Comedy Gold: Obama Says “Everyone Must Pay Their Fair Share” Then Sticks it to the Poor and Middle Class

Remember this?
Obama demanding over and over again that every American must pay their fair share.

But that was sooo last week.

Now we find out that under the new fiscal cliff plan workers making less than $30,000 a year will take a bigger hit than those making $500,000 a year.
The Daily Mail reported:

Middle-class workers will take a bigger hit to their income proportionately than those earning between $200,000 and $500,000 under the new fiscal cliff deal, according to the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center.

Earners in the latter group will pay an average 1.3 percent more – or an additional $2,711 – in taxes this year, while workers making between $30,000 and $200,000 will see their paychecks shrink by as much as 1.7 percent – or up to $1,784 – the D.C.-based think tank reported.

Overall, nearly 80 percent of households will pay more money to the federal government as a result of the fiscal cliff deal.

‘The economy needs a stimulus, but under the agreement, taxes will go up in 2013 relative to 2012 – not only on high-income households, as widely discussed, but also on every working man and woman in the country, via the end of the payroll tax cut,’ said William G. Gale, co-director of the Tax Policy Center.

‘For most households, the payroll tax takes a far bigger bite than the income tax does, and the payroll tax cut therefore – as [the Congressional Budget Office] and others have shown – was a more effective stimulus than income tax cuts were, because the payroll tax cuts hit lower in the income distribution and hence were more likely to be spent,’ he added.

It figures.

Hat Tip Gini

Get news like this in your Facebook News Feed,
Gateway Pundit

Commenting Policy

Please adhere to our commenting policy to avoid being banned. As a privately owned website, we reserve the right to remove any comment and ban any user at any time.

Comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, anti-Semitism, or personal or abusive attacks on other users may be removed and result in a ban.

Facebook Comments

Disqus Comments

  • Patty

    And let’s not forget to add the new Obamacare taxes to the mix — the same ones that even Democrats who voted for the law have admitted will be job killers. There will be no unaffected taxpayers.

  • Oliver

    “Fair Share” is one of those False Premises I’ve been squawking about lately.

    In reality, a fair share would be to tax everyone equally, but Obama’s master spin doctors phrase things in such a way that the masses — who probably NEVER even thought about taxes in terms of fairness before — are lulled into believing that the tax system is inequitable, and that the rich are not paying enough … when in fact, the exact opposite is true.

    BEWARE THE FALSE LIBERAL PREMISES … they are based on emotion (greed, sympathy, envy, etc), masterfully delivered and easy to miss.

    & OT: In 2nd debate Obama proves he had time to save the Navy Seals in Benghazi, and possibly even Ambassador Stevens. Why were they left to die? And who called off the rescue mission?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwydSm5RUeo

  • Pingback: Comedy Gold: Obama Says “Everyone Must Pay Their Fair Share” Then Sticks it to the Poor and Middle Class « infowarsusa()

  • Pingback: Comedy Gold: Obama Says “Everyone Must Pay Their Fair Share” Then Sticks it to the Poor and Middle ClassPolitifreak()

  • Oliver

    by the way, did you notice how he says in the video “EVERYONE must pay their fair share”, but that whole concept started with him saying THE RICH should pay their fair share?

    He originally used envy / class warfare to sell the fairness concept so non-rich people would buy into the idea, then later changed that to “everyone must pay their fair share” in order to justify tax hikes on middle & lower income families. This is so people forget his campaign promise that middle class taxes would not go up “one thin dime”.

    This is how he lies and gets away with it.

    GOP constantly makes the mistake of using logic, reason and facts to argue against his emotion-based appeal. And if you know anything about human nature, you know that emotion trumps reason every time. GOP will continue to lose if they don’t learn how to communicate on the basis of emotion.

  • Patty

    #2

    They knew too much!! There was something that would end this administration.

  • How about the 47% not paying any net taxes whatsoever, where’s their contribution, numbnuts?

  • Pingback: Comedy Gold: Obama Says “Everyone Must Pay Their Fair Share” Then Sticks it to the Poor and Middle Class | Born Conservative()

  • Highlander

    Reaganite, EVERYONE will be paying one way or another. People’s lack of understanding of economics never ceases to amaze me. Every dime of money that the federal government bleeds out of this society winds up coming out of the pockets of the people one way or another … ALL of the people.

    Even the dirt bag on the street buying his daily heroin will suffer from this tax hike, because as the costs trickle down from the rich, to retail businesses, to the middle class, and on down to the street dealers, and everyone’s cost of doing business goes up, the price of heroin and everything else we buy will go up. Nobody will escape this. Yes, some will pay more than others, but the people at the bottom, who smugly think that they will be exempt will probably be hit the worst, when calculated as a percentage of their disposable income.

    I think people are already starting to figure that out, and personally, I’m going to have a hard time feeling sorry for them. Their ignorance is going to cost us all dearly, and it’s only fair that they should bear the brunt of it …. The question is, will they EVER figure out how bad they’re being screwed, and by whom?

    So far, the majority of Americans still think that evil Booosh is responsible for all of this, and until the MSM starts telling them the truth, and quits functioning as the propaganda arm of the Democratic Party, that isn’t likely to change.

  • Highlander

    Oh and Reaganite, as a business owner and landlord myself, I intend to pass EVERY DIME of extra expense I incur straight through to my tenants and customers. Income taxes, health care taxes, property taxes, gasoline costs … everything. I’ll absorb the Social Security increase. I don’t really consider that an increase since they just reduced it a while back, and they really shouldn’t have. Supposedly I’ll be getting that money back some day, so I can let that slide, but I know I’m not alone in my plan to pass everything else that comes my way right on through. I think America’s parasites are in for a rude awakening, because their rents, utilities, food, and all their other basic costs of living are going to go up by 25-50% over the next couple years, and I can guarantee you that their income isn’t going to keep pace …

  • SusieSunshine

    Sorry, but I don’t understand the complaint…. Anyone with the brain of a field mouse KNOWS that Obama intends to permanently cripple America, destroy her if he can. This is not just the other guy – the people living in some other state or across the street. This is you and ME that I’m speaking of.

    Poverty? Heh… We haven’t even started to approach the poverty that Obama has in mind for this country. I said “Obama”, but actually, it’s the entire progressive Marxist ideology that has America in it’s gun sights. The education system, from K-4 through Grad school, is infested with ideologues who agree with Obama and the progressives. Schools, unions, local governments, the local janitor’s union…. Everyone wants a big piece of the pie and screw the capitalists who are making the money! Capitalism is bad – Communism/grifting is good.

  • AuntieMadder

    Call me stupid, but what the heck is the difference between payroll taxes and income taxes?

  • red boy

    “SusieSunshine”
    You are absolutely correct! In less than 6mo, we as a nation will not be in a recession but a great depression. You will start seeing sign of it in less than a month.

  • red boy

    “AuntieMadder”
    Nothing at all

  • Highlander

    Well Auntie, SUPPOSEDLY, payroll “taxes” are Social Security withholding, and we SHOULD get that money back when we retire. I certainly understand your skepticism though … and I’ve been furiously resisting allowing them to be called TAXES for that very reason. I seem to be somewhat alone in my quest though … even so-called Republicans don’t seem to want to differentiate between withholding and taxes anymore, and it makes me sick to think that some day, all the money we set aside for our retirements may be stolen …

  • red boy

    It’s all the same to me. I’ll never see a dime out of my social security.

  • Blacque Jacques Shellacque

    …even so-called Republicans don’t seem to want to differentiate between withholding and…

    I’ve always considered withholding the government’s way to effectively anesthetize the typical worker from the amount of money that the government is seizing from them. It’s one thing to see on a W-4 a total of money that was withheld over the span of one year, but something entirely different if each taxpayer were to have to write a check at tax time for the total amount.

  • Ghost

    “…it doesn’t matter… it doesn’t matter… it doesn’t matter”

  • pagar

    All must pay their fair share so that:

    http://www.whitehousedossier.com/2013/01/02/obama-returns-hawaii-added-cost-3-million/

    How much can you spend on vacation?

  • Finncrisp

    One thing we can thank Al Gore for is shattering forever the myth of what the government does with social security funds. Remember the lock box and the account with your name on it that was yours, without equivocation? Well, that led to the disclosure that every dime of social security is dumped into the general fund and there is no lockbox. So Medicare, Social Security are really just a tax and feed the general fund like every other tax.

    This makes the spending problem even more apparent. Barry issues fatwahs every day about how he is transforming America. Bout time we wised up…

    He is not interested in our welfare, only his own agenda, our welfare be damned.

  • FMB42

    Liberal politicians use the term “fair share” to pacify those who pay little or no income taxes (i.e. much of their voter base).

    In reality, using the term “fair share” is an absolutely lie in regard to the US income tax code. There is nothing “fair” or equitable about forcing certain people to pay higher income taxes while, at the same time, allowing huge numbers of others to pay little or no income taxes.

    Note:

    The definition of the term “fair” is “free from bias, dishonesty, or injustice.”

    The definition of the term “equitable” is “dealing fairly and equally with all concerned.”

    The definition of the term “share” is “an equitable portion.”

    Liberals who make fraudulent use of the term “fair share” further serve to define the lies and hypocrisy found in the propaganda they spew.

  • donh

    Booo Hooo…Republicans should have walked away and let all taxes rise. People want the omnipotent titanic sugar daddy nanny state , but they don’t want to pay for it. It is grossly immoral to take even a penny out of paychecks of people earning as little as $10 an hour…especially when they are paying into outdated busted failed communist welfare programs funding the grotesque spoiled lifestyles of the political statist class. Unfortunately not enough hamburger flippers are voting for freedom. The ” working poor ” are sold on the lies and schemes of big bully brother government. So make them pay more for it until they see the light.

  • ChrisF

    I’m thinking of making out my check to the IRS in the amount of “MY FAIR SHARE” this year to see if they can cash it.

  • bob

    Every one should pay their fair share? Everyone who gets a welfare check should pay 6% of it back to Obama. It’s their fair share.

  • Neo

    It’s come to this

    Her musings were suddenly interrupted when her date asked a decidedly unromantic question: “What’s your credit score?”
    “It was as if the music stopped,” Ms. LaShawn, 31, said, recalling how the date this year went so wrong so quickly after she tried to answer his question honestly. “It was really awkward because he kept telling me that I was the perfect girl for him, but that a low credit score was his deal-breaker.”

    If the US government was trying to date, it would be destined to be a spinster.

  • this fiscal cliff worked out the same as the tax deal works out every year more money for the politican less money for the worker. another step on the road to the total enslavement of the american people by the american politican.

  • RealMc

    This statement needs to be adjusted imho:

    Overall, nearly 80 percent of households will pay more money to the federal government as a result of the fiscal cliff deal.

    IT SHOULD READ:

    Overall, nearly 80 percent of WORKING households will pay more money to the federal government as a result of the fiscal cliff deal.

    At this point, I am seriously considering to stop paying my mortgage and wait for fricking handouts too. It seems slovenly behavior is what is rewarded where hard work and paying your bills on time is a thing of the past.

    Too all you fricking morons that voted for the color of skin instead of content of character, PISS OFF.

  • Leslie Brillstein

    from Bloomberg News:

    ‘Barack Obama is the first president in more than five decades to win at least 51 percent of the national popular vote twice, according to a revised vote count in New York eight weeks after the Nov. 6 election.

    . . .

    Obama is the first president to achieve the 51 percent mark in two elections since Republican Dwight D. Eisenhower, who did it in 1952 and 1956 . . .

    Obama, 51, benefited from political factors that included a lack of serious opposition for his party’s nomination or from well-known third-party challengers, and an absence of social unrest, scandal or foreign-policy disasters during his first term, said Allan Lichtman, a history professor at American University in Washington.

    “Under the big picture, this was an entirely predictable election outcome,” Lichtman said.’

  • Shawn

    Obama and all of DC is a bunch of liars and crooks.

  • FMB42

    Quote:
    “Obama, 51, benefited from political factors that included a lack of serious opposition for his party’s nomination or from well-known third-party challengers, and an absence of social unrest, scandal or foreign-policy disasters during his first term…”

    Ya, lets ignore one one of the worst economic recession/depressions during the last 100 years while we talk about a so-called lack of “social unrest, scandal or foreign-policy disasters.”

    This is not to mention the fact that Obama’s Benghazi scandal and his facilitation of the Muslim Brotherhood foreign-policy disaster was completely covered-up and/or ignored by most of the MSM (and RINO Romney).

    Quote:
    “‘Barack Obama is the first president in more than five decades to win at least 51 percent of the national popular vote twice, according to a revised vote count in New York eight weeks after the Nov. 6 election.”

    This only goes to show you what widespread and systematic voter fraud can do for your political party.

    The often used “vote early, vote often” Democratic campaign slogan really worked like a charm this past Presidential election.

  • Annie P

    @ Finncrisp:

    I was wondering if the new Obamacare tax would be put in a lockbox? Or just go into general funds as well. What a nightmare.

  • bigL

    everytime you see a volt or a leaf or a some hybrid you and we are paying for part of the twerp-mobile

  • Patty

    #15 January 5, 2013 at 3:46 am
    Highlander commented:

    Reaganite, EVERYONE will be paying one way or another. People’s lack of understanding of economics never ceases to amaze me.

    ~

    HERE, HERE!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • bg
  • Sure “everybody” will your Highness with the exception of your literary and Hollywood Courtiers!

    Do the names Babs, Terry Mcmillan, Michael (I want more) Moore, Gwenyth Paltrow, JCO (I am sorry, I hate making fun of people for their looks, but geez, with all that money she has, I swear she looks like a relative of the MARX brothers!) and the director who will soon be telling movies goers, “The Dark Side made me do it!” George Lucas ring any bells?
    (See his latest anti tax benefit- for himself and his millions! for more info. or Michelle malkin)

  • shadow

    How about the 47% not paying any net taxes whatsoever, where’s their contribution, numbnuts?

    How can 47% not pay any taxes, if “nearly 80 percent of households will pay more money” due to the payroll tax increase. Or are payroll taxes only considered taxes when you can use an increase against Obama, but are not considered taxes when it comes to who pays and who does not?

  • bg

    ++

    shadow #36 January 5, 2013 at 1:18 pm

    comprehension is key..

    80% of households who PAY TAXES will pay
    more due to the 47% who NOT PAY TAXES..

    ==

  • Wow all you guys have hit it right between the eyes. Why can’t people see this? I get mad when everyone calls SS “entitlement”. WE pay for SS and we pay again when we start receiving and again at tax filing. My medicare cost me $115. a month plus cost of supplemental insurance that doesn’t pay a dime on regular visits. Since we have private ins why aren’t they required to pay FIRST ans medicare pay the rest. Why isn’t education free to everyone so we can educate our children. Why doesn’t the gobberment ( intentional) require the people. that aren’t handicapped. get a job and supplement their income to a living wage. Its is not us seniors that have worked all their lives and paid in that are to blame it the alcoholics,welfare generations, drug addicts, and all the amorphous disabilities and endless reasons to suck the gov tit that are draining us dry. I could go on for hrs.

  • shadow

    bg #37 January 5, 2013 at 1:38 pm

    comprehension is key..

    So is knowlege of which you speak. The “47%” is the portion who do not pay income tax. Payroll tax reaches a bit further. Anyone that earns a wage pays that, even if they pay no income tax. In fact, over half of that 47%, still pay the payroll tax. All in all, taxes will increase on 77% of all households.

  • Highlander

    Shadow, since you obviously haven’t been paying attention ….

    PAYROLL TAX is Social Security WITHHOLDING. It is not SUPPOSED to be a TAX… It is supposed to be YOUR MONEY, put into a dedicated TRUST, for your retirement. Everybody needs to be paying in to the fund, because supposedly, EVERYBODY will be drawing benefits from that trust when they retire.

    INCOME tax is a TAX. Income taxes are SUPPOSED to be the mechanism through which we fund the Constitutionally specified functions of the federal government. EVERYBODY needs to be paying at least SOMETHING in the way of income taxes too, because we ALL have a responsibility to pay for our share of the services the federal government is CONSTITUTIONALLY required to provide to us.

    We’ve foolishly allowed the criminals in Washington to raid the Social Security trust fund, and dump OUR money into the general fund in order to fund all sorts of senseless unconstitutional nonsense, nonsense that selfish idiots like YOU think big government should be doing for you, for FREE. It’s a crime of epic proportions … a crime made possible by the stunning ignorance of people like you, who have no problem with giving our politicians unlimited power to tax and spend … unlimited power to seize money from a small group of successful people, and redistribute it to the growing masses of lazy, indigent people like yourself, in exchange for your votes. You’re too stupid to realize that eventually, we are going to run out of “other people’s money” and the whole scheme is going to come crashing down around us. That day is coming soon, and people like me, who have seen this day coming for years and done everything in our power to prevent it, are sick and tired of trying to educate dopes like you about the dangers of ignoring the Constitution. If you want to stick your head in the sand and let our politicians destroy this country, fine, but don’t expect to receive a lot of sympathy or support from the rest of us when the hammer finally falls and you find yourself starving in the street.

    People like you, who are too stupid to face the realities of history and human nature, or educate yourselves in Constitutional law simply don’t deserve to be living in a free society. And very soon, if things keep going the way they are, you won’t be.

  • “fair share,” that is enough money to pay for the services that government provide YOU and not one penny more. the government is suppose to exist to serve the citizen not the citizen serve the people in gonernmemt.

  • Lim Lynn

    Obama Says “Everyone Must Pay Their Fair Share” Then Sticks it to the Poor and Middle Class
    One question to be answered will American citizens be over tax by Barack Hussein Obama and most American citizens become poor middle class?

  • gastorgrab

    If the goal is to make everyone “equal”, then shouldn’t everyone pay an ‘equal’ share of taxes?

    How come ‘Fair’ and ‘Equal’ are not the same thing?

  • shadow

    PAYROLL TAX is Social Security WITHHOLDING. It is not SUPPOSED to be a TAX… It is supposed to be YOUR MONEY, put into a dedicated TRUST, for your retirement.

    Where did you get that from? LMAO You show that rare combination of ignorance and certitude that only a conservative can deliver.

    I hate to be the one to pop your bubble, but the money you pay into SS and medicare is used to pay current benefits, only if there is money left over after the benefits are paid does it go into a trust fund, which is made up of US treasury bonds. And it’s always been that way, so nobody “raided” the trust fund. That’s just another bit of fiction that Republicans like pin on Democrats.

  • AuntieMadder

    Thank you to those who answered my question.

    So, they’re calling FICA withholdings “payroll taxes” nowadays. Interesting… Because it’s all spendable now. They don’t even try to hide it anymore.

    So, when employers match those payroll taxes (fka FICA withholdings), I wonder under what name or title those payments are made.

  • #44 bubble burster…”nobody raided the trust fund.” oh yes they did, you see it was a trust fund until 1965. lyndon baines started raiding it then and the politicans have been raiding it since. the reason current contributions are used to pay current benefits is because the politicans depleted the trust fund. also any current contributions not used to pay current benefits goes into the general fund not a social security trust fund.

    also there are two instances that i know of where politicans have reduced social security benefits, the pension windfall act and taxing social security benefits, both done by democrats. if you know of any instances of the evil republicans reducing benefits please inform me.

  • Whistleblower

    The Valerie Plame Case: Why was Patrick Fitzgerald appointed Special Counsel?

    http://illinoispaytoplay.com/2013/01/03/the-valerie-plame-case-why-was-patrick-fitzgerald-appointed-special-counsel/

  • Highlander

    Shadow, you are such a moron, it amazes me that you are able to operate a computer. Look up the history of Social Security. I think you’ll find that it was originally promised to be, and set up as, a TRUST FUND. Our Social Security contributions are only being dumped into the general fund now because we allowed crooked politicians to re-write the rules while we were sleeping ..

    Is EVERYTHING a right wing lie to you? Jeez ….

  • Highlander

    Auntie … EXACTLY. And the matching “employer contribution”, which, incidentally, I have to make since I’m self-employed, goes into the general fund. It does NOT get credited to the employee in any way, In fact, NONE of the money is specifically earmarked for a particular employee, which I find outrageous. Basically, all we get now is a PROMISE, that when we retire we will get whatever benefits they decide to pay us, based on how much we made throughout our lifetime. There is no guarantee that you will ever see the money you’ve paid in (much less the interest that your money has earned) and for someone like me who pays double, the chances are even slimmer. Why? Because politicians have been shamelessly raiding the fund for years….

    The entire thing is OUTRAGEOUS, and what’s even more aggravating is that punks like Shadow, who have no idea what they’re talking about, are running around spouting lies and misinformation as if they’re some sort of experts. They don’t have a clue how the program was originally supposed to work, nor do they understand how it has been corrupted. All they know is that “rich people” need to be paying more. It’s what they’ve been programmed to believe … and they regurgitate it on cue every chance they get …

    Thanks to public education, the ignorance, arrogance, and stupidity of our younger generations is stunning, and it will eventually be our undoing …

  • Paleoconservative greetings. I am not going to pay, nor play your neoconservative Fair Tax. I suggest you all start working for cash. If you are working in poverty; like me, then you will not be getting fined for not joining the Obama Care deal either.

    Hey I.R.S.

    You will get no national income tax from me…ever again. I also defy your payroll tax increase.

  • Highlander

    Tommy, don’t waste your time trying to explain those pesky facts to Shadow …. he’s pathologically obtuse. Based on how little he understands about Social Security, I’m guessing he’s maybe 25 years old … He’s far too immature and inexperienced to ever grasp just how evil and corrupt the government he supports really is.

    He just can’t understand why people like you and I, who’ve spent our entire lives paying into a system that’s been raped and pillaged like Social Security has, could possibly feel the way we do about parasites and big government. As far as he’s concerned, we’re nothing but a bunch of rich old racists, stuck in our ways and blind to the new world order, and he can’t figure out why we aren’t eager to trust Obama and the progressives, who are clearly much smarter and wiser than we are…

    It would almost be laughable if it wasn’t so aggravating. Unfortunately, I’m not laughing, and I’m guessing you aren’t either …

  • shadow

    ”nobody raided the trust fund.” oh yes they did,
    Q1. Which political party took Social Security from the independent trust fund and put it into the general fund so that Congress could spend it?

    A1: There has never been any change in the way the Social Security program is financed or the way that Social Security payroll taxes are used by the federal government. The Social Security Trust Fund was created in 1939 as part of the Amendments enacted in that year. From its inception, the Trust Fund has always worked the same way. The Social Security Trust Fund has never been “put into the general fund of the government.”

    Most likely this question comes from a confusion between the financing of the Social Security program and the way the Social Security Trust Fund is treated in federal budget accounting. Starting in 1969 (due to action by the Johnson Administration in 1968) the transactions to the Trust Fund were included in what is known as the “unified budget.” This means that every function of the federal government is included in a single budget. This is sometimes described by saying that the Social Security Trust Funds are “on-budget.” This budget treatment of the Social Security Trust Fund continued until 1990 when the Trust Funds were again taken “off-budget.” This means only that they are shown as a separate account in the federal budget. But whether the Trust Funds are “on-budget” or “off-budget” is primarily a question of accounting practices–it has no effect on the actual operations of the Trust Fund itself.

  • shadow

    also there are two instances that i know of where politicans have reduced social security benefits, the pension windfall act and taxing social security benefits, both done by democrats. if you know of any instances of the evil republicans reducing benefits please inform me.

    Both of those were signed into law in 1983, by Ronald Reagan.

  • shadow

    Why? Because politicians have been shamelessly raiding the fund for years….

    You know, for all the name-calling you do, you get an awful lot of things wrong.

    Q1. Which political party took Social Security from the independent trust fund and put it into the general fund so that Congress could spend it?

    A1: There has never been any change in the way the Social Security program is financed or the way that Social Security payroll taxes are used by the federal government. The Social Security Trust Fund was created in 1939 as part of the Amendments enacted in that year. From its inception, the Trust Fund has always worked the same way. The Social Security Trust Fund has never been “put into the general fund of the government.”

    Most likely this question comes from a confusion between the financing of the Social Security program and the way the Social Security Trust Fund is treated in federal budget accounting. Starting in 1969 (due to action by the Johnson Administration in 1968) the transactions to the Trust Fund were included in what is known as the “unified budget.” This means that every function of the federal government is included in a single budget. This is sometimes described by saying that the Social Security Trust Funds are “on-budget.” This budget treatment of the Social Security Trust Fund continued until 1990 when the Trust Funds were again taken “off-budget.” This means only that they are shown as a separate account in the federal budget. But whether the Trust Funds are “on-budget” or “off-budget” is primarily a question of accounting practices–it has no effect on the actual operations of the Trust Fund itself.

    http://www.ssa.gov/history/InternetMyths2.html

  • Highlander

    Shadow, repeating falsehoods over and over again doesn’t make them true. Who do you work for? Are they paying you well to come here?

  • Highlander

    Shadow, your attempt to use the government’s own social security propaganda site to “debunk” the facts about what they’ve done with our social security funds is laughable.

    You can mince words and play games with semantics all day long if you want, but the fact is, the federal government transferred the trillions of dollars that SHOULD be sitting in our Social Security trust fund into the general fund, through the issuance of what were essentially IOU’s. IOU’s that will NEVER be paid back. I know that, and the millions of other Americans who have paid into the fund and watched their money disappear know it too. I think I speak for a lot of people when I say that it’s incredibly insulting to be fed this sort of BS, by you, or by the federal government.

    Contrary to popular beliefs, we don’t have our heads buried in the sand. We see what’s going on, and although we’ve foolishly neglected to do anything about it up until now, our patience is wearing rather thin.

    If you want to believe that our Social Security funds haven’t been pillaged, feel free, but I’m not going to allow you to come here and spread lies and propaganda uncontested. If the money hasn’t been snatched, then WHERE THE HELL IS IT? If our money was there, then we wouldn’t be having this argument, now would we?

  • Glenn47

    Obama is killing social security anyway. He took people out of unemployment and put them under social security disability to make his unemployment figures look better. Then we have those that didn’t pay into it, that will take from it, we are so scre…

  • Pingback: Workers making $30,000 will take bigger hit than those earning $500,000()

  • Highlander

    Come on Shadow … we’re anxiously awaiting your response!

    If our Social Security money hasn’t been snatched, then WHERE THE HELL IS IT?

  • #53bubble burster…”both of these were signed into law in 1983 by ronald reagan”

    the pension windfall act was signed into law in 1977 by reagan and the republican controlled congress. it was adjusted to two thirds in 1983.

    social security was first taxed in 1984 passed by both democrats and republicans in 1983. it taxed benefits of people still working and earning above a certain threshold.

    in 1993 taxes on social security benefits were raised by president reagan and the republican controlled congress to include just about anybody working.

    shadow you have a real future in journalism. i’d bet you could get hired by the new york times right now if you applied.

  • H.J.Res. 15: Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to repeal the twenty-second article of amendment, thereby removing the limitation on the number of terms an individual may serve as President.

    here: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/hjres15#

  • Highlander

    Tommy, did you check out that link shadow posted? Apparently, now we’re paying the Social Security Administration to develop and post a propaganda site aimed at “Debunking Some Internet Myths …”

    Unfortunately, not only are they not debunking myths, they’re re-writing history for us … They must think we’re incredibly stupid if they think we’re going to forget how much money they’ve withheld from our paychecks, and what they did with it.

  • Highlander

    Meanwhile, the efforts to change the subject continue …

  • Pingback: The Latest on Democrats in Office « Enemies of the Constitution()

  • Pingback: Obama Sticks It To the Middle Class With New Obamacare Tax on Dental BracesPolitifreak()

  • Pingback: Obama Sticks It To the Middle Class With New Obamacare Tax on Dental Braces()

  • Pingback: Low Information Voter News: Obama Sticks It To the Middle Class With New Obamacare Tax on Dental Braces « Tarpon's Swamp()

  • Pingback: Obama Sticks It To the Middle Class With New Obamacare Tax on Braces | Undivided US()

  • Pingback: Obama Sticks It To the Middle Class With New Obamacare Tax on Braces | 168ops.org()

  • Pingback: Obama Sticks It To the Middle Class With New Obamacare Tax on Braces()