Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
On Aug. 8, 2020, U.S. President Donald Trump said he intended to "terminate the tax," referring to Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes. It's a step that would — if taken in isolation — remove nearly 90% of funding for Social Security benefits, and thus likely pose a threat to the continued existence of those programs.
Does our elderly voters on this forum (and everywhere) know that President Trumps actions (and threats for a permanent action to his deferral if re-elected) poses a threat to the continued existence of your Social Security and for the BILLIONS of our children after us?
If you haven't heard it already, Trump just signed an executive order to suspend the payroll tax.
THIS FUNDS YOUR SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE.
Trump said the employer portion of the payroll tax would be deferred from Aug. 1 through the end of the year, though the move would not directly aid unemployed workers, who do not pay the tax when they are jobless, and faces bipartisan opposition on Capitol Hill.
“If I win, I may extend and terminate,” Trump said, repeating a longtime goal but remaining silent on how he’d fund the Medicare and Social Security benefits that the 7% tax on employee income covers. Employers also pay 7.65% of their payrolls into the funds.
If you value your life and wellbeing- dump him in NOV.!!
Here we go-
It's election season, so it's time for democrats to accuse republicans of wanting to take away medicare and social security.
It is somewhat hilarious, but the dems are so predictable and their approaches are worn and tired.
On Aug. 8, 2020, U.S. President Donald Trump said he intended to "terminate the tax," referring to Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes. It's a step that would — if taken in isolation — remove nearly 90% of funding for Social Security benefits, and thus likely pose a threat to the continued existence of those programs.
Does our elderly voters on this forum (and everywhere) know that President Trumps actions (and threats for a permanent action to his deferral if re-elected) poses a threat to the continued existence of your Social Security and for the BILLIONS of our children after us?
The next post:
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009
Here we go-
It's election season, so it's time for democrats to accuse republicans of wanting to take away medicare and social security.
It is somewhat hilarious, but the dems are so predictable and their approaches are worn and tired.
The CARES Act - passed as law - authorized $2T in "spending". $500B of that hasn't even been "spent" in the form of capital to be used to back up loans to large corporations. Loans, not grants. Think the 2009 bailout, when the Banks, etc actually paid the money back.
Major actual cash out/never see again:
1. $300B in direct stimulus (the $1,200/$2,400 per couple plus up to $1K for kids). Had an income cap. No direct economic impact from COVID needed - ie, even retirees received this. Completely "free money"
$250B for the "$600/wk" benefit (along with extending all UI benefits for 26 weeks) for ~ 4 months.
2. $350B in PPP loans, later increased to $660B which has not all been funded (deadline last Friday)
3. $100B to hospitals, plus $40BB in PPE. Think of this - in PPE alone with 5MM total cases and a 20% hospitalization rate that's $40K in PPE alone per hospitalization. For hospitals, at 1MM patients - that's 100K/hospitalization. IOW, a LOT of this money better not have been spent yet.
4. $150B given to the states. That's actually not very much - $455/person when I'd spitball the average spent by states is $5,000.
Since the end of March passage, cases leapt and deaths did too, but deaths peaked in early May as "expected".
So, $2T (plus $310B more in PPP) was thrown at the issue. Almost half an entire year of Federal spending ($4.8T in 2020). And not more than $1.5T has been spent.
so why, if we're past the worst of the health toll, would we need to have an EVEN LARGER stimulus bill?
Why, if the unemployment rate peaked at the end of May and has dropped back to 2010 level (with wages up) do we need to spend EVEN MORE than 5 months ago? Why, if economic recovery seems to be happening from $2T in spending would we now need to push COVID spending to > a FULL YEAR of Federal spending?
Trump is losing badly currently among senior citizen voters, who are usually the strongest voting bloc, and he thinks making cuts to the program that basically is the only income for millions of seniors will win him votes? lol.
And it isn't a true tax cut, but a tax deferment. Wait until the shock in taxes people get when they have to pay it all back in 2021. Smaller paychecks.
Well, help this "idiot" understand...
Where is there any cut in payments to current beneficiaries?
When Obama cut 2% from individual payroll taxes for 2 years, what is the mathematical difference from 7.6% for 5 months?
I understand if they gave the nightmare scenario to make us feel better when we bottomed out at 16%. That said, when more small businesses close, we have evictions start again and the inaction of local governments to have the $100 unemployment to make the state hand out the $400 unemployment; we will have problems with the economy and we will wish that we had passed the 3T bill. Also remember number of states will be hurting due to decreased tax revenue in particular the gas tax stalling construction projects.
honest constructive criticism here - try to complete one thought and one sentence at a time.
First, the estimated cost to the states of the $400 benefit is sitting in their hands already (collectively) from CARES Act.
Second, the "$600 program" cost $250B. At 16 weeks of benefit, that is 26MM workers getting the benefit. Today, we have only 16MM people unemployed.
So perhaps we say "$600 up to 100% of your previous wage" ... that's completely fair right? Let's assume all 16MM need it (or those re-hired are replaced with businesses that close) through the end of December. That's $192B. But it's not $3T.
I'm curious about your position on evictions. With a $1,200/person "gift" already provided, with unemployment benefits = 100% of income, with all welfare benefits provided as before April 1 ... why would folks not be paying their rent?
On the gas tax - do you have any information to support your claim?
honest constructive criticism here - try to complete one thought and one sentence at a time.
First, the estimated cost to the states of the $400 benefit is sitting in their hands already (collectively) from CARES Act.
Second, the "$600 program" cost $250B. At 16 weeks of benefit, that is 26MM workers getting the benefit. Today, we have only 16MM people unemployed.
So perhaps we say "$600 up to 100% of your previous wage" ... that's completely fair right? Let's assume all 16MM need it (or those re-hired are replaced with businesses that close) through the end of December. That's $192B. But it's not $3T.
I'm curious about your position on evictions. With a $1,200/person "gift" already provided, with unemployment benefits = 100% of income, with all welfare benefits provided as before April 1 ... why would folks not be paying their rent?
On the gas tax - do you have any information to support your claim?
First the states had to not use CARES monies in a legal way to have the money to front the illegal Trump plan (since it is spending around Congress. FYI. I would say that about any politicians doing that.) In fact many states need more leading to the Republican plan.
As for the $600 vs $400 debate, most people didn't get the option to return to work and some did but got furloughed again as the sunbelt reopened and closed.
I cannot give a concrete answer on evictions. There are some cases where people got money and then the money was taken back due to alleged fraud and accounting errors. https://www.12news.com/article/news/...b-c28f35b23183 If you got money while unemployed and then got hit with being a potential fraud case you might have been able to pay bills but now are not. I highly doubt people socked away the money and didnt pay rent unless there was a rent holiday or deal worked out.
Is that a real question? Did you read how many portions of the proposal had nothing to do with stimulus as it relates to covid-19.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
