WELCOME TO OPINIONS BASED ON FACTS (OBOF)
| Name | Published |
| OVERVIEW | Dec. 28, 2010 |
| SOCIAL SECURITY PART 1 | Dec. 30, 2010 |
| SOCIAL SECURITY PART 2 | Jan. 10, 2011 |
| SOCIAL SECURITY PART 3 | Jan. 17, 2011 |
| SOCIAL SECURITY PART 4 | Jan. 24, 2011 |
| SOCIAL SECURITY PART 5 | Jan. 31, 2011 |
| SOCIAL SECURITY PART 6 | Feb. 07, 2011 |
| SOCIAL SECURITY PART 7 | Feb. 14, 2011 |
| SPECIAL ISSUE | Feb. 18, 2011 |
| SOCIAL SECURITY PART 8 | Feb. 21, 2011 |
| SOCIAL SECURITY PART 9 | Mar. 01, 2011 |
| SOCIAL SECURITY PART 10 | Mar. 07, 2011 |
| SS & MORE PART 1 | Mar. 14, 2011 |
| SS & MORE PART 1A | Mar. 21, 2011 |
| SS & MORE PART 2 | Mar. 25, 2011 |
| SS & MORE PART 3 | Mar. 29, 2011 |
| SS & MORE PART 4 | Apr. 04, 2011 |
| SS & MORE PART 5 | Apr. 11, 2011 |
| SS & MORE PART 6 | Apr. 18, 2011 |
| SS & MORE PART 7 | Apr. 25, 2011 |
| SS & MORE PART 7A | Apr. 29, 2011 |
| SS & MORE PART 8 | May 02, 2011 |
| SS & MORE PART 9 | May 09, 2011 |
| SS & MORE PART 10 | May 16, 2011 |
| SS & MORE PART 11 | May 24, 2011 |
| SS & MORE PART 12 | Jun. 06, 2011 |
| SS & MORE PART 13 | Jun. 20, 2011 |
| SS & MORE PART 14 | July 05, 2011 |
| SS & MORE PART 14A | July 18, 2011 |
| SS & MORE PART 15 | July 19, 2011 |
| SS & MORE PART 16 | Aug. 03, 2011 |
| SS & MORE PART 17 | Aug. 15, 2011 |
| SS & MORE PART 18 | Aug. 29, 2011 |
| SS & MORE PART 19 | Sept. 12, 2011 |
| SS & MORE PART 20 | Sept. 26, 2011 |
| SS & MORE PART 21 | Oct. 10, 2011 |
| SS & MORE PART 22 | Oct. 24, 2011 |
| SS & MORE PART 22 EXTRA | Nov. 04, 2011 |
| SS & MORE PART 23 | Nov. 07, 2011 |
| SS & MORE PART 24 | Nov. 21, 2011 |
| SS & MORE PART 25 | Dec. 05, 2011 |
| SS & MORE PART 26 | Dec. 19, 2011 |
| SS & MORE PART 27 | JAN. 03, 2012 |
| SS & MORE PART 27A | JAN. 05, 2012 |
| SS & MORE PART 28 | JAN. 17, 2012 |
| SS & MORE PART 29 | JAN. 31, 2012 |
| SS & MORE PART 30 | Feb. 14, 2012 |
| SS & MORE PART CL1 | Feb. 21, 2012 |
| SS & MORE PART 30 EXTRA | Feb. 23, 2012 |
| SS & MORE PART 31 | Feb. 28, 2012 |
| SS & MORE PART CL2 - 59 | Mar. 06, 2012 |
| SS & MORE PART 31 EXTRA | Mar. 07, 2012 |
| SS & MORE PART 32 | Mar. 13, 2012 |
| SS & MORE PART CL3 - 1 | Mar. 20, 2012 |
| SS & MORE PART 32 EXTRA | Mar. 24, 2012 |
| SS & MORE PART 33 | Apr. 10, 2012 |
| SS & MORE PART CL 4 - 2 | Apr. 17, 2012 |
| SS & MORE PART 34 | Apr. 24, 2012 |
| SS & MORE PART CL5 - 49 | May 01, 2012 |
| SS & MORE PART 35 | May 09, 2012 |
| SS & MORE PART CL6 - 19 | May 15, 2012 |
| SS & MORE PART 35 EXTRA | May 18, 2012 |
| SS & MORE PART 36 | May 22, 2012 |
| SS & MORE PART 36 EXTRA | May 25, 2012 |
| SS & MORE PART 36 | |
| EXTRA II | June 01, 2012 |
| SS & MORE PART 37 | June 05. 2012 |
| SS & MORE PART 37 EXTRA | June 07, 2012 |
| SS & MORE PART 38 | June 12, 2012 |
| SS & MORE PART 39 | June 19, 2012 |
| SS & MORE PART 40 | June 26, 2012 |
| SS & MORE PART 41 | July 03, 2012 |
| SS & MORE PART 42 | July 10, 2012 |
| SS & MORE PART 43 | July 17, 2012 |
| SS & MORE PART 44 | July 24,2012 |
| SS & MORE PART 45 | July 31, 2012 |
| SS & MORE PART 46 | Aug. 07, 2012 |
| SS & MORE PART 46 EXTRA | Aug. 09, 2012 |
EXTRA EXTRA EXTRA
IN THIS ISSUE
1. Opening Comments.
2. Beating back the CEO attach on Social Security.
3. Social Security's dirty little secret & why are cuts needed.
4. What about the taxes paid by the 10 largest companies.
OPENING COMMENTS
What can I say, at the beginning, that will make you want to read the following articles? Maybe, the fact that the information here will affect every single person in the United State
At this point, I will only add that Social Security is, without a doubt, the most successful government program that has ever been developed, and even more important, it has never cost the taxpayers a dime. It is not an entitlement program. IT IS AN INSURANCE PROGRAM. All legislation and reference to Social Security, labels it an insurance program.
The money that is taken out of your pay check is referred to as a "payroll tax," which it isn't at all. It is labeled FICA (Federal Insurance Contribution Account). And that account is your account, no body else'. Remember that, particularly when you read the second article.
Just one other point. Some will say that the taxpayers are now having to put money into SS so that it has enough to make payments and that it adds to the deficit. Neither is true. The money that is added to the SS fund now is actually SS money that was previously used for other things, as you will see in the second article.
BEATING BACK THE CEO ATTACK
ON
SOCIAL SECURITY & MEDICARE
by Dean Baker OP - ED
Center for Economic & Policy Research
Published Tuesday August 7, 2012
“The CEOs want to do this behind closed doors because they know that politicians who have to answer to their constituencies will never be able to get away with these cuts. The key is to force the debate into the sunlight.”
Last week I wrote about the conspiracy of corporate chieftains to impose a budget plan involving large cuts to Social Security and Medicare, regardless of who wins the elections in November. According to veteran Washington Post columnist Steven Pearlstein, who wrote approvingly of these efforts, many of the top executives of the country’s biggest companies are meeting behind closed doors to design such a budget plan.
This plan is expected to follow the designs of the plan crafted two years ago byMorgan Stanley Director Erskine Bowles and former Senator Alan Simpson, the co-directors of President Obama’s deficit commission. The Bowles-Simpson plan called for a reduction in the annual cost-of-living adjustment for Social Security that is equivalent to a 3 percent cut in benefits. It also called for gradually raising the normal retirement age to 69 and phasing in lower benefits for workers who earned more than $40,000 a year. The Bowles-Simpson plan would also raise the age of eligibility for Medicare to 67.
Pearlstein indicated that these corporate honchos were prepared to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to get their plan put into law. He put the necessary figure at $278 million. This target is made easier by virtue of the fact that the CEOs sit on trillions of dollars of corporate revenue and, thanks to the Supreme Court, all their contributions for this effort will be fully tax deductible.
That’s the state of play, at least according to Pearlstein’s assessment, or my interpretation of his assessment. The question is whether this juggernaut can be stopped?
Well, if it were a straight question of where the money lies, the answer is clearly no. The CEOs seeking to cut back or dismantle Social Security and Medicare can probably outspend the defenders of these programs 10 to 1. However, there is still the simple fact that the voters overwhelmingly support these programs.
This is a result reported by every poll every conducted on these issues. Both Social Security and Medicare enjoy extremely high approval ratings across the political spectrum. There is almost nothing that unites the public as much as support for these programs. Well over 70 percent of Republicans, Democrats and Independents indicate strong support for Social Security and Medicare.
The same holds by ideology. There is little difference between people who call themselves liberals and conservatives, both groups overwhelmingly support Social Security and Medicare and are opposed to cuts in these programs. Even self-described supporters of the Tea Party overwhelmingly support Social Security and Medicare.
The question is how to make it so that popular sentiment overrides the big bucks of the corporate chieftains. The obvious answer would be to make the protection of these programs central issues in the election. Members of Congress and candidates for seats should be pressed to indicate where they stand on the proposed cuts to these programs.
That means getting them to answer specific questions, like whether they support reducing the annual cost-of-living adjustment or raising the normal retirement age for Social Security or the age of eligibility for Medicare. These are among the most important issues in people’s lives and voters should not have to go to the polls not knowing where the candidates for the House, the Senate or the presidency stand on them.
People should also be aware that politicians are true masters of evasion on these questions. A response like, “I support Social Security and Medicare,” should be taken to mean that they are prepared to support cuts for these programs. All of the people running for office are smart enough to know how to say that they oppose the cuts being put on the table, and they undoubtedly would say that they oppose the cuts, if it is true.
Similarly, a statement like, “I oppose the privatization of Social Security and Medicare” should also be taken to mean that they are prepared to support cuts to these programs. Again, they are not being asked about privatization, it’s not immediately on the table, why would they give an answer about privatization except to avoid admitting their support for cuts?
The news media should also be pressed into service in this effort. It is their job to tell us the candidates’ positions on important issues and there are few issues more important to voters than Social Security and Medicare. People should harangue their local newspapers and television stations to ask candidates their positions on cuts to these programs. This is far more important than most of the gossip about the campaigns that dominates news coverage.
The whole effort here must be focused on smoking out politicians on where they stand on cuts to Social Security and Medicare. The CEOs want to do this behind closed doors because they know that politicians who have to answer to their constituencies will never be able to get away with these cuts. The key is to force the debate into the sunlight.
WHY IS THERE SUCH A NEED
FOR THESE CUTS?
OrlandoSentinel
Cash flow imbalance: Social Security's dirty little secret
By Allen W. Smith Ph. D. / Guest columnist
August 7, 2012
| |
| |
Most of the public debate on Social Security is focused on the wrong problem. The real Social Security problem — the one that threatens the future of the program — has been hidden from the public for the past 30 years.
It began with the enactment of the Social Security Amendments of 1983. This legislation was intended to allow Social Security to build up a large reserve, which could later be drawn down to pay benefits to the baby boomers. But, instead, the 1983 law laid the foundation for the systematic raiding of the trust fund over the next 30 years.
The $2.7 trillion in surplus Social Security revenue, generated by the 1983 payroll tax hike, was spent on wars and other government programs as it came in. The money was replaced with government IOUs, called "special issues of the Treasury." These IOUs are not at all like the marketable Treasury bonds held by China and America
The true status of the Social Security trust fund should come as no surprise to anyone who has kept a close watch on the raiding over the past three decades. It was clear to U.S. Sen. Ernest Hollings, of South Carolina
"… the most reprehensible fraud in this great jambalaya of frauds is the systematic and total ransacking of the Social Security trust fund … in the next century. … the American people will wake up to the reality that those IOUs in the trust fund vault are a 21st-century version of Confederate bank notes."
Even President George W. Bush publicly admitted that Social Security money was being spent for non-Social Security purposes.
On Feb. 10, 2005, during a speech at Blue Bell , Pa.
"Now one of the myths about Social Security is there's a pile of money sitting there accumulating, because you put money in, the government saves it for you, and then when you retire you get it out. That's not the way the system works. Every dime that goes in from payroll taxes is spent. It's spent on retirees, and if there's excess, it's spent on government programs. The only thing that Social Security has is a pile of IOUs from one part of government to the next."
The surplus Social Security revenue, which was supposed to be used to pay benefits to the baby boomers, is gone.
The only money that Social Security has is its annual revenue. That revenue became insufficient to pay full benefits, beginning in 2010. The government had to borrow $49 billion that year, in order to pay full Social Security benefits. In 2011, $45 billion had to be borrowed to cover the gap between revenue and the cost of paying full benefits. The gap between revenue, and the cost of paying benefits, will get larger and larger, as time passes, and the Social Security trustees estimate that the gap will be a whopping $318.7 billion in 2030.
Those people who argue that Social Security has enough money to pay full benefits until 2033, without any government action, are just plain wrong. It doesn't have enough current revenue to even pay this year's benefits.
This is the hidden Social Security problem. This
is the big national secret that government knows all about, but most Americans know nothing about.
Allen W. Smith of Winter Haven is a professor of economics, emeritus, at Eastern Illinois University
~~~
PAID 9 PER CENT AVERAGE
TAX RATE LAST YEAR.
SOME ONLY PAID 2% & 4%.
None, pay the 35% Corp. rate.
by TRAVIS WALDRON
Think Progress / news report.
Published Wednesday 8, August 2012
In PART 45, I posted and article,
WHAT FIVE OIL COMPANIES DID WITH THEIR $375 MILLION IN DAILY PROFITS
In Part 44 I posted an article,
CORPORATE TAX CONFUSION
Corp. tax, Marginal Corp. tax, Effective Corp. tax, & Actual Corp. tax, plus no Corp. tax even with large profit.
Now we have info about 10 largest companies.
“The 10 companies include Wall Street banks like Wells Fargo and JP Morgan Chase, oil companies like ExxonMobil and Chevron, and tech companies like Apple, IBM, and Microsoft.”
Floyd
America’s 10 most profitable corporations paid an average corporate income tax rate of just 9 percent in 2011, according to a study from financial site NerdWallet reported by the Huffington Post. The 10 companies include Wall Street banks like Wells Fargo and JP Morgan Chase, oil companies like ExxonMobil and Chevron, and tech companies like Apple, IBM, and Microsoft.
The two companies with the lowest tax rates were both oil companies. ExxonMobil paid $1.5 billion in taxes on $73.3 billion in earnings, a tax rate of 2 percent. Chevron’s tax rate was just 4 percent. None of the companies paid anywhere near the 35 percent top corporate tax rate, providing more evidence to debunk claims that America’s corporate tax rate is stunting economic growth and job creation (Despite the high marginal rate, American corporations pay one of the lowest effective corporate tax rates in the world).
The study also calculated the overall amount the companies owed in both domestic and foreign taxes. This includes deferred taxes that will, theoretically, be paid in the future, once the companies bring foreign profits back to the United States
If Republicans have their way, however, those deferred taxes may never be paid. Switching to a territorial tax system, a policy leading Republicans have considered, would allow corporations to repatriate foreign profits back to the United States nearly free of taxation, costing the country billions of dollars and thousands of jobs.
~~~
If the good Lord is willing, and the creek don't rise, I'll talk with you again on Tuesday 14, 20120.
"GOD BLESS YOU ALL
&
GOD BLESS THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Floyd
No comments:
Post a Comment