ADVERTISEMENT

Nobody Talks About How to Fight Inflation

It is a revenue problem

Revenues have been down ~2% from the running average due to Bush and Trump tax cuts on corporations, the wealthy and cap gains. To return to the original running average, they need to be increased by ~4% for the next couple decades, which will take a significant bite out of the debt and deficits.
Bullshit
Revenues are up over 30% from when Trump took office in 2016..
 
And what about the weather?? Everybody complains about the weather, but nobody does anything about it.
 
Elon Musk paid 11 billion dollars in taxes. You could confiscate every penny from the top 1% and it would fund the government for about 60 days. We might have a spending problem.
And how much of that did he get back for his 2022 taxes? Also, how much subsidies did he get to start his businesses? And who trained the employees he hired to start his space program?
 
Not true…..according to the Honorable Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Green! Her latest assertion is that in fact, “the givernment” does control the weather!
God Bless MTG!
 
  • Haha
Reactions: RileyHawk
Because what is causing inflation is hard to deal with.

Massive money was created out of thin air. 2x

Labor shortages....supply chain issues.

Housing market issues. Too much an too little.

Lower middle and middle class is maxed out.

The poor are so poor they cant afford to work.

Industry is starting to fire older and more experienced workers leaving new magers in place that have no clue. Reducibg efficiency.
Not sure that industry is “firing” older more experienced workers, rather most of those workers are choosing to retire. Employers are actually trying to retain their older, more experienced staff.
 
Since we have a two party system with small advantages in numbers in Congress for either side, there has to be compromise.

The Clinton compromise was to cut spending by by every dollar of tax hikes.

That is what has to happen again.

Partisans on each side demand there view or nothing. If that is the case then NOTHING will get done.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cohawk and DogBoyRy
Since we have a two party system with small advantages in numbers in Congress for either side, there has to be compromise.

The Clinton compromise was to cut spending by by every dollar of tax hikes.

That is what has to happen again.

Partisans on each side demand there view or nothing. If that is the case then NOTHING will get done.
reality is that when clinton left office medicare + social security = $612B

by the time the next president leaves office medicare + social security = $3.1T

"just do what clinton did" doesn't address the fact that so much of the debt is driven by non-discretionary spending (which has increased simply due to demographics...the baby boomers aging)
 
reality is that when clinton left office medicare + social security = $612B

by the time the next president leaves office medicare + social security = $3.1T
Democrats have proposed solutions to fix the SS gap here.

GOP will not engage in any discussion of fixes, whatsoever. That is by design, because they want to get rid of it. Despite most retirees actually needing it in retirement to supplement their retirement savings.
 
  • Like
Reactions: franklinman
reality is that when clinton left office medicare + social security = $612B

by the time the next president leaves office medicare + social security = $3.1T

"just do what clinton did" doesn't address the fact that so much of the debt is driven by non-discretionary spending (which has increased simply due to demographics...the baby boomers aging)
Right. The increases in SS and Medicare have been predicted for decades, but no one is willing to do anything about it. It could have been fixed 25 years ago, but it's probably too late now.
 
Right. The increases in SS and Medicare have been predicted for decades, but no one is willing to do anything about it. It could have been fixed 25 years ago, but it's probably too late now.
Two quick partial fixes would be to double the max withholding and also cut SS payments to anyone over $5 million in assets.
 
Two quick partial fixes would be to double the max withholding and also cut SS payments to anyone over $5 million in assets.
Do you think thr republicans or Democrats in Congress will be more supportive of those measures?
 
I honestly think it would pass with both party majorities.
Sure, sure.

Democrats’ Proposals:​

  • Raise or Eliminate the Cap: Many Democratic lawmakers have pushed for either raising or eliminating the cap on income subject to Social Security taxes. Currently, only income up to a certain amount (e.g., $160,200 in 2023) is subject to the Social Security payroll tax. Democrats argue that lifting this cap would ensure wealthier individuals contribute a fairer share to the Social Security system.
    • Senator Bernie Sanders and Senator Elizabeth Warren, among others, have supported legislation to tax higher incomes for Social Security.

Republicans’ Proposals:​

  • Opposition to Raising the Cap: Republicans have generally been more cautious about increasing the taxable income cap for Social Security. Many in the GOP argue that solutions to Social Security’s long-term funding issues should focus on reducing benefits or raising the retirement age rather than increasing taxes.
In summary, raising the maximum withholding level for Social Security funding has been primarily championed by Democrats, while Republicans often seek alternative ways to address Social Security’s financial challenges.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joes Place
Sure, sure.

Democrats’ Proposals:​

  • Raise or Eliminate the Cap: Many Democratic lawmakers have pushed for either raising or eliminating the cap on income subject to Social Security taxes. Currently, only income up to a certain amount (e.g., $160,200 in 2023) is subject to the Social Security payroll tax. Democrats argue that lifting this cap would ensure wealthier individuals contribute a fairer share to the Social Security system.
    • Senator Bernie Sanders and Senator Elizabeth Warren, among others, have supported legislation to tax higher incomes for Social Security.

Republicans’ Proposals:​

  • Opposition to Raising the Cap: Republicans have generally been more cautious about increasing the taxable income cap for Social Security. Many in the GOP argue that solutions to Social Security’s long-term funding issues should focus on reducing benefits or raising the retirement age rather than increasing taxes.
In summary, raising the maximum withholding level for Social Security funding has been primarily championed by Democrats, while Republicans often seek alternative ways to address Social Security’s financial challenges.
Well thats proof enough for me.
Yet when the dems had the house, senate and president they did nothing.
 
Sure, sure.

Democrats’ Proposals:​

  • Raise or Eliminate the Cap: Many Democratic lawmakers have pushed for either raising or eliminating the cap on income subject to Social Security taxes. Currently, only income up to a certain amount (e.g., $160,200 in 2023) is subject to the Social Security payroll tax. Democrats argue that lifting this cap would ensure wealthier individuals contribute a fairer share to the Social Security system.
    • Senator Bernie Sanders and Senator Elizabeth Warren, among others, have supported legislation to tax higher incomes for Social Security.

Republicans’ Proposals:​

  • Opposition to Raising the Cap: Republicans have generally been more cautious about increasing the taxable income cap for Social Security. Many in the GOP argue that solutions to Social Security’s long-term funding issues should focus on reducing benefits or raising the retirement age rather than increasing taxes.
In summary, raising the maximum withholding level for Social Security funding has been primarily championed by Democrats, while Republicans often seek alternative ways to address Social Security’s financial challenges.
If Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren are for it then I’m against it.
 
And how much of that did he get back for his 2022 taxes? Also, how much subsidies did he get to start his businesses? And who trained the employees he hired to start his space program?
Have you never contributed anything to society?
How many tax dollars did it take to keep you alive last year?
 
Well thats proof enough for me.
Yet when the dems had the house, senate and president they did nothing.
LOL. During Obama's tenure the Democrats had a filibuster proof Congress for about two months. And despite that they were able to get the ACA done.

Where are all the republican bills to raise the cut off level for SS taxes?

Your ignorance is palpable.
 
Have you never contributed anything to society?
How many tax dollars did it take to keep you alive last year?
Unlike you, yes I have contributed to society. Unlike you magats who live in your trailers by the river, I do not receive tax dollars. So go f**k yourself, as that is probably the only sex you will ever have, dickhead.
 
Wow
2020-2022.
No. You're wrong yet again.

  • In the Senate, Democrats had 58 seats after the 2008 election. They gained two more seats in 2009:
    • Al Franken of Minnesota was finally seated in July 2009 after a lengthy recount.
    • Arlen Specter, a Republican senator from Pennsylvania, switched parties to become a Democrat in April 2009.
      This gave the Democrats 60 seats, the number needed to overcome a filibuster (60 votes are required to invoke cloture, which ends debate on most legislation).
  • However, this filibuster-proof majority was short-lived due to the death of Senator Ted Kennedy in August 2009, followed by the special election of Republican Scott Brown in Massachusetts in January 2010. After Brown's election, the Democrats no longer had 60 votes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joes Place
No. You're wrong yet again.

  • In the Senate, Democrats had 58 seatsafter the 2008 election. They gained two more seats in 2009:
    • Al Franken of Minnesota was finally seated in July 2009 after a lengthy recount.
    • Arlen Specter, a Republican senator from Pennsylvania, switched parties to become a Democrat in April 2009.
      This gave the Democrats 60 seats, the number needed to overcome a filibuster (60 votes are required to invoke cloture, which ends debate on most legislation).
  • However, this filibuster-proof majority was short-lived due to the death of Senator Ted Kennedy in August 2009, followed by the special election of Republican Scott Brown in Massachusetts in January 2010. After Brown's election, the Democrats no longer had 60 votes.
Wtf does this mean about 2020-2022?
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT