Ironically, the Democrats were in favor of a tax cut two years ago. Obama said he wanted a way for workers to be able to take more of their pay home in our slowing economy. And even more ironic is which tax Obama and the Democrats wanted to cut. They proposed a Social Security payroll tax cut. Can you imagine what the media narrative would be if the Republicans were the ones wanting to cut Social Security taxes? The Democrats do it, and no one cares.
Before the cuts, Social Security was being “funded” by a 12.4% tax on workers’ wages where the wages did not exceed $110,100. 6.2% was paid by the employer, and the remaining half was paid by the worker. Obama’s proposal reduced the worker’s tax portion to 4.2%, a 2% cut. Because the employers’ tax portion remained the same, this created a Social Security budget shortfall, for which Congress has had to reimburse to the tune of $215 billion of borrowed money to be added to the national debt. Even though Republicans were in favor of letting the tax cut expire in 2011, the Democrats were successful in extending them for this year. They are, however, set to expire come the new year.
Now, no one is really in favor of the tax cut. Not even the Democrats who proposed it. They’re saying that it didn’t really do anything to spark our economy, and that was the cut’s purpose. But how much were they expecting the economy to be “sparked” when the tax cut only gave back $19 per week for the average worker? Granted, that is about $1,000 more per year saved. With the economy the way it is, were people more likely to spend that money or save it? Did they even realize their paychecks were slightly bigger?
One little tax cut didn’t spark the economy, so everyone wants to let it expire. Next year, it will feel like a tax increase on 163 million workers, and this is not the time to be raising taxes. I generally like any kind of tax cut because it means Americans get to keep more of the fruits of their labor. The problem with the Democrats’ Social Security tax cut is that it wasn’t offset by spending cuts, because Democrats don’t generally believe in spending cuts. So it just creates a wider deficit.
And I thought Social Security was the Democrats’ sacred cow. Why do they get to put it at risk and then claim that the Republicans are the ones that want to “raid” it?
Tax cuts do need to happen, and all sorts of taxes need to just be eliminated altogether. But there also need to be massive spending cuts. Whole federal departments can be eliminated. They don’t need to start with Social Security. People are already dependent on it, and since the government promised to pay retirees these benefits, nothing should be done to put Social Security at risk. There are plenty of other programs to attack. So many redundant government bureaucracies exist as a result of our government’s “job creation” measures, yet the Dems want to go after Social Security and make the taxpayers cover the shortfall? We need real tax and spending cuts, not mere tinkering around with a massive budget.