Sen. Jon Kyl: Payroll Tax Holiday Not Stimulative

What is stealing is the continued GOP policies that only help the richest in America. Basically if anything helps the middle class and poor, the GOP will be against it UNLESS they can broker a deal where the rich gets the lion’s share.

This is why they oppose the payroll tax, because it doesn’t help the rich.

Save America! Kill the Bush tax cuts!

I agree with the Republican’s on this! STOP messing with Social Security funding Barack Obama.

Is social security an entitlement or a government savings program?

Rence…what you’re not considering is what would have happened if those tax cuts (now Obama’s) weren’t in place all those years. We know that revenue to the treasury grew like crazy in the years following the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts (IRS data confirms this, it’s not subjective) so the only thing we know for sure is that more and more tax payer dollars would have gone to the government where they would be prompted wasted on crap we don’t need. The Obama Stimulus I and proposed Stimulus II (the “jobs” plan) is just another political favor to secure union votes. Why? I have no idea. Unions vote for the Democrat no matter how incompentent his/she is. They’ll vote for Obama in 2012 because that’s what they do. They get promised infrastructure jobs and fake “shovel-ready” jobs in exchange for their votes and then they watch the president laugh about the failure with his jobs czar Jeff Immelt. But they’ll still vote for him! We should all go bald scratching our heads. Gotta admire their pet-like loyalty to Obama.

S – that argument applies the same to the Obama stimulus, no one can say for certain where the economy would have been without them but many economists feel it would have been worse off.

Also your argument about the 47% who don’t pay FEDERAL INCOME tax is because many of those folks don’t have much of an income. This includes Students and Senior Citizens. Yet everyone still pays other taxes such as sales and property tax.

If the GOP were truly interested in putting America back onto the path of fiscal solvency, they would kill the Bush tax cuts. Reagan raised taxes 11 times or so during his Presidency. Clinton did as well and the economy prospered just fine.

And cutting taxes on the richest HAS stimulated the economy and created jobs?

Odd, since the last jobs report I saw showed that over 60% of all new jobs for the month were created by SMALL businesses, and the rest by MID-SIZED ones (LARGE companies ELIMINATED 5,000 jobs).

And last I read (in the Wall Street Journal) we were LOSING 850,000 private sector jobs a month when Bush left office and are now in the 18th straight month of private sector job GROWTH. Those tax cuts for the top few percent were in effect for a while, and we just kept losing more jobs every month.

And data shows that despite record profits, the largest corporations and the richest investors (the ones the Republicans call “the job creators”) are SITTING on trillions in cash…NOT investing it or hiring.

WE are the job creators…the workers, the consumers, the small and mid-sized business owners.

And every extra penny you put into OUR pockets tends to get SPENT and stimulate the economy and create more jobs which INCREASES tax revenues.

The supply-siders had 8 years and drove this nation off a cliff. Their approach and their policies were (yet again, as in the 20′s/early 30′s) a dismal FAILURE.

They have some nerve to be trying to re-hash the same old garbage.

RENCE:”the tax holiday has been in effect for 11 months – and it was not stimulative – jobs aren’t being created – so we must do away with it.”

Where do you get your figures? Rush Limbaugh?

Seriously, according to the numbers from the Dept. of Labor (AND the private sector calculations always issued a few days prior) we have been GAINING private sector jobs every month for the past 18 (going on 19) months. Even the recent zero net gain reflected an actual gain in private sector jobs which was offset by public sector losses and so only ammounted to 50,000 new jobs total (which was considered “zero net gain”).

The Wall Street Journal (hardly a bastian of liberalism!) regularly publishes a graph of private sector job losses/gains going back to Feb. of ’08 or so. As of now, it looks like an upper-case letter V; the left, downward slope in RED (for BUSH’S last yr or so in office, culminating with a record 850,000 p.s. jobs LOST in one month) and the right, upward sloping side in BLUE (indicating OBAMA’S time in office to date, bringing us back up to a high of over 250,000 new p.s. jobs a month).

Yes, there’s a long way to go, so deep was the hole we got into, and the recovery has been slower than we’d all like, but to claim that “jobs aren’t being created” is flat-out FALSE.

I’d wager (like many economists) that if not for the Republican obstruction (extension of the Bush tax cuts, blocking of additional stimulus, etc..) we’d be even BETTER off by now.

Funny how the Republicans claim tax breaks for the rich stimulate the economy but when the tax breaks are for regular folks, the tax breaks don’t help the economy!
It is pretty clear whose side the Republicans are on and if you are middle-class or poor, it isn’t yours.

If you want to ensure the stability of social security, apply it to ALL earnings instead of, what, the first $140,000? [sorry,don't have my books here and do not remember the exact figure]. If you have $1,000,000 in earnings it should ALL be subject to the withholding. THAT would put a good chunk of money into the system. Oh, wait, that would mean the wealthy would have a tax INCREASE – and the Republicans cannot stand for that!! Also, the lowest 50% DO have taxes taken from their salary so that is a FALSE Republican claim. They simply are too poor to owe an income tax – they get refunds at the end of the year most likely.

WORSE!

It defunds SS and Medicare for seniors.

There is no reason to have this tax cut, as it is entirely contrary to what Obama claims he wants…….revenue. Obama is not honest with the people, about what he is doing, in any way.

Let this tax cut expire. Working people will not feel the impact, very much.

MICHELLE SHU JAS – As a country, we’ve had a progressive tax scheme for generations because we’ve recognized that not everyone starts off with the same opportunities. Therefore the tax code reflects that.

And Obama can’t ‘fund’ ANYTHING. That’s Congress’ purview. They are the SOLE controllers of the checkbook.

Sounds like your anger is misplaced.

So sick and tired of these worthless Republicans always wanting more for the rich. They would agree and vote a bill in that would reduce taxes on the rich and raise taxes on the middle class in a heartbeat. They have no shame being so obvious that they only care about the rich and don’t give a damn about the working men and women. If these guys ain’t rich yet, they will soon be or before they leave office. They only care about working people on election day. After that you could die in front of them of thirst and these bloodsucking lowlifes won’t give you a drop of water. If there is such a thing as HELL, they will all surely meet there. Worms.

What’s not new, the Republicans would rather the poor pay for the wealthy and the wealthy just get wealthy. This includes about more than half of key Congressmen and Senators who get to take advantage of these BUSH TAX BREAKS!!! It’s time to stop the madness and make the Republican party do their job and that is work for the American People. Even retired Senator Simpson -R-Wyoming thinks it’s time to raise taxes on the wealthy to make sure that the deficit is cut down. What I find funny America, you all complain for the Trillion dollar deficit, and what it will mean to the future generation of children and grandchildren. Shouldn’t we worry more about their education today and how they will be able to compete against other countries that stress education and college. They won’t be able to pay off the debt because they will be working jobs that will make them not competitive with other countries.

katie mcclure wrote:”Even retired Senator Simpson -R-Wyoming thinks it’s time to raise taxes on the wealthy to make sure that the deficit is cut down”
.
You can raise taxes all you want and DEMOCRATS will continue to spend every penny of it and will insist on even more. It has been proven time after time. DEMOCRATS are dangerously addicted to other peoples money and they have shown no inclination whatsoever to change. Their concern for the deficit is for show only…. just watch what they DO instead of what they SAY.

Tax breaks for the wealthy DO help economies – just not ours. They invest the money they save on taxes overseas, where labor rates are so much lower. After that, your job becomes redundant. You can join the ranks of the unemployed and watch our money flow out of this country like a river.

This is class warfare – being waged on YOU.

bobomcstevens wrote:”You seem to forget that it was under REPUBLICAN Presidents where our deficits shot up.”
.
And you forgot that at 4:10pm you wrote “And Obama can’t ‘fund’ ANYTHING. That’s Congress’ purview. They are the SOLE controllers of the checkbook.”
.
So which is it… I know it is difficult for oBama stooges to grasp any understanding of the things they are told to cut-and-paste into these blogs. But.. you just explained why the deficits shot up under President Bush. ( Bush – President, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid – Congress. ) Thanks for finally getting it right.

Here’s one for the GOP, it you don’t want to vote for the payroll tax cut then let’s get rid of all the tax cuts and loop holes. No more of you picking and choosing what’s fair and effective. If it’s time to cut entitlements, then let’s cut them along with all the corporate welfare. It’s Time for some true tuff love. You people are always trying to find an angle to do away with anything that’s aimed at helping the middleclass DIRECTLY while claiming everything you propose will help the middleclass but it’ll take a while for it to trickledown. I hope that was Obama’s angle when he agreed to the STUPID committee. He knew they wouldn’t compromise on anything so come 2013, the Bush tax cuts go and we force cuts to social programs and the military to the tune of over 6 trillion.

Just watch – both parties will support the payroll tax cut. Then they will announce Social Security is insolvent and raise the retirement age to 70. While they retire at 55.

The Bush tax cuts did not spur any economic growth or job creation. For proof, just look at the last ten years. Instead, those irresponsible cuts (along with an underfunded and unnecessary war in Iraq) greatly contributed to the worst economic conditions since the Great Depression. In other words, Dubya and the Republicans whacked us upside the head.

Posted by: TnMuse—For the same reason no one else pays income taxes on all income, you willing to tax retirement plans, or the 401ks of those that actually save. You and everyone who collects giving up $20 won’t make a lick of difference. The facts are SSI Medicare and Medicaid promise more than the government can deliver or the people who pay the majority of the bills are willing to pay for. When you rely on others you have to put up with what they are willing to pay for.

This is crazy. The Republicans are fighting in EVERY committee to completely destroy Social Security and Medicare and yet their lemmings are complaining about the tax relief for small business to HIRE AMERICANS!! Are you kidding!!! The entire reason Republicans want to move to a private system is to eliminate all together the employer portion of FICA taxes. Not a holiday, ELIMINATION!! You will be limited to only your portion of the FICA and forced to pay it into an employer controlled 401k. Instead of the current REQUIRED full match as they do with FICA employers will pay what they choose. If history tells us anything, employers will not pay a nickel to the employees benefit unless required by law or bargaining agreement contract. I put a word between “is” and “crazy” but deleted it as the website surely would not post it but trust me, I thought long and hard about leaving that very well known word in.

MICHELLE SHU JAS | NOVEMBER 27, 2011, 6:21 PM:

“… look at a graph of the federal budget deficit during those 6 years…. it was shrinking UNTIL the DEMOCRATS took over congress in 2007.”
=================================================
LOL! …. “shrinking?”… LOL! … not exactly. The deficit grew for 4 years before it shrunk very little from where it started at in 2001. These are the actual budget deficits (before borrowing from the Social Security Trust Fund) during those 6 years that Republicans controlled the both houses of congress:

2000 = $86.4 Billion SURPLUS (Clinton is President w/Republican congress)
2001 = $32.4 Billion DEFICIT (Bush 1st year w/Republican congress)
2002 = $317.4 Billion DEFICIT (Bush 2nd year w/Republican congress)
2003 = $538.4 Billion DEFICIT (Bush 3rd year w/Republican congress)
2004 = $568.0 Billion DEFICIT (Bush 4th year w/Republican congress)
2005 = $493.6 Billion DEFICIT (Bush 5th year w/Republican congress)
2006 = $434.5 Billion DEFICIT (Bush 6th year w/Republican congress)

LOL! …. I wouldn’t call starting with a budget SURPLUS and then ending with a half-trillion dollar deficit (regardless of the fact that the deficit shrunk by $134 Billion during the last two years) anything to brag about…. hehehehehe!
-342,153

X-Repub; You must have a file to pull that data from. There’s no way you keep coming up with those numbers off of the top of your head.

It’s politics. It won’t do dittly.

The truly rich pay little to no FICA or Medicare tax because they earn most, if not all of their income via investment. FICA and Medicare are payroll taxes; therefore, they are only levied on payroll income.