Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Steve Lokness who wrote (92699)	10/31/2008 1:13:37 PM
From: TimF	Respond to of 541604

The one program running a surplus is SS. So what? Really "running a surplus" means nothing in this context. SS spending cost a dollar per every dollar spent. SS taxes are just how you pay for the spending. They don't make the program any less expensive. And the taxes are just as harmful as any other taxes. Its a tax on payroll. You tax something and you get less of it. They discourage employment increases and pay increases for employed people. Any program could "run a surplus". All you need to do is create a tax with the same name. If we had a "give big pork benefits to friends of Bush tax", would you defend giving out pork to Bush's friends because the program "ran a surplus". I doubt it. And sure social security spending is more justifiable than doling out pork to Bush's friends, but that's based on what's done with the money, not on "running a surplus". If "running a surplus" meant we shouldn't cut or criticize the spending, than after the new "give Pork to Bush's friends tax" we shouldn't cut or criticize pork handouts to those friends.