Or not worth the pixels.

I just looked and it 's still there, with 595 votes. Right between Harry Reid and Romney on The View. Maybe the bed bugs got to your computer?

Nope. This one was posted about 1/2 hour ago. I posted the most brilliant, insightful comments Evah. But then it went POOF and Newsvine said as I attempted to post my most brialliant comments that the author had withdrawn it.

I'm thinking those COmcast cuts will not end well around here.

Sorry,
Let me hear you holler.

Yeah, you are probably right - much better to discuss bedbugs than the force vote in the senate.

Let's make sure to keep it Libby-lite after all.

They pulled down the new article and updated the existing (old) one.

Reid said, "I will do everything that I can in throwing my legislative body in front of any efforts to weaken Social Security," he said. "People should leave Social Security alone."

In other words, it must be allowed to go bankrupt without any attempts to fix it, and I will demonize anybody that tries to stop it. Great thinking, Harry.

Let me guess - a doubling of the cap would not effect you? How fair of you.

Tell you what, since the benefits are the same, how about we share the pain and increase the % for everyone. That way everyone gets to participate in the game. Sound fair and reasonable?

spanky, what are you talking about? the rate IS the same for everyone. But those making 100K/year or less pay ALL year,...and those making more phase out and don't pay any more. Why? McCain is triple dipping and he doesn't even know how many houses he has,...I am pretty sure he wouldn't notice if his 'earnings' were a little smaller,...

Clara,

Make more money . then you wont have to pay more after the 108k mark.

Liberals are only happy if we are taking more of other peoples money to make sure they get the Handouts they want...

Clara that means you and I pay the same amount, right? But now you want me to pay more than you, on the income over the cap. Why should I have to do that? Will my benefits be bigger if I pay more?

And let me assure you that the rich draw their social security. Why? Because it's their stinking money. They paid in, just like for medicare. Do rich people need to be on Medicare? Ask them and they will give you the same answer: "you know how much money I have paid in over my life?"

Ok Clara why the disperate treatment? You want to have a little break from paying? All you got to do is hit the cap. I assure you I would notice if my earnings were "a little smaller." Or am I not entitled to as much of my earingins as you? Or you could just be honest and call what you advocate what it is: income re-distribution.

Do you not understand that the all people pay into Social Security? People only stop paying into it once they have reached the cap. I agree doubling the cap is a GREAT idea, maybe even triple it that would be okay too and it would generate lots and lots of money. But even if person makes 500,000 they paid into Social Security until the cap was reached. They are entitled to Social Security just as anyone else is. No one is entitled to take any social security benefits away from anyone just because some government employee decided they "make" too much money.

I heard a rumor the other day that sounds like a great idea. At 62 give people a lump sum of money ( that some gov employee figures out they would draw if they lived to be 85) let the individual do whatever they want with the money, hide it under the bed, put it in the bank, if they want they could buy CDs or invest it. Whatever they want to do. Then they would no longer be eligible for anymore benefits, that would save a ton of money. But they would be responsible for themselves. Sounds like a good plan to me.

But I can already hear the lefties screaming "thats not fair" Social Security was never entended to be your only income after retirement, or did you people forget that?

Spanky ~ Just pay the same percentage on your higher earnings. That's not redistribution -- that's called a flat tax. Everyone pays the same rate, and no one gets any breaks. Republicans like the flat tax because it's just as regressive as they are.

The country needs your money, Spanky. It's the patriotic thing to do. Won't you heed the call? Or maybe create a few jobs so that those people could pay into the system instead. You never did talk about how you're doing on that.

"But I can already hear the lefties screaming "thats not fair" Social Security was never entended to be your only income after retirement, or did you people forget that?"

People that had hundreds of thousands invested in the market never expected to see it evaporate during Bush, or for Madoff to get his hands on it. Or, did you forget that?

Janet ~

Social Security was never entended to be your only income after retirement, or did you people forget that?

No. But did "you people" forget that Reaganomics have squeezed a lot of other people into the position where they will HAVE to depend on Social Security for their retirement income?

Or did "you people" just leave your compassion under the bed with your money?

" You never did talk about how you're doing on that...."

Anna- Spank been too busy muddin' to worry about making the big dollars with his accounting degree. Why would he want to create any jobs? For crying out loud, who do you think he is, the Speaker of the House??

d-b-o ~

For crying out loud, who do you think he is, the Speaker of the House??

Not really, but I don't think Spanky is an accountant, either.

Awww Anna M, you too? Come on. You are a high powered lawyer. DOn't you want to keep your money? For christsakes the California Lawyer Magizine survey says average Starting salary here is about $140K at a decent firm. You got to be hitting the cap yourself there, right?

The current system is just fine. The tax is flat, just capped. Again, not like you get any more if you pay more. And really if these people would only work harder and earn more then they'd get to pay more taxes too. I know - it sure is easy to call for other people to pay more. OPM is the best kind, I get it.

As for the jobs I already employ 8 other people. Me and Drive By had a nice little discussion, and he even apologized to me on two different threads - high water day! How about you anna m? How many jobs have you created or saved? Time to man up and go out on your own? You'll never make real money working for someone else.

Taking money from me and giving it to others is redistribution.

Golly Drive By we already have gone down this road. I guess you just are not very attentive, eh?

And that's what the whip is for Drive By - I get to enjoy my time here with you. As long as the troops are efficiently and happily performing, I'm good. But as a minion yourself, I guess it's unfair of me to expect your understanding.

And Anna thanks but Drive By calling me an accountant is much better than the other day when he was calling me gay. I guess Drive By doesn't think too highly of gays. But then again he apologized for that also. You know Drive By - I'm not one to tell others what to do, but it may be time to put the crack pipe down. There appears to cognitive issues with your abiility to recall events that occurred last week and the week before.

We already talked about this, Spankster. What I make and what I pay are my business, but unlike you, apparently, I don't mind paying my fair share, and I don't mind sharing with people who have less.

Taxes are the price we pay for a free and civilized society. As we've gone down this road where some people's only agenda is to pay less, one thing is for sure -- we aren't more free, and we aren't more civil.

What is "fair share?" What duty do the taxers have to ensure that the money is not wasted?

Like I have said many times before here in San Diego we got a little problem with City employee pensions. 2001 it cost $30 million. Today $250 million, five years $500 plus. Guess what, all the money is going to service the pensions. So is it fair that the pensions have dramatically increased? Should the head librarian have gotten $250k per year? Is that fair? And now is is guarenteed $250K for life. Same with our fire and police. They all retire at 55, then get rehired in the next city over. Full pensions and making full salary. Fair?

ANd please - it is your goal to pay as little as you can also. Or do you not itemize or claim your deductions and exemptions? Like you saidthey need more money. Why don't you give them more of yours?

Also I really could care less what you make. But see, you kind of brought it up in #3.6 - calling me out about jobs created. Now don't get me wrong, I love to play. But if you are going to do that you have to play along too, right?

So hit me - what is my fair share? Who gets to decide? And let's be clear: we are all way better off now than we were in the 80's. Don't believe me? Take a look at you hairstyle in 1988.

It will not matter how much you raise the cap the government will waste the money.

STOP THE SPENDING NOW!

Naw, they don't waste money - they spend it judiciously on for the needs of the people.

See if you can guess the number of illegal aliens that get welfare and other benefits here in the great state of California?

Let me ask you this, Spanky: How did you get the "little problem" in San Diego? Was it really the big bad unions, or was it the duly elected city government making bad decisions and choices? And exactly why is it not fair that the librarian gets a lifetime pension of $250,000? Or isn't a librarian whose job is to nourish souls as important as a CEO whose sole job is to create profit? And who made the rules that allow safety workers to retire from one job with a full pension and go to work somewhere else? Didn't your elected city government have something to do with that? How is that a FEDERAL problem to fix? Aren't you FOR local government? Can't local government be trusted to make good decisions? Why can't voters throw them out if they don't like it? Did you participate in the city government decisions with regard to these issues? Why not? Don't you think it's important to do your share in that regard?

I don't, at least not any more, but I don't complain about it, either. I trust the people I vote for to do the best job they can, and if I don't like it, I remember that I hold a vote.

I only called you out about creating jobs because you did that to me. That had nothing to do with income, per se, but everything to do with putting your money where your mouth is. I care not one jot what you make. Pauper or king (or queen) it makes no difference to me. Just apply the same standards to yourself that you do to others.

I wouldn't "hit" you, Spanky ... well, at least not with any intent to hurt you ... but who decides is US ... through the governments we elect and the direction we give them. We are responsible for what government does because government IS us. To blame government is to do no more than to blame ourselves.

You don't like that? Change it. Unlike you, apparently, I'm not that much better off than I was in the 1980s. Because I was much younger then, and money won't give me those years back. But I don't mind because, except as it buys me the little luxuries I crave, luxuries that hurt no one and help stimulate the economy, money's not my deal.

It's what people have in their hearts, not in their wallets, Spanky. Unless that's where their hearts are.

You can't take it with you, Spanky.

AnnaMolly, and everyone else behind raising the income tax on FICA-

I will support you, just as soon as you have a rational explanation for why Medicare is in the red, despite the promise made by Bill Clinton that it would be solvent for all time when he eliminated the income limit on the Medicare tax.

Until that hAppens, this is a non- starter.

Because, no joe, Congress has been raiding the fund. It was done to cover the huge deficits created by Bush's policies and the war in Iraq. Remember the war, no joe? That cost some money, and what we didn't steal we borrowed from China. In essence, a big shell game. They don't want you to know it, so they're saying there's a deficit and calling for cuts in benefits -- in essence, a hidden tax increase because you already paid for those benefits that you'll never see.

And maybe, just maybe, we could ask doctors and health insurers to make a little less money. It's worth a try, no joe. I'd rather a doctor drive a Subaru than a Mercedes if it means an ailing senior or a little kid gets some health care.

And maybe, just maybe, we could ask doctors and health insurers to make a little less money.

And the lawyers with their frivolous lawsuits? Can they make less too?

what is this , "mans inhumanity to man? I am damn glad for Social Security! I paid into it all my life and now it has been a great investment. it's our money, from the social security fund which is not in deficit or should ever be in deficit! raise the cap to pay on total income and we won't need this conversation.

there is trillions of dollars in SS that the banks would love to get their hands on and gamble away. the program works well, medicare works well, and one day you will be damn glad it is there for you!

It will get the support of most Senate Democrats that are up for reelection in 2012.

They better support it if they hope to have any Dems left in Congress in 2013

Blanche Lincoln

She just lost my vote.

Hmmmmm,,,,,History impaired??? Obama walked in the door to total economic collapse

Yes Bo

After the Dems had control of Congress for two years and Bush passed their spending bills.Then entered Obama to escalate the spending even more and drive the deficit and the economy into a bigger hole. Now we are forced to cut all spending back just to keep from defaulting on the interest payments on the debt while continuing to raise the debt ceiling. Lets face it, Obama's policies and practices are UNSUSTAINABLE!

The economic timebomb created by GRAMM-LEACH-BLILEY did not explode because the Democratic congress gave Bush what he wanted in 2007. To make that assertion is to demonstrate a level of willful ignorance bordering on brainwash.