Obama’s tax plan

By Randy Koutnik, P.O. Box 236, Clancy - 10/22/08

Why haven’t specific questions been raised regarding Senator Obama’s financial plan for our country, in particular his reference to a $250,000 cutoff for earnings. Is he talking about gross or net? Is he talking about those who file their taxes as an individual, couple or a business? Personally, this would be devastating to my family, and I have spoken with people of the private small business sector who likewise state it would be financially devastating to them. His plan also seems to fly in the face of the small business sector in that it impedes the motivation to expand businesses, which normally leads to more employment and stimulus to a community. At the very foundation of this is the erosion of a solid work ethic in our country and communities and self responsibility for financial improvement and money management. Financial equity cannot and should not be mandated.


4 stars
Current rating: 4 with 32 ratings.


Untitled Document Please login to enter comment :
*Member ID:
*Password:
  Forgot Your Password?
 

Click here to register
Reader Comments:

purple wrote on Nov 3, 2008 6:42 PM:

" How long will it take for obama and company to lower the threshhold to say those making more than $ 75,000 per year will see massive tax increases?

Anyone catch how obama plans to bankrupt those entities which want to build coal-fired energy plants. Does that not constitute a threat to Montana's economic future? If coal-fired plants are forced to pay higher fees [fines, etc.] for emmissions, then the production of coal will decline.

Remember Montana's "rainy day" fund? The state has hundreds of millions invested in a COAL TRUST FUND. How much will that trust fund be worth if coal goes the way of the dinosaur? Pennies on the dollar perhaps? "

capital_city wrote on Nov 3, 2008 10:24 AM:

" Okay, anyone take a stab at these:
1) Fact: Just today, at his rally, Obama announced he is going back to the 1990's tax plan for anyone making over $125k, which means taxes will go up for those people. In the next sentence he said no one under $250k will see a tax increase. How does that work?
2) Fact: 40% of people do not pay income taxes. How do you cut income taxes for a group who does not pay income taxes?
3) Fact: 40% of workers do not pay income taxes. How do you give 95% of workers a tax cut, when only 60% of workers pay income taxes? "

gun961960 wrote on Oct 23, 2008 9:55 AM:

" Hey Ding (intersting name BTW)...I have taken this opportunity to help you out by copying Mr. Obamas plan for you and pasting it here:
Cut taxes for 95 percent of workers and their families with a tax cut of $500 for workers or $1,000 for working couples.
Provide generous tax cuts for low- and middle-income seniors, homeowners, the uninsured, and families sending a child to college or looking to save and accumulate wealth.
Eliminate capital gains taxes for small businesses, cut corporate taxes for firms that invest and create jobs in the United States, and provide tax credits to reduce the cost of healthcare and to reward investments in innovation.
Dramatically simplify taxes by consolidating existing tax credits, eliminating the need for millions of senior citizens to file tax forms, and enabling as many as 40 million middle-class Americans to do their own taxes in less than five minutes without an accountant.
Under the Obama Plan:
Middle class families will see their taxes cut and no family making less than $250,000 will see their taxes increase. The typical middle class family will receive well over $1,000 in tax relief under the Obama plan, and will pay tax rates that are 20% lower than they faced under President Reagan. According to the Tax Policy Center, the Obama plan provides three times as much tax relief for middle class families as the McCain plan.
Families making more than $250,000 will pay either the same or lower tax rates than they paid in the 1990s. Obama will ask the wealthiest 2% of families to give back a portion of the tax cuts they have received over the past eight years to ensure we are restoring fairness and returning to fiscal responsibility. But no family will pay higher tax rates than they would have paid in the 1990s. In fact, dividend rates would be 39 percent lower than what President Bush proposed in his 2001 tax cut.
Obamas plan will cut taxes overall, reducing revenues to below the levels that prevailed under Ronald Reagan (less than 18.2 percent of GDP). The Obama tax plan is a net tax cut his tax relief for middle class families is larger than the revenue raised by his tax changes for families over $250,000. Coupled with his commitment to cut unnecessary spending, Obama will pay for this tax relief while bringing down the budget deficit.

Please notice in the first SENTENCE it states fairly clearly that he plans to give a tax cut to 95% of WORKERS!! DING...there it is!! "

MTRICH wrote on Oct 22, 2008 10:14 PM:

" bigp
you really should look into what bushs tax breaks did for you. I know...you have bought into the BS that the Rich got a bigger tax break than those poorer. Sorry but they still pay more taxes than you do by far, both by percentage and really more by actual dollars paid. If I give a tax break of 1% to two people and one makes 100,000 per year and on makes 50,0000 per year. Did the richer one get a bigger tax break? The way the Repubs see it--1% is 1% so they got the SAME tax break. Democrat mathematical theory says I gave a BIGGER TAX BREAK TO THE RICH. They would (and do) say that the richer one got twice the tax break. Of course that does not even take into account that we are subtracting that 1% from the 35% tax rate (in my little story) for the rich and from the 16% or so you most likely pay. So, do we call paying 34% tax a big break in a SPECIAL kind of math known a Democrat Math??? I often complain that peoples sense of right and wrong requires a political party affiliation but now I find that math has a political party too. "

Ding wrote on Oct 22, 2008 9:41 PM:

" It's interesting that Obama says 95% of people will get a "tax cut" under his plan when 40% of earners in this country do not even pay federal income taxes. Giving tax dollars to people who don't pay taxes is called welfare. Should we really trust someone who can't perform basic arithmetic?

Socialism was already tried and it failed - now Obama wants to resurrect it from its grave. While the socialist countries of Europe are reducing taxes, Obama wants to buck the trend. Go figure. "

peacockridge wrote on Oct 22, 2008 5:37 PM:

" Re: Randy Koutnik and Speed Smith letters about taxes in 10/22 Reader's Alley- where to start.
1.Taxes are figured on net, not gross income.
2.We currently have a regressive tax structure in this country. The wealthy pay a smaller percentage of their income in taxes. The working class pays a higher percentage of their income in taxes. Obama's plan would address this, but I doubt if it would reverse it.
3.Trickle down econimics has, for 30 years, not worked. The average wage of the working class over that period has gone down (adjusted for infalation) and the average income of the wealthy has gone through the roof. Every time productivity goes up the CEO's get their raise (and then some) and then give the workers a virtual pay cut. Then they go to the Republicans in Congress to get a tax cut.
4.If Joe the Plumber wants to pay a smaller percentage of his income in taxes then grow grow grow. Become a millionaire or multi millionaire.
5.Most of the Federal Budget goes to pay for the military and for retirees in Social Securtiy and Medicare. "

Adam Laceky wrote on Oct 22, 2008 11:32 AM:

" Really, it's not that hard to find the answers:

http://www.barackobama.com/taxes/ "

daemon wrote on Oct 22, 2008 11:22 AM:

" What "cutoff?" Obama's not capping income at $250. IQ's must be dropping. "

gln wrote on Oct 22, 2008 11:21 AM:

" not sure who has other info but the plans are based on "AFTER TAXES", so after all your write-offs, see the attached links:
http://www.theliberaloc.com/2008/08/27/obama-tax-plan-vs-mccains-tax-plan-which-one-is-better-for-you/

http://obama.3cdn.net/b7be3b7cd08e587dca_v852mv8ja.pdf

but giving the >~$500k big breaks has not worked, but for the past YEARS!, getting maybe a 4% raise (if lucky) has been the norm so, really it hasn't worked. about time to get the money working in another direction- I'm for change. "

ccsaintdawg wrote on Oct 22, 2008 10:18 AM:

" Randy says, "Financial equity cannot and should not be mandated."

Well, since 1913 the U.S. has had a "progressive" tax, i.e., the top 5% of the wealthy pay more tax. This isn't anything new.

Read and know your history before making comments bashing Obama's tax plan. "

ematt wrote on Oct 22, 2008 8:46 AM:

" Randy-
Not sure if you are going to find much sympathy because of the "devastation" that you would have to pay an extra 3% on your earnings over 250K... "

saber69 wrote on Oct 22, 2008 8:34 AM:

" Randy I understand your concern. I just can not get past some of his plans on this. I do not make over 250,000 so under his plan it would seem that I would benefit however when you take a closer look at it there are holes. He wants to give a tax credit to everyone regardless if they pay taxes are not. He will tax the business's more however they will just raise their prices and pass that expense on to us. He will extend unemployment benefits so why look for a job and pay into the system when you can sit at home and draw a paycheck. I am all for helping those that need a hand up but not a handout. I am still undecided so for those of you that are reading this, instead of soundbites to lash out at me could some of you pro Obama people educate me as to how I am wrong in this concern or what programs Obama has to stimulate getting America back to work and off feeding from the government. Maybe term limits on government assistance would be a great start. "

skooter wrote on Oct 22, 2008 8:33 AM:

" There's absolutely nothing wrong with examining the tax code of this country and trying to find a better balance - and that's never been socialist no matter what John and Sarah want to tell you. If it was it would have been every time they cut wealthy taxes and put more of the burden on us. The economic engine of this country is the middle class and it always has been. Give them/us more money and decent jobs, and the rest of the country prospers. That's what Obama's plan proposes.

Unfortunately, 8 years of Bush mismanagement has left us with unbalanced budgets, astronomically more debt & a 10 BILLION A MONTH WAR for 5 yrs. Someone has got to pay to knock that debt down. So its either more taxes on the middle class or more on the class that can at least afford to pay a little more.

I read today that for each MILLION a tax filer claims, they will pay 45K. That's a decent amount don't get me wrong - about the cost of a new BMW. But when you have a Million in income that's probably a fairly small percentage. And, if you are making that much, during the past 8 years you had a pretty sweet run and probably made a lot of money while the rest of us were probably less fortunate. "

capital_city wrote on Oct 22, 2008 8:09 AM:

" It has been discussed as: $250k for couples and businesses, $182k for individual filers and their business. All is based on gross income.
This tax plan should cover the new welfare plan being proposed and stimulate the 40% of workers who do not pay income taxes. "

gun961960 wrote on Oct 22, 2008 7:46 AM:

" Hey Randy...how do you know it would be devasdating to your family if you don't know the answers to your own questions? LOL You might want to take the effort you put into writing this ignorant letter into doing what might amount to five minutes of research to answer these questions. Sir, if you are so blessed to make 250,000 or more per year, especially in MT I say shut your trap and pay up MR. There are thousands of children and seniors in our state who need healthcare. We pay our teachers in MT a pathetic salary...your candidate wants to stay in Iraq until we achieve "VICTORY" and at the current rate means we could indeed be there for 100 more years. Your candidate believes in derugulation so you can expect more of the same in our financial crisis should he by some miracle get elected. So I think if you support McCain you should have to pay %50 in taxes to pay for all his victory seeking ideas. "

BigP wrote on Oct 22, 2008 7:43 AM:

" Well Randy, because of my income from the TWO jobs I work, one being a small business, I don't have any tax breaks because I don't earn near $250,000. But now Randy if you earn that much money, you have enjoyed the Bush Temporary Tax Break for the last 8 years, so now I have to say, if you are starting to see hard times and worry that you are going to suffer more, can you imagine what it is like for the rest of us that do not enjoy that same tax break and have been taxed to death.... Again, why is it when we give the rich a tax break that is considered good conservatizim, but when we give the middle class or the working poor a tax break, it is socializm? "

patriot wrote on Oct 22, 2008 6:03 AM:

" Randy,
Your point is well stated and one of reason for those who have worked hard to realize the American dream. Why should citizens who are successful carry the burden and pay nearly 40% of their income for redistribution to those who are not paying their share. Bring on the "fair tax" plan or "flat tax". "


Text Size:
Small | Medium | Large

View/Post Comments
 Email this story
  Print this story
 Rate Article
 Share Article

submit to reddit Delicious Digg!