TAXES: McCain vs. Obama

email | unknown

[ChocChipCookie]

I’m not sure comparing the the income tax data in the original post with the link you provided is comparing apples to apples. The original info breaks it down single/married, while the information at your link does not. It also breaks down income into different levels.

I don’t see anything blatantly in error in my original post. VRWC, I do agree with your general position on posting emails received, but again, maybe I’m blind, but I don’t see anything in this information to argue against, other than the fact that it doesn’t come from an official source.

[ChocChipCookie]

Try this link:

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=27025

[Wiseghy]

We don’t make “a lot”, relative to many others in urban CA. However, I kept thousands more under the Bush cuts.

Obama seems to be aimed at older, retired or near retirement folks, and those at the time of their peek income making years. Those folks will pay 10’s of thousands more $$$.

Kind of puts a new spin on things in considering political donations, which are normally taboo in this house.

My guess is he hopes to dole out exceptions to friends and allies, and use everyone else to foot the bill for healthcare and more SS without a new payroll tax. Shifting $$$ out of the military won’t be enough without broadscale wealth redistribution.

Our economy will take on a Socialist European hue, with high unemployment, low growth and monster barriers to entry. Like Europe, graduates will be forced to scrape up family connections over a period of years to get government or the few corporate jobs in order to get into the work force.

[calcowgirl]

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0708/Grover_Norquist_call_your_office.html

In an interview, Carly Fiorina, a top adviser, explains that any tax increases on ``middle- and working-class’’ Americans are off limits.
She says if a bipartisan coalition is ``creative enough’’ to fashion tax increases on wealthier Americans, that may prove palatable.

[MosesKnows]

I believe the limit is 10K a year

Since 2006, the limit is $12,000 per person per year that is not subject to tax by the recipient. A married couple can gift $24,000.

[Myrddin]

In an interview, Carly Fiorina, a top adviser, explains that any tax increases on ``middle- and working-class’’ Americans are off limits. She says if a bipartisan coalition is ``creative enough’’ to fashion tax increases on wealthier Americans, that may prove palatable.

So Carly is just another "tax the rich" liberal. The middle and working class pay comparatively small amounts of income tax vs the "rich". The dumbass liberals forget that the "rich" often have the option to earn less or move their money out of the line of fire. The static projections made on stupid moves e.g the luxury yacht tax fell flat. The "rich" quit buying yachts and lots of yacht manufacturers went out of business...as did their former employees.

[theBuckwheat]

There is one more thing McCain should do: index capital gains for inflation.

That will cause the lovers of big and Bigger government to choke as they stammer to justify why government should be allowed to continue taxing the numerical gain in dollars solely due to their own deliberate destruction of the value of the currency. It is a very potent political and economic issue to highlight the philosophies of the two candidates.

(And why GWB hasn't done this is beyond me.)

[SoConPubbie]

In an interview, Carly Fiorina, a top adviser, explains that any tax increases on ``middle- and working-class’’ Americans are off limits. She says if a bipartisan coalition is ``creative enough’’ to fashion tax increases on wealthier Americans, that may prove palatable.

Add in that John McCain will have to find a way to cover the costs of the implementation of his Carbon Cap-and-Trade scheme and all the costs involved with making Illegal Aliens citizens by granting them Amnesty and all we are getting is smoke from the McCain camp.

[Chgogal]

((((Pinging)))) Dr. Allen. ((((Pinging)))) Dr. Allen. Your candidate sucks.

[Redleg Duke]

Well, goodie-goodie for you!

[Kellis91789]

The top 1% of Income earners in the USA pays almost 40% of the income taxes.

Yet liberals never ask themselves what they’d do if that 1% chose to pick up and leave. Where would they be able to make up that 40% of lost income tax ?

Personally, I am SHOCKED that this 1% doesn’t effectively buy some Carribean island country lock, stock, and barrel, switch citizenship, pay Uncle Sam his taxes one last time so he can’t legally come after them, and be done with America. Pick a country where the government is not a mobocracy and the natives can’t vote themselves your money. They could implement a 5% flat income tax and have $150B/yr revenue, much more than needed to provide reasonable government services for three million people.

[Myrddin]

Avoiding unnecessary taxation is a constant struggle. The more you work and succeed, the more effort you must make to keep your earnings. I relocated to Idaho mostly out of disgust for the endless anti-gun laws being passed in California and the ridiculous overcrowding. I also saved a bunch on my taxes. The marginal rate over $100k is 7.8%. I was in the 9.3% bracket in California. The difference in state income taxes in one year covered the cost of my relocation. The lower vehicle registration, insurance and lack of smog certificate costs made the cost of running my cars lower.

The feds have been crafting laws to attempt to make it impossible for the exceptionally wealthy to move their wealth out of the reach of taxation. The stage is set to really put the screws to "the rich". I've arranged my affairs such that I can get along welcoming people to Walmart if necessary. It would be a hell of a pay cut, but there's no point in busting your butt if the government is going to steal most of it.

[roadcat]

Since 2006, the limit is $12,000 per person per year that is not subject to tax by the recipient. A married couple can gift $24,000.

What? I'll have to look that one up! My wife and I have been gifting our daughters every year. We thought the max was $12,000 per person per year. Our intent is to avoid the hefty taxes when we die, by giving as much as we can while alive. Folks, the government will take half of your kids inheritance away when you die! And, it's going to be a lot more than half after 2010.

[RWB Patriot]

“They could implement a 5% flat income tax and have $150B/yr revenue, much more than needed to provide reasonable government services for three million people.”

You say that as though the government is taxing people to help them. The government only taxes people to make more money for itself and to bribe potential voters. Why else would things that are obviously not working (welfare, SS, universal health care, etc) are still being used; because they allow the government to steal more of our money.

[the anti-liberal]

Yes, goody-goody for me.

The fact is, both Parties suffer from various pathologies, each in their own way (well, all three, if you include Independents - which has a specific platform, etc) - it just happens that the pathologies of the Left, and hence of Democrats, are more dangerous to society then those of the Right.

[StoneRaven]

I can make up all kinds of numbers but it doesn’t make them true. As far as I can tell liberals and conservatives are both full of BS. Rather than taking some article/email that is obviously slanted one way or another (wonder which way this one slants???) as the gospel and then talking about it and spreading it around like it was the truth, maybe it would be a good idea to do a little digging. Ignorance is bliss I guess.

http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/would_obama_tax_my_profits_if_i.html

[StoneRaven]

There are lots of errors in your post if you would take a little time to look.

http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/would_obama_tax_my_profits_if_i.html

[ChocChipCookie]

So you signed up today just to post your own version of the “facts”? Welcome, newbie.

You have a website with your version of the truth, (hmmm... wonder which way it slants??), and the information from this now-popular email come directly from the following link. Don’t like the facts? Argue directly with the author.

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=27025

On the other hand, Obama’s statements about the direction in which he wants to steer this country, along with huge increases in government spending, for you in Rio Linda that means new and higher TAXES, are too well documented to be denied. Only you true Obamazombies refuse to see the truth.

[mnehring]

Funny, you claim to debunk a ‘slanted’ article w/ a slanted article of your own. Have you even thought to look into ‘factcheck.org’? Did you know they were run by the Annenberg Public Policy Center and headed by none other than Brooks Jackson who works for Obama?

JACKSON, BROOKS W BOWIE,MD 20721 ANNENBERG POLICY CENTER/DIRECTOR 8/17/07 $2,300 Obama, Barack (D)

The original analysis isn't from an email, it is from Human Events. http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=27025.
Factcheck.org only debunks(sic) this by taking a couple of quotes off Obama’s site, while HumanEvents uses actual policy proposals and votes.

Cute attempt newbie, but no cookie for you today.

[mnehring]

Ping 39