« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Obama Will Veto Payroll Tax Extension If The Keystone Pipeline Comes With It

House Republicans Threaten American Middle Class With Pernicious Job Opportunities

President Barack Obama wears the crown of Aquilonia on a troubled brow. He fears for the welfare of his humble subjects. He expressed that touching concern in his speech this week in TexasKansas. He elucidates below:

“Fewer and fewer of the folks who contributed to the success of our economy actually benefited from that success,” Obama said Tuesday. “Those at the very top grew wealthier from their incomes and their investments, wealthier than ever before. But everybody else struggled with costs that were growing and paychecks that weren’t. And too many families found themselves racking up more and more debt just to keep up.”

Of course one reason this is happening is because these people do not have lucrative jobs that allow them to keep up. This fundamental lack of lucrative jobs can be rapidly fixed if business and investment professionals could be convinced that the United States remains a 1st World Country that actually appreciates its entrepreneurs. Jobs, you see, are created when a stable basis of wealth is created to support their continued existence.

This blessed occurrence is highly unlikely with our current state of affairs. Two options exist by which President Obama could give the US Economy an invigorating shot of cure-all. He could extend the current Payroll Tax Holiday and save the average family about $1,000/Year in tax liabilities. Or, he could greenlight the Keystone XL Pipeline that would ship tar sand oil from Alberta, Canada to the US Gulf Coast for refining.

Here a major logical difference occurs between President Obama and the House Republicans. Barack Obama interprets this Or as a disjunctive or exclusive or. House Republicans use a more permissive interpretation of the logical term “or”.

President Obama seems to believe we can’t have a payroll tax holiday and a Keystone Pipeline in the same bill. He explains his stance below.

“Any effort to try to tie Keystone to the payroll-tax cut, I will reject,” Obama told reporters Wednesday

The House GOP, on the other hand, repudiates their reputation for being members of The Iniqutous Party of NO!™ Their spokesman, Michael Steel, embraces the healing power of and below.

“If President Obama threatens to veto it over a provision that creates American jobs, that’s a fight we’re ready to have,” he said.

So according to our Feckless Leader, Barack Obama, Republicans threaten the American Middle Class. It sounds to me like the only thing the Middle Class is being threatened with here is work. There are some, regrettably, who would view the presence of a legitimate employment opportunity as a rank imposition. Though it astounds me, a line from the classic My Fair Lady helps me understand the mindset behind viewing what the House GOP wants to do with the Keystone Pipeline as a threat.

Who asked him to make a gentleman out of me? I was happy. I was free. I touched pretty nigh everyone for money when I wanted it, same as I touched him. Now, I’m tied neck and heels, and everybody touches me. A year ago, I hadn’t a relation in the world except one or two who wouldn’t speak to me. Now, I’ve fifty, and not a decent week’s wages amongst the lot of ‘em. Oh, I have to live for others now, not for myself. Middle-class morality.

Oscar Wilde stated this more succinctly when he stated “Work is the curse of the drinking classes.” When only 53% of the American population accrues any real liability on Federal Income Taxes, the extension of the Payroll Tax reduction takes on a extra-economic dimension. Take away all Federal Tax liabilities, and the average citizen has no cause-and-effect linkage to how much government costs. To paraphrase Alfred Doolittle ”We touch them, they never touch us.” In the logical strong form Government := ObamaClaus.

This leads to a situation that holds an unbearable lightness of being. You don’t have a job, but you can’t be blamed because jobs don’t exist. But that’s OK; the government is here to care for you. If you are just poor enough, that won’t cost you a dime.

But what happens if the jobs start to exist? Then you have no excuse not to be occupying one of those, rather than Wall Street. The remaining vestiges of America’s former ethical grounding will lead to condign moral censure should any individual occupy the welfare office and not go earn their keep. As St. Paul stated pithily in 2 Thessalonians 3:10.

For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.

Extend all that crazy, bible-thumping Jeebus Talk too far, and you get the type of republic where people live free or die. It morphs over time into the type of place where people tolerate the necessary evil of a limited government rather than worshipping the false idol of an overdetermining one. But this would be severely disempowering to Barack Obama and all others in on his racket. The better America for him involves a people that shun all forms of obligation like work and taxation while clamoring for ever more Federal largesse at “The Rich’s” expense.

Thus, the logical compromise of willingly tolerating the payroll tax holiday extension in return for the awesomeness of The Keystone Pipeline provides a stark contrast to our President’s desire for the payroll tax holiday extension without the Keystone Pipeline. It is the harsh contradiction between the Amerika of Barack Obama, and the America that all good, worthy Conservatives pledge allegiance to.

Get Alerts

COMMENTS

  • theone3434

    Several points and I will gladly accept further clarification on this from others.

    1) The Keystone XL Pipeline: Isn’t the major “hold up” with the project due to the geographical areas in which the pipeline would be put down? Haven’t those particular towns (if memory serves correct several of them being in Nebraska) overwhelmingly voiced their opinion against having the pipeline cross through their neighborhoods? There was a question posed in one of the first GOP debates in Las Vegas regarding storing nuclear waste in one of Nevada’s regions and the most popular answer was that the people living in that area should get to decide whether or not they wanted the waste…not Washington bureaucrats. Isn’t the pipeline just another form of this same argument. I know there were also questions regarding the estimates used by the oil companies regarding the number of jobs created but that will always be a source of contention until it is actually built (plus weighing the environmental impact).

    2) Middle Class workers: I take some umbrage with the insinuation that if more jobs become available, those currently without them would not take them due to their comfort in accepting government assistance. Of course there will be SOME that do this and it is an absolute shame and disgusts me. However, at least half of those without a job currently, had one within the last 3 years (prior to the collapse) so I don’t believe the are adverse to working nor would they LIKE keeping their $300 per week unemployment checks when they were making much, much more than that previously. We are talking about hard working blue collar people here who did do a lot of the work that keeps this country running (the middle class IS America). The fact of the matter is that when you compare the number of job openings to those that are unemployed (and further filtered to those who qualify) getting our unemployment numbers down to pre-recession percentages is VERY, VERY difficult. We have to create more job openings and that means keeping jobs in America and making our work force better trained to occupy those positions. I (maybe naively) still believe that the vast majority of Americans value a job and the respect/satisfaction that comes with it. From everything I have seen or heard, when a job opening or fair is held, there are literally hundreds to thousands of applicants standing at the door handing out resumes.

    3) Lack of lucrative jobs: This I really do not follow. I have an advanced degree and work in a one of the few growing professions of the last decade (Business Analytics and IT). Over the course of the last 5 years, the average pay increase has been about 1-2% per year (not factoring in individual awards, bonuses). This while our top executives continue to earn 6 digit bonuses and double digit percentage pay raises yearly due to meeting bottom line or shareholder goals (usually achieved through workforce cuts). This, on its face, is atrocious. The middle class CARRY this economy. You want to create jobs, allow the middle class to create the necessary consumption power to create jobs. This means rewarding those that work hard with a higher income (statistics have shown the the average worker now works longer hours and is more productive for the same pay)…not just a higher bonus to the person at the top that guides the ship (not saying he/she does not deserve it as well…but their must be some type of balance). In fact, by giving the middle class higher purchasing power (through higher salaries), demand will increase and create MORE job openings Thus starting the climb BACK to a growing economy.

    4)The actual bill: If the Obama is saying he will hold up the bill because of the Keystone pipeline attachment (addressed in point 1) then at least pass the payroll tax extension on its own (and pay for it in other areas as not to steal from future SS funding). I don’t understand why we would hold the middle class hostage in this congressional pissing contest. We can all agree (or at least McConnell thought we could) that the payroll holiday NEEDS to be extended. So let’s extend it.

    I want to reiterate that I am open to different views and arguments…just my initial thoughts.

    • Marcus_Traianus

      1- We are talking about Obama and his DoS’s reasoning for delaying the XL Pipeline (curiously, until after the election). Not the state’s, who are already negotiating directly with TransCanada on a new route. That includes Nebraska. But I suspect you already knew that.

      2- Do some research on unemployment insurance as one example. Pay attention to what happens once it’s about to run out.

      3- People are paid based on bonus plans and meeting goals. If you are in charge of a division that has a goal of making $200 million and your pay is tied to meeting that goal…congratulations! You get what was promised for your performance. That was called capitalism before Obama took office. You don’t like being a IT BA because the pay sucks? Aspire to do better and be that guy who just created more jobs and prosperity for numerous people in the company. Not dictate or steal his salary because of sour grapes. That’s called Marxism. We don’t do that hear.

      4- The Payroll Tax is part of Obama’s reelection scheme. An average of $1,000 over the course of a year (252 working days) is about $3.96 a day. Wow! Bonanza! Point is Democrats don’t want to “pay” for it any way. They want to “steal” (if I can use that word for something that really isn’t there) from the already going broke Social Security Trust Scheme. Nonsense and what’s with this Middle Class Marxist class warfare nomenclature? Have you adopted his rhetoric?

      If Obama and Democrats wanted to make a difference for the “Middle Class” they would have spent the last three years reforming the tax code and cleaning up our fiscal situation. Not making it the worst in our history by quadrupling the national debt, passing Obamacare, passing business killing regulations, passing the Stimulus and ridiculous budgets that nobody took seriously.

    • jasondallastx

      You arguments would have been stronger if you’d preceded Obama with “feckless leader” or some other appropriate label. How is anyone supposed to follow your logic without name calling?

      • Repair_Man_Jack

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbSBL7E3o1Q

        • jasondallastx

          I think we’re all saying the same thing. :)

    • Repair_Man_Jack

      ” I take some umbrage with the insinuation that if more jobs become available, those currently without them would not take them due to their comfort in accepting government assistance.”

      I understand. I wasn’t being Mr. Nice-Guy. here are some of the factors that lead me to think an awful lot of people are deliberately tanking it and would hate being shown up in front people who are not.

      From the following post…
      http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/20-signs-that-the-culture-of-government-dependence-has-gotten-completely-and-totally-out-of-control

      #1 If you can believe it, 48.5% of all Americans now live in a household that receives some form of government benefits. Back in 1983, that number was less than 30 percent.

      #3 The amount of money paid out to individual citizens by the government today is absolutely staggering. In 1980, government transfer payments accounted for just 11.7% of all income. Today, government transfer payments account for 18.4% of all income.

      #6 When you total it all up, American households are now receiving more money from the U.S. government than they are paying to the government in taxes.

      #8 Back in 1965, only one out of every 50 Americans was on Medicaid. Today, one out of every 6 Americans is on Medicaid.

      The post lists 20 different instances. Some of them, like the Angle Adams video, are anecdotal. A lot of them are data-driven conclusions with the links provided. It sucks to say people are tanking it and taking a dive, but a lot of our fellow Americans really are tanking it. I regret that my rather blunt and direct way of stating this offended your sensibilities.

  • theone3434

    Keystone Pipeline: After a little more research, I agree it needs to be approved and started ASAP. TransCanada is going to move forward with pulling oil from the area regardless of what this administration does and I would rather create the jobs here in America than any other alternative. There have been several proposals to alter the path of the pipeline to address the concerns of the towns that were originally against the idea.

    Unemployment Insurance: I agree that 99 weeks is absolutely ridiculous. End it now. My point was only that the majority of the unemployed (at least those laid off during the recession) WANT to work if given the opportunity.

    Bonuses: Here is the point of bonuses based upon merit…to grow the business. If you are achieving your bottom line goals based upon reducing payroll, then you are just undercutting long term prosperity for PERSONAL short term gains. That is NOT true capitalism and what has made America successful and what we need to turn the economy around. Forward thinking leaders that understand the market and consumer needs which GROW a business is what is needed.

    Did I say that I don’t like being an analyst?? No. I pointed out the FACT that most middle class Americans (technically I earn above that) have seen a much lower increase in wages over the last decade than any other point in our lifetime (again, a fact). Again, you write as if the people at the top have been creating numerous jobs that directly tie to their increased earnings. This is absolutely false (not in every instance but in general over the course of the last 3 years it is the opposite). Every single statistic will back me up on that point. In fact, the thrust of my post was to enhance THEIR bottom line by allowing the working class to have the spending power to create higher demand (which inevitably increases profits and creates jobs). That is TRUE CAPITALISM.

    Payroll Tax: $1,000 may not seem like much to you but I know plenty of working class families that that money would mean a lot to. The Dems wanted to pay for this by putting a surtax tax on people making over $1M salaries (insert joke here). The GOP offered to pay for it through federal worker salary freezes, 10% job cuts in federal work force, and reduced benefits to $1M (insert irony joke here). I don’t like cutting jobs right now for anyone but at least they are federal and not private jobs. Surely, a compromise can be made and I believe it will.

    • writescribe

      $3.96 a day does not sound like a lot. It works out to about $27 a week. Believe it or not, I know of at least a couple of people for whom an extra $27 would make a difference (certainly not life-changing but more along the lines of easing-of-the-mind).

      I agree with much of what Marcus said, but the summary dismissal of $1,000 as insignificant is probably not the most persuasive technique. And, seriously, when did uttering the words “middle class” get one labeled a Marxist?

      • jasondallastx

        Writescribe.

        No one is going to understand your side unless you use analogies with incendiary, hyperbolic terms. EG, “Obama is a feckless leader” – see how persuasive that is? Or maybe “Bush was evil” – that one is even more persuasive, no? But when in doubt throw in “brown shirts” “Marxist” or “Pol Pot” and then you’ve won the argument. Then we’ll be able to follow what you’re saying. Right now, it’s just all emotionless words. And what does that get us? You see, using derogatory terms bolsters any argument.

        Please join the group-think and be like everyone else.

        • Repair_Man_Jack

          http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/21/maxine-waters-tea-party-jobs-unemployment_n_932421.html

          Just tell anyone you disagree with to go to Hell.

          • pttx333

            classiest? She truly belongs in D.C. right next to b.o. and the other morons! That woman gives me the creeps!

          • Repair_Man_Jack

            on the House Banking Committee. The Gold-Sachs cower in fear.

          • pttx333

            I know that I read about something along those lines a good while back. Why don’t the dems ever get thrown out when it is for certain they are involved in really bad misdeeds? That woman, along with many others, should be frog-marched out of town and left by the side of the road!

          • Repair_Man_Jack

            “Meet the old Boss”
            Wah-wah-wah
            “Same as the old boss”

          • pttx333

            how could I forget that obnoxious old goat? I must say that his ethics problems have been … um … uh … colorful, to say the least, what with his “friends” and all – then there’s the Fannie/Freddie thingy. Yep, the dems really have some classy, up-town folks, huh. Of course, in the dem party, their “issues” are only resume enhancers. Yep, we live in a land of fools and morons!

          • jasondallastx

            Can’t we be better than that? Yes, we should point out childish behavior from political leaders on both sides. But can we not use those examples as justification for our own childish behavior?

          • pttx333

            B. Fwank is one of a kind who has been elected for many years, even with all of his over-the-top shenanigans!

    • Marcus_Traianus

      1- Redemption. Hallelujah! The pipeline will create new American jobs, ultimately make it cheaper to get the fuel, secure an energy source on the continent, improve refinement, etc. etc. I missed the bad part. Because I can’t find it. Except Obama hates that icky black goo. And jobs. Obviously.

      2- Face it. Most people do want to work. But there is a segment of the population content living off public assistance paid for with other peoples hard earned money. They have and always will exist. We need to provide disincentive for that type of behavior, provide it for people who truly need it and reward people who work.

      3- If you make more money you grow the business. Period full stop. That’s semantics- e..g. what does growing the business mean? Certain type of business work on volume especially the financial sector. More money = more capital to do other things in other parts of the company e.g. R&D. It allows more people across the company to do better if there salary is tied to overall performance. IT permits stockholders to get dividends It allows the company to hire more workers. Don’t look at it as one guy pumping up the volume, earning a huge bonus and lighting cigars with a $50.00. That’s ObamaTalk ™. The financial sector is one of the most heavily regulated parts of our economy besides energy. That (regulation) costs our country billions of dollars in business and jobs.

      4- Median household income has risen steadily since 1975. But we can have fun with statistics another time. I am trying to earn a living.

      5- Point is, they should not be stealing so much of anyone’s income to begin with. Look who pays that payroll tax and who will benefit from a reduction. I think most folks actually paying the tax would trade it for a permanent percentage decrease in their income tax. My guess is that would be more than $3.96 a day.

      • theone3434

        1) Agreed…on all accounts

        2) I think you and I have just restated the same things…I didn’t feel like the article/blog was efficiently telling this story so I stated my opinion (which is the same as yours).

        3) Not sure where you are going with that part. My point was that when executive make the decision to lay off workers to achieved a bonus, they are not only hurting those employees now out of work but their own business (potentially) and the economy as a whole. For example, if CEO XXX needs their bottom line to improve by $500k in order to achieve a merit bonus of $100k and, in order to improve that bottom line past the threshold, they lay off enough workers to get to achieve the bonus…they are not helping anyone (including the business) other than themselves. They are the ones that are taking money out of the pockets of others. It doesn’t take business acumen or savvy to simply lay off workers. Capitalism requires invention, business insight, entrepreneurs, etc. etc. etc. Any monkey can simply fire people. Should we reward people/companies that do this? In my opinion, no. Call me a marxist but it disgusts me how this has become acceptable. I am not naive…I understand that not everyone can have or deserves a job but to REWARD someone for doing it is beyond comprehension to me.

        4) Median household income has risen steadily since 1975. Ok, now let’s look at individual numbers across classes and specific decades. You don’t want to go into the actual raw data…fine. I assure you that they are not pretty to the middle class (which still makes up the bulk of the buying power in America).

        5) I agree with your point…and believe it should be held true across all areas (see point #3). IF that offer was afforded then we would certainly take it…but it isn’t. Hopefully that changes in 2012. In the meantime, let’s get the middle class more purchasing power without increasing the debt or stealing from SS.

  • johnt

    for the nations use. It is oil for the nation that is the issue, as for example The O’s slowdown on offshore drilling. Any man who claims unemployment insurance creates jobs is either a man deranged or one who is secure in the knowledge that his nonsense will be treated with undue respect.
    I am unaware of any definition of capitalism that says an employer cannot reduce staff, also, as a rule of thumb it is idiotic to claim that salaries should be increased so that a particular company can also increase profits ?? Would you wish to reconsider that statement. May I also add that to discuss economic theory in the frameework of the past debilitating three years suggests a self serving, argumentaive motive, Can you guess why ?

  • davidengageamerica

    There is no reason Congress should expand the payroll tax cut.

    Economists have already said that extending the payroll tax cut is better than doing nothing but it isn?t the most effective way to stimulate consumer spending. http://eng.am/uvIDMJ

    Congress should be pushing for long-term job solutions that will help grow our economy, not just temporary ineffective solutions like the payroll tax cut.

  • renl57

    Obama: ?Those at the very top grew wealthier from their incomes and their investments, wealthier than ever before. But everybody else struggled with costs that were growing and paychecks that weren?t.”

    Notice how Obama didn’t mention folks who *lost* their paychecks due to losing their jobs. Or graduating from school and being unable to find jobs. Much of which took place during his term.

    Since Obama’s track record on jobs is so ghastly,

    the strategy of the Left (Obama + Pelosi + Occupy Wall Street + New York Times) is to change the subject to something else–inequality of income among those who are still working. And then propose something they hope will be popular–like redistribution of wealth from rich to middle class.

    When the GOP fights for the Keystone XL pipeline, they should point out that a necessary condition for reducing inequality of income is reducing unemployment.

  • MsDollie

    “Obama Will Veto Payroll Tax Extension If The Keystone Pipeline Comes With It”

    Call his bluff.

  • sowa1

    should attach the Keystone Pipeline to everything that comes up for a vote. Democrats have already attached all kinds of junk to it. The Obama Social Security tax cut hurts Social Security and should never have been passed in the first place. Lost more jobs under Obama than President Bush and am sick and tired of hearing comparisons after three and a half ;years of this guy. I’d take President Bush back in a second.