Paul Krugman: Republicans may try using a rise in the payroll tax to undermine Social Security

[Better Believe It]

Obama’s Hostage DealBack to Article »
By PAUL KRUGMAN
December 9, 2010

One big concern: Republicans may try using the prospect of a rise in the payroll tax to undermine Social Security finances.

Which brings me back to Mr. Obama’s press conference, where — showing much more passion than he seems able to muster against Republicans — he denounced purists on the left, who supposedly refuse to accept compromises in the national interest.

Well, concerns about the tax deal reflect realism, not purism: Mr. Obama is setting up another hostage situation a year down the road. And given that fact, the last thing we need is the kind of self-indulgent behavior he showed by lashing out at progressives who he feels aren’t giving him enough credit.

The point is that by seeming angrier at worried supporters than he is at the hostage-takers, Mr. Obama is already signaling weakness, giving Republicans every reason to believe that they can extract another ransom.

http://community.nytimes.com/comments/www.nytimes.com/2010/12/10/opinion/10krugman.html

[Poboy]

1. 'may'? Thats the plan!

[aquart]

2. "May be"? Afraid someone will accuse you of being mean?

[glitch]

27. Partisan!

No kidding, Krugman was late on this one. Not that I don't appreciate him weighing in.

[sasha031]

3. they have been trying to do this for years, it's been on their xmas wish list

[kenny blankenship]

4. Guess what? Certain "Democrats" are trying to help them.

[polichick]

7. Seems so - there's no way they're just blind to the set up...

How could they be that clueless?

[gateley]

5. Everyone seems to get this except Obama. nt

[polichick]

8. Or does he? How could he not know what this is - he's served in both houses. nt

[TheKentuckian]

6. Duh, Paul.

[Davis_X_Machina]

9. Right in broad outline, but wrong in detail.

'Republicans may try to use the appearance of the sun in the east this morning to undermine Social Security.'

Cutbacks at the Times, I see. No one editing the op-deds

[laughingliberal]

10. Of course this is the plan.

Although I spent yesterday being screamed at for 'bullshit spin' and using a 'boogeyman.'

How can I trust that a man who exhumed Alan Simpson's rotting corpse and Wall Street darling, Eskine Bowles, to preside over our austerity commission isn't in agreement with this?

[Better Believe It]

12. The Austerity Commission. I like that because that really indicates what it's all about.

[laughingliberal]

13. Yep. The die was cast in Toronto and I doubt there is much anyone can do to stop it. nt

[polichick]

18. In Toronto? Why there? nt

[laughingliberal]

19. G-20. World leaders agreed to IMF/World Bank demands for austerity. nt

[polichick]

20. Oh, I see - thanks! (We're up shit's creek.) nt

[polichick]

21. You should start a thread about that - may explain a lot. nt

[laughingliberal]

22. Here's a good article on the G-20...

in Toronto:

http://rabble.ca/news/2010/07/g20-month-later-reflections-confronting-impacts-economic-austerity

Focuses a lot on Canada but easy to see where we're heading down the same path.

Here's another about the G-20 in South Korea:

http://rabble.ca/news/2010/06/g20-and-deficits


And another by Krugman explaining, bless his heart, why austerity is the wrong approach:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/18/opinion/18krugman.html

[polichick]

31. This year I turned off radio coverage of the G-20 meeting because...

...my heart is with the protestors and it was so upsetting. So I didn't connect Obama's willingness to go after Social Security, etc. until you mentioned it.

Thanks for the insight and the links!

[Odin2005]

11. MAY?More like WILL! The Tax Holiday is a trap to help destroy SS.

[reformist2]

14. Did Obama EVER voice support for this before? So why now??

It makes no sense to me why he would suddenly support this now. If he thought the economy really needed this kind of extra stimulus, why didn't he start talking this up weeks (months) ago???

No. This is obviously a Republican idea that Obama either willingly or unwillingly has agreed to. But now that it's out in the open, Obama needs to disavow this ASAP. If he doesn't, I'll be forced to assume the worst about his motives...

[polichick]

17. It was Obama who chose Simpson and Bowles - not Republicans...

imo it just doesn't make sense that a smart guy who served in both houses of Congress doesn't know what all this means. How could he not?

[harun]

15. "may"? Krugman know's better than "may". Maybe just using theatrics.

Payroll tax cut came from the Right Wing think tanks for a REASON.

[LuvNewcastle]

16. In the past thirty years we have seen

attempt after attempt to destroy New Deal programs. Wealthy Republicans hated Roosevelt, Social Security, and anything else that offered a sense of independence and freedom from worry. But the Republicans couldn't do it alone -- they needed the help of the 'Reagan Democrats' and Clinton 'moderates' to tear it all down. Now, with the help of Obama, the Republicans are almost done. Democrats are going to have to take a stand or they will be completely irrelevant. There can be no more compromise, no matter what the President says.

[stranger81]

23. And in other news, the sun may rise in the east tomorrow. [n/t]

[shanti]

24. ya think, paul?

:eyes:

[neverforget]

25. Duh! And the Democrats walk right into a Republican trap.....

[bvar22]

26. "Republicans" may use it to undermine Social Security.

There is a whole wing of the Democratic Party who will use it for the same results.

It is NO secret that the DLC has lusted after the Social Security funds to give to their friends on Wall Street since its inception in the late 80s.
The "privatization" of Social Security was one of their major goals.

[glitch]

28. Republicans is correct.

No matter what they call themselves.

[wiggs]

29. Currently, we can say that SS doesn't have much to do with the deficit (depiste)

many pundits and gop leaders including it in deficit discussions). But if the tax deal passes with the fica holiday, we can't say that anymore because general fund monies will have to be spent to replace ss revenue.

Don't know why we have to do that.

[Better Believe It]

32. Until the Obama/GOP Social Security payroll tax cut is passed.

[Faryn Balyncd]

30. He is correct. They will.

:kick: