Too much money spent on a meaningless payroll tax cut.

[blueclown]

Too little spent on infrastructure spending. I'm surprised that he didn't learn from the 2009 ARRA, which worked but was too small and too overweighted with tax cuts. Compared to the overall size of the bill, the infrastructure spending is pretty miniscule. I do support the unemployment tax extension, but there is not much here in direct infrastructure job creation.

Overall though, this was a terrific speech and an excellent way to set the national tone over the next year. I just wish a few things were different.

[dkf]

1. Are the infrastructure funds from the first stimulus spent yet?

I honestly don't know the answer to this. It sure took forever to deploy the first time around though.

[SpartanDem]

11. We have a freeway reconstruction project going on it Detroit

with ARRA signs along it

[dkf]

2. And do you think it should simply be shut down for 2012?

[blueclown]

3. What should be shut down?

[dkf]

4. The payroll tax cut.

[blueclown]

12. Yes.

I believe the money is best spent elsewhere if you are looking to create jobs.

[valerief]

5. It will deplete social security. That's its purpose. nt

[MrMickeysMom]

6. plus a God-damned zillion

That is EXACTLY what is happening with cutting the payroll tax.

If you don't fund it, IT MUST DIE.... which maybe is what these internationalist (fill in the blank)s are trying to do to the rest of us.

[valerief]

7. They don't want to repay all the funds they've "borrowed". nt

[sad sally]

8. deepen the cut - let it bleed

The centerpiece of the plan is cuts in payroll taxes, which cover the first $106,800 in earnings and are evenly split between employers and employees. Obama would reduce the portion paid by workers next year to 3.1 percent from 4.2 percent now. The rate was cut 2 percentage points under the terms of a tax deal reached last year. That cut is set to expire Dec. 31, which would push it back to 6.2 percent.

The White House also would use temporary payroll tax cuts next year to offer incentives for new hiring and assist small businesses.

Businesses would get the same 3.1-point reduction on taxes they pay on the first $5 million of their payroll, a limit that skews the benefit toward smaller firms. The full 6.2 percent employer contribution would be waived on the first $50 million net increase in a company’s payroll.

[MrMickeysMom]

20. The numbers have nothing to do with any debt...

You think they're going to jack with those numbers?

Unlike those who are making the cuts, we earned that money and paid into it over a lifetime.

It disgraceful that a Democratic administration would do this to all workers especially to the base that worked their asses off to elect this JOKE.

[Inuca]

14. Or may you are wrong?

To prevent Social Security from losing tax revenue, Congress mandated that revenues be transferred from the general fund to the Social Security trust funds to make up for the tax reduction. This is provided for in section 601 of the Tax Relief Act, which reads in part, "There are hereby appropriated to the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Trust Fund and the Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund established under section 201 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 401) amounts equal to the reduction in revenues to the Treasury by reason of the application of subsection (a). Amounts appropriated by the preceding sentence shall be transferred from the general fund at such times and in such manner as to replicate to the extent possible the transfers which would have occurred to such Trust Fund had such amendments not been enacted." http://taxes.about.com/od/payroll/a/Reduced-Social-Security-Withholding-For-2011.htm

[valerief]

18. It still means fewer bucks going into SS. nt

[valerief]

19. Okay, thanks. I guess I just expect Congress to NOT fund it from general funds.

They always pass laws they don't fund.

[MrMickeysMom]

21. That's unnecessary...

just eliminate those cuts. The trust fund never is meant to be part of the general fund, added to or supplemented by.

Most American people are too disinterested and stupid to care about things like this than they are with their country's own well being.

[woo me with science]

10. This is the correct answer. nt

[Inuca]

13. Of course it's his purpose

because it is a generally accepted fact that he is EVIIIILLLLL!

By the way:

To prevent Social Security from losing tax revenue, Congress mandated that revenues be transferred from the general fund to the Social Security trust funds to make up for the tax reduction. This is provided for in section 601 of the Tax Relief Act, which reads in part, "There are hereby appropriated to the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Trust Fund and the Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund established under section 201 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 401) amounts equal to the reduction in revenues to the Treasury by reason of the application of subsection (a). Amounts appropriated by the preceding sentence shall be transferred from the general fund at such times and in such manner as to replicate to the extent possible the transfers which would have occurred to such Trust Fund had such amendments not been enacted."
http://taxes.about.com/od/payroll/a/Reduced-Social-Security-Withholding-For-2011.htm

[Pirate Smile]

16. They replace the payroll tax $ with general funds.

[scheming daemons]

17. No... it doesn't... the funds are replaced from the general fund.

[Hosnon]

9. But isn't this new proposal about the employer's share?

That may actually spur hiring, at least in large companies.

However, as a small business owner, hiring is ultimately determined by one thing: demand.

[Inuca]

15. Both employees and employers n/t