What a coup! To get a copy.

“Moment of Truth” indeed.

Note that it does not have a specific date in December 2010.

OMG!

It gets better. The first page of text is titled “Preamble”.

I don’t know if I can make myself read it.

They should rename it: “The Falseness of this Moment.”

So far, page 2 is my favorite.

HaHaHa

Glancing at the Tax Reform section is an early morning eye opener. They are proposing to reduce the deficit by reducing taxes at every income bracket and including for corporations. Or maybe I’ve just developed dyslexia. Or maybe this is the Orwell version of the Catfood Commission Report.

Can a link be made that SS is not connected to the deficit, Once people see this as fact the rest should be easy.

this is a nicely packaged, steaming pile of class warfare.

it wouldnt surprise me at all if the Obama administration thinks its the best thing since the health insurance industry giveaway act.

greenwarrior is right, I get physically nauseous just reading the TOC.

Obama will love the whole thing and will be eager to implement it in its totality in the spirit of “Bipartisanship”. After all, it’s what the voter’s have said they want…

I hope that someday when some unfortunate doctoral student writes his/her dissertation on the Catfood Commission Report, that they have the wisdom to recall how this report is an iconic fragment. A fragment/icon which represents the self-aggrandizement of Ayn Rand and of the predatory capitalists born of American ‘royalty’ and empowered by corrupted politicians. Yes, let this dysfunctional attempt at redistributing wealth to the rich stand as an Ink.Is.Not.Even.Dry- Magna Carta of the elitist capitalists on crack. A sort of Texas-sized, Wall Street sponsored Xmas list.

We need to eradicate mad cow disease the federal deficit so the plan was to eliminate all cows tax cuts for the rich but that didn’t go over well with ranchers and people who like their burgers rich people and Republicans so the new plan is to kill all cats gut social security because though that won’t address mad cow disease the federal deficit, there are perhaps enough people who hate cats are stupid enough to believe that we are actually doing something to keep voting for us. When we have killed all the cats the tax cuts for the rich enshrined in law until the end of time and several weeks thereafter and it becomes obvious that mad cow disease the federal deficit has only grown worse, then we can launch a crusade against ostriches Iranians because, after all, who likes ostriches Iranians?

MSNBC will declare the deal to be “another triumph for Obama,” with the usual concomitant damage to the Democratic Party.

“The Moment of Truth”

Wait: That’s a joke, right? “Erskine and Alan?” You mean that’s not the name of some half-assed comedy duo?

I stand corrected.

Catfood. It’s what’s for dinner.

Reforming social security for its own sake; block it off from the rest of the budget so that no borrowing from it can take place, it’s going to be fine forever after. What? that wasn’t what they meant?

…..how can this be a commission report when they can’t get a majority vote to approve a ‘commission’ report with 14 of 18 saying “yeah”???? This is still the Bowles-Simpson handshake, not a report from a ‘commission’. These two clowns are milking this for all it is worth.

Yeah that’s a keeper.

You’re failing to give credit to the smiling clown behind the two.

Without any changes, Social Security benefits will automatically be reduced by 22% in 2037. And if we only reform Social Security a la the Bowles-Simpson Handshake, Social Security benefits will be reduced by 36% in 2037. That’s fixing 2037 Social Security benefits reductions by reducing them by 14% more.

My apologies to you for leaving out the Trojan Horse.

Can’t wait to hear Ed Schultz verbally fellate Obama and the DLC, while explaining how this is “good for the Country and necessary action for the sake of our kids”…

After all the talk about debt and deficits, it is long past time for America’s leaders to put up or shut up.

But, but, but, Senator-elect Mark Kirk just said

Kirk also called for extending all of the Bush tax cuts, “no matter what” the effect on the nation’s budget

Cogent, to the point, transparent – you’re right. Let’s keep page two and lose the rest.

Maybe they’d like to offer up their opinion on how to achieve world peace too?

Or a recipe for Whirled Peas.

Isn’t that some sort of Muslim terrorist symbol at the top of the title page?

Thank you Jane. But Thank You Catfoodies for displaying your plot to destroy Social Security. How does this go? The President will offer a Bipartisany compromise. Then Mr. O. will concede some more Social Security benefits. Then Mr. O. will chastise angry bloggers. The Dee Cee Villagers will ring the church bells, celebrating another class war victory.

The new Catfood recipes do mention the wars, but not the costs. The context is the wars are permanent. And the Catfoodies are anticipating new wars. Did I say wars? I meant Overseas Contingency Bullshit.

RECOMMENDATION 1.4: REQUIRE THE PRESIDENT TO PROPOSE ANNUAL LIMITS FOR WAR SPENDING. Create a separate category for Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO).
Discretionary spending constraints must not ignore spending for the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan and other future conflicts. At the same time, budget rules should not determine war policy. In order to balance these competing goals, the Commission chose as a starting point the more gradual of CBO’s troop drawdown scenario, while providing the President and Congress with an opportunity to adjust the path to more accurately track with actual projections of OCO spending needs.

From now on our President will be have a new basketball moniker on the court: “Catfood Barry”

Since SS has been a target of the repubs since its inception, there has been a long history of attacking it. Early on the defense of SS was easy, but as the attacks continued, the dims began to wilt and have accepted the falsities of the right wing. Apparently the dims do not have enough interest in SS to understand what the treasury notes held by the SS administration mean.

Matt Bai is already double-daring Obama to cut Social Security and alienate progressives.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/01/us/politics/01bai.html

Plug for the December 16 rally.

Date: 2010-12-16, 10:00 am.

Location: White House
1600 PENNSYLVANIA AVE NW
WASHINGTON, DC, 20500-0003

Guess you’ve never listened to the “liberal” Bill Press radio show. His knees are raw.

Thanks. The money paragraph.

Should Mr. Obama embrace the commissioners’ argument on Social Security, the sense of betrayal on the left will be so intense that he could conceivably draw a primary challenge over it in 2012.

I like the fact that they are redesigning the tax system. I wonder how many boxes of crayons they used to figure that out.

That sounds good but I think we need to challenge him with a third party candidate. The Doormat party is toast.

Do we at least get free arm bands with this proposal?

You might like this for no other reason than to maintain your sanity:

A little bit of pushing back by Eric Kingson on CNBC:

http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232/?video=1674475527&play=1

How about the Tequila Party?

Ahh, how the English language evolves. “Reform” is apparently going the way of “restructure”.

Hey…isn’t that a cockroach scurrying across the floor over there?? Let me “restructure” it with my boot.

stewartm, got it!

Chuck Todd reports the soup of the day at the WH is “Big Shit Sandwich.”

There is no more concept of “for the greater good.” There is no concept of “good”.

Seems clear “the greater evil” is alive and well.

Jane: Here is a great photo you might want to use at the top; I can’t imagine anything more purrrrfect:

http://www.owned.lv/images/a319f44ac7eba1c62ff499f309b38b4e.jpg

(ooh–if it’s legal, that is…)

Ha ha, good one Wendy… and I don’t think there are any laws against a cat doing that. :o)

This report is super sub-prime. Was this boondoggle funded by the taxpayer?

Reform social security for its own sake, not deficit reduction.

I am ALL frigging FOR that!

REFORM IT so the money stolen and given to rich people is put BACK

REFORM IT so a person can retire EARLIER to make up for all the money STOLEN from it

REFORM IT so they CAN NEVER STEAL FROM IT AGAIN

there, that should do the trick

why the HELL aren’t politicians pointing out, THE WEALTHY HAVE SOCIAL SECURITY’S MONEY and they NEED to give it BACK!

FDR tried to “restructure” the cockroaches but he didn’t get them all. Hope you have better luck with your boot.

p. 48: “A serious bipartisan conversation needs to take place regarding incentives to generate personal retirement savings that supplement Social Security and addresses the gap between what Americans need for retirement and what they currently have.” [italics mine]

I can see Obama drooling.

Conspicuous in it’s absence is military spending for ill-conceived adventures.

perris, they have no intention of giving it back. To mask over that heist is what this Commission is all about.

Warz now have the funny name of Overseas Contingency Operations (OCO).

See Frank’s comment at 25.

As if they needed a mask in this nation of uneducated, apathetic and incredibly gullible people. No mask is going to fool those of us who pay attention and none is needed for everybody else. This is about political cover for Mr Bipartisan.

I think it was I.F. Stone who suggested always reading govt reports from the back… that’s where they try to bury stuff.

With that in mind, on the “first page”, hiking the federal gas tax by 15 cents (good luck with that) and they didn’t forgotten about you college kids, “Eliminate In-School Interest Subsidies for Student Loans”.

Government-wide, adjusting the CPI to account for substitutions made in response to price increases, “for example, when one product in the market basket (apples) becomes more expensive, consumers will forego purchasing that item in favor of a cheaper alternative (oranges)”. (p. 51)

And by apples they mean human food and by oranges they mean cat food.

I learned a new term in the book I just finishsed reading. Perception Managment.

They need to be called on the fraud.

New post up top…

What happened to all the talk about how the commission will "never be able to get the votes" to agree on the Simpson-Bowles wishlist from a few weeks ago?

I just ran a search of the entire PDF. Nowhere in it are the names "Simpson" or &quot:Bowles".
Further, the word "Senator" appears only once, in reference to Senator Tom Coburn, the newest god of conservatism. Did Tom Coburn write this? Why aren’t the authors names (the members of the commission) on this document?

Jane, are you absolutely certain this isn’t a fake, designed to discredit you and progressive blogs?

Perhaps I’m somewhat in disbelief because after all these months, this report contains exactly what most analysts said it would contain – a bunch of mostly ineffective, mostly debunked ideas couched in the language of patriotic duty.

The National Security catfoodies, QDR (pdf) have their own recipes for us cats. This is part of “Whole of Government”. It is all Theater to support a permanent national security police state. All parts of government belong to neo-con war-mongers, especially economic. Especially stealing Social Security for the war profiteers.

Both the QDR and the recently released National Security Strategy (NSS) use the term ―whole of government‖ to denote the integration of all tools of national power (defense, diplomacy, economic, development, democratic reform and human rights, homeland security, intelligence, strategic communications, and the American people and the private sector) in support of U.S. national security goals and objectives.

Section 3.3.3. on page 33

They want Medicare recipients to pay 500.00 as a copay instead of allowing Medigap insurance to cover copays. Their sick reasoning is #1: They accuse patients of overusing medical care. #2: They want to punish Medicare recipients who have to go to the hospital with the hefty copay to discourage people from using the healthcare system through Medicare. That’s telling people who are very likely to be genuinely sick, to just forego receiving care. That is unethical. We are talking about Medicare recipients who are over the age of 65 or disabled people who are likely seeking disability related healthcare.

this has not been formally submitted to or voted on by the entire commission –

more background here

Recommendation 5.10

Individuals need more financial assets and less debt, especially for retirement. Social Security forms the first tier of support for retirement but was never intended to be the sole source of retirement income. Retirement security solutions need to recognize and incorporate the challenges for self-reliant Americans who take responsibility for their families through a lifetime of work. Business owners and employees have historically negotiated over retirement benefits, and government employers face revenue challenges. Many private and public pension plans face serious underfunding of their long-term obligations. A serious bipartisan conversation needs to take place regarding incentives to generate personal retirement savings that supplement Social Security and addresses the gap between what Americans need for retirement and what they currently have.

Let’s see–first you guys want to take an axe to SS, then you want to have a “serious bipartisan conversation” to talk about the very problem you just made worse.

No thankee.

stewartm

“The only thing worse than a Democrat or a Republican is when these two pricks work together!” -Lewis Black

You’d be surprised how many people in the humanities read papers that way.

“The Whole Truth” by Davis Baldacci?

Just finished it myself.

i think he’s going to get one anyway.

I’m impressed with the embedded pdf, never seen that on a blog before.

Watched it. So the average Social Security payment is $1400/month. If the US cannot make maintaining payments at that level, especially given the fact that people have paid in most if not all of that, then there is something seriously fucked in Washington. If the country weren’t so fucking big and people could actually easily organize demonstrations, they wouldn’t even try this kind of bullshit evil robbery. What evil. What evil. What evil.

Ha ha ha! Thanks, Beowulf! I posted Jane’s link at Dagblog,com, and used the photo. It’s a pip, ain’t it?

“Moment of Truth,” sounds like Frank Luntz had a hand in this report.

I saw Rep Kaptur make a good point this AM on CSpan’s WJ. She asked why we didn’t have a commission on jobs instead of on the deficit. Amen!

Nobody in Washington should be allowed to say the word “truth”. It should be called “Liar Town”. I used to think that I had some idea what it was like to be almost any human being except for a few outliers like, oh say, Michael Jackson. But, anymore, I can’t imagine what it is like to be one of these Liar Town monkies. Michael Jackson seems so utterly human compared to some freekazoid like Bowles.

Re: Tax Reforms:

The Commission recommends RAISING taxes on capital gains and dividend income, taxing them as ordinary income (29%) rather than the current low rate of 15%. Guys like Steve Jobs and Warren Buffet get a huge chunk of their income in capital gains.

So, the top INCOME tax rate falls from 35% to 29%, but capital gains and dividend taxes RISE from 15% to 29%. Also, mortgage interest deductions are eliminated for second homes, boats, etc., which are used primarily by the wealthy.

This makes it less clear whether tax revenues will rise or fall. I would like to know what the net effect will be on tax revenues, and how taxpayers at each income level are likely to be affected (will taxes increase or decrease, and for which groups?)

OurFiscalSecurity came out with this jobs focused plan:

http://www.ourfiscalsecurity.org/fiscal-blueprint/

Baker et al came out with this progressive, jobs focused plan:

http://www.ourfuture.org/files/documents/citizens-commission-report-early.pdf

I also noticed that the “fix” moves a higher percentage of the payroll tax into financing tax cuts for the rich.

Hell of a deal. And Means testing and replacing SS with a “better plan” to make up for the cuts – can we say private accounts – seems the thrust that the GOP talking heads are taking out of the document today.

Papau in the next thread above this one said that capital gains are feathered by the wealthy into the future and ‘expensed’, so they (are avoided) don’t count the way they do for the ‘little people’ like us.

Simpson was appointed and given such a visible position so that he could play the part of wingnut assclown as middle-class America gets screwed over by the Democrats and Republicans.

I’d like to commend him on doing a fine job.

Cld you respond to #70′s question about capital gains changes? Thanks. I cited you and was hoping I understood what you were saying. But just in case I didn’t………

The increase in taxes on the rich is a fake – the lower percentage lowers their tax more than than all the offsets – and the treating of capital gains as ordinary income – normally an increase in tax for the rich – is currently a give away to the rich because it triples the value of the past 3 years massive capital loss carryforwards – indeed that loss can then be used up faster – to be followed in a few years no doubt by again giving investment income special status post “deficit reduction mania” and moving back to “growth needs no investment tax”.

The B-S plan presented today is a more soft version of the Galston-Macguineas plan (Peterson puppets) over at CFRB.org. They actually had the gall to extract 2% directly from payroll taxes to place into mandated personal savings accounts. They figured if no one was going to oppose them, they might as well steal everything in the Social Security store.

No problem – @77 covers the increase in value of the current capital loss carryforward accounts under the proposal.

Capital losses for the non-rich follow the same pattern – but for more than 50% of the population they do not see tax loss accounting because they do not invest directly – and if they invest, they invest in funds that clear the books yearly because IRAs and 401k’s do not pay taxes. the net-net is that below the top 10% – esp the top 1% – the increase in value of the capital loss carryforward increase in value under catfood treatment is a minimal benefit, but for the rich we are talking major dollars.

The 2% movement of payroll tax into private accounts was what Newt proposed to Bill Clinton – who shot it down (despite Newt claiming he had agreement with someone in the WH before Monica). Bill Clinton instead proposed in his state of the union to establish via SS voluntary extra payroll deduction 401k like savings accounts with a cash gift – coming from the projected general account surplus – being stuffed in those accounts each year, much like employer “matching” programs. The GOP controlled Congress killed the voluntary idea.

So we are back to diverting payroll tax in order to save the funding of SS – seems to use the same logic as deficit reduction via more tax cuts for millionaires.

OK, I understand that. But income taxes come with lots of deductions, too, and many of those will be eliminated. Will the investment income deductions (for expenses, etc.) be eliminated the same way that income tax deductions will be eliminated?

The devil is in the details.

Also, regarding SS benefits, they established a means testing concept for getting benefits sooner, for people who can’t work after age 62, I think. Again, who would qualify for that? And how will their total SS income over time be affected if they start claiming it early? Lots of details are missing.

Aren’t capital losses counted as a deduction from regular income already? I’m almost positive they are and have been for a while, which means that there’d be no new advantage in capital loss carryforwards.

Moment of Truth?

Ha! There’s not even a microsecond of truth in it.

Oh. So, they would have to eliminate the loss carryforwards to make this thing “fair” — to eliminate a tax loophole for the super rich?

I’m not holding my breath.

Thx. I was wondering how near we are to freak-out, grab-a-sign-and-protest time. :)

I still think we’re rather close to that time.

I get the distinct impression from reading the comments on this thread that nobody knows exactly what this Commission is recommending. If that’s the case, and I believe that it is, than Obama doesn’t understand any of its recommendations either. But I’ll bet he’ll give us all a great speech extolling its virtues. What a bunch of wankers our political class is and what a group of suckers we are for listening to them. Peace

I don’t see how eliminating the loss carryforwards makes anything “fair” or how it’s a tax loophole, for the super rich or anyone else.

If you have greater insight into exactly what this Commission is recommending than anyone else around here, then, by all means, help us understand it better.

Most of what I’ve focused on in this thread has to do with more general discussion and speculation about the way taxation does and/or should work.

I also point out that the public partisan performance (Simpson playing the role of wingnut assclown) seems to have little to do with what the masters of the universe will produce in the end (i.e., a pos that screws over the middle class).

Knoxville, I think you’re right: it doesn’t seem like a huge loophole. Here is the definition:

Capital Loss Carryforward: The net amount of capital losses that are not deductible for the current tax year but can be carried over into future tax years. Net capital losses (total capital losses minus total capital gains) can only be deducted up to a maximum of $3,000 in a given tax year. Any amounts exceeding $3,000 can be put toward offsetting capital gains in the current year or simply deducted in the next year(s).

$3000 is not a huge amount of money for guys like Warren Buffet. It’s more of a help to small investors, it seems.

This news article suggests that they put back in some of the income tax exemptions:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2010-12-01-deficit-plan_N.htm

This comment, I like.

I am praying that their Social Security proposals are roundly dismissed as ‘answers’ to a question which the commission should never have asked. They appear to have found ways to raise the FICA and actually reduce the benefits to lower than what would have happened if they had done nothing at all.

Goss has delivered the CBO report on the entire package of proposals but I have not had a chance to figure out what it means yet. Later.

I have no greater insight than do you. But our time would be better spent speculating about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin than in discussing this. IMHO. Peace

That was my understanding. Thank you for providing that definition. By reducing the amount that can be deducted as capital losses per year, it significantly limits what the super rich can claim annually while ensuring that small investors get some break for their losses when an investment goes badly (as well as pay taxes when they invest well and have good luck on their side!).

What’s the harm in trying to make ourselves more financially literate and to understand tax laws, and in thinking about alternatives to the Commission’s report?

Speculating about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin? Perhaps you and I are focusing on different comments…

Yeah, they put back lots of exemptions, including these:

mortgage interest for primary residences, the exemption for employer-provided health insurance, the child tax credit and tax breaks for charitable giving and retirement savings.

But they would cap the amount of mortgage interest deduction at $500,000 per year (and make it for primary residences only), rather than the current $1.1 million per year. They would also cap retirement fund deductions at $20,000 per year. So, that is a progressive tax increase.

The child tax credit and EITC are beneficial to lower and middle class families, so it is good that they are keeping those.

The charitable giving deduction is a big one, but at least that has some positive social value. Redefining what qualifies as a charitable deduction might be another interesting exercise.

Krugman pans the Social Security proposal: http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/

Bowles-Simpson, the revision, is out. It has not improved.

I think it is worth pointing out that like so many proposals from that side of the political spectrum — for this is, very much, bipartisanship as a compromise between the center-right and the hard right — this one involves a fundamental piece of strange logic. Namely, it argues that in order to head off the dire prospect of future cuts in Social Security benefits, we must … cut future Social Security benefits.

Also: in response to the point many of us have made about raising the retirement age — that only the affluent have seen life expectancy rise faster than the retirement-age rises already in the law — the plan promises special exemptions for those with physical hardships.

Let’s think about that. Right now we have a retirement system that has the great virtue of not being intrusive: Social Security doesn’t demand that you prove you need it, doesn’t ask about your personal life, doesn’t make you feel like a beggar. And now we’re going to replace that with a system in which large numbers of Americans have to plead for special dispensation, on the grounds that they’re too feeble to work for a living. Freedom!

purr-fect! i love it!

Jane, am I correct in thinking that this report is unsigned?

We’ve been hearing that Jan Schakowsky was excluded from deliberations. Maybe a number of others were as well.

I seem to recall that this report was funded by Peter G. Peterson, although they seem to have managed to hit up the taxpayers for a pretty good amount too.

As things are going, many seniors will not even be able to buy cat food.

For example in Washington state the Department of Social and Health Services has arbitrarily changed its Medicare-supplement and food stamp recertification procedures to make it extremely difficult for recipients to fulfill the requirements. This catch-22 enables DSHS Eichmann wannabes to eliminate recipients for alleged non-compliance rather than impose the cutoffs that will openly condemn us to genocide by abandonment.

Interestingly — especially given the long DSHS record of institutional hostility to males — it appears the victims of this bureaucratic sleight-of-hand are all elderly males. Elderly females, it seems, are still able to re-certify their Medicare supplement and food-stamp eligibility via the old, much easier process.

This is significant for two reasons: (1), that Washington is a notably Democratic state with Governor Christine Gregoire herself a Democrat (which again demonstrates that in terms of pampering the rich by savaging the poor there is no meaningful difference between Democrats and Republicans) and (2), because of the long-ago admission by Watergate Felon Paul Ehrlichman that the state is a favorite Ruling Class proving ground for techniques of oppression.

Combined, these factors suggest we will soon be seeing the tactics developed by the Gregoire Administration applied elsewhere.

A SUGGESTION FOR JANE: a wild, probably stupid idea but one that might work nevertheless. What about collaborating with Martha Stewart to produce a protest satire called Catfood Gourmet? Given how Ms. Stewart was victimized by the Ruling Class, especially given her experiences in the Joint, it strikes me she might actually go for it. Might be worth a try, anyway…

Loren Bliss

Using economic discrimination to deny elderly and disabled people medical care is literally genocide by neglect, the U.S. version of the Final Solution. Not only does it spare the Ruling Class the expense of building and operating concentration camps, it also facilitates blaming the victims: they have no resources, they cannot work, they doomed themselves by their own bad choices and therefore deserve no mercy. (Translation: they were kept hopelessly poor all their lives by shit jobs, now they are no longer exploitable for profit, and the principles of capitalism demand they be discarded like worn-out machines — that is, murdered by abandonment.)

Believe me, this is exactly how the Big Business/Wall Street aristocrats and their toadying politicians and bureaucrats think about the rest of us.