Politics obvious in payroll tax cut

There was much hoopla after the payroll tax was extended, and both parties claimed victories. Over what? The facts, as far as I can, tell are as follows:

About a year ago, Congress, with President Obama’s support, passed a 2 percent decrease in Social Security taxes deducted from workers’ paychecks. This deduction was to help struggling working families and stimulate our economy. The decrease was to end Dec. 31. Democrats, who generally supported this cut, wanted a two-month extension; Republicans, many of whom opposed it, wanted a 12-month extension. Make sense?

Also, a 2 percent cut would save a minimum wage or part-time worker about $280 a year, a worker earning $50,000 about $1,000 a year, and a worker earning $100,000 about $2,000 a year. But it’s intended to help the struggling workers. Make sense?

Nancy Pelosi states the two-month extension will save workers $1,000; Obama states that a working father will now be able to take his daughters out for pizza. Make sense?

Congress knew the cut would expire many months ago, yet it took them this long to agree to an extension. Make sense?

Through all this rhetoric many questions are left unanswered: Social Security is heading toward bankruptcy, and how will this decrease in funding be made up? (The only way would be on the backs of future earners.) How long is this tax cut expected to last? Will there be increases or decreases to the 2 percent?

Obama is right about one thing — this is an example of why the public holds government in low esteem. This is not about what’s best for the workers, it’s about both parties trying to show each other up. A high school student council could do a better job of handling this matter.

Robert W. Kuechenberg

Palatine