Quick question for WTFagboy - I gather you don't like unfunded stuff. You keep bitching about Bushie's "unfunded wars" and whatnot. Yet when Tip and Ronnie worked out a plan for funding future SS/Medicare liabilities by collecting extra taxes and putting them into interest-earning trust funds, you fulminate about "accounting tricks".
Which is it? You can't have it both ways. You can't complain when your tranny boyfriend makes you wear a condom, and then bitch again when he lets you fuck him bareback!
Originally Posted by lustylad
I'm with Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan on this. Not that you understand a word of what was said.
http://articles.latimes.com/1989-12-...ocial-security
WASHINGTON — A key senator Friday advocated cuts in the Social Security payroll tax that would save 130 million workers and employers a total of $62 billion during the next two years.
The proposal by Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan (Y.) would cancel a 0.14% increase in the levy scheduled to take effect on Jan. 1 and would lower the rate by an additional 0.96% for workers and employers in 1991.
Moynihan, who as chairman of the Senate Finance subcommittee on Social Security is in a crucial position to advance his plan, said that it would put the retirement system back on a pay-as-you-go basis instead of amassing trust fund surpluses exceeding $200 billion in the coming decade.
"The Administration is content to see the budget deficit gradually eliminated by the growing Social Security tax revenue," Moynihan said at a news conference. "This . . . perverts the original purpose for the surpluses--to provide for the retirement of the baby boom (generation) in the next century