General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsRand Paul concedes he will cut Medicare and Social Security to pay for tax cuts
http://www.examiner.com/article/rand-paul-concedes-he-will-cut-medicare-and-social-security-to-pay-for-tax-cutsPaul conceded he would have to cut Social Security and Medicare in order to pay for an extension of the Bush tax cuts. As Chris Wallace noted, a full extension of the Bush tax cuts, which Paul advocates for, would reduce the federal revenues by about $4 trillion over the next ten years. The government would either need to add that $4 trillion to national debt, or make some serious cuts to entitlement programs to offset the loss revenue. In his initial answer Paul tries to simply say he will reduce spending, but to his credit host Chris Wallace challenges him, saying that government would need to cut entitlement programs to reduce spending that much. It is at this time that Paul agrees he would need to raise the retirement age and cut Medicare benefits as well. Pauls opponent, Jack Conway, says he would reduce Medicare fraud and close tax loopholes to help pay for the Bush tax cuts. In fairness to Paul, Conways cuts would also not completely offset the costs of the extending the tax cuts.
Conway made a courageous move in agreeing to debate Paul on the Republican-friendly Fox News network. Polls (seen on the left) have shown Conway consistently trailing Paul by a small margin. In the past Paul has made a number of mistakes when interviewing before the national media. It is possible that Conway agreed to the debate hoping to get Paul to make one more embarrassing statement on camera. It has yet to be seen whether Pauls statements on Medicare and Social Security will hurt him with Kentucky voters this November.
I'll bet rugs will still be covered.
yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)I don't understand why that isn't done first?
lpbk2713
(42,759 posts)Rather than make the one percenters and the megacorps
pay he will take it away from those who really need it.
Sherman A1
(38,958 posts)Let's hope this gets lots of traction in the media.
FSogol
(45,490 posts)Zorra
(27,670 posts)Dragonfli
(10,622 posts)In theory, one could cut PAYROLL taxes by savaging SS, but that would only apply to FICA payed on income below the cap.
This doesn't even make sense.
Mariana
(14,858 posts)If there is a shortfall - if there is not enough OASDI tax collected in a given year - bonds are redeemed to make up the difference. That's why the trust fund exists in the first place, and why we've been overpaying OASDI tax for decades, so SS would be funded even when there isn't enough tax collected to cover the benefits being paid.
The money to redeem the bonds comes from general revenue. What Paul seems to be suggesting is that he would refuse to redeem the bonds in the SS trust fund.
Dragonfli
(10,622 posts)Mariana
(14,858 posts)hifiguy
(33,688 posts)what every candidate or potential candidate not named Bernie Sanders, Liz Warren or Martin O'Malley is already planning.
A Simple Game
(9,214 posts)and have half of his party defend him for doing so what does a Republican candidate have to lose?
Dragonfli
(10,622 posts)because, you know, the Republicans are worse. The reasoning does not appear to apply to Republican policy, so changing registration should do the trick.
A Simple Game
(9,214 posts)If Hillary were to change her affiliation to Republican I think many here on DU would still vote for her to be President.
KamaAina
(78,249 posts)So that's what's on top of his head. A weasel!