Saving Social Security: Stopping Obama's Next Bad Deal

Thanks to both of you and, Inkos, it looks like we will, once again, have a choice between dumb and dumber. If there were the least chance that a Green candidate could win, which there is not, I would look very favorably at a strong Green candidate.



Merry Christmas and happy New Year to all who read and write to the Huffington Post website. Most comments are well thought through while others are obviously written by morons, but we can hope that all have a happy holiday season and as good a new year as Obama and the Republican Congress will allow.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

What's the Estate Tax Supposed to Do, Anyway?

The estate tax should accomplish two things: Wealth is power and the accumulati­on of wealth among a few wealthy families is dangerous for our democracy. The estate tax has been imposed in this country many times in the past. It was used to finance wars. At time when our government is fighting two wars, neither of them paid for during the Bush administra­tion, the estate tax could be, maybe should be, dedicated to fighting those wars. I have to ask, "Why should transferri­ng huge estates to heirs who have done nothing to earn the money not be taxed while people who are working for a living are expected to pay taxes on their salaries and wages?" The American people have been spoiled with income tax cuts. The Bush tax cuts gave the largest dollar amounts of tax cuts to the well to do. The Republican­s have fretted over raising their taxes by 3.6% of their income. They would go to the wall to protect the well to do from paying 3.6 cents more per dollar on their after tax income, and they cry their eyes out about estate taxes as our country goes deeper and deeper in debt. They cry about deficit spending, but refuse to accept the fact that the rich are not paying their share. Since most wealthy estates hold stocks that have appreciate­d and have never been taxed why shouldn't those estates be taxed? The Waltons have never paid taxes on their capital gains.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

'Democrat' Is No Longer A Brand

Enthusiast­­H, I agree, Obama, or Obushama, is a disaster and a disgrace to the Democratic Party, but we do not need a third party. Ralph Nader and the Green Party took 100,000 + votes in Florida and gave us President George W. Bush. A third party would only insure Republican domination for decades to come. What we need is a real Democrat running in the 2012 primary, someone who can defeat Obama and be a real Democrat as President. But, we really do not need to waste our votes on third party candidates who willonl stengthen the Republican hold over our government­­. I would accept and support Nader, or, preferably­­, Bernie Sanders over Obama if either would run as a Democrat because they both have real Democratic ideals that they would fight to uphold, unlike our current non-leader who has let the Republican­­s run over him and has become a yes man to John Boehner and Mitch McConnell. Roosevlt, Truman, and Kennedy must be rolling over in their Graves. Obama buckled even to the point of not fighting for the public option. For me, it's Nobama in 2012 if we have a stong leader to run against him in a primary
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

'Democrat' Is No Longer A Brand

Enthusiast­H, I agree, Obama, or Obushama, is a disaster and a disgrace to the Democratic Party, but we do not need a third party. Ralph Nader and the Green Party took 100,000 + votes in Florida and gave us President George W. Bush. A third party would only insure Republican domination for decades to come. What we need is a real Democrat running in the 2012 primary, someone who can defeat Obama and be a real Democrat as President. But, we really do not need to waste our votes on third party candidates who willonl stengthen the Republican hold over our government­. I would accept and support Nader, or, preferably­, Bernie Sanders over Obama if either would run as a Democrat because they both have real Democratic ideals that they would fight to uphold, unlike our current non-leader who has let the Republican­s run over him and has become a yes man to John Boehner and Mitch McConnell. Roosevlt, Truman, and Kennedy must be rolling over in their Graves. Obama buckled even to the point of not fighting for the public option. For me, it's Nobama in 2012 if we have a stong leader to run against him in a primary.
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Warren Buffett vs. the Broken-Clock Brigade

We are a very docile people who allow the government to favor the rich and the corporations, that were given personhood by the Supreme Court, which together are using our tax money for their own benefit. American workers must pay excess taxes for Social Security. Those surpluses are used to pay for a big chunk of the U.S. deficits caused by the conditions noted by CenTexDem. I think it is time to ask why Social Security is expected to be funded for 75 years ahead when Big business and their rich stock holders are given tax cuts, exemptions, and benefits that create deficits and postpone the enevitable cost of paying for the Bush wars and deficits. The government could use that money to revive the economy by building the infrastructure necessary to create renewable energy systems and prepare this country for the day when oil production stalls out. The government could invest to build and repair highways, bridges, and schools, and to insure that young Americans will have the skills that they will need to survive in tomorrow's economy. We are all in this mess together but we do not all share equally in the opportunities that are created by being Americans.
About Bush Tax Cuts
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Forget the Carter Comparisons, Obama Is Following in the Footsteps of Harry Truman -- and That's a Very Good Thing

The Democrats may have had a majority in the Senate, but he had no super majority. He had blue dog democrats, "republican lite" Senators that were no always there for him when he needed them to support progressive policies.
About Elections 2012
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Does Social Security Have WMD?

Actually, raising the cap has been discussed. The cap is automatically increased each year based upon the Consumer Price Index. That cap was $65,4000 in 1997 and has increased to $106,800 this year and last. I would like to see very high income individuals taxed to support the program. Rush Limbaugh has an 8 year contract that pays him 50 million dollars a year. This is his second 8 year contract that will pay that amount. Also he received a $100 million dollar signing bonus for each. Why should someone who argues so vehemently against Social Security not be required to pay at least a 2% tax on his millions of "unearned" income? he would not miss a million dollars a year. As it is, he makes enough to pay off his Social Security tax no later than January 2.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Does Social Security Have WMD?

Swamp East and you, Eppur are both wrong. First of all, United States Treasury bonds are not I.O.U.s as so many propagandists like to call them. They are real obligations of the United States just as are the bonds sold to China, Japan, corporate pension funds, banks and anyone else who buys them. They are real assets just as are EE or HH bonds. Our government has never defaulted on Treasury Securities. The Treasury uses money from China and Japan to finance federal deficits just as it has done with Trust Fund investments. Only propagandist’s claim there is no trust fund, they and those who are just ignorant of how government finances work. Government like not-for profit organizations has trust funds that are dedicated to be used for certain purposes. There are 239 government trust funds, but Social Security is the only one that is targeted by propagandists. The Federal Highway trust fund ran out of money in 2008. When Bush took office, it had 9 billion dollars to spend on transportation infrastructure. Bush, the anti-tax president did nothing to raise revenues for that trust fund and allowed it to run out of assets, so, money was transferred from the general fund to that trust fund. If there had been a small fuel tax increase, the fund would have remained solvent, now it will take a big fuel tax increase or transfers from the general revenues to fund the highway trust; that means more borrowing.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Cutting Social Security is the New TARP

The 1983 Social Security law did tax Social Security benefits for higher income retirees, not for everyone but for those individuals who make income between $25,000 and $34,000 there may be a tax on 50% of their Social Security income, and those joint filers with income between $32,000 and $44,000 may have to pay on 50% of their benefits. Low income recipients pay nothing. Individuals with income over $34,000 and joint filers who have income above $44,000 may pay taxes on up to 85% of their benefits. If their income tax bracket is 10%, that means that their benefits may be taxed between $5 and $8.50 per hundred dollars of benefits. That money goes back into the Social Security trust fund. I have pay the tax and do not consider it a problem. I felt that I was fortunate to have enough income to be required to pay it. Most recipients will never have to pay the tax.
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost