|
Post by jeffolie on Jun 13, 2008 12:35:40 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by blueneck on Jun 13, 2008 15:56:05 GMT -6
Just what exactly does a CEO do to deserve more in a day than most people earn in a year?
Its about freakin time we reign in the obscene salaries and perks of the wealthy
the economy works much better when prosperity is shared and the demand side of the equation is not ignored
|
|
|
Post by unlawflcombatnt on Jun 13, 2008 20:08:24 GMT -6
Just what exactly does a CEO do to deserve more in a day than most people earn in a year? Its about freakin time we reign in the obscene salaries and perks of the wealthy the economy works much better when prosperity is shared and the demand side of the equation is not ignored Amen to that. But in reading Obama's Social Security proposal: " But Douglas Holz-Eakin, the Republican candidate's senior economic policy adviser, said that as president, McCain would not consider an increase "under any imagineable circumstance."
Obama was vague about what forms of income would be affected, saying, "We should exempt anyone making under $250,000 from this increase so that the change doesn't burden middle-class Americans." Campaign aides said the additional tax, like the current one, would apply only to wages and salaries and not to other forms of income such as investments.
Obama has talked before of establishing such a "doughnut hole" in the amount of income subject to the Social Security tax. Friday marked the first time he confirmed a resumption point: $250,000 and above." Why the donut hole? Won't this result in those making $102,000/yr. paying the same amount of Social Security tax as those making $224, 000? What's the rationale behind that?
|
|
|
Post by blueneck on Jun 13, 2008 20:13:35 GMT -6
There is none - just like there is none for the donut hole in medicare?? Maybe because this is the wage bracket for most political contibutors perhaps?
|
|
|
Post by proletariat on Jun 14, 2008 5:57:18 GMT -6
I agree with ULC. The payroll tax is pretty unbearable for those on the lower end of the economic ladder. A more principled stand would be get rid of the donut hole, and decrease the % for those at the bottom.
As for the reason for the donut hole, demographically that is his base. The Dems are / have become an upper middle class political party.
|
|
|
Post by blueneck on Jun 14, 2008 5:58:31 GMT -6
For once we can agree Obama's plan once again is much better than McCain's however, who is still pomoting Bush's failed privatization scheme. Absebt a total revamp Obama's plan donut hole and all is better than bupkus
|
|
|
Post by proletariat on Jun 14, 2008 9:02:28 GMT -6
I think there tends to be agreement on the issues, it the partisan action where the disagreements arise.
While I'll agree that Obama has "better" positions than McCain, they also have a much greater likelihood of being implemented. McCain's views on SS privatization are irrelevant because a Democratic congress would have none of it. If however Obama offered "soft" privatization like his social security adviser Liebman has suggested in the past, it will very likely become implemented.
|
|