Comparison of Obama and McCain tax plans.

[TheBDB]

Here is a comparison of each candidates tax plans based on family income. Looks like this doesn't include the effects of the Bush cuts expiring in 2010. I am a little surprised that the plans are exactly what I expected them to be. McCain cuts taxes on everyone, more for the higher brackets, and is not revenue neutral. Obama is revenue neutral, has bigger cuts for the lower brackets and taxes the sh!t out of the rich. I fall in the area where it doesn't matter much between the two for me personally, so I guess I will give my support to Obama's plan.

 

[jpeyton]

Actually that's a comparison of Obama's and Bush's tax plans 😉

 

[Rainsford]

While the merits of each plan can be debated, I think this is an interesting graph to remember when Republicans inevitably say that Obama will "raise your taxes". For the vast majority of Americans, Republicans are outright lying when they make statements like that, and even if you are generous and interpret their comments to mean your taxes won't go down as much as they will under McCain, they are still talking about a small percentage of Americans. It's only really true when you start talking about families with annual incomes above $600k, but I doubt Republicans would be very successful running a campaign to help folks in that income bracket.

 

[glenn1]

Originally posted by: Rainsford
While the merits of each plan can be debated, I think this is an interesting graph to remember when Republicans inevitably say that Obama will "raise your taxes". For the vast majority of Americans, Republicans are outright lying when they make statements like that, and even if you are generous and interpret their comments to mean your taxes won't go down as much as they will under McCain, they are still talking about a small percentage of Americans. It's only really true when you start talking about families with annual incomes above $600k, but I doubt Republicans would be very successful running a campaign to help folks in that income bracket.

I'm not sure on what basis McCain is making that claim, but to be fair most of the tax relief Obama is proposing is not in terms of marginal rates, but rather new tax credits. For some that might be splitting hairs because the taxes owed will decrease, but for others it might not depending on whether they're eligible for the credits.

For example, Obama's own website gives the example "Married Couple Making $75,000 with two children, one of whom is in college: $3,700 (includes $1,000 Making Work Pay; $500 universal mortgage credit; and $4,000 college credit net of current college credits)." For a similar couple who were renting and whose child had already graduated from college would recieve far less tax relief, or maybe none at all.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

How many of these kinds of threads do we need?

 

[Dari]

It's really fucked up how McCain's tax savings go down the less you make. If that isn't a huge "FUCK YOU" to middle America I don't know what is.

 

[evident]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
How many of these kinds of threads do we need?

as many as the times you see mccain's "OBAMA WILL RAISE YOUR TAXES AND RAPE YOU" commercials

 

[closetskelly]

Theyre both going to raise taxes, its just a matter of on who and by how much. and therein lies the dilemma

 

[evident]

Originally posted by: closetskelly
Theyre both going to raise taxes, its just a matter of on who and by how much. and therein lies the dilemma

sad part is. GWB raised all of our taxes by starting all this bullshit. my generation is gonna have a huge tax burden one way or the other so it doesn't make a difference anyways

 

[Czar]

Bottom three amounts to 60% of taxpayers.

So Mccain wants them to have about $150 in savings, wohoo.
Obama wants them to have $833.

$830 matters alot to many people, but $150 wont make a difference to most.



and do those making over a million dollars per year need extra $200.000 to survive?

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
How many of these kinds of threads do we need?

No one makes you read the fact-oriented threads. One would conclude from reading your posts you have done pretty well at avoiding them.

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: Czar
and do those making over a million dollars per year need extra $200.000 to survive?

The question is not "do you need it" but rather is it fair you're punished in comparison to the rest of society simply because you were successful financially.

Though the reality is it doesn't really matter for those making that much money, as they will just find new and creative ways to shelter their earnings.

The people who will feel things the worst are the $75-$200K bracket IMHO

 

[Juddog]

Originally posted by: Czar
Bottom three amounts to 60% of taxpayers.

So Mccain wants them to have about $150 in savings, wohoo.
Obama wants them to have $833.

$830 matters alot to many people, but $150 wont make a difference to most.



and do those making over a million dollars per year need extra $200.000 to survive?

^^ Cosigned, basically this is McCain giving America's middle class the middle finger while he hands out money to his rich buddies. Yeah we've seen where trickle-down economics has gotten this country the past 8 years, combined with "borrow and spend" Reaganomics.

 

[Jhhnn]

Originally posted by: glenn1

Originally posted by: Rainsford
While the merits of each plan can be debated, I think this is an interesting graph to remember when Republicans inevitably say that Obama will "raise your taxes". For the vast majority of Americans, Republicans are outright lying when they make statements like that, and even if you are generous and interpret their comments to mean your taxes won't go down as much as they will under McCain, they are still talking about a small percentage of Americans. It's only really true when you start talking about families with annual incomes above $600k, but I doubt Republicans would be very successful running a campaign to help folks in that income bracket.

I'm not sure on what basis McCain is making that claim, but to be fair most of the tax relief Obama is proposing is not in terms of marginal rates, but rather new tax credits. For some that might be splitting hairs because the taxes owed will decrease, but for others it might not depending on whether they're eligible for the credits.

For example, Obama's own website gives the example "Married Couple Making $75,000 with two children, one of whom is in college: $3,700 (includes $1,000 Making Work Pay; $500 universal mortgage credit; and $4,000 college credit net of current college credits)." For a similar couple who were renting and whose child had already graduated from college would recieve far less tax relief, or maybe none at all.

Yeh- And so what? That still doesn't support the lie from the McCain camp that Obama will raise your taxes, now does it?

From bozack-

The question is not "do you need it" but rather is it fair you're punished in comparison to the rest of society simply because you were successful financially.

How lame. The vast majority of Americans merely wish they were being "punished" in such a fashion while making that kind of money.

Shee-it, Sherlock, most of us would volunteer... And if the take-home pay of financial industry execs vs the results achieved are any indication, would probably do a better job of it.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
How many of these kinds of threads do we need?

No one makes you read the fact-oriented threads. One would conclude from reading your posts you have done pretty well at avoiding them.

:roll: I posted in the other threads about this subject. How many times does it need to be shown to you people that BHO WILL raise your taxes before you'll stop posting these threads?

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Dari
It's really fucked up how McCain's tax savings go down the less you make. If that isn't a huge "FUCK YOU" to middle America I don't know what is.

I believe this may be due to refundable credits Obama gives to people who dont income pay taxes.
When 50% of the population essentially dont pay federal income taxes in this country. How the hell do you sell them on an "income" tax cut? Give them money from the higher income bracket of course.

 

[chess9]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Dari
It's really fucked up how McCain's tax savings go down the less you make. If that isn't a huge "FUCK YOU" to middle America I don't know what is.

I believe this may be due to refundable credits Obama gives to people who dont income pay taxes.
When 50% of the population essentially dont pay federal income taxes in this country. How the hell do you sell them on an "income" tax cut? Give them money from the higher income bracket of course.

Is that a bit like giving my middle income taxes to investment bankers and others who hold mortgage backed securities? 😉 Or, is it actually better? This Congress seems ready to rob from the poor to give to the rich...yet again.

-Robert

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: chess9

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Dari
It's really fucked up how McCain's tax savings go down the less you make. If that isn't a huge "FUCK YOU" to middle America I don't know what is.

I believe this may be due to refundable credits Obama gives to people who dont income pay taxes.
When 50% of the population essentially dont pay federal income taxes in this country. How the hell do you sell them on an "income" tax cut? Give them money from the higher income bracket of course.

Is that a bit like giving my middle income taxes to investment bankers and others who hold mortgage backed securities? 😉 Or, is it actually better? This Congress seems ready to rob from the poor to give to the rich...yet again.

-Robert

I dont like that either but it is a point that needs to be made. Our progressive scale has tilted so far that under Obama the majority of the income earners in this country wont even be eligible to pay taxes. Hell it may even be they get paid just for working from higher income earners.

Now is that a bad thing? I dont know and we will find out. I see it like this.

Majority of the population doesnt feel the cost of the govt, doesnt have a share within the govt since they dont fund it and they run amok because they dont understand the costs because they dont pay it.

On the other I see it going as the rich pay for govt, the rich get the govt they want.

Or a third option is the middle class is resurrected.

I think the 3rd option is a longshot judging by the increase in govt and the income gap seem to correlate. But I could see option 1 or 2 happening.

 

[Jhhnn]

Nice to see CSG sputtering and spouting the party line, as usual- particularly when it's transparently dishonest.

Use of the BHO codeword is particularly telling.

The sad truth is that federal revenue must be increased if we're to pay for all the foreign and domestic adventurism of the past Admin, and that we can't get blood out of a turnip. Therefore, those at the top, those who've benefitted most from the years of excess, will be asked to pay up.

 

[Robor]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
How many of these kinds of threads do we need?

No one makes you read the fact-oriented threads. One would conclude from reading your posts you have done pretty well at avoiding them.

:roll: I posted in the other threads about this subject. How many times does it need to be shown to you people that BHO WILL raise your taxes before you'll stop posting these threads?

Proof?

 

[GTKeeper]

I just wonder what the Repub supporters say in this regard:

Obama's plan is revenue neutral
McCain's plan will reduce the amount of gov't revenue.

What is the response based on that, especially since we are facing such huge deficits at this point.

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
How lame. The vast majority of Americans merely wish they were being "punished" in such a fashion while making that kind of money.

Shee-it, Sherlock, most of us would volunteer... And if the take-home pay of financial industry execs vs the results achieved are any indication, would probably do a better job of it.

You hold to this robin hood mentality because you are not there, I would be more than willing to bet that if you were in these people's position you might feel diferently.

But like I said, this matters not to the truly wealthy as they can find many ways to not pay taxes.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: GTKeeper
I just wonder what the Repub supporters say in this regard:

Obama's plan is revenue neutral
McCain's plan will reduce the amount of gov't revenue.

What is the response based on that, especially since we are facing such huge deficits at this point.

WTF is revenue neutral mean?

McCain's is just fine as long as he follows through to reduce spending to match his loss of revenue.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: bozack

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
How lame. The vast majority of Americans merely wish they were being "punished" in such a fashion while making that kind of money.

Shee-it, Sherlock, most of us would volunteer... And if the take-home pay of financial industry execs vs the results achieved are any indication, would probably do a better job of it.

You hold to this robin hood mentality because you are not there, I would be more than willing to bet that if you were in these people's position you might feel diferently.

But like I said, this matters not to the truly wealthy as they can find many ways to not pay taxes.

Funny how the rish find ways to avoid taxes and yet pay the most in volume. Care to explain that?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: GTKeeper
I just wonder what the Repub supporters say in this regard:

Obama's plan is revenue neutral
McCain's plan will reduce the amount of gov't revenue.

What is the response based on that, especially since we are facing such huge deficits at this point.

WTF is revenue neutral mean?

McCain's is just fine as long as he follows through to reduce spending to match his loss of revenue.

"revenue neutral" is just another attempt by the left to suggest tax-cuts "cost". They have been trying to pull this BS for years and some people just eat it up but anyone with 2 licks of sense knows that SPENDING is where "cost" is.