Obama's bout to cave on Social Security...
Options
earth two superman
Members Posts: 17,149 ✭✭✭✭✭
in exchange for letting tax cuts for the rich expire next year, as is my understanding.
Thoughts?
Thoughts?
Comments
-
"The just shall live by faith." Galatians 3:11
What ? are you trusting in today? -
just name an issue and obama will cave on it
swimming? obama is willing to drown in the ocean in the name of bipartisanship
tying shoes? obama is willing to go back to velcro, in the name of bipartisanship
hunger strikes? obama is willing to drive the republican caucus to mcdonalds with the secret service motorcade, in the name of bipartisanship -
I don't know exactly how the compromise is gonna go down, I'm skeptical about bush tax cuts expiring, but for months all signs have pointed toward obama caving on SS
-
So Obama has no problem spending hundreds of billions of dollars a year on Afghanistan and Iraq, but is willing to cave on Social Security and Medicare. Many seniors rely only on SS and Medicare to get by, and many barely have a dime to their name after taxes and bills. And Obama is still gonna cave on this?
How about we cut back on the wasteful wars overseas and spend that money protecting SS and Medicare? One more reason I'm not voting for Obama in 2012. -
If Obama really caves on this I'm willing to bet 100 dollars to anyone on Paypal Obama will be a one term president.
**Reminds self Republicans are just as gung ? on cutting SS and Medicare**
::sigh:: America is ? either way. Democrats and Republicans are both run by corporations and the Pentagon. America is doomed in the long run. We're finished. -
kingblaze84 wrote: »::sigh:: America is ? either way. Democrats and Republicans are both empowered by stupidity. America is doomed in the long run cause the stupid parents are raising the stupid kids. We're finished.
................ -
http://news.yahoo.com/obama-puts-medicare-social-security-cuts-table-031442907.html
Obama puts Medicare, Social Security cuts on the table
The Obama administration, in seeking $4 trillion in spending cuts in a debt limit deal, has put major changes to Social Security and Medicare on the table if Republicans agree to increased tax revenues.
The offer caters to both sides in the debt limit negotiations and according to the Washington Post, President Obama will urge congressional leaders on Thursday to seize the opportunity to act. The compromise, however, still puts both Republicans and Democrats in tough spots.
Democrats have vowed to protect Medicare and Social Security, while Republicans still argue that tax increases are not realistic legislative proposals. If leadership from both parties agree to the Obama’s compromise, the next move will be to sell the plan to their respective bases and to members of Congress.
But Thursday’s meetings at the White House will reveal just how many concessions each party is willing to make.
The president has reportedly already privately discussed his plan with Speaker of the House John Boehner. Michael Steel, spokesperson for Boehner, though, told the Washington Post “there are no tax increases on the table.”
But House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, however, signaled Wednesday that he may be flexible on ending certain loopholes in the tax code. (Obama recognizes mistakes in Twitter town hall)
Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner has warned that if the debt limit is not raised by August 2, the United States will default on its debt.
----Obama is selling us out........it's bad enough that he's a warmonger but the fact that he'd rather spend money blowing people up overseas instead of using it to strengthen entitlement programs shows me Obama has his head up Republican and corporate ? . -
................
This is all true too........it seems Obama wants to purposely lose in 2012 now. He's also gonna leave 10,000 troops in Iraq, LMAO......what a fraud he's become at this point -
kingblaze84 wrote: »This is all true too........it seems Obama wants to purposely lose in 2012 now. He's also gonna leave 10,000 troops in Iraq, LMAO......what a fraud he's become at this point
you can't campaign on "change" and not really "change" anything -
kingblaze84 wrote: »If Obama really caves on this I'm willing to bet 100 dollars to anyone on Paypal Obama will be a one term president.
**Reminds self Republicans are just as gung ? on cutting SS and Medicare**
::sigh:: America is ? either way. Democrats and Republicans are both run by corporations and the Pentagon. America is doomed in the long run. We're finished.
Well it looks like you better turn to the One who lives Forever since you see the handwriting on the wall, eh? -
you can't campaign on "change" and not really "change" anything
Nah. Obama made good on his campaign promises. He said change was coming and it did. So he was a man of his word. SMH @ the change that really came though. -
kingblaze84 wrote: »So Obama has no problem spending hundreds of billions of dollars a year on Afghanistan and Iraq, but is willing to cave on Social Security and Medicare. Many seniors rely only on SS and Medicare to get by, and many barely have a dime to their name after taxes and bills. And Obama is still gonna cave on this?
How about we cut back on the wasteful wars overseas and spend that money protecting SS and Medicare? One more reason I'm not voting for Obama in 2012.
When are we ever gonna get a President that dont give a ? and does what the people want?
Why not just raise the SS age by a couple yrs, which i understand would save millions maybe even billions? What people dont understand is that when the age for SS was determined they set it at 65 even tho life expectancy was only at 55. Now that life expectancy has risen just raise the retirement age. I'd rather work longer then to lose my SS altogether.
Why not bring back all the troops from these unpopular wars that some of these countries dont want us in anyway?
Why not raise the tax on people that make over $400,000 back to what it was under Clinton?
I voted for Obama cuz i had faith in him but im slowly losing it. I would only vote for him this time because the alternative to him would be Romney or Bachman. -
All that "people live longer" stuff is lost on me, its still taking thousands of dollars from working people to pay off debt that was exacerbated to this unstable point (if you think we're in the danger zone in % of GDP terms, I actually don't) largely by recklessness in the financial sector.
If we had real financial reform or if obama had let the bush tax cuts expire, I'd be willing to say ok take a chuck out of social security too, but so far seems like everything has been put on the backs of working people. -
Why not bring back all the troops from these unpopular wars that some of these countries dont want us in anyway?
Why not raise the tax on people that make over $400,000 back to what it was under Clinton?
I voted for Obama cuz i had faith in him but im slowly losing it. I would only vote for him this time because the alternative to him would be Romney or Bachman.
But c/s the rest of this post. -
Jonas.dini wrote: »All that "people live longer" stuff is lost on me, its still taking thousands of dollars from working people to pay off debt that was exacerbated to this unstable point (if you think we're in the danger zone in % of GDP terms, I actually don't) largely by recklessness in the financial sector.
If we had real financial reform or if obama had let the bush tax cuts expire, I'd be willing to say ok take a chuck out of social security too, but so far seems like everything has been put on the backs of working people.
Well they were only talking about raising it to 67 i think so an extra 2yrs isnt that bad imo. The way it looks they have to do something to SS because its unsustainable the way it is now.
When he took out the Public Option bill during the health Care reform last yr i was upset but i still rode along with him. After not letting the tax cuts expire Obama really let me down. They say that he had to do it in order for the Democrats to get what they wanted but what did we get in return? -
When are we ever gonna get a President that dont give a ? and does what the people want?
Why not just raise the SS age by a couple yrs, which i understand would save millions maybe even billions? What people dont understand is that when the age for SS was determined they set it at 65 even tho life expectancy was only at 55. Now that life expectancy has risen just raise the retirement age. I'd rather work longer then to lose my SS altogether.
Why not bring back all the troops from these unpopular wars that some of these countries dont want us in anyway?
Why not raise the tax on people that make over $400,000 back to what it was under Clinton?
I voted for Obama cuz i had faith in him but im slowly losing it. I would only vote for him this time because the alternative to him would be Romney or Bachman.
1. The administrator just offered a series of cuts to social security including a shift in age.
2. The major sticking point in the debt debate is Obama's desire to raise taxes on people making 400,000 or more, like it was under Clinton.
3. Time tables for withdrawal for both theaters have been set. You may not agree with the speed but at least the end is in sight.
Odd that he seems to be doing what you want of him and you still lose faith. -
Why not raise the tax on people that make over $400,000 back to what it was under Clinton?
I voted for Obama cuz i had faith in him but im slowly losing it. I would only vote for him this time because the alternative to him would be Romney or Bachman.
Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) voted against beginning debate on a measure that would have the Senate declare the rich should share the pain of debt reduction Thursday, a day after arguing that it's the poor and middle class who need to do more.
"I hear how they're so caring for the poor and so forth," Hatch said in remarks on the Senate floor Wednesday, in reference to Democrats. "The poor need jobs! And they also need to share some of the responsibility."
Hatch's comments were aimed at a motion that passed 74 to 22 to start debating a non-binding resolution that says millionaires and billionaires should play a more meaningful role in reducing the nation's debt.
Just one Democrat, Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), voted against having the debate. Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), who had previously called the resolution "rather pathetic," nevertheless voted to move ahead on it.
But it was Hatch whose remarks Wednesday raised the idea that the wealthy are already doing too much, even as the nation's effective tax rates are at modern lows since the Bush administration slashed rates in 2001 and 2003. In his view, it seems, the middle class and poor should be picking up the slack.
"The top 1 percent of the so-called wealthy pay 38 percent of all income tax. The top 10 percent are paying 70 percent of all income tax," Hatch said. "The top 50 percent pay somewhere near 98 percent of all income taxes. 51 percent don't pay anything," Hatch said, suggesting the payroll taxes that the poor and middle classes pay towards Social Security yields them an especially generous benefit.
"Democrats say they [the 51 percent] pay payroll taxes. Well, everybody does that because that's Social Security. They pay about one-third of what they're going to take out over the years in social security," Hatch railed. "Obamacare -- a family of four earning over $80,000 a year -- gets subsidies. Think about that. That's what we call the poor?"
Hatch hedged that the the poorest of the poor shouldn't have to pay taxes. But he was clear that people who qualify for subsidies because they can't afford things like health care should dig deeper.
"Now, we don't want the really poor people who are in poverty to have to pay income taxes," he said. "But 51% of all households. And that's going up, by the way, because of our friend down in the White House and his allies."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/07/orrin-hatch-debt-poor-rich_n_892177.html -
Having the Senate declare that millionaires should share more of the pain involved in putting America's financial house in order is "rather pathetic," Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) declared Tuesday.
The top Republican on the Senate Budget Committee made that pronouncement after Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) bowed to GOP pressure and yanked from the floor a resolution on U.S. military action in Libya in favor of moving to budget issues.
Reid's first measure in that direction is a non-binding resolution that states: "It is the sense of the Senate that any agreement to reduce the budget deficit should require that those earning $1,000,000 or more per year make a more meaningful contribution to the deficit reduction effort."
The measure describes how well the wealthy have done lately, citing statistics that say the median income of S&P 500 companies chief financial officers jumped $2.9 million last year alone, even though the "median family income has declined by more than $2,500" in the last 10 years.
The resolution also notes that 20 percent all income goes to the top 1 percent, and 80 percent of the nation's income growth over the last quarter century has also gone to the top 1 percent.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/07/orrin-hatch-debt-poor-rich_n_892177.html -
President Obama is not about to do anything, the people who are REALLY IN CHARGE are probably PRESSURING HIM to make these cuts
President Obama HAS NO POWER...he is just the CEO of the United States and some of you honestly believe things would or will be different under a different President? hahahaha
WAKE UP! The President Of The United States is like that James Bond Movie Role, Different Actor after 4 movies/years...but pretty much the SAME CHARACTER and SAME SCRIPT! So it don't matter who The President is, NOTHING WILL CHANGE IN THIS COUNTRY! -
1. The administrator just offered a series of cuts to social security including a shift in age.
2. The major sticking point in the debt debate is Obama's desire to raise taxes on people making 400,000 or more, like it was under Clinton.
3. Time tables for withdrawal for both theaters have been set. You may not agree with the speed but at least the end is in sight.
Odd that he seems to be doing what you want of him and you still lose faith.
He's actually not doing any of the things im asking of him. What he does is put these things on the table then when its time to make concessions he caves on them.
Making a deal isnt giving the republicans everything they want while not getting anything in return.
As far as bringing the troops home they have 10,000 in Iraq that are coming home but in Afghanistan the troops are set to withdraw but they still "may stay longer if needed". Thats some ? .
I try to have faith in him but in these last negotiations if he doesnt stand firm this time then i would honestly have to say ? Obama! -
kingblaze84 wrote: »If Obama really caves on this I'm willing to bet 100 dollars to anyone on Paypal Obama will be a one term president.
**Reminds self Republicans are just as gung ? on cutting SS and Medicare**
::sigh:: America is ? either way. Democrats and Republicans are both run by corporations and the Pentagon. America is doomed in the long run. We're finished.
left wing/right wing
SAME DAMN BIRD!!!!!
one day people will understand this.. but by then it will be too late.. -
The user and all related content has been deleted.
-
If they were to legalize the distribution and sale of marijuana then tax it, it would open up a wealth of new opportunities. <My 2 cents..
-
Obama would agree to completely dismantle social security, medicare, and medicaid if the republicans agree that billionaires pay an additional 5 cents per year in taxes.
Then Obama would declare victory. -
you can't campaign on "change" and not really "change" anything
I thought that ? was par for course when it comes to politics, now more than ever we see our democracy doesnt work
![[Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/v2/b26bfbf7cca7b014faa8ceaf4da7ed14.svg)
