In addition, he will raise taxes on anyone selling a house, their stocks, who has an IRA, etc., etc.
He will rasie taxes in different varieties on people across the board.
THE AUDACITY OF TRUTH ABOUT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA
Posted on 06/13/2008 3:24:36 PM PDT by Brilliant
Democratic Sen. Barack Obama on Friday called for higher payroll taxes on wage-earners making more than $250,000 annually, a step that would affect the wealthiest 3 percent of Americans.
The presidential candidate told senior citizens in Ohio that it is unfair for middle-class earners to pay the Social Security tax "on every dime they make," while millionaires and billionaires pay it on only "a very small percentage of their income."
The 6.2 percent payroll tax is now applied to all wages up to $102,000 a year, which covers the entire amount for most Americans. Under Obama's plan, the tax would not apply to wages between that amount and $250,000. But all annual salaries above the quarter-million-dollar amount would be taxed under his plan, Obama said.
Obama also said his rival, John McCain, has indicated in the past he was willing to consider higher payroll taxes.
But Douglas Holz-Eakin, the Republican candidate's senior economic policy adviser, said that as president, McCain would not consider an increase "under any imagineable circumstance."
Obama was vague about what forms of income would be affected, saying, "We should exempt anyone making under $250,000 from this increase so that the change doesn't burden middle-class Americans." Campaign aides said the additional tax, like the current one, would apply only to wages and salaries and not to other forms of income such as investments.
Obama has talked before of establishing such a "doughnut hole" in the amount of income subject to the Social Security tax. Friday marked the first time he confirmed a resumption point: $250,000 and above.
Obama made the remarks at a retirement facility in Columbus, capital of a state he lost badly to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton in the Democratic primary on March 4. Republican John McCain is hoping to carry Ohio this fall, as President Bush did four years ago in his narrow win over Democrat John Kerry.
Obama said his plan "allows us to extend the life of Social Security" without raising the retirement age or cutting benefits. He said McCain "a few years ago" stated that he might consider a higher cap on incomes subject to the tax, "but today he's attacking me for holding the very same position."
Obama also criticized McCain for being open to letting taxpayers invest part of their Social Security payments in private investment accounts.
"Imagine if your security now was tied up with the Dow Jones," he said, alluding to the recent slide in stock prices. "You wouldn't feel very confident about the security of your nest egg."
McCain, campaigning Friday in New Jersey, said Obama was misrepresenting his position.
"I will not privatize Social Security," he said. "But I would like for younger workers, younger workers only, to have an opportunity to take a few of their tax dollars, a few of theirs, and maybe put it into an account with their name on it. That's their money."
He told reporters later on his campaign bus: "Private savings accounts have to be voluntary, they have to be only for young people, and they can't be the centerpiece of the argument. We have to solve this problem and not worry about private savings accounts, because even though I support them, I don't think it's central to the issue. Central to the issue is that the system is going broke. Of course I'm not for privatization. But I do think young workers ought to have some options."
Current retirees would not lose any benefits, McCain said.
The total Social Security tax rate of 12.4 percent is evenly divided between workers and their employers.
Obama, speaking on other retirement issues, said he would "limit circumstances when retirement benefits can be cut," and increase the wages and benefits workers could protect in bankruptcy court. Companies would have to disclose more about their pension fund investments, he said. He vowed to end "the outrage of executives getting bonuses while workers watch pensions disappear."
So, the tax where we pay into our own health care and retirement, should be going to pay for everyone elses’ health care and retirement. I do not think Mr. Obama has a grasp of the concept behind these programs...or maybe he is a marxist. One or the other.
Give inflation a chance to work for about 10 years and your dog will be getting gored.
So much for the pretext that Social Security is “insurance” that’s kept in a lockbox somewhere waiting for you to retire.
In addition, he will raise taxes on anyone selling a house, their stocks, who has an IRA, etc., etc.
He will rasie taxes in different varieties on people across the board.
A lot of people making over 250,000 aren’t doing it on wages. What is O’Bama talking about? Does he know what he is talking about?
It is not about fixing these programs...it is about making things "fair."
Wrong. Wealth and income are not necessarily the same, though the Democrats would like us to believe their lies.
The 6.2 percent payroll tax is now applied to all wages up to $102,000 a year, which covers the entire amount for most Americans.
It only affects wages. The truly "wealthy" have a significant portion of income derived from interest, dividends, and capital gains and would thus be unaffected. So too would anyone who operates his own business and shifts his compensation from wages into capital gains or dividends.
Does this mean the wealthy will get back much larger Social Security checks from the system? Like 10X what others get? Is it an insurance system?
Or is Social Security really just another massive transfer of wealth from the more capable and hard working to the lazy?
“The total Social Security tax rate of 12.4 percent is evenly divided between workers and their employers.”
And if you are self employed, you pay the full 12.4 percent.
How many of those millionaires and billionaires ever even apply for social security? I’m sure that Bill Gates can’t wait till he turns 62 so he can apply for that huge Government check.
Right?
So penalize wealth. We don't need wealthy people and besides, no one in their right would ever want to wealthy themselves, right?
now there's a way to win friends and influence people... wonder why Dale Carnagie never thought of that???
No, the company does not pay for 50 % of Social Security tax
The cost of the employer share is built into the cost of doing business by lower wages or higher costs, so the employee or consumers actually pays for it in the long run, not the company
Penalize the engine of creativity, advancement - the chance, the right to rise to the highest level - and watch the (modern) world grind to a halt.
Obama's going to have to tax more than that to come up with enough to finace his "Global Poverty Act': $845 billion mor.e for global poverty Democrat sponsors act OK'd by Senate panel that would cost 0.7% of gross national product
Annual Cost of Improving the World
• $19 billion: Eliminates starvation and malnutrition globally.
• $12 billion: Provides education for every kid on earth.
• $15 billion: Provides access to water and sanitation.
• $23 billion: Reverses the spread of AIDS and Malaria
The Cost in Perspective
• $522 billion: U.S. Military budget this year.
• $484 billion: Cost of Iraq War thus far.
Sources: World Bank, National Priorities Project
Silly me! I have always thought that this is what all that money that we have been giving the United Nations was going towards. But no the money that we have already given them with no representation only went for programs to finace such spectacles as the UN World Hunger Summit, see menu:
June 4, 2008
|
|
 |
Six years ago, at another Food and Agriculture Organisation summit in Rome, The Times got hold of the menu for the sumptuous opening day lunch. Its publication caused a scandal. The 2002 summit had set itself the target of halving the number of hungry people in the world by 2015. It began by feeding the heads of state lobster and foie gras and letting them wash it all down with an array of fine wines. Of the world's wealthier nations, only Italy, the host, and Spain, the holder of the EU presidency, sent heads of state or government. The British sent Alun Michael, then Minister for Rural Affairs. By contrast, dozens of presidents, prime ministers and even monarchs arrived from the developing world. They included President Mbeki of South Africa and, of course, Robert Mugabe. |
|
(Philippe Wojazer/Reuters) Silvio Berlusconi, the Italian Prime Minister, jokes with Food and Agriculture Organisation Director General Jacques Diouf before sitting dow to lunch in Rome
|
|
|
Perhaps mindful of accusations of hypocrisy levelled at them six years ago, world leaders tightened their belts this year and were offered a far more modest menu of pasta, mozzarella, spinach and sweetcorn at the equivalent fixture. " It does not look good if leaders discussing global starvation are seen to be dining lavishly," an FAO official said. "At the last summit in 2002 we did not give enough thought to the menu and were open - unfairly, in our view - to the charge of hypocrisy." 2002 Menu Foie gras and toast with kiwi fruit 2008 Menu Vol au vent with sweetcorn and mozzarella |
|
| And this just in: Western leaders expressed outrage yesterday as Robert Mugabe flew into Rome in defiance of an EU travel ban to attend a United Nations world food summit while millions of people are starving under his brutal rule in Zimbabwe | |
He is an abject Marxist and his entire persona is one of class struggle positioning him, of course, to be in charge of making it all right for the rest of us...because he and his idolaters are the enlightened ones, don’t you know.
This looks like something that could kill most small buisnesses and the jobs they provide.
Not being one at Gates's level, I must admit, I don't get it. Isn't Gates eligible for SS at 62? If I have to pay SS taxes on 100% of my earned income, why shouldn't anyone else that will be eligible for it when they retire? Not that Gates will apply for it. He probably won't. But he'll still be eligible!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.