Quote:
Originally Posted by g8orbill
|
You're not serious, are you?
The reduction in the social security payroll taxes\ rate was proposed by my prez as a
temporary stimulus. The reduction was opposed by the Republicans when it was initially proposed and would not have been extended by the
Republican House even if Obama wanted to extend it. By the way the 6.2 percent rate was based on a proposal by the nonpartisan Greenspan social security reform commission, eneacted by Congress and signed into law by President Reagan (your prez) in 1983.
The tax increase will affect 77% of households. True statement, but if I recall we have been told that only 53% of all households pay taxes. Seems to me that if the social security payroll tax is to be considered a tax for one purpose, it's a tax for all purposes. You really cannot have it both ways.
Workforce participation? In calculating workforce participation, the Bureau of Labor Statistics divides the number of adults in the workforce by the total number of non-institutionalized individuals age 16 and older, including students, full-time homemakers and retirees. The first baby boomers hit 65 in January 2011 and thousands of retired since then. Regardless of the state of the economy workforce participation will decline based solely on demographics.
How about the decline in household net worth to its lowest level in 43 years? Since the writer did not indicate how the number was calculated, a reasonable assumption is that the writer used the median household net worth in early 2009, following the bursting of housing bubble and the stock market collapse.
Linear Mode
