The chart that shows how grossly unfair US Tax System become

FredHayek wrote: blah blah blah platitudes blah blah blah. .....

blah blah blah talking-points, hate, blah blah blah. Thanks, Fred, I already know all of your disgusting views, and anti-social points. You're the one that continually justifies my contempt for the right-wing, and makes me proud to be a progressive liberal. Anything else productive you'd like to add to the conversation?

Personal insults already this morning? Happy Memorial Day to you! So now anyone who isn't far left is anti-social? Interesting reveal.

As are your comments on a daily basis. Why should Memorial Day be any different. But we knew you couldn't resist playing the "Memorial Day" card...

Now that we've had the perfunctory morning-salute, we can go back and look at the chart that is the subject of the O.P.

We already told you the payroll taxes is what throws this off and unless you want to un-fund senior's Social Security, they have to increase as the ratios of retired people to the few remaining workers left in the Obamarecession.

OR, they need to pass a law to FUND Social Security by raising the cap on income. And I've stated FOR YEARS that I'm all for that. Raise it from $106,800 to $150,000, $250,000, or remove it altogether... I'm good with that. It doesn't penalize the folks making less than that, and god knows the folks making more than that can afford to pay more.

Works for me.

Oh... Insert standard Frank Luntz "job creators" drivel here: ___________________________

I thought you said Social Security was adequately funded right now and wasn't going to go bankrupt. Just like you think US debt at 200% of US GDP isn't anything to worry about, just a scare tactic from Paulbots.

It is...for the next 16-20 years. If it's adequately funded for the next 16-20 years, then you can shut up about it, and how the "payroll taxes will throw this off", for another 16 years.... God, the silence will be wonderful. It's also not part of the "deficit"...But you knew that too.

Not part of the debt? More delusional? The SS lockbox just contains a lot of IOU's from the Feds.

FredHayek wrote: Not part of the debt?

You might try reading what I WROTE, instead of what you wanted to hear... Just a suggestion....

I said: "It's also not part of the "deficit"...But you knew that too."

The deficit and the "debt" are two different things... But you also knew that too...

LadyJazzer wrote:

FredHayek wrote: Not part of the debt?

You might try reading what I WROTE, instead of what you wanted to hear... Just a suggestion....

I said: "It's also not part of the "deficit"...But you knew that too."

The deficit and the "debt" are two different things... But you also knew that too...

How can you still possibly claim Social Security is not part of the deficit?

Even the White House counts Social Secuity as part of the deficit. Why would they do that if they didn't have to? Obama's proposed 2014 budget projects the overall deficit to be $744 billion. There are countless news links to confirm it, but here is one of them.

http://articles.latimes.com/2013/apr/10/news/la-pn-obama-budget-proposal-20130410


Now let's look at the break down from Obama's own proposed 2014 budget at whitehouse.gov:



http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2014/assets/tables.pdf

As anyone can see from the table (Table S-4), Social Security contributes $860 billion to the overall deficit in 2014 (the 2% payroll tax break is no longer in effect). And it's projected to only get worse in following years (up to $1.4 trillion in 2023).

It's seldom you get absolute proof of something here, but if the White House's own budget report is not proof, then what is? I consider this proof because it's even coming from the Democrat side and again I can see no way the White House would count Social Security if they didn't have to.

OK, you have your liberal blogs. :rofllol

And oh, we also have the fact checkers who support the fact that Social Security DOES count towards the deficit.

Gee, this one even says Social Secuity is adding to the debt.

But tax revenues no longer cover the cost of Social Security benefits. As a result, Social Security is adding to the debt.

http://factcheck.org/2012/11/durbin-again-denies-social-securitys-red-ink/

Democrats are relying on sleight of hand to potentially mislead voters about the long-term financing of Social Security.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/updating-a-ruling-social-security-and-its-role-in-the-nations-debt/2012/11/29/1cd3e8aa-3a68-11e2-8a97-363b0f9a0ab3_blog.html