In payroll-tax debate, both parties rush to abandon principles
The debate in Washington about extending the payroll tax holiday has been remarkable. It has managed to put Republicans and Democrats alike in opposition to things they support, and in support of things they oppose. All at little actual benefit to them — or the rest of us.
OK, let’s make that “remarkably bad.”
Here are the basic facts: Last December, as part of a broader deal, the president and the Congress agreed to a one-year reduction of 2 percentage points in employees’ portion of payroll taxes, which are supposed to fund Social Security and Medicare. Leaders of both parties propose extending the holiday through next year. Both have tacked onto their proposal an unrelated extension of unemployment benefits. They have competing plans to offset the extension, which is projected to reduce revenues by $120 billion.
After that, there’s little agreement about anything.
Republicans don’t share President Obama’s obsession with raising taxes on “millionaires and billionaires” (no matter what the problem is, he says taxing “the rich” is part of the answer). Thus, he charged last week, the GOP will “barely lift a finger to prevent taxes going up for 160 million Americans who really need the help.”
And what qualifies as “barely lift[ing] a finger”? Why, proposing to do exactly what was done last year and exactly what Senate Democrats now propose, but with different offsets.
When Obama finally acknowledged Senate Republicans had proposed extending the tax holiday, he said he wouldn’t agree to a plan whose offsets — spending cuts — “hurt the economy.” Which requires him to ignore the fact that the tax cuts come today but, as usual, the spending cuts don’t kick in until a few years have passed, if ever.
This is the standard pattern by which Washington kicks the can down the road, in another of the president’s favorite tsk-tsk phrases.
But what’s really odd is how the debate has put Republicans and Democrats in one another’s shoes. Suddenly, Democrats profess belief that tax cuts create jobs.
Meanwhile, it’s left to Republicans to argue that lowering the payroll tax will destabilize Social Security. You know, the program the GOP supposedly wants to gut, right before pushing your wheelchair-bound grandma off a cliff.
To their credit, there are some Democrats who recognize that cutting the link between payroll taxes and Social Security only further weakens the notion that working Americans pay for the benefits they eventually receive. In fact, working Americans pay for current retirees, with nothing but a promise from Congress that future generations will do likewise decades hence.
Similarly, there are principled Republicans willing to make the case, an unpopular one in this instance, that not all tax cuts are created equal. A temporary tax cut with unpredictable effects on demand for business owners will have far less economic impact than a tax cut that is long-term and produces clear incentives.
Yet, for the most part, this debate features Democrats acting to weaken a cornerstone of the New Deal, while Republicans thumb their noses at a key underpinning of supply-side economics.
A lack of bipartisanship sets hands a-wringing, but at least partisan gridlock usually has the benefit of contrasting coherent, divergent philosophies. Voters then face a clear distinction and can opt for whichever viewpoint seems to fit the nation’s contemporary problems best.
I find it much more worrying for the parties to forsake those coherent, divergent philosophies in favor of political pandering.
That’s hardly an unprecedented occurrence, and the parties still will present stark contrasts next year in their visions for the size, scope and role of the federal government, as Obama observed in an interview broadcast Sunday on “60 Minutes.”
Yet, few contemporary problems are more pressing, more in need of clear choices for voters to evaluate, than the big three federal expenses of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, and how we pay for them. Fail to offer that choice, and it’ll cost the average person a lot more than $20 a week in his paycheck.
– By Kyle Wingfield
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
209 comments Add your comment
SBinF
December 15th, 2011
9:57 am
Great TD, so long as you admit that you can’t refute the numbers. I’m not sure what me being a communist has to do with the discussion, or how you would know that I’m a communist.
Do you even know what communism is? I would ascertain not, only that it is pejorative in your mind. Pray tell, what have I posted that would lead you to believe that I’m a communist? If you want to get really fancy, you could juxtapose theoretical communism (as Marx laid out) versus practical communism. I wonder, have you read any Marx, or do you toss around the word ‘communist’ because you heard it elsewhere?
td
December 15th, 2011
9:58 am
The Lack and Absence of Moral Principles by the Republicans
December 15th, 2011
9:53 am
Let us be honest for a minute the “payroll tax” is not really a tax it is a payment on an insurance policy that is supposedly set aside for the individuals use in the future. So what the Dems are really saying is that the people that currently do not pay for any government services (income taxes) should not have to pay for future benefits either?
MarkV
December 15th, 2011
10:09 am
td 9:51 am: “MarkV @9:42 am Senate Democrats now propose, but with different offsets.
“It is not what the Dems propose but rather what they have passed in the form of a bill.”
Tell that to Kyle, I quoted him.
“Can you tell me the Senate bill that has passed with their proposals to extend the tax cuts? Can you tell me were to find the 2011 or 2010 Senate budget bill?”
What has that got to do with what is being discussed here?
“Define “middle class”? Is this the class of people that actually pay income taxes or do you count people that pay no income taxes?”
Why don’t you learn on your own how middle class is defined . This is not a school.
.
SBinF
December 15th, 2011
10:13 am
TD seems more than content to make outrageous claims, then challenge everyone to refute them. He then asks others to define basic terms, info on which is readily available to anyone with a computer.
———————————-
And if that doesn’t work, just call your opposition a communist!
Hey TD, the 1950s called, it wants it’s debate tactic back.
MarkV
December 15th, 2011
10:16 am
SBinF @9:57 am
To TD: “I wonder, have you read any Marx, or do you toss around the word ‘communist’ because you heard it elsewhere? “
SbinF: There can be no doubt that the answer is the latter.
John Galt
December 15th, 2011
10:22 am
If you want to talk about Marx, then let’s talk about Marx.
There is not much that the democrats have done over the last 100 years that Marx would have disapproved of.
Government’s role in the life of the individual continues to expand. Getting the majority dependent on government is key.
Can anyone honestly say that people are not not more dependent on government more today than they were four years ago? Fifty years ago? 100 years ago?
MarkV
December 15th, 2011
10:25 am
John Galt 10:22 am: “There is not much that the democrats have done over the last 100 years that Marx would have disapproved of.”
Completely false, showing again that people tossing the words communism and Marxism do not know anything about those subjects.
SBinF
December 15th, 2011
10:26 am
I’m not familiar with Marx’s belief that the majority must become dependent on the government.
“There is not much that the democrats have done over the last 100 years that Marx would have disapproved of.”
Yes, over the last 100 years, the democrats have seized the means of production and placed them all under state ownership.
Are you trolling me? Because I feel like you are.
UGA 1999
December 15th, 2011
10:31 am
MarkV….just because you do not agree with a comment posted by another person, does not mean they are wrong about Marxism. In Obama’s own words he likens himself to a Marxist. Have you read his book?
Don't Tread
December 15th, 2011
10:34 am
“Voters then face a clear distinction and can opt for whichever viewpoint seems to fit the nation’s contemporary problems best.”
Like I said yesterday, it’s a choice of the lesser of two evils. However, as yesterday’s passage of the defense appropriations bill with a little constitutional violation thrown in, the lesser of two evils is still evil.
John Galt
December 15th, 2011
10:35 am
Nothing I have said is false. Marx wanted to use the education system to teach the children values that were not of their parents. Guess what?
That is what we do today. And today we are now feeding up to three meals a day to these kids as well. Tell me what party do you think they support when they grow up and have been raised by the system?
Marx was pro union. He did not want individuals negotiating for their own salaries. Instead, he wanted them to be set as a group.
That is what the unions and the Democrats support and pursue at every turn.
You will have to do better than that to dismiss the truth, MarkV.
John Galt
December 15th, 2011
10:36 am
SBinF,
Why would anyone troll you? You flatter yourself.
SBinF
December 15th, 2011
10:41 am
I ask because anyone with even a cursory understanding of Marx’s views would know that he indeed did not want the proletariat to become dependent on government, but to essentially rise up and take control of the government (and thus the means of production).
The end result of course, would be a classless, stateless society (communism). That’s why I thought it odd that I’d be called a communist….argumentum ad hominem . You can’t make a point, or refute a point, so you lob insults. You guys should go work for the Gingrich campaign. He’s good at that too.
————————
Agreed about the lesser of two evils comment. I have been pretty unhappy with Obama, but by golly, he stands above any of the alternatives.
MarkV
December 15th, 2011
10:41 am
John Galt @ 10:35 am
You are only showing your ignorance not just of Marxism, but of logical thinking. People and movements are not defined by a few similarities, but by the central ideas.
A Marxist is a person adhering to Marx’s theory of history, and an economic and political program. Such theory and program seeks the elimination of private property, ” public ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange. “dictatorship of the proletariat” as a step toward communism. There is no evidence that Democrats or Obama subscribe to these doctrines.
You do not become a Christian by agreeing with something Jesus said, such as “Sell all that you have and distribute to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.” (Luke 18:22) It does not make Jesus a Marxist either. You are not a Marxist if you say something that coincidentally appears in some writing of Marx or of another prominent Marxist. You are not a Marxist if you decry the “inequalities in the distribution of wealth,” mentioned in the Communist Manifesto. Marx denounced sexism and racism. You are not a Marxist if you oppose sexism or racism.
UGA 1999
December 15th, 2011
10:45 am
MarkV….you are splitting hairs of indifference and not seeing the big picture. Open your eyes.
MarkV
December 15th, 2011
10:50 am
UGA 1999 @10:45 am: “MarkV….you are splitting hairs of indifference and not seeing the big picture. Open your eyes.”
A more ridiculous statement would be very hard to find.
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
December 15th, 2011
10:51 am
Describing Obozo as a Marxist is being generous. He’s much more dangerous than that.
UGA 1999
December 15th, 2011
10:53 am
MarkV….you can call it whatever you wish, it does not change the facts.
MarkV
December 15th, 2011
10:55 am
UGA 1999 @10:53 am
Can’t you find at least some meager argument, instead of ridiculous assertions?
UGA 1999
December 15th, 2011
10:59 am
MarkV….again what you call “ridiculous assertions”…..others call “facts”.
td
December 15th, 2011
10:59 am
MarkV
December 15th, 2011
10:16 am
SBinF @9:57 am
Progressive, socialist and communist are one in the same and believe in the theories of Karl Marx.. Let me see if I can give you examples of Marx that the left is all for today:
Social justice
Income equality
Redistribution of wealth
Anti Capitalism
All of the above and more leads to the classless, stateless system based on common ownership and free access. This system is also all about a superabundance and maximum freedom of individuals to develop their own capacities and talents.
Putting it another way the government is responsible for making sure everyone is as equal in social progress and well as economic progress no matter the extent of their input. People can not be held responsible for their own actions because it is the oppressive economic system (capitalism) that has caused them to turn out the way they are.
Again I will state that following the current progressive (Democratic) ideology is pure communism because Dems believe that people do not have to be held accountable for their own actions. People do not have to take any responsibility for their education, people should be able to believe whatever they want to believe, people do not have to have a work ethic and work hard, people can have children as they choose and not have the responsibility to take care of them financially, emotionally or raise them to become a good citizen and if they fail then it is the governments responsibility to provide for them by taking from the people that have made the right decisions in life. .
UGA 1999
December 15th, 2011
11:01 am
MarkV….These are FACTS not opinions….
http://obamaism.blogspot.com/
MarkV
December 15th, 2011
11:02 am
UGA 1999 @10:59 am
It is duly noted that you are unable to present any argument. It is also noted that you do not know the meaning of the word “fact.”
UGA 1999
December 15th, 2011
11:04 am
MarkV…..please see the attached website….all the facts or whatever you want to call them noted….
http://obamaism.blogspot.com/
UGA 1999
December 15th, 2011
11:06 am
“The truth is, in order to get things like universal health care and a revamped education system, then someone is going to have to give up a piece of their pie so that someone else can have more.”
M. Obama
Tell me MarkV does that comment sound like a free market society, socialism or marxism?
MarkV
December 15th, 2011
11:15 am
td @10:59 am
“Progressive, socialist and communist are one in the same and believe in the theories of Karl Marx.. Let me see if I can give you examples of Marx that the left is all for today:
Social justice
Income equality
Redistribution of wealth
Anti Capitalism”
That is false in most respects. No only you are falsely claiming what “left is all for today,” your mixing of “progressives” with socialists and communists is a nonsense.
Most progressive believe in social justice. Very few are anti capitalist. None believe in income equality and redistribution of wealth.
“Again I will state that following the current progressive (Democratic) ideology is pure communism because Dems believe that people do not have to be held accountable for their own actions. “
Completely false and offensive as a generalization.
Glenn
December 15th, 2011
11:18 am
When you mention things like our big three federal expenses medicaid , medicare , and social security then fail to mention our defense budget and fail to mention that one of the reasons medicaid and medicare is a mess is due to those with no health insurance aren’t you kind of playing into that .
Me . Republicans are pandering to the wealthy and the Democrats are pandering to the working class . No news there . The news is the divide that is happening between the two .
MarkV
December 15th, 2011
11:18 am
UGA 1999 @11:06 am: “Tell me MarkV does that comment sound like a free market society, socialism or marxism?”
It is consistent with free market society, and has nothing to do with socialism or Marxism.
The Lack and Absence of Moral Principles by the Republicans
December 15th, 2011
11:20 am
@Lil’ Barry Bailout (Revised Downward) December 15th, 2011 9:43 am
*******************************************
You and the AJC (Kyle Wingfield) are just as FAKE as you accuse Obama of being.
HOW LONG are you going to be “(Revised Downward)”? Everyone knows by now that this is just a ploy to throw people off in thinking you are being MONITORED for your comments.
Give us a break! No one is stupid here!
You can fool some of the people some of the time but NOT ALL THE TIME!
UGA 1999
December 15th, 2011
11:21 am
MarkV…..Dude you can lie to yourself but we all know the truth!
Tigermike
December 15th, 2011
11:21 am
“Job creators” do not hire more workers because their sales do not justify expanding their businesses. They are not waiting for yet another round of tax cuts. They like making money and if hiring more people would help them do that, they would. The global economy has changed and workers need a different skill set than before. Education is the key and every person has a responsibility to obtain an education and a skill set that will help them be employed. Both parties are playing games with issues in order to position themselves for the 2012 election. Medicare needs to be built around medical necessity and reasonable end of life care. No more social visits to the doctor and more discussions of when to begin palliative care when people are dying. Social Security would have been fine if the politicians had not stolen the money in exchange for Treasury bonds which will apparently be defaulted on. Medicaid needs to be replaced with a functional community health program to provide indigent care. Obamacare is the only program which provides for the modernization of health care delivery and insurance coverage of persons who cannot obtain insurance on the private market due to preexisting conditions. BTW, any one who wants to gut the EPA needs to look at the pollution situation in China. Common sense, as Thomas Paine would say.
UGA 1999
December 15th, 2011
11:24 am
Tigermike….look at the economic situation in China as well.
MarkV
December 15th, 2011
11:25 am
UGA 1999 @11:21 am
I have already commented on your inability to present arguments. Do not make me repeat it all the time.
Justin
December 15th, 2011
11:26 am
Kyle has unfortunately added another piece of ignorant propaganda to the heap. This is the standard strategy of establishment D.C. shills like Kyle: Ignore the facts, repeat lies, know that the vacuous dolts you are attempting to persuade will take the bait. Homerun Kyle!!
Lil' Barry Bailout (Revised Downward)
December 15th, 2011
11:28 am
“You and the AJC (Kyle Wingfield) are just as FAKE as you accuse Obama of being.”
——–
Who accused Obozo of being fake? Not me. He’s genuine–a genuine menace to all freedom-loving Americans.
td
December 15th, 2011
11:29 am
MarkV
December 15th, 2011
11:25 am
UGA 1999 @11:21 am
I have already commented on your inability to present arguments. Do not make me repeat it all the time.
You are doing the exact thing that you are accusing UGA 1999 of doing. You just dismissed my logical argument out of hand without even attempting to say why or raise an counterpoint argument. Instead of being dismissive or mean spirited, why do you not spend a little time and defend your philosophy and show us where we are “wrong”?
Oh yea right
December 15th, 2011
11:30 am
ALL and I do mean ALL the Rino’s along with Obama need to be removed from office in November. Its time Americans stand up and take our country back. Remember this is government BY THE PEOPLE FOR THE PEOPLE. Not a government by the RINO’S FOR THE RINO’S.
I have a thought. To all the people that believe that the world will end in December of 2012, well it just might if you do indeed elect Obama for another 4 years. That WILL be the end of this country as we know it and we will never be able to get it back. Think about this before you go re-elect a President, House and Senate that has taken this country to a new low. Other countries are now laughing at us and with good reason. We are the jokes of the world right now. No longer that super power that once was. What a shame.
snoqualmiefalls
December 15th, 2011
11:31 am
I’m loving the comments concerning our past President Bush, all warm and fuzzy… all that love for the former Boy Emperor.
Well that seems factual considering all the restorationist comments…. put your money where your mouth is fellow restorationists…. Jebbie Bush will continue the brave and valiant policies of Bush II… start pushing for Jebbie since Newt and Mittens have no chance.
MarkV
December 15th, 2011
11:34 am
td @11:29 am
I would have to find any logical argument in you writing first. I have already dealt with most of those issues @10:41 am.
Voice of Reason
December 15th, 2011
11:34 am
UGA 1999 and td,
You might as well give up arguing with MarkV. His arguement consists of telling you that you are “unable to present any argument,” making “ridiculous assertions,” “ridiculous statements,” and accuse you of “showing your ignorance.” All of those quotes are from his last 4 posts. Clearly, when his arguements are shot down by sound reasoning and fact, he resorts to condescention rather than refuting your arguments.
The Lack and Absence of Moral Principles by the Republicans
December 15th, 2011
11:36 am
@MarkV December 15th, 2011 10:41 am John Galt @ 10:35 am – A Marxist is a person adhering to Marx’s theory of history, and an economic and political program. There is no evidence that Democrats or Obama subscribe to these doctrines.
_______________________________
Newt Gingrich Is A Closet Marxist/Communist Monster !!!!!!!!
God save us from this evil smarmey snake! He is no friend of limited
government under The Constitution. In 1979 he voted to create the Dept Of
Education and designate 68 million acres of mineral rich land in Alaska as a
Federally protected wilderness. NOTHING in OUR Constitution Authorizes ANY of
this.
Gingrich was aware of a book written by the communist William Z. Foster
called “Toward Soviet America”. In it he calls for a Dept. Of Education and for
studies to be Revolutionized. He wanted them cleansed of God and Patriotism. He
wanted studies taught on basis of Marxism, dialectical materialism,
Internationalism and general new ethics of a “New Socialist Society.
JDW
December 15th, 2011
11:37 am
@MarkV…debating UGA 1999 is kind of like talking to a 5 year old…they know all the answers.
Why just the other day ole’ UGA, who purportedly holds a degree from his namesake, informed us (and I quote) that
“UGA is a private institution. Do a little research before you comment. I know you are a dem but I assumed you could read.”
His depth of knowledge is so superior that ONLY HE KNOWS that the oldest state chartered university in the US is now a “private institution”.
UGA 1999
December 15th, 2011
11:39 am
JDW….why because I have valid points that I can back up with black and white facts.
Again just because you do not agree with my article does not mean they are false.
Keep up the good work clown!
MarkV
December 15th, 2011
11:39 am
Voice of Reason @11:34 am
Show me any argument UGA 1999 has presented. I have presented my arguments @ 10: 41, and they have not been disputed.
Voice of Reason
December 15th, 2011
11:40 am
Oh, and MarkV, I don’t think I ever want to hear you “support” a free market economy ever again. Having the government intervene in any way other than preventing monopolies is a direct contradiction to a free market society. If you want the government to tell you how to live and what to buy, be my guest, but leave me out of it.
The Lack and Absence of Moral Principles by the Republicans
December 15th, 2011
11:41 am
@Lil’ Barry Bailout (Revised Downward) December 15th, 2011 11:28 am – “You and the AJC (Kyle Wingfield) are just as FAKE as you accuse Obama of being.”
Who accused Obozo of being fake? Not me. He’s genuine–a genuine menace to all freedom-loving Americans.
****************************************************************
And you are a genuine FAKE blogger planted on the blog to SPEW lies, racism and disrespect against Obama.
We know the old Okey Doke! Some of us are NOT FOOLED….Shame on the AJC!
UGA 1999
December 15th, 2011
11:44 am
The Lack of Absense…..HAHAHAHA your comment about Barry made me laugh. Yep it is a ALWAYS about racism….hahahahaha
Don't Tread
December 15th, 2011
11:44 am
“The truth is, in order to get things like universal health care and a revamped education system, then someone is going to have to give up a piece of their pie so that someone else can have more.”
Or, in other words, “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need”. Wonder where that came from? I’m sure it wasn’t Harpo or Groucho.
MarkV
December 15th, 2011
11:50 am
Voice of Reason @11:40 am
Why have you excluded preventing monopolies then? Is that not intervening in the free market? You may define “free market” in such an absolutist way with one exception, and that is your privilege, but it does not mean that anything else cannot be called free market.
JDW
December 15th, 2011
11:50 am
@UGA 1999…”I have valid points that I can back up with black and white facts. ”
I have yet to see a valid point from you that can be backed up with credible facts. On the other hand I constantly see assertions, such as “UGA is a private institution” that a 5 year old knows are not true.