I don't know where the 44% figure comes from--they must be counting social security recipients in the number of people who would pay no taxes. With the baby boomers hitting SS age, I can see that the number of filers who owe no tax would increase substantially under either Obama's or McCain's plans. WHERE ARE YOUR LINKS?
Obama's tax plan would increase the debt by $3.5 trillion by 2018, and McCain's would increase the debt by $5.0 ABOVE the CBO's forecasts for the next decade. Obama would provide more tax relief to the lower-income citizens who need it. I'll go with Obama's for the benefit of us all. Any greater discrepancy between the disposable income of the haves and the have-nots in this country and we'll be back to the days of class warfare and riots in the streets. How will your businesses do then?
"The Obama plan would reduce taxes for low- and moderate-income families, but raise them significantly for high-bracket taxpayers (see Figure 2). By 2012, middle-income taxpayers would see their after-tax income rise by about 5 percent, or nearly $2,200 annually. Those in the top 1 percent would face a $19,000 average tax increase—a 1.5 percent reduction in after-tax income.
McCain would lift after-tax incomes an average of about 3 percent, or $1,400 annually, for middle-income taxpayers by 2012. But, in sharp contrast to Obama, he would cut taxes for those in the top 1% by more than $125,000, raising their after-tax income an average 9.5 percent."
>>> So we should just get rid of corporate/small business taxes altogether, right?
There's certainly a case to be made for that argument. Like individuals, corporations pay a lot of other kinds of taxes. Close a few loopholes, remove a few deductions and a flat tax, like Huckabee proposed, could be very workable. But since that isn't likely to happen, I simply suggest that you make taxes "reasonable," rather than punitive, and you'll hear less whining because businesses are relocating or downsizing.
>>> And the owners and shareholders will create all the jobs we poor folk need after handsomely rewarding themselves. We've seen how trickle-down works on Wall Street and we say, "No thank you!"
Why do you begrudge the people who work the hardest and take the most responsibility and risk the rewards of their labors?
>>> I'd rather government create the jobs in the public sector and to hell with the greedy business owners.
Greedy...as in taking all the risks, working the hardest and sacrificing the most so that "poor folk" who are uneducated, untrained and unambitious can have a job? LOL!
>>> Socialism is looking pretty good to me these days, compare to the Capital-greedy-ME-ism we've been seeing lately!
I think the only "ME-ism" is in the mirror of liberals who support the kind of socialism and "corporo-hatred" you're selling. "Give it to ME-ME-ME...don't ask me to do anything for it, just give it to ME-ME-ME."
It's rather elitist of you, wouldn't you say, to assume that because I'm poor that I'm undeducated, untrained and unambitious? And that the rich work the hardest and sacrifice the most?
Cmon! Have you ever seen the construction workers repairing, in 100-degree heat, the roads on which the rich folks drive their gas-guzzling SUVs? How do you know they are undeducated? And how can you call them untrained and unambitious?
Well, the short answer for the 44% is it came from The Tax Foundation.
AND, coincidentally, our own Nobel Prize for Economics economist, Paul Krugman, who has been recently trashed (lol) has this to say about The Tax Foundation - along with other economists.
Some responses to the Tax Foundation's announcement of a new campaign called Compete USA which claims high corporate tax rates are hurting US competitiveness. First, Paul Krugman:
Run for the hills! Excessive taxes on corporations are threatening American prosperity, because we can’t match the low, low taxes of other advanced countries. Or so says the Tax Foundation, which is rolling out a new campaign called Compete USA. John McCain has already made big cuts in corporate taxes a big part of his agenda.
There’s a lot to say about this stuff, but right now I’d just like to mention one aspect. The Tax Foundation people start off with a graph that’s supposed to be terrifying, with the headline “Europe cuts rates while U.S. stands still”; the graph shows European tax rates dropping far below the US rate.
What they don’t make clear is that:
1. The graph shows the “statutory” tax rate, which is the maximum rate a corporation can pay in principle. But because corporate tax rules allow all kinds of deductions and exclusions, the statutory rate is a poor guide to the actual disincentives the corporate tax creates.
2. Even more important, while they don’t explain how they calculate the “average” tax rate, the fact that their own data show that all the big economies have tax rates above 30%, while their graph shows an average rate of about 27%, seems to indicated that they’re showing us an unweighted average — that is, one that makes small economies like Ireland and Greece seem as important as big economies like Japan and Germany. And whaddya know, corporate taxes in big economies tend to be similar to those in the United States, a point made by the Congressional Budget Office in the study from which the chart above is drawn. (Yes Germany cut rates this year. Big deal.)
So basically, the Tax Foundation wants us to be frightened of the Greek menace. How can American business survive in a world in which Greek corporations have a big tax advantage?
Wrong. Fact is, though our tax laws include statutory rates that are fairly high (35% for corporations earning about $18 million or more annually) but generally in the same ballpark as those of other developed western nations, the actual tax rates paid by US corporations are extraordinarily low, around 6%. Remember the latest GAO report (reported elsewhere on ataxingmatter) that shows that two-thirds of US corporations pay no federal income tax. That's not just the ones that are losing money, but also many corporations that have record high profits (including some Big Oil companies) that end up paying next to nothing in taxes.
>>> Did you hear the last debate, the one that the polls say McCain lost?
You say lost, I say won.
>>> Did you hear him say that "he" would be able to do all three things needed for the country if he were president at one time? Did you hear Obama say that he would not because we wouldn't be able to afford it?
I heard McCain propose a spending freeze. I also heard Obama say that he couldn't do everything...but then went on to list all of his hugely expensive programs that he wasn't going to drop.
>>> Anyway, a link to your figure of a trillion dollars and the figures for the 50 to $100 increase "only" to the middle class in tax cuts under Obama's plan, pleas
The information is pretty easy to find, you really should take a little time to get informed...
>>> It's rather elitist of you, wouldn't you say, to assume that because I'm poor that I'm undeducated, untrained and unambitious?
I don't recall making any assumptions about you, but who am I to disagree with you if you find an affinity with any characteristics that have been previously mentioned?
>>> And that the rich work the hardest and sacrifice the most?
That one is fairly accurate...by comparison, of course.
>>> Cmon! Have you ever seen the construction workers repairing, in 100-degree heat, the roads on which the rich folks drive their gas-guzzling SUVs?
Who do you imagine is paying that construction worker...who probably drives a huge gas-guzzling pickup? Who do you imagine gets the contracts that keep that construction worker working year after year? How do you imagine that construction company came into being?
>>> How do you know they are undeducated?
Generally speaking, "educated people" don't work repairing roads in 100-degree heat.
>>> And how can you call them untrained and unambitious?
Um...because they're construction workers repairing roads in 100-degree heat?
>>> McCain in the debate, which by the way I wasn't talking about what I thought about McCain losing the debate. According to the polls, the majority of the American people polled say he lost.
I guess it depends on who gets polled. In this case, it appears that a lot of stupid people were polled. ; )
>>> This is a snip ONLY about McCain's health care plan. The link is under it. His health care plan will cost 1.3 TRILLION - just the health care plan.
Besides the fact that your numbers are spread over 10 years just to make the number look big, it won't "cost" anything...it's "payed" for by a REDUCTION in taxes. On the other hand, Obama's will actually COST the government money...and you're going to pay.
Pages
I don't know where the 44% figure comes from--they must be counting social security recipients in the number of people who would pay no taxes. With the baby boomers hitting SS age, I can see that the number of filers who owe no tax would increase substantially under either Obama's or McCain's plans. WHERE ARE YOUR LINKS?
Obama's tax plan would increase the debt by $3.5 trillion by 2018, and McCain's would increase the debt by $5.0 ABOVE the CBO's forecasts for the next decade. Obama would provide more tax relief to the lower-income citizens who need it. I'll go with Obama's for the benefit of us all. Any greater discrepancy between the disposable income of the haves and the have-nots in this country and we'll be back to the days of class warfare and riots in the streets. How will your businesses do then?
"The Obama plan would reduce taxes for low- and moderate-income families, but raise them significantly for high-bracket taxpayers (see Figure 2). By 2012, middle-income taxpayers would see their after-tax income rise by about 5 percent, or nearly $2,200 annually. Those in the top 1 percent would face a $19,000 average tax increase—a 1.5 percent reduction in after-tax income.
McCain would lift after-tax incomes an average of about 3 percent, or $1,400 annually, for middle-income taxpayers by 2012. But, in sharp contrast to Obama, he would cut taxes for those in the top 1% by more than $125,000, raising their after-tax income an average 9.5 percent."
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/UploadedPDF/411750_updated_candidates_summary.pdf
-----------------------------------------------
http://www.pnhp.org/news/2009/october/meet_the_new_health_.php
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQTBYQlQ7yM
>>> So we should just get rid of corporate/small business taxes altogether, right?
There's certainly a case to be made for that argument. Like individuals, corporations pay a lot of other kinds of taxes. Close a few loopholes, remove a few deductions and a flat tax, like Huckabee proposed, could be very workable. But since that isn't likely to happen, I simply suggest that you make taxes "reasonable," rather than punitive, and you'll hear less whining because businesses are relocating or downsizing.
>>> And the owners and shareholders will create all the jobs we poor folk need after handsomely rewarding themselves. We've seen how trickle-down works on Wall Street and we say, "No thank you!"
Why do you begrudge the people who work the hardest and take the most responsibility and risk the rewards of their labors?
>>> I'd rather government create the jobs in the public sector and to hell with the greedy business owners.
Greedy...as in taking all the risks, working the hardest and sacrificing the most so that "poor folk" who are uneducated, untrained and unambitious can have a job? LOL!
>>> Socialism is looking pretty good to me these days, compare to the Capital-greedy-ME-ism we've been seeing lately!
I think the only "ME-ism" is in the mirror of liberals who support the kind of socialism and "corporo-hatred" you're selling. "Give it to ME-ME-ME...don't ask me to do anything for it, just give it to ME-ME-ME."
<>
It's rather elitist of you, wouldn't you say, to assume that because I'm poor that I'm undeducated, untrained and unambitious? And that the rich work the hardest and sacrifice the most?
Cmon! Have you ever seen the construction workers repairing, in 100-degree heat, the roads on which the rich folks drive their gas-guzzling SUVs? How do you know they are undeducated? And how can you call them untrained and unambitious?
-----------------------------------------------
http://www.pnhp.org/news/2009/october/meet_the_new_health_.php
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQTBYQlQ7yM
Well, the short answer for the 44% is it came from The Tax Foundation.
AND, coincidentally, our own Nobel Prize for Economics economist, Paul Krugman, who has been recently trashed (lol) has this to say about The Tax Foundation - along with other economists.
(snip)
Economist's View
« Robert Pindyck on Energy Policy | Main | links for 2008-08-20 »
August 19, 2008
"The Greek Menace"
Some responses to the Tax Foundation's announcement of a new campaign called Compete USA which claims high corporate tax rates are hurting US competitiveness. First, Paul Krugman:
Next, from Linda Beale:
>>> Where are you getting your figures?
From many sources...
Obama's Trillion-Dollar Spending Plan
http://www.usnews.com/blogs/capital-commerce/2008/2/14/obamas-trillion-dollar-spending-plan.html
>>> Did you hear the last debate, the one that the polls say McCain lost?
You say lost, I say won.
>>> Did you hear him say that "he" would be able to do all three things needed for the country if he were president at one time? Did you hear Obama say that he would not because we wouldn't be able to afford it?
I heard McCain propose a spending freeze. I also heard Obama say that he couldn't do everything...but then went on to list all of his hugely expensive programs that he wasn't going to drop.
>>> Anyway, a link to your figure of a trillion dollars and the figures for the 50 to $100 increase "only" to the middle class in tax cuts under Obama's plan, pleas
The information is pretty easy to find, you really should take a little time to get informed...
Mr. Obama's campaign promise, which he has repeated in his speeches and in the presidential debates, stems from his "Making Work Pay" tax cut that will give a $500 refundable tax credit to every worker or $1,000 to each working couple.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/oct/13/obama-tax-cut-refunds-those-who-dont-pay/
<>
>>> It's rather elitist of you, wouldn't you say, to assume that because I'm poor that I'm undeducated, untrained and unambitious?
I don't recall making any assumptions about you, but who am I to disagree with you if you find an affinity with any characteristics that have been previously mentioned?
>>> And that the rich work the hardest and sacrifice the most?
That one is fairly accurate...by comparison, of course.
>>> Cmon! Have you ever seen the construction workers repairing, in 100-degree heat, the roads on which the rich folks drive their gas-guzzling SUVs?
Who do you imagine is paying that construction worker...who probably drives a huge gas-guzzling pickup? Who do you imagine gets the contracts that keep that construction worker working year after year? How do you imagine that construction company came into being?
>>> How do you know they are undeducated?
Generally speaking, "educated people" don't work repairing roads in 100-degree heat.
>>> And how can you call them untrained and unambitious?
Um...because they're construction workers repairing roads in 100-degree heat?
McCain in the debate, which by the way I wasn't talking about what I thought about McCain losing the debate.
>>> McCain in the debate, which by the way I wasn't talking about what I thought about McCain losing the debate. According to the polls, the majority of the American people polled say he lost.
I guess it depends on who gets polled. In this case, it appears that a lot of stupid people were polled. ; )
>>> This is a snip ONLY about McCain's health care plan. The link is under it. His health care plan will cost 1.3 TRILLION - just the health care plan.
Besides the fact that your numbers are spread over 10 years just to make the number look big, it won't "cost" anything...it's "payed" for by a REDUCTION in taxes. On the other hand, Obama's will actually COST the government money...and you're going to pay.
<>Do you really trust the govt to raise your taxes then really pay off the debt?
<>hell with the greedy business owners.<>
I am speechless.
Pages