OBAMA INCREASES TAXES ON MIDDLE CLASS...........

POSTED ON JANUARY 4, 2013 BY PAUL MIRENGOFF
SMALLER PAY CHECKS — A JANUARY SURPRISE


Working Americans have just experienced a pay cut they didn’t expect — the cut resulting from the expiration of the reduction in the payroll tax rate. Like most Americans, some of the folks who post at the Democratic Underground are not amused.

As Mollie Hemmingway says, it’s almost as if everyone’s taxes went up and the media forgot to mention it.

Actually, the resumption of prior payroll tax deductions is one of the few good things to come up of the “fiscal cliff” deal, in my opinion. The real cliff America faces is the debt cliff, a big part of which results from entitlements we will be unable to pay for. Social security is such an entitlement.

The reduced payroll tax was making the debt cliff even steeper. And its purpose — to stimulate the economy during a downturn — no longer applies, at least not if one accepts the Obama administration’s view that the downturn ended a while ago. Thus, it was high time to restore the old payroll tax rate.

How will the restoration play out politically? If it has any impact, it will hurt the Democrats. After all, President Obama pledged to address the debt by raising taxes on the rich. He didn’t say anything about raising them on everyone who works for a living. But coming almost two years before the next national elections, this January surprise will be of no real political consequence.

Where's the link, loony?

I suppose every time someone takes a shit, it's the same as an increase in clear colons...

what a fucking idiot you are, you Silence of the Lambs motherfucker.

Whirly is right about this one. There is a first time for everything.

I had multiple employees in my office this morning asking me why their paychecks were "short" $20 or $30 or $40 this pay period. I explained it was due to the expiration of the Bush tax cuts, which they gave not one shit about.

I gave them all raises to cover the difference.

You should have asked then who they voted for Tim. They will start giving a shit when things start to personally affect them.

Whirly is right about this one. There is a first time for everything.

I had multiple employees in my office this morning asking me why their paychecks were "short" $20 or $30 or $40 this pay period. I explained it was due to the expiration of the Bush tax cuts, which they gave not one shit about.

I gave them all raises to cover the difference. Originally Posted by timpage

I call BULLSHIT... fugger

wait till obamacare kicks in

liarinchief

You should have asked then who they voted for Tim. They will start giving a shit when things start to personally affect them. Originally Posted by Chica Chaser

Yeah, I thought that's what I said, sorry you didn't catch it. I know who they voted for, it was Obama, and they weren't happy about the tax increase. Neither am I since I have to match it on payroll. But, unlike you, I don't necessarily equate my, or my employees' happiness, with what might be best for the country. But, that's just me...you, of course, can spin it any way you like...so long as it results in more money in your pocket and the rest of the country be damned.

I call BULLSHIT... fugger Originally Posted by IIFFOFRDB

+1

I call BULLSHIT... fugger Originally Posted by IIFFOFRDB

Call it whatever you like you silly simple-minded asshats.

I can understand why Whatzup is dubious because he is pretty stupid. The payroll tax cut expired at midnight on Monday. So everyone got a 2% tax increase on the first...what is the number $140,000 of income. So you can say that people who make between $140,000 and $400,000 made out. Their tax increase was less than those making less than $140,000. So pay attention Whatzup. Your master sold you out and you are now under the bus.

Whirly is right about this one. There is a first time for everything. Originally Posted by timpage

Wow! That's a statement I surely thought I'd never see.

However...

Sorry, timpage, but I fundamentally disagree with your assessment that "Whirly" is right.

The opening post simply addresses the expiration of the two percentage point payroll tax cut, which was bad policy to begin with and resulted from an ill-considered deal made by Senate Republicans and Obama in 2010. It was originally proposed to be a temporary (1-year) measure to help stimulate the economy a little bit, but was extended at the end of 2011 for another year. During the fiscal cliff negotiations, neither party's congressional caucus supported further extension, so the pre-2011 payroll tax rate was reinstated. For that reason, the very thread title is fundamentally dishonest. At least with respect to this issue, the president did not raise taxes on anyone. The opening post was simply a zealous partisan attack by someone who doesn't understand the issue, or doesn't care to let a couple of facts get in the way of his political barbs.

There was another thread on this very matter only three days ago. It's very short (only 9 posts) but contains further explanation of the issue. And note that people on both sides of the political divide seemed to agree, or at least not to disagree.

See @ http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=636201

You can't have it both ways...as much as you would like to.

See Capt. Midnight's post, you buffoons. Of course, it's more than 10 words long and contains some words that are above 6th grade level, so Trendaway and the Teawipes (a fantastic "doo-wop" group, btw) will struggle due to comprehension deficit syndrome (IBSyndrome's twin).

All of you "sunset" law lovers are up in arms about allowing a temporary measure to actually be temporary. Talk about having it both ways.............

Wow! That's a statement I surely thought I'd never see.

However...

Sorry, timpage, but I fundamentally disagree with your assessment that "Whirly" is right.

The opening post simply addresses the expiration of the two percentage point payroll tax cut, which was bad policy to begin with and resulted from an ill-considered deal made by Senate Republicans and Obama in 2010. It was originally proposed to be a temporary (1-year) measure to help stimulate the economy a little bit, but was extended at the end of 2011 for another year. During the fiscal cliff negotiations, neither party's congressional caucus supported further extension, so the pre-2011 payroll tax rate was reinstated. For that reason, the very thread title is fundamentally dishonest. At least with respect to this issue, the president did not raise taxes on anyone. The opening post was simply a zealous partisan attack by someone who doesn't understand the issue, or doesn't care to let a couple of facts get in the way of his political barbs.

There was another thread on this very matter only three days ago. It's very short (only 9 posts) but contains further explanation of the issue. And note that people on both sides of the political divide seemed to agree, or at least not to disagree.

See @ http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=636201 Originally Posted by CaptainMidnight

Capt'n, you trying to talk logic to Whirly?

I call bullshit because the employer's share of the tax never decreased. The 2 percent reduction was only on the employee and not the employer.