Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
Republicans

Journal ncc74656's Journal: Looks like this week's filibuster "compromise"... 5

Journal by ncc74656
...may have been the tip of the iceberg:

Social Security Compromise?

BusinessWeek says Congress and the White House are inching toward a compromise on Social Security. Private accounts will not be part of the plan. Instead, the compromise would include (a) reducing the rate of growth in benefits paid to upper-income beneficiaries (as President Bush has suggested) and (b) sharply increasing taxes on upper-income taxpayers (i.e., those that earn more than $80,000 per year).

Thanks for nothing, guys. If I had wanted Democrats running Congress, I would've voted for the bastards in the first place...it would've saved time, compared to what we're getting now.

This discussion was created by ncc74656 (45571) for no Foes, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Looks like this week's filibuster "compromise"... More

Looks like this week's filibuster "compromise"...

Comments Filter:
  • I was wonder why the dems suddenly gave in, well besides wanting to not look like friggin idiots. So it appears some back room deals have taken place and the administration will opt for the slight fix and postpone the problem in faovr of getting up / down votes on judicial nominies. Well that sucks.

    jason
    • Why the dems didn't give in:

      1) Reid probably didn't have the votes to keep the judical filibuster without the deal. This would have been bad for more than just judical nominations since the fear is the GOP leadership might try to change any rule it didn't like with a simple majority once the precedent had been set.
      2) The deal specificly allows a filibuster on two of the appeals court nominees and the possiblity on two of the others.
      3) Possible backroom deals on other legislation (Social Security anyone?) a
  • Pay more AND get less!!!!

    Fortunately this will keep it from getting the stigma of being a plan only for the poor...

    I want my personal accounts! At the very least that's one bit of my money that they can't spend.

    BTW, did they say whether companies have to continue to match on the additional salaries? If so, that's a huge tax increase.
  • How about I go right to the source:

    The most likely change: taxing wages up to $140,000. Hitting those workers with the full 12.4% tax would close about 40% of the shortfall.

    So, instead of someone with a $250,000 salary paying 3.97% of their income into social security, they would pay a whopping 6.94%. Which is still far less than the 12.4% that people who are going to need social security pay.

    This is *exactly* the correct first step to correct social security's books. Raise the cap on social security
  • It will increase the speed of which the impending second civil war will arrive.

Slashdot Top Deals

Gravity brings me down.

Close