This blog originally founded by Blogger who holds a theological degree and a doctorate in Counseling Psychology. Taught Psychology for 32 years and is now Professor Emeritus. Is a board-certified psychologist and was awarded the Lifetime Achievement Award in his profession. Ministered as a chaplain, and pastored Baptist and Episcopal churches. Publications cover the integration of psychology and theology. Served in the Army, the Merchant Marines and the Peace Corps.

Wednesday, December 7, 2011

President Robbing Social Security Fund

Michelle Bachman is the only public voice shouting this and no one appears to be hearing it:


 On the pay roll tax, “the roles are somewhat reversed and U.S. Rep. Adam Kinzinger, R-Ill., says there’s a good reason for it.
Some Republicans are resisting President Barack Obama’s call to extend the payroll tax cut for another year. The president says it will otherwise cost some 160 million Americans another $1,500 per year out of their paychecks.

Republicans have continually pushed to extend the so-called Bush tax cuts. Kinzinger said the problem with extending the payroll tax cut is it’s shortchanging the Social Security system.”

“Not only do we have trouble with the Social Security trust fund because congressmen who have been there for decades prior have been robbing the Social Security system … and now we are shortchanging it some more, so that’s where our concerns are,” Kinzinger said.

Kinzinger said Congress has been raiding the Social Security fund for decades.

Kinzinger said he would support extending the payroll tax cut if Congress can find a way to replace the money lost in the Social Security fund.”  (From the webpage of  WJBC The Voice of Central Illinois.)


Enhanced by Zemanta

38 comments:

Jack said...

Kinzinger clearly said, "Congress has been raiding the Social Security fund for decades." I love how that, somehow, turned into "President Robbing Social Security Fund".

"Kinzinger said he would support extending the payroll tax cut if Congress can find a way to replace the money lost in the Social Security fund."

There is a very easy, very effective way; Remove the cap.

Blogger said...

Jack, In his reelection bid, the president is using the payroll tax cut to corner Republicans. Therefore, all that is important right now is that "The President Robbing Social Security Fund."

The rest is so yesterday.

Jack said...

The payroll tax debate began, in earnest, this summer. Hardly breaking news. So cry, complain, and blame the president all you want.....but Republicans want to raise your taxes.

I hate buying into stereotypes, but it's pretty hard to ignore this one when GOPers vehemently fight every tax idea....then push to raise a regressive tax.

So yesterday.

Sarkazein said...

It's the spending stupid!

guy faulkes said...

There is no use reasoning with those that worship leftist entitlement spending, Sark. They do not understand budgeting as they never had to do it. Cutting spending is a sin to them.

Sarkazein said...

"Kinzinger said he would support extending the payroll tax cut if Congress can find a way to replace the money lost in the Social Security fund."

If there is a deficit and a huge national debt, there is no way to "find" the money to "pay for it", it is not there.

Sarkazein said...

It is incredible the Leftists still think they can fix things by raising taxes. They are, in fact, ridiculous.

Jack said...

Sorry to burst your bubble Sark, but it's the "Rightists" who want to raise the tax.

Blogger said...

Jack, the payroll tax is not stimulating jobs, instead it is mostly resulting in keeping money from being put into the Social Security Trust Fund, speeding up its bankruptcy.

At the same time, now that workers are use to it, then not extending it feels to them like a raise in their taxes.

The whole purpose was political to put Republicans into a bind--one more illustration of Democrats dirty tricks.

Sarkazein said...

"Sorry to burst your bubble Sark, but it's the "Rightists" who want to raise the tax."- Jack


And?

Sarkazein said...

Ah the dishonesty of the Leftist. Social Security is going broke. The "Rightists" think the payroll deduction cut will cause the program to go broke faster. The Leftists know this also. But, the Leftist Obama wants to overload the system and bring it down. This is and has been his plan since he read Alinsky's book while in between cocaine lines in college.
Just as the Rightists tried to prevent the financial crisis by reigning in Fannie-Mae but were fought by the Leftists at every turn, the "Rightists", now, are trying to save Social Security.
Blogger is right, it is a dirty trick. Obama thinks he wins either way. If he can't get it passed, he blames the Republicans for not wanting to steal more from the rich. If it does pass, the system comes closer to crashing.

Jack said...

"the payroll tax is not stimulating jobs...At the same time, now that workers are use to it, then not extending it feels to them like a raise in their taxes."

Blogger, you sound like a Democrat. Just replace "payroll tax" with "Bush-era tax cuts". Makes me chuckle on the inside.

Sarkazein said...

The Social Security payroll money is for Social Security. Already deducted from and promised to be returned to many.

The income tax is different.

Sarkazein said...

None of your petty little stuff matters anymore. Obama needs to be impeached now along with Holder and everyone in leadership in the ATF.

High Crime and an attempt to bring down the Bill of Rights

Sarkazein said...

"Social Security was not established to be a source of 'temporary' stimulus funds. The idea that its payroll tax rate should be moved up and down with economic events is highly dangerous to the program's financial future," Chuck Blahous, a public trustee for Social Security and Medicare, said in a statement.
Blahous and others argue that the more Social Security is seen as a program that must rely on general tax revenue, the less it will be viewed as a self-financed program that pays out earned benefits.
"Social Security will gradually be turned into something more akin to welfare, for which the funding is provided not solely by ... workers but also by a subsidy funded by those subject to income tax," Blahous said.

guy faulkes said...

Sark is right about the impeachment now being imminent due to these new email disclosures. The problem is that while the House will impeach, the Senate would not remove Obama from office because of partisanship maneuverings. If Obama is not defeated, look for this to happen after the Republicans take the Senate in 2012.

On the other hand, gun control is such a widespread issue and concern that many politicians lose their offices for supporting it. Democrats might vote as this new evidence would demand and remove him form office. Any thoughts on this?

Sarkazein said...

Guy Faulkes- Months ago, when I heard Rush say that Fast and Furious was a way to sway public opinion toward gun control, I was shocked. The first part of my shock was that Rush would make such an accusation. There was no way, in my mind, a government agency would be so reckless. Then a while later after hearing more details about F&F, it started to make more sense.
In fact, we were supplying a narco-terrrorist organization with arms to fight the Mexican government all to make a Leftist political point. This administration is truly made up of thugs and needs to be removed.

Sarkazein said...

There is a Texan sitting in prison right now for selling a gun to an illegal alien. The government said the seller should have been able to know by the illegal alien's appearance that he was an illegal. We now know why the government was so hell-bent on putting one of our citizens in prison... to promote Leftist ideology.

guy faulkes said...

Sark, are you saying the government wanted this guy to use racial profiling before selling the gun? The hypocrisy is interesting, if not supervising.

Sarkazein said...

Guy Faulkes- Yes, the government prosecutor said he should have been able to tell by appearance and by accent.

Blogger said...

“just replace "payroll tax" with "Bush-era tax cuts". Makes me chuckle on the inside.” Jack, when I wrote it, I expected you would catch that. Then I got to thinking. Take away the Bush tax cuts and the economy will be lost. Take away the payroll tax and Social Security will be saved (for a time). As Cain says--apples and oranges.

Blogger said...

"he should have been able to tell" OOOwee! That's so much not PC!

Jack said...

"Take away the Bush tax cuts and the economy will be lost. Take away the payroll tax and Social Security will be saved"

It's only "apples and oranges" if the payroll tax hike would have zero effect on the economy. Since it would have an effect, it's apples and apples.

There's talk as if Social Security will go bust in a matter of months if this tax is not raised. But the Social Security Trust Fund is currently running a $2.6 billion surplus and is completely solvent, in its current form, through 2035. So, will something need to change in order to fund Social Security? In the next 20 years, yes. But it's no imploding anytime soon. If you are serious about the program's viability, then consider that simply removing the cap would make SS financially solvent through the end of the century.

But, the greater question remains. Why would Republicans scream about a tax hike on the top bracket, then actively push for a tax hike on low and middle-income workers? Why oppose a progressive tax but advocate for a regressive tax?

Sarkazein said...

Jack- Is it the same people holding the Social Security Trust Fund that are $15,000,000,000,000 in debt?
Are the actual funds intermingled in the US Treasury?
If the USA goes bust, will the Chinese honor the "Trust Fund"?

Blogger said...

He He The president tried to put Republicans between a rock and a hard place with the call for the payroll tax cut.

Today, Republicans showed that two could play that game and put him between a rock and a hard place, job seeking union members vs tree huggers, by attaching the pipe line to the bill. Don't you just love it?

Sarkazein said...

Blogger- I believe the inexperienced Obama painted himself in a corner by saying he would never agree to the pipe line bill being attached to the payroll tax before the Republicans ever even offered it. Who is it the Leftist pinheads say- says no all the time? The true answer to that is Harry Reed and Obama.

Jack said...

That still doesn't change the fact that the GOP wants to raise taxes.

Socialists.

Sarkazein said...

Jack- Are you saying anyone wanting to raise taxes is a Socialist. Yes you did.

Again, for the discern-a-bility impaired, it is two different things.

Jack said...

Kenyans?

Jack said...

Sark, your political party rails against taxation and you're apoplectic when tax increases are discussed.

Then your political party seeks to raise taxes and increase taxation, and you find it unfathomable that anyone wouldn't want to raise taxes.

If you're going to be pissed off at everyone, at least keep it consistent.

Sarkazein said...

Jack- Yu must only be reading your comments.

Jack said...

"taxiing [sic] too little is not the problem." - Sark, 9/20/11

"We have to restrain the money flow to the government." - Sark, 9/21/11

Sarkazein said...

You have too much time on your hands Jack. You must be one of those charging way too much for your services.

Social Security and INCOME tax are different. You are a one trick pony.

Sarkazein said...

Social Security tax (so they say) does not go for insane things like we read about and see everyday in government waste. (except for fakers that get lawyers to get them their SSI)

Sarkazein said...

"taxiing [sic] too little is not the problem." - Sark, 9/20/11

It is the spending stupid!

You must enjoy hearing that.

Jack said...

“Why should a ‘capitalist society’ need socialist tax support?” --GIG (4/9/11)

“Another solution is lowergin [sic] taxes. The big brother, nanny state government already gets too much of my money to keep listless, lazy Trogylydytes like yourself afloat.” --Johnny (8/23/11)

“We don't like redistributive taxes so you can keep them.” --Anonymous (8/17/11)

“An improved economy due to tax cuts that create jobs instead of kill them.” --Guy (8/3/11)

"I do not want anyone to raise taxes" --Guy (8/29/11)

“Increased taxes...would kill off what business and entrepreneurs that are left. Fewer people making money means less tax revenue, idiot.” --Anonymous (8/6/11)

“Never, ever, raise taxes or tax a tax credit away from anyone. Work to lower taxes and get government out of our lives.” --Johnny (7/9/11)

“If the Republicans break their word to cut spending and to not raise taxes, the citizens of this country will never trust them again.” --Guy (7/8/11)

Sarkazein said...

Were any of the quoted commenters (by Jack) commenting about Social Security? Or was it the income tax?
My apologies to the quoted (by Jack) commenters for asking the obvious.

Sarkazein said...

Do away with Social Security and you can cut out FICA completely, I'd rather invest for my own retirement.