McCain the elistist NOT Obama
Find a Conversation
McCain the elistist NOT Obama
| Thu, 08-21-2008 - 11:13pm |
Obama raps McCain for ignorance of his own houses
WASHINGTON - John McCain may have created his own housing crisis.
Hours after a report that the Republican presidential nominee-in-waiting didn't know how many homes he and his multimillionaire wife own, Democratic rival Barack Obama launched a national TV ad and a series of campaign stops aimed at portraying McCain as wealthy and out of touch.
With the economy the top issue in the race, Obama sought to turn McCain's gaffe into one of those symbolic moments that stick in voters' minds

Pages
<>
Yes, I already said this on payroll tax (Social security tax) and not federal income.
<benefits are also capped based on what income is taxed.
But in reality you do want to use other people's money. If you didn't you wouldn't balk at having our taxes raised to support of the government programs you believe it. You want them but you aren't willing to pay for them. You're OK with having others pay though...the small minority of taxpayers.
The thing is when that happens you will still wind up paying and so will all those who you claim to want to help but they'll be now worse off than before the wasteful redistribution plan you thought was merely sticking it the other guy!
>>I'm not sure of the upper limit, but I'll start with the rates of the Clinton admin when things were pretty peachy.<<
Ah yes, and the rates on the middle class were higher. At least things were a bit fairer then. And lets not forget that revenue generated were lower. Last year was the highest revenue generating year in history.
Hmmm....how could that be? Lower rates equals more government renvenues.....you don't say? I am so sad that people don't take time to learn the facts.
~Obama, that toerated a monster of a
All income "once".
Once the money that is earned is spent..i.e. used for something, it should not be taxed again by he who earned it.
Those who spend on new things get the immediate benefit of "those things". Those who chose to save delay gratification in the hopes of being able to retrieve and use their earnings later and the interest earned helps the savings to retain its purchasing power (i.e. keep pace with inflation).
Those who take the risk by investing may come out further ahead or further behind but should be treated the same. Their risk taking helps further our growth which makes things better for everyone and we'd not want to discourage them by unfair tax practices.
I'm pretty aware of the facts. Your post is typical supply-side spin. I'm so sad people try to mislead by
<>
Nice try, but try dispensing this message to people who have to spend their money on food, rent/mortgage, transportation costs, home energy costs, retirement, health care costs first and then have barely enough money for other things like kids clothes or dental costs, home repairs and maintenance never mind being able to invest in non-retirement stock risks.
Pages