Cenk's "Liberal Demagoguery On Social Security" | 32 comments (32 topical, 0 hidden)
no, no, no (none / 0)
You are 100% off on the history, the tax distribution as well as the subject matter. The lion’s share of the Bush tax cuts went to the wealthy either in the form of bracket reductions, dividend tax reductions or capital gains reductions....and they did not end the recession. It was the record low interest rates and Wall Street speculation that ended the recession. What the tax cuts did was fuel to the speculation creating and even bigger bubble.

There are no social security taxes paid on dividends and only a small portion is paid in by those in the upper tax bracket yet it was the surplus Bush used to promote tax cuts during the election and after he got elected. Yes he handed out some token money to the middle class, but that is just buying votes.

Don't forget that the Enron Scandal that Bush helped extended the recession well before 911 occurred.

Bush cut dividend taxes by %50, leading BOD/CEO's to loot over reinvest. He also cut capital gains taxes by 25% leading to even more looting, particularly by hedge fund managers. He also cut the inheritance tax by 10% per year until it went to nothing this year. And no, it does not belong to the families, at least not all of it. People don’t make money in a vacuum, there is a public infrastructure that was used to make that money. That infrastructure has now been depleted because the wealthy have systematically raped the system rather than being stewards of it.


We have beaten this to death. Apparently I am unable to convey my point to you. Sorry

by sisco66 on 09/14/2010 05:57:35 PM EST

[ Parent ]
What does all of that have to do with... (none / 0)

social security?  Other than the fact that part of social security and medicare is paid from the general revenues.  You could just as easily blame excess defense spending for the frittering away of the money.

Whether or not the Bush tax cuts had a positive effect or a negative one is meaningless for social security.  The government has always including their revenues in the general budget to understate the true deficit.  The government uses cash accounting, not accrual accounting.

Don't waste your vote, vote Green or Independent in the next election.

by mcamelyne on 09/14/2010 10:14:33 PM EST

[ Parent ]
full circle (none / 0)
that has been my point all along...it was not supposed to be that way. Greenspan and Regan pulled a fast one way back in the 1980's after the plan was put in place. After Clinton balanced the budget (+/-)Gore wanted to fix it, but lost. Then Bush spent all the money, most of it going to rich people living on paper trading who don't pay into the system to begin with.

Greenspan and Bernanke are ideologs who took academic theories with very strict boundary conditions and unleashed them on the world gutting what few boundary conditions (regulations) were in place along the way. They have been using the fed to cover the flaws in their ideology ever since.


by sisco66 on 09/15/2010 06:42:37 AM EST

[ Parent ]

Cenk's "Liberal Demagoguery On Social Security" | 32 comments (32 topical, 0 hidden)