Posted on 09/20/2008 7:11:31 AM PDT by MrChips
I believe he first plans to let the “Bush” tax cuts expire. That will increase the capital gains tax rate and eliminate the $1,000 per child tax credit. Since I have three kids, that will immediately increase my taxes. Then he will put in place his own (much smaller) tax credits that are “refundable” and thus available to those 40% who pay no taxes. That’s how he gets the 95% figure. The result will be a tax increase for many families who currently pay taxes. It’s a wealth transfer scheme and should appeal to the welfare masses.
0bama’s #1 plan on taxes is the cancel the Bush tax CUTs. He’s hell bent on taking that away from us. Technically he isn’t RAISING taxes, as in the tax RATE (so he claims), he’s just undoing the huge tax cuts we all got.....which will raise taxes incredibly on working people. Thousands of dollars more we’ll have to pay each year. THAT is the truth of it. He says he’s only raising taxes (as in the rate) on the rich ($250K+). So really, he’s going to raise the tax rate on the “rich” and just make the rest of us pay more than we’ve ever paid before. Plus he wants to do a welfare program for those who do NOT pay taxes! He wants to do tax CREDITS to people who don’t pay taxes! So these people who don’t work and shouldn’t need to even file a return, he wants them to file a return showing they don’t need to pay taxes, but that they qualify for a refund ANYWAY. Rich pay higher rates, working class pay more, the bums get welfare. THAT is 0bama’s tax plan in a nutshell.
Results: Between the credit crisis, bankruptcies, billion dollar buyouts and billion dollar buyouts, the economy has emerged as issue No. 1 in the presidential race. Which candidate do you think will do the best job reviving the U.S. economy?
Poll Results:
John McCain (R) - 66.9%
Barack Obama (D) - 22.2%
Bob Barr (L) - 1.3%
None of the Above - 9.7%
Total Responses -
528
“With billions of people living on just dollars a day around the world, global poverty remains one of the greatest challenges and tragedies the international community faces,” Obama said. “It must be a priority of American foreign policy to commit to eliminating extreme poverty and ensuring every child has food, shelter, and clean drinking water. As we strive to rebuild America’s standing in the world, this important bill will demonstrate our promise and commitment to those in the developing world.
“Our commitment to the global economy must extend beyond trade agreements that are more about increasing profits than about helping workers and small farmers everywhere,” he continued.
The bill institutes the United Nations Millennium Summit goals as the benchmarks for U.S. spending.
“It is time the United States makes it a priority of our foreign policy to meet this goal and help those who are struggling day to day,” a statement issued by supporters, including Obama, said.
Oh, and that Texas poll of white Republicans is reliable!
Thank you for your post, MrChips, I'd like to have simple refutation as well. I'm no economist either, it seems to me that this *cut taxes* stuff from Obama is the same type of double-talk we got for years about *massive cuts* in government programs that, once the magic of baseline budgeting was uncovered, turned out to be reductions in proposed increases, no real minus at all.
A one-time credit of $500 is hardly a "tax cut" -- as you point out, no rate reduction. It is merely an offset of federal dollars to me. And no offset to those who fall below the taxable income line anyway, those dollars just become an offset to payroll or SS tax.
As to Obama's claim that "95% of Americans would get a tax cut under my plan," I just heard a gentleman on FOX this morning point out that only 70% of Americans pay income tax in the first place, so ... again, the offset to payroll, not a tax cut on income tax, since that remaining 25% don't pay it, presumably don't file a return.
Are we hearing this stuff right? In simple terms, FRiends, is there not some easy math way of countering the argument?
Some explanations by economists and pundits are difficult, but both Williams and Sowell present complex concepts in simple terms, which is a gift.
An example can be found here.
I was typing as you posted ... really? It's 60%, not the 30% I heard this morning? That's even more ridiculous than I'd thought, this 95% of Americans baloney.
Barrack Obama has 94 recorded votes on taxes. Every time, Obama either voted in favor of raising taxes or against tax cuts. He has NEVER voted to reduce our tax burdens. As often the case with THE ONE, the reality of his voting record does not correspond with his rhetoric.
It doesn’t include the payroll tax, which is really just another income tax. The money all goes into the same pot after the entitlement bills are paid.
Its actually really simple. Obama is a Communist and he floats around this nonsensical garbage that the freeloading left interprets as giving them “free” stuff. This is the playbook of the Demoratic party and has been for as long as I can remember. Class warfare, free stuff, welfare state politics. However, this candidate intends to fully redistribute wealth and he’ll do it by taxing and spending. Then when the economy tanks into a depression, he’ll blame Bush and the Republicans and say that he just inherited these problems. This clown is just a black Jimmy Carter.
Here is the scheme: The lower-income tax return filers will be paid something like an extended income compensation, the funds to be taken from the FICA taxes paid in by your employer toward the Social Security “fund”.
The effect is to milk the Social Security fund even faster than it is now being emptied, but on the short term, nobody will notice.
The high-income earners, the bulk of whom are small businessmen and women, pay the higher tax rates, but in return, they let go the lower-end employees and eliminate those jobs, in an effort to cut their own costs, in order to pay the higher tax rate. With skillful management of cash flow that may be declared on the income tax return as “adjusted net income”, but enough so the “alternative minimum tax” does not kick in, the business emerges as a lean, mean cash machine, carrying a smaller payroll, actually returning less to the Treasury than simply cutting the tax rate to begin with.
The tax consultant remains fully employed, however.
At this point, we bitter little people can discourage and frustrate the Obozos. Let some air out of their tires :^) and perhaps some will stay home on the day that counts.
In reference to the Tax Foundation link posted above: How does one get “negative” tax liability? I need to figure out how to get into THAT category.
JoMa
It's called the "earned income tax credit".
One more thing on the Tax Foundation link: Did anyone notice what state was LAST in the percentage of non-payers? It is Alaska. (Does anyone make a connection here with a certain VP candidate?)
Did you notice which state was #2? It is Louisiana. No wonder everyone cried after Katrina. Most of the state is on the doll of the federal government. I am curious why there was not a big backlash in Mississippi after Katrina since that state is #1. Maybe there was and it was just not reported by the MSM, but I doubt it.
JoMa
BO has said that he would repeal the Bush tax cuts, that would raise my taxes - and I do not make over $250,000.
I do invest some money, so raising capital gains taxes would raise my overall taxes.
He would raise taxes on companies and those making over $250,000 - that would cause businesses to leave the U.S. or to compensate for the increased tax imposed on them, they would raise prices on me and my paycheck shrinks some more since I could not buy as much due to higher prices.
BO has said that he would repeal the Bush tax cuts, that would raise my taxes - and I do not make over $250,000.
I do invest some money, so raising capital gains taxes would raise my overall taxes.
He would raise taxes on companies and those making over $250,000 - that would cause businesses to leave the U.S. or to compensate for the increased tax imposed on them, they would raise prices on me and my paycheck shrinks some more since I could not buy as much due to higher prices.
Explains it pretty well.
We are fortunate to get our first glimpse of what an Obama presidency will be like, and it is frightening. If you ever questioned whether this far-left candidate would start radically redistributing wealth, UNITED STATES WEALTH, around the world, just consider the Obama-sponsored bill that is before Congress right now, the Global Poverty Act of 2007.
We are the most generous country in the world with foreign aid and military, civil, and emergency aid whenever and wherever it is needed. At the present time America is facing a mortgage crisis, loan foreclosures, an economic slowdown, massive increases in fuel costs, and huge increases in college costs.
Our Far-Left Democratic presidential candidate apparently thinks the American taxpayer is not squeezed enough!
Barack Obama has proposed a bill that will cost the typical family of four over $8000 to help fight poverty around the world. But it gets even crazier!
This money will not go to directly to those who need it, but rather to the UN for distribution.
Please contact your congressmen and tell them not to vote for this bill.
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.