Republican Chutzpah

Keep your government hands off my Social Security!

There is a word which, as far as I know, is best defined by an example:  Chutzpah is defined by the man who murders both his parents and begs the court for mercy on the grounds he is now an orphan.

The Republicans in their debate last night displayed much chutzpah--they do everything they can to kill government and then complain the damn government just does not work.

They beat that mule to death and then they complain he just won't plow the fields.

Of course, the two federal government programs which most Americans, even Republicans who hate government, love and will simply not tolerate doing without are Social Security and Medicare. The Republican party has been trying to kill both programs since the Democrats delivered these babies squealing and squirming, Social Security sometime in the 1930's and Medicare in 1965, and both times the Republicans screamed "socialism!" and pointed to these as the first signs of the coming apocalypse.  

Every year since their births,  Republicans tried to kill them by a thousand cuts, tried to "privatize" Social Security and Medicare and Dr. Ben Carson is still trying.

Every Republican on that stage last night will tell you Social Security is on life support and in danger of immediate collapse--Chris Christie confidently told us it will be insolvent in 3 to 5 years, when, in fact, it's just fine until 2033 and other government accounts keep borrowing from it.  But, of course, if you use a number like 3 to 5, it sounds like you really know what you are talking about. 

Rand Paul tells a little bit of truth, saying there are only 3 workers to support every 1 retiree, that the program was put in place when people only were expected to live until age 68, so carrying them from age 65 was easy enough. He says we have to raise the retirement age to some undetermined age, but most people are talking 67.  Probably not unreasonable, but the fact is there is a much easier solution which the Republicans will not touch any sooner than they would touch a high voltage wire: simply make the rich pay more, i.e. "raise the cap."

Now this involves some math, so don't expect any of those Republicans to get it, but here it is:  Currently, everyone pays into Social Security through their paychecks and they are taxed on their income up to $118,500, which is "the cap" on how much of your income can be taxed to support Social Security. After that, you do not pay any more. So if you make $40K, or $80K or $100K you are paying into the system. But if you make $500,000 or $100,000 you stop paying on all income above  $118,500. 

Now, how much pain would it cause a guy making $1,000,000 to pay tax on say, income up to $800,000?  If the rate is X, then he might pay, say $1,000 more a year in payroll taxes. 

Of course, for the really rich, who escape the higher tax rates by income which is not payroll income, none of this matters. 

If some adjustment to the "cap" on taxable income were made, Social Security would be fine until the 22nd century. 

So who would not be for this? 

You guess it: The Republicans.

And why would they resist such an easy fix to avoid the coming apocalypse? I'll leave you to draw your own conclusions.  

Here's a multiple choice test: 
They are unwilling to raise the cap because:
A. They are trying to protect the middle class.
B. They are owned by the super rich who do not want to pay a dime more in any tax
C. They are brain dead.

Hint: It's not "A"