paul.
You guys are like Lucy pulling the football away whenever Charlie Brown is conned into trying to kick it.
One could argue we shouldn't be paying those taxes to begin with or at least collect taxes at an equal percentage per income. The job of the government is to use taxes to pay expenditures of government programs that defend the laws of the land and secure the nation. The dems want to use tax collection to redistribute money based on socioeconomics. A lot of government agencies and programs have been created as a shell to redistribute money from the earners to the non earners / workers. This is why there is a continual taking money from one area to pay for another. SS should be dismounted and only be used for people who are truely disabled and not a retirement program.
Sorry, but that's a lie and I am calling you on it.
80% of House Republicans and 2/3 of Republican Senators voted for the Social Security Act of 1935. Those numbers are not substantially different from the Democratic votes. So ha-ha, your party owns it, too.
You will find very few Republicans today who will say they are against social security. You will find a whole raft of Republicans that extended prescription drug benefits when a Republican President was in office.
Doesn't matter what happened in 1935, time have changed and SS is an imploding wasteful useless program.
Great. Now convince Republicans to oppose it. I dare you.
Anonymous
12/24/2011 20:57
Subject: Bachmann and the payroll tax cut extension
Tea Party Republicans - always ready to go to the mattresses for millionaires.
Anonymous
12/24/2011 20:42
Subject: Re:Bachmann and the payroll tax cut extension
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:takoma wrote:Anonymous wrote:jsteele wrote:Yes, you are correct. Increased fees on Fannie and Freddie mortgages will pay for the cut.
Great idea, rob peter to pay paul. Why should mortgage fees be used to pay SS.
GOP -- Tax decreases give money back to the people, so they do not have to be paid for.
Dems -- Let's give a tax decrease to workers.
GOP -- You have to pay for it.
Dems -- We'll pay for it from Fannie and Freddie.
GOP -- Great idea, rob peter to pay paul.
You guys are like Lucy pulling the football away whenever Charlie Brown is conned into trying to kick it.
One could argue we shouldn't be paying those taxes to begin with or at least collect taxes at an equal percentage per income. The job of the government is to use taxes to pay expenditures of government programs that defend the laws of the land and secure the nation. The dems want to use tax collection to redistribute money based on socioeconomics. A lot of government agencies and programs have been created as a shell to redistribute money from the earners to the non earners / workers. This is why there is a continual taking money from one area to pay for another. SS should be dismounted and only be used for people who are truely disabled and not a retirement program.
Sorry, but that's a lie and I am calling you on it.
80% of House Republicans and 2/3 of Republican Senators voted for the Social Security Act of 1935. Those numbers are not substantially different from the Democratic votes. So ha-ha, your party owns it, too.
You will find very few Republicans today who will say they are against social security. You will find a whole raft of Republicans that extended prescription drug benefits when a Republican President was in office.
Doesn't matter what happened in 1935, time have changed and SS is an imploding wasteful useless program.
Anonymous
12/24/2011 17:14
Subject: Re:Bachmann and the payroll tax cut extension
Anonymous wrote:takoma wrote:Anonymous wrote:jsteele wrote:Yes, you are correct. Increased fees on Fannie and Freddie mortgages will pay for the cut.
Great idea, rob peter to pay paul. Why should mortgage fees be used to pay SS.
GOP -- Tax decreases give money back to the people, so they do not have to be paid for.
Dems -- Let's give a tax decrease to workers.
GOP -- You have to pay for it.
Dems -- We'll pay for it from Fannie and Freddie.
GOP -- Great idea, rob peter to pay paul.
You guys are like Lucy pulling the football away whenever Charlie Brown is conned into trying to kick it.
One could argue we shouldn't be paying those taxes to begin with or at least collect taxes at an equal percentage per income. The job of the government is to use taxes to pay expenditures of government programs that defend the laws of the land and secure the nation. The dems want to use tax collection to redistribute money based on socioeconomics. A lot of government agencies and programs have been created as a shell to redistribute money from the earners to the non earners / workers. This is why there is a continual taking money from one area to pay for another. SS should be dismounted and only be used for people who are truely disabled and not a retirement program.
Sorry, but that's a lie and I am calling you on it.
80% of House Republicans and 2/3 of Republican Senators voted for the Social Security Act of 1935. Those numbers are not substantially different from the Democratic votes. So ha-ha, your party owns it, too.
You will find very few Republicans today who will say they are against social security. You will find a whole raft of Republicans that extended prescription drug benefits when a Republican President was in office.
Anonymous
12/24/2011 14:25
Subject: Re:Bachmann and the payroll tax cut extension
takoma wrote:Anonymous wrote:jsteele wrote:Yes, you are correct. Increased fees on Fannie and Freddie mortgages will pay for the cut.
Great idea, rob peter to pay paul. Why should mortgage fees be used to pay SS.
GOP -- Tax decreases give money back to the people, so they do not have to be paid for.
Dems -- Let's give a tax decrease to workers.
GOP -- You have to pay for it.
Dems -- We'll pay for it from Fannie and Freddie.
GOP -- Great idea, rob peter to pay paul.
You guys are like Lucy pulling the football away whenever Charlie Brown is conned into trying to kick it.
One could argue we shouldn't be paying those taxes to begin with or at least collect taxes at an equal percentage per income. The job of the government is to use taxes to pay expenditures of government programs that defend the laws of the land and secure the nation. The dems want to use tax collection to redistribute money based on socioeconomics. A lot of government agencies and programs have been created as a shell to redistribute money from the earners to the non earners / workers. This is why there is a continual taking money from one area to pay for another. SS should be dismounted and only be used for people who are truely disabled and not a retirement program.
Anonymous
12/24/2011 14:17
Subject: Bachmann and the payroll tax cut extension
Here is what america would look like if we had a liberal utopia of all taxes and equal pay for all http://articles.cnn.com/2010-12-21/politics/north.korea.wolf.blitzer.notebook_1_flight-attendants-air-koryo-beijing?_s=PM
OLITICS
OLITICS
takoma
12/24/2011 13:42
Subject: Re:Bachmann and the payroll tax cut extension
Anonymous wrote:jsteele wrote:Yes, you are correct. Increased fees on Fannie and Freddie mortgages will pay for the cut.
Great idea, rob peter to pay paul. Why should mortgage fees be used to pay SS.
GOP -- Tax decreases give money back to the people, so they do not have to be paid for.
Dems -- Let's give a tax decrease to workers.
GOP -- You have to pay for it.
Dems -- We'll pay for it from Fannie and Freddie.
GOP -- Great idea, rob peter to pay paul.
You guys are like Lucy pulling the football away whenever Charlie Brown is conned into trying to kick it.
Anonymous
12/24/2011 12:53
Subject: Re:Bachmann and the payroll tax cut extension
Because you guys have been complaining that Freddie and Fannie are underpricing their product anyway so it kills 2 birds with one stone.Anonymous wrote:jsteele wrote:Yes, you are correct. Increased fees on Fannie and Freddie mortgages will pay for the cut.
Great idea, rob peter to pay paul. Why should mortgage fees be used to pay SS.
takoma
12/24/2011 11:01
Subject: Re:Bachmann and the payroll tax cut extension
jsteele wrote:Yes, you are correct. Increased fees on Fannie and Freddie mortgages will pay for the cut.
That she was wrong about Revolutionary War history is one thing, but for a candidate who is a Member of Congress not to know what is in the one bill recently at issue seems like it ought to be the biggest news in the campaign.
Anonymous
12/24/2011 11:01
Subject: Re:Bachmann and the payroll tax cut extension
Here is a good example of what is wrong with SS. It's unsustainable.
Anonymous
12/24/2011 10:57
Subject: Re:Bachmann and the payroll tax cut extension
jsteele wrote:Yes, you are correct. Increased fees on Fannie and Freddie mortgages will pay for the cut.
Great idea, rob peter to pay paul. Why should mortgage fees be used to pay SS.
jsteele
12/24/2011 10:52
Subject: Re:Bachmann and the payroll tax cut extension
Yes, you are correct. Increased fees on Fannie and Freddie mortgages will pay for the cut.
Anonymous
12/24/2011 10:45
Subject: Bachmann and the payroll tax cut extension
No matter what the topic, chances are MB is wrong about it.
takoma
12/24/2011 10:34
Subject: Bachmann and the payroll tax cut extension
MB (not Marion Barry, Muriel Bowser, or Michael Brown; the one from MN) opposes the extension on grounds that we should not be taking money out of the SS trust fund. But my understanding is that all the fuss was about how to fund it, and that seems to mean it will NOT come out of the trust fund. Am I confused or is she?