Obama’s tax cuts
By Elizabeth Butler, 20 Day Spring Loop - 09/26/2008
No matter how often the McCain campaign insists that Obama will raise “everybody’s” taxes, it just isn’t so!
A June 11 article on CNN Money.com has the facts.
For those of making under $19,000, the average tax bill in 2009 would decrease $19 with McCain’s proposals, while with Obama’s we would see a $567 decrease.
In the $19,000-$38,000 range, McCain’s proposals would on average result in $113 less taxes. Obama’s proposals do eight times better, with a $892 decrease.
From $38,000-$66,000, the average bill with Obama’s proposals is decreased by $1,042, more than three times as much as McCain’s at $319.
As the income level rises above $112,000, the pattern reverses. When we reach the $227,000-$603,000 income level the Obama tax proposals result in a minimal increase in the average bill ($12). It is only when income rises above $603,000 that the Obama tax proposals would result in a significant rise in the average 2009 tax bill.
A June 11 article on CNN Money.com has the facts.
For those of making under $19,000, the average tax bill in 2009 would decrease $19 with McCain’s proposals, while with Obama’s we would see a $567 decrease.
In the $19,000-$38,000 range, McCain’s proposals would on average result in $113 less taxes. Obama’s proposals do eight times better, with a $892 decrease.
From $38,000-$66,000, the average bill with Obama’s proposals is decreased by $1,042, more than three times as much as McCain’s at $319.
As the income level rises above $112,000, the pattern reverses. When we reach the $227,000-$603,000 income level the Obama tax proposals result in a minimal increase in the average bill ($12). It is only when income rises above $603,000 that the Obama tax proposals would result in a significant rise in the average 2009 tax bill.
Current rating: 2.4 with 28 ratings.
Click here to register
Reader Comments:
capital_city wrote on Oct 9, 2008 3:04 PM:
" Mind you, these 'rich' entities being taxed to death include businesses.
Corporate businesses will pass the tax burden to the stock holders; Employers will pass the tax burden to the employees by cutting benefits and reducing work force; Retail owners will pass the tax burden to the consumer by inflating prices; Consumers won't be able to invest as much due to the higher costs of taxes, benefits, and consumer goods.
So let's tax the group that the middle class relies on for job security and benefits. "
Corporate businesses will pass the tax burden to the stock holders; Employers will pass the tax burden to the employees by cutting benefits and reducing work force; Retail owners will pass the tax burden to the consumer by inflating prices; Consumers won't be able to invest as much due to the higher costs of taxes, benefits, and consumer goods.
So let's tax the group that the middle class relies on for job security and benefits. "
diazo wrote on Oct 6, 2008 9:07 AM:
" Saint20,
I do understand the difference between a tax credit and a deduction, thanks. If you want to talk about loaded assumptions, you only have to Google "Tax Foundation" and you'll find plenty of debunking of the loaded assumptions that these people use to argue that taxes always need to be cut for corporations and the wealthiest individuals. Every reputable study I've seen indicates that most families making less than $250,000 would benefit more from Obama's plan. But as I wrote earlier, I don't care which plan would benefit me more personally; I am more concerned that the wealthiest start paying their share again. Especially with all of us suddenly being $700 billion deeper in debt.
And let's be honest, it is Democrats who consistently push for reasonable oversight of industry and it is Republicans who consistently push to deregulate everything. We Montanans are reminded of that everytime we pay our utility bill. I don't know why you are suddenly dropping loaded terms like "socialism" into the mix here; I don't know of any Democrats calling for "socialism".
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were not government-run until they had to be taken over a couple weeks ago after successfully being cut loose from effective oversight, largely thanks to the lobbying of Republicans like John McCain's campaign manager Rick Davis, who was paid millions by Fannie and Freddie over the years to protect them from greater oversight. Job well done, Mr. Davis! And now McCain wants to bring the magic of deregulation to the healthcare industry. I can't wait. "
I do understand the difference between a tax credit and a deduction, thanks. If you want to talk about loaded assumptions, you only have to Google "Tax Foundation" and you'll find plenty of debunking of the loaded assumptions that these people use to argue that taxes always need to be cut for corporations and the wealthiest individuals. Every reputable study I've seen indicates that most families making less than $250,000 would benefit more from Obama's plan. But as I wrote earlier, I don't care which plan would benefit me more personally; I am more concerned that the wealthiest start paying their share again. Especially with all of us suddenly being $700 billion deeper in debt.
And let's be honest, it is Democrats who consistently push for reasonable oversight of industry and it is Republicans who consistently push to deregulate everything. We Montanans are reminded of that everytime we pay our utility bill. I don't know why you are suddenly dropping loaded terms like "socialism" into the mix here; I don't know of any Democrats calling for "socialism".
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were not government-run until they had to be taken over a couple weeks ago after successfully being cut loose from effective oversight, largely thanks to the lobbying of Republicans like John McCain's campaign manager Rick Davis, who was paid millions by Fannie and Freddie over the years to protect them from greater oversight. Job well done, Mr. Davis! And now McCain wants to bring the magic of deregulation to the healthcare industry. I can't wait. "
gun961960 wrote on Oct 3, 2008 10:37 AM:
" I have said it before and I will say it again....there is plenty of blame to go around. I have had many criticisms for the Democrats and the Republicans. You on the other hand would like to blame everything on the democrats and that is why I was SHOCKED with your previous post. "
purple wrote on Oct 2, 2008 9:40 AM:
" "gun"
Are you going to come forth and publicly admit that democrats are also part of the problem? "
Are you going to come forth and publicly admit that democrats are also part of the problem? "
Saint20 wrote on Oct 1, 2008 4:23 PM:
" Diazo,
Republicans dont like socialism (Government run industries like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) but agree with Government oversight of industries. The Tax Policy Institute is supposed to be non-partisan but an analysis by the Tax Foundation (conservative) found that the statistics from the Washington Post article and Table (ridiculous by the way) are not consistent about including that McCain supports keeping the current Bush tax cuts in place. The figure is used and not used (by the Washington Post) when it benefits figures for Obama. This was very apparent with figures used by Obama in the debate.
"Obama is basically comparing apples and oranges, and thereby misleading the American people," Prante explains. "It's kind of like Obama telling you that the Georgia Bulldogs are 4-0 and the St. Louis Rams are 0-3 without telling you the fact that the Georgia Bulldogs play college football and the St. Louis Rams play professional football. He is implying that the two figures are comparable regarding the quality of the tax plans." Tax Foundation.
Repealing the Bush Tax cuts is part of Obamas tax plan. The tax credit is beneficial but you have to understand the difference between a tax credit and a deduction. Tax credits are always more beneficial. Ive read a few articles about the health care credit and each one compares the tax credit to the amount of the deduction as being equivalent in actual tax savings. A deduction only saves you what you pay in taxes. For a family making under $40,000 the equivalent tax deduction to match a $5,000 credit would be more than $20,000. The CNN article compared the cost of $12,000 in pretax payments to health insurance as being better than a $5,000 tax credit. The tax savings are actually over $2,500 for a family paying $12,500 in health insurance pre-tax. "
Republicans dont like socialism (Government run industries like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) but agree with Government oversight of industries. The Tax Policy Institute is supposed to be non-partisan but an analysis by the Tax Foundation (conservative) found that the statistics from the Washington Post article and Table (ridiculous by the way) are not consistent about including that McCain supports keeping the current Bush tax cuts in place. The figure is used and not used (by the Washington Post) when it benefits figures for Obama. This was very apparent with figures used by Obama in the debate.
"Obama is basically comparing apples and oranges, and thereby misleading the American people," Prante explains. "It's kind of like Obama telling you that the Georgia Bulldogs are 4-0 and the St. Louis Rams are 0-3 without telling you the fact that the Georgia Bulldogs play college football and the St. Louis Rams play professional football. He is implying that the two figures are comparable regarding the quality of the tax plans." Tax Foundation.
Repealing the Bush Tax cuts is part of Obamas tax plan. The tax credit is beneficial but you have to understand the difference between a tax credit and a deduction. Tax credits are always more beneficial. Ive read a few articles about the health care credit and each one compares the tax credit to the amount of the deduction as being equivalent in actual tax savings. A deduction only saves you what you pay in taxes. For a family making under $40,000 the equivalent tax deduction to match a $5,000 credit would be more than $20,000. The CNN article compared the cost of $12,000 in pretax payments to health insurance as being better than a $5,000 tax credit. The tax savings are actually over $2,500 for a family paying $12,500 in health insurance pre-tax. "
diazo wrote on Sep 30, 2008 2:11 PM:
" Who would have thought we would ever see all these right wingers, who usually rant against burdensome government regulation of industry, suddenly finding regulatory religion? Now theyre combing the internet for any example they can find of Democratic aid to the deregulatory project that has been the primary mission of the Republican party since 1980. Thanks, skooter, kzeiler and ematt for providing spin correction to their overblown claims. "
diazo wrote on Sep 30, 2008 2:10 PM:
" saint20,
The tax plan comparison in the Washington Post (see kzeiler's link) was based on an analysis by the Tax Policy Institute. On the TPI website you will find an extract with all their assumptions, and they do include McCain's proposed $5000 health care credit in their analysis. What you didn't mention is that this credit will be largely offset by his proposal to make employer-provided health insurance taxable for the first time. Also, McCain's plan blows a far larger hole in the federal budget, making its passage unlikely in any event.
Even if the two plans are a wash for my family, I think McCain's plan is irresponsible and lets the wealthiest continue to escape paying their fair share of the tax burden. The world will not end if the top income tax rate and the capital gains tax rate return to what they were under the boom years of the Clinton era. Maybe we could even invest in infrastructure and start to pay down the debt that the economic elite are now imposing on the rest of us thanks to their Wall Street shenanigans. "
The tax plan comparison in the Washington Post (see kzeiler's link) was based on an analysis by the Tax Policy Institute. On the TPI website you will find an extract with all their assumptions, and they do include McCain's proposed $5000 health care credit in their analysis. What you didn't mention is that this credit will be largely offset by his proposal to make employer-provided health insurance taxable for the first time. Also, McCain's plan blows a far larger hole in the federal budget, making its passage unlikely in any event.
Even if the two plans are a wash for my family, I think McCain's plan is irresponsible and lets the wealthiest continue to escape paying their fair share of the tax burden. The world will not end if the top income tax rate and the capital gains tax rate return to what they were under the boom years of the Clinton era. Maybe we could even invest in infrastructure and start to pay down the debt that the economic elite are now imposing on the rest of us thanks to their Wall Street shenanigans. "
ematt wrote on Sep 30, 2008 10:10 AM:
" Saint20-
As opposed to the CMA (Commodity Futures Modernization Act, yes signed by Clinton) which Democrats have tried to close up since then, which has been continually blocked by the Republicans? This has far more to do with the financial mess now than the CRA. Seriously, are you pointing this entire fiasco toward Carter?
McCain was officially "cleared of impropriety but criticized for poor judgment" from the Senate Ethics committee. "Please deal in facts and try to mislead and make things up" (Freudian slip Saint 20?). McCain was far from exonerated. "
As opposed to the CMA (Commodity Futures Modernization Act, yes signed by Clinton) which Democrats have tried to close up since then, which has been continually blocked by the Republicans? This has far more to do with the financial mess now than the CRA. Seriously, are you pointing this entire fiasco toward Carter?
McCain was officially "cleared of impropriety but criticized for poor judgment" from the Senate Ethics committee. "Please deal in facts and try to mislead and make things up" (Freudian slip Saint 20?). McCain was far from exonerated. "
Saint20 wrote on Sep 30, 2008 8:28 AM:
" Correction: Davis's Firm recieved $15,000 a month for two years since 2006. "
gun961960 wrote on Sep 29, 2008 7:09 PM:
" Purple...so what your saying is that Republicans had some responsibility in this deregulation mess. Good boy!! Did you have some good therapy over the weekend. That is the first time I have seen you say that a Republican has done anything worthy of criticism. All I can say is WOW!! "
Saint20 wrote on Sep 29, 2008 4:02 PM:
" Scooter,
Daviss Firm received $15,000 since 2006 but Davis separated from the firm in 2006. The appearance of impropriety is important to consider. The interesting thing about the date 2006 is that John McCain and the Republicans tried to push a bill through to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Obama sat by silently similar to his notorious present votes in the Illinios legislature. I know that Obama has received $165,000 in contributions from associates of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac compared to McCains $22,000. McCain collected that amount in 30 years while Obama collected his amount in the past few months.
McCain was found not guilty of dissuading investigators of anything in the Keating 5 situation. Please lets deal in facts and not try to mislead and make things up. Investigations that exonerate a person some how makes them guilty in your book.
The Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) was established in 1977 by Jimmy Carter. CRA allowed Fannie Mae to enable mortgage companies, savings and loans, commercial banks, credit unions, and state and local housing finance agencies to lend to home buyers. It allowed Fannie Mae to buy mortgages on the secondary market and sell them as mortgage-backed securities on the open market. President H.W. Bush had to enact a law to increase public oversight in 1989 due to the S&L crisis. In 1995 Clinton added new regulations to increase access to mortgage credit for inner city and distressed rural communities. CRA mortgage loans increased by 39% from by 1998 while other loans increased by only 17%. I already mentioned what took place in 1999 with the additions by Democrats to CRA through the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999. You may not like it but most of the problems occurring today fall in the lap of Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, and the Democrats. The only ones trying to regulate these foreseen issues have been Republicans. "
Daviss Firm received $15,000 since 2006 but Davis separated from the firm in 2006. The appearance of impropriety is important to consider. The interesting thing about the date 2006 is that John McCain and the Republicans tried to push a bill through to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Obama sat by silently similar to his notorious present votes in the Illinios legislature. I know that Obama has received $165,000 in contributions from associates of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac compared to McCains $22,000. McCain collected that amount in 30 years while Obama collected his amount in the past few months.
McCain was found not guilty of dissuading investigators of anything in the Keating 5 situation. Please lets deal in facts and not try to mislead and make things up. Investigations that exonerate a person some how makes them guilty in your book.
The Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) was established in 1977 by Jimmy Carter. CRA allowed Fannie Mae to enable mortgage companies, savings and loans, commercial banks, credit unions, and state and local housing finance agencies to lend to home buyers. It allowed Fannie Mae to buy mortgages on the secondary market and sell them as mortgage-backed securities on the open market. President H.W. Bush had to enact a law to increase public oversight in 1989 due to the S&L crisis. In 1995 Clinton added new regulations to increase access to mortgage credit for inner city and distressed rural communities. CRA mortgage loans increased by 39% from by 1998 while other loans increased by only 17%. I already mentioned what took place in 1999 with the additions by Democrats to CRA through the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999. You may not like it but most of the problems occurring today fall in the lap of Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, and the Democrats. The only ones trying to regulate these foreseen issues have been Republicans. "
MTRICH wrote on Sep 27, 2008 8:58 PM:
" skooter
Rick Davis has not been a registered lobbyist for over three years. He was a congressional lobbyist for freddie&fannie more than 3 years ago and made half of what you claim. Yes the huffington post posted the false information but they will not post the truth--there's news! It is just as easy to make connections with Joe Biden and fred/fan but of course it is not so easy with Mr. Obama--he has been in Washington such a short time you can barely make a connection between him and most of the members of his own party in the senate. of course only one of the above people tried to real in Fannie/Freddie--that was John McCain who warn two years ago that something had to be done about the way they were doing business. The FACTS sure change the way all that works out don't your think? "
Rick Davis has not been a registered lobbyist for over three years. He was a congressional lobbyist for freddie&fannie more than 3 years ago and made half of what you claim. Yes the huffington post posted the false information but they will not post the truth--there's news! It is just as easy to make connections with Joe Biden and fred/fan but of course it is not so easy with Mr. Obama--he has been in Washington such a short time you can barely make a connection between him and most of the members of his own party in the senate. of course only one of the above people tried to real in Fannie/Freddie--that was John McCain who warn two years ago that something had to be done about the way they were doing business. The FACTS sure change the way all that works out don't your think? "
purple wrote on Sep 27, 2008 7:31 PM:
" "skooter"
smart governmemnt - now there is an oxymoron!
DEREGULATION - I find it funnier than [blank] that democrats constantly blame republicans for deregulation. Voting in favor of deregulation DID NOT happen in a vacuum, it took YES votes from MANY democrats for any deregulation bill to pass.
Soooooo guess what, DEMOCRATS as JUST AS responsible for deregulation as republicans. "
smart governmemnt - now there is an oxymoron!
DEREGULATION - I find it funnier than [blank] that democrats constantly blame republicans for deregulation. Voting in favor of deregulation DID NOT happen in a vacuum, it took YES votes from MANY democrats for any deregulation bill to pass.
Soooooo guess what, DEMOCRATS as JUST AS responsible for deregulation as republicans. "
skooter wrote on Sep 27, 2008 5:11 PM:
" Saint20 - its easy to make a connection with a F. Mac & Mae and McCain. Its his campain mgr Rick Davis who's made millions from Fannie/Freddie (30K a moth for 5 yrs) for providing access to McCain if elected. A Freddie Mac Sen VP came out and said that a McCain staff photo looked like it was taken at their lobbyist meetings - all of the same people.
McCain was part of the Keating5 and even tried to dissuade the investigator from looking at his S&L buddy.
Deregulation has always been pushed by the right and is the first play in their playbook. Just as with MTpower here, a lot of people were bought and sold a bill of goods about dereg being good for competition and for us. its was obviously BS. Democrats who ever voted for deregulation at the sake of the taxpayer should be ashamed.
There is a role for smart government and oversight to avoid us taxpayers getting shafted after every Enron, MTpower, keating S&L and this latest bailout (they want you to call it a "rescue" instead of a bailout now please).
And its just the the repubs to try and cover for the corporations and blame those nasty people taking out loans by citing CRA. The link is considered dubious at best by many - and as another attempt at scape-goating anybody but those responsible.
How many times has some right winger claimed the untrue BS in here that Obama was going to socialize Health Care? Don't look now -your president and his backers (yes, McCain) have socialized your financial system in the blink of an eye. "
McCain was part of the Keating5 and even tried to dissuade the investigator from looking at his S&L buddy.
Deregulation has always been pushed by the right and is the first play in their playbook. Just as with MTpower here, a lot of people were bought and sold a bill of goods about dereg being good for competition and for us. its was obviously BS. Democrats who ever voted for deregulation at the sake of the taxpayer should be ashamed.
There is a role for smart government and oversight to avoid us taxpayers getting shafted after every Enron, MTpower, keating S&L and this latest bailout (they want you to call it a "rescue" instead of a bailout now please).
And its just the the repubs to try and cover for the corporations and blame those nasty people taking out loans by citing CRA. The link is considered dubious at best by many - and as another attempt at scape-goating anybody but those responsible.
How many times has some right winger claimed the untrue BS in here that Obama was going to socialize Health Care? Don't look now -your president and his backers (yes, McCain) have socialized your financial system in the blink of an eye. "
Nutmeg wrote on Sep 26, 2008 7:31 PM:
" The facts are we all --- well 95% of us - will be better off if we elected Senator Obama our next President.
Considering McCain's ongoing erratic behavior I also trust Obama-Biden to actually follow through with their goals and are not just lying to get elected. "
Considering McCain's ongoing erratic behavior I also trust Obama-Biden to actually follow through with their goals and are not just lying to get elected. "
MTRICH wrote on Sep 26, 2008 6:16 PM:
" I have no reason to question your facts. I agree that Obama intends to lower taxes on 95% of the people and make the other 5% pay your share for you. I just personally will not make my money by stealing it from those who have more than me. I see most here have no such compunction. Fair taxation for all just doesn't seem to be something you folks can understand. Steal from the rich!...steal from the rich!!...steal from the rich!!! if you say it enough you may even be able to live with yourself. Of course you have to change all those great statements this country was built uponyou know, like equal protection under the law (unless you are richer than me). No taxation without representation (unless you are richer then me). All men are created equal (unless you are richer than me). Ask not what your country can do for you - (ask what your country can do to redistribute wealth to me.) I do not wish to live in an egalitarian society myself and I simply have to believe none who have thought the process out would. "
capital_city wrote on Sep 26, 2008 4:27 PM:
" Elizabeth, what taxes are you talking about? Income, payroll, or capital gains? Payroll and captial gains affects us all. It appears you are referring to the income tax, so you may have done some fact checking on that issue. Obama has stated that he would like to put no cap on payroll taxes and raise the capital gains tax to as high as 35%. This may not affect how you and I do business. However, Investors, small businesses, and people who create jobs for people like me don't want to hear that. Also, when businesses pay higher taxes, the employee benefits are the first suffer. "
MtMadeMan wrote on Sep 26, 2008 3:05 PM:
" It was not Bush deregulation as much as it was the democrats who fought both Bush and McCain who tried to install oversite but were thwarted by all the democrats getting sweetheart loans from the banks they were supposed to watch. They also encouraged all the subprime mortgages. Obama got more in one year from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac then McCain in 5 years. Revisonist history will not work anymore. The internet lets the citizens find the facts the media ignores.
Check out the "Comunity Reinvestment Act" here;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5tZc8oH--o
or google it.
As to taxes, 49% of the people pay no taxes or recieve more than they pay. It is not a tax rebate when you give them "tax breaks" it is redistributing the money of those with money to those without, pure communism.
Tax cuts are a ploy to buy votes by using public money. We need moderate taxes and massive cuts in government spending.
McCain bad for the country, Obama total destruction for the country. "
Check out the "Comunity Reinvestment Act" here;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5tZc8oH--o
or google it.
As to taxes, 49% of the people pay no taxes or recieve more than they pay. It is not a tax rebate when you give them "tax breaks" it is redistributing the money of those with money to those without, pure communism.
Tax cuts are a ploy to buy votes by using public money. We need moderate taxes and massive cuts in government spending.
McCain bad for the country, Obama total destruction for the country. "
Saint20 wrote on Sep 26, 2008 3:01 PM:
" Scooter,
The Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999 was approved by a majority of Republicans and Democrats in both houses and signed into law by President Clinton. The deregulation bill was written by Phil Gramm a Texas Senator at the time. McCain was not present for the vote and was the only Senator at the time not to vote for the Bill. Im sure this will lead to speculation.
Everyone agreed with the deregulation. The democrats pushed for stronger privacy rights with the bill and to strengthen the Community Reinvestment Act. The Community Reinvestment Act is what made it so that loan and credit laws became more liberal and available to more people regardless of income or credit.
Scooter, you can blame the financial crisis on the right and Phil Gramm but the provisions that caused the current crisis were added by Democrats at the opposition of Republicans. The same changes gave Fannie and Freddie extraordinary leverage allowing them to only need under 3% of capital to back investments. Banks have to have 10%. Scooter, if you are looking for connections to presidential candidates connect the dots between campaign contributions and lobbyists from Fannie and Freddie to the Obama campaign.
I look forward to engaging the Obama supporters based on the facts. I was a Romney supporter but Ill take McCain over Obama based on policy. "
The Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999 was approved by a majority of Republicans and Democrats in both houses and signed into law by President Clinton. The deregulation bill was written by Phil Gramm a Texas Senator at the time. McCain was not present for the vote and was the only Senator at the time not to vote for the Bill. Im sure this will lead to speculation.
Everyone agreed with the deregulation. The democrats pushed for stronger privacy rights with the bill and to strengthen the Community Reinvestment Act. The Community Reinvestment Act is what made it so that loan and credit laws became more liberal and available to more people regardless of income or credit.
Scooter, you can blame the financial crisis on the right and Phil Gramm but the provisions that caused the current crisis were added by Democrats at the opposition of Republicans. The same changes gave Fannie and Freddie extraordinary leverage allowing them to only need under 3% of capital to back investments. Banks have to have 10%. Scooter, if you are looking for connections to presidential candidates connect the dots between campaign contributions and lobbyists from Fannie and Freddie to the Obama campaign.
I look forward to engaging the Obama supporters based on the facts. I was a Romney supporter but Ill take McCain over Obama based on policy. "
Saint20 wrote on Sep 26, 2008 2:25 PM:
" My family has an adjusted gross income of $75,000. The McCain plan will give us additional deductions of $10,500 for our three kids in addition to the $5,000 tax credit for health care. That is a tax savings of over $7,000.
I prepare taxes and if you make over $40,000 as a family and have kids McCains plan is better. If you are a single parent with a low income Obamas plan is better. Each individual situation is different if the candidates are able to deliver what they are campaigning. Given current events I think tax cuts will be difficult.
I saw your figures in the previous posts and I am always skeptical of averages. I can tell you that the figures are misleading simply because most people with incomes of $11,000 to $17,000 with kids do not actually pay taxes but get a credit above what they paid in taxes from the Federal Government. An article saying additional credits (what Obama is offering) are a tax decrease is misleading, unless the figures are only for single people or families with no children. In addition, our tax system is based on a progressive tax rate. So tax deductions increase as you pay more taxes. So the more you pay in taxes the more benefit you recieve from tax deductions. Tax credits stay the same unless you are phased out based on income. I think that the statistics noted in the previous posts must not include the $5,000 tax credit for Health Care. That credit alone outweighs any credit offered by Obama. If you do not pay for health care then you would not benefit; however, most of the people in the U.S. without health insurance are again single. In summation if you make over $40,000, have kids, and pay health insurance you should vote for McCain if taxes are important to you.
Each individual situation is different if the candidates are able to deliver what they are campaigning.
One think I like about Obama's plan is that it limits the amount of taxes paid by Senior citizens. This type of legislation is long over due. I prepare taxes and i hate handing Senior citizens a tax return with a $5,000 to $10,000 tax bill. "
I prepare taxes and if you make over $40,000 as a family and have kids McCains plan is better. If you are a single parent with a low income Obamas plan is better. Each individual situation is different if the candidates are able to deliver what they are campaigning. Given current events I think tax cuts will be difficult.
I saw your figures in the previous posts and I am always skeptical of averages. I can tell you that the figures are misleading simply because most people with incomes of $11,000 to $17,000 with kids do not actually pay taxes but get a credit above what they paid in taxes from the Federal Government. An article saying additional credits (what Obama is offering) are a tax decrease is misleading, unless the figures are only for single people or families with no children. In addition, our tax system is based on a progressive tax rate. So tax deductions increase as you pay more taxes. So the more you pay in taxes the more benefit you recieve from tax deductions. Tax credits stay the same unless you are phased out based on income. I think that the statistics noted in the previous posts must not include the $5,000 tax credit for Health Care. That credit alone outweighs any credit offered by Obama. If you do not pay for health care then you would not benefit; however, most of the people in the U.S. without health insurance are again single. In summation if you make over $40,000, have kids, and pay health insurance you should vote for McCain if taxes are important to you.
Each individual situation is different if the candidates are able to deliver what they are campaigning.
One think I like about Obama's plan is that it limits the amount of taxes paid by Senior citizens. This type of legislation is long over due. I prepare taxes and i hate handing Senior citizens a tax return with a $5,000 to $10,000 tax bill. "
ks wrote on Sep 26, 2008 2:06 PM:
" You wanna know what I dont get? These Obama supporters who think they should have the lower end of taxes because they are "lower class" but yet they are still able to buy new cars and fix up their houses and get free or reduced lunches/ or medical care because they have three or four kids. What sense does that make? Honestly this is true. The way I look at it, if they can fork four or five hundred out for a vehicle a month and then more money on there house then why the heck should they pay less than the rest of us?? "
kzeiler wrote on Sep 26, 2008 11:11 AM:
" Hmmm...first round of comments to this letter seem have been moderated. And the wild-eyed right wingnuts are notably absent. Must be having to consult Townhall.com on how to counter facts. I guess all they could do is artificially jack up the "ratings" here.
Last time I try to predict what purple & the usual suspects are going to do.... "
Last time I try to predict what purple & the usual suspects are going to do.... "
ematt wrote on Sep 26, 2008 8:57 AM:
" Sorry Elizabeth,
"Facts" are not going to sway McCain supportors... "
"Facts" are not going to sway McCain supportors... "
skosena wrote on Sep 26, 2008 8:19 AM:
" neither tax plan is going to work when you take into account our current economic situation.....700 billion....1 trillion.....taxes are going up. "
skooter wrote on Sep 26, 2008 8:11 AM:
" You'd think that you can't argue with facts - but some will start railing on you here soon in the comments.
The only problem now is that the Bush's bailouts to date and this new, huge bailout fiasco brought on by the right deregulating financial markets (laws written by P. Gramm McCain's advisor/lobbyist) like they did Energy (can you say ENRON) and other markets...its going to be real hard for either candidate to do either tax cut plan.
BUT, I guarantee you one thing, Obama will find a way to make sure the burden of Bush (and by proxy McCain's) boondoggle doesn't fall on just OUR (working Americans) heads. The wealthy will pay their share too. "
The only problem now is that the Bush's bailouts to date and this new, huge bailout fiasco brought on by the right deregulating financial markets (laws written by P. Gramm McCain's advisor/lobbyist) like they did Energy (can you say ENRON) and other markets...its going to be real hard for either candidate to do either tax cut plan.
BUT, I guarantee you one thing, Obama will find a way to make sure the burden of Bush (and by proxy McCain's) boondoggle doesn't fall on just OUR (working Americans) heads. The wealthy will pay their share too. "
kzeiler wrote on Sep 26, 2008 7:39 AM:
" So just who the heck had the time to drive the ratings on this to 1.4 with 100 ratings. 100 ratings by 7:30am? Highly doubt that's real.
Must be someone who really doesn't like the facts involved with comparing Obama's proposed tax cuts to McCain's. Once again, here's a good graphical comparison.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/06/09/ST2008060900950.html
Looking forward to comments from the usual suspects - I'll predict that purple's already submitted some failed trickle-down economics "but the rich will just raise prices on us" arguments. "
Must be someone who really doesn't like the facts involved with comparing Obama's proposed tax cuts to McCain's. Once again, here's a good graphical comparison.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/06/09/ST2008060900950.html
Looking forward to comments from the usual suspects - I'll predict that purple's already submitted some failed trickle-down economics "but the rich will just raise prices on us" arguments. "
Share Article
Nutmeg wrote on Oct 10, 2008 12:31 PM:
I would rather take care of strong military, good schools, domestic energy, jobs, health care, safe bridges and roads FIRST --- then the rest can "trickle up" to the rich McCain-Palin conservatives. "