Not Joe the Plumber, but SAHM

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-16-2008
Not Joe the Plumber, but SAHM
246
Thu, 10-16-2008 - 10:49am

My Open Letter:

Dear Senator Obama,

I am a stay-at-home mom living in the over $250k tax bracket. I want to ask you why you feel my family is not doing it's part to share the wealth in this country. Our family does well but we also pay taxes at the highest marginal rate. We do not have millions or the kind of lifestyle that would get us access to tax loopholes. We only get deductions for home mortgage interests, state taxes paid and charitable contributions. Last year those three deductions were capped because the government limits the deductions at our income level. In the past we have been stuck in AMT which ensures we do not underpay our fair share of taxes.

Because of our family's income level, our children will not qualify for student loans or other aid. Therefore we must save entirely for their college. We save as much as we can. In recent weeks lost 30% of those savings as well as a decent amount of our retirement savings and the few mutual fund investments we have are under water. The only other asset we have is our family home. We only have one. It would be really tough to sell it in this market, we've lost a large chunk of our equity.

We have never received a stimulus check, yet we do our part to donate to charities we believe in, invest in the market and spend to keep the economy going. And we pay our taxes. There is no question that the opportunities in this great country have allowed us to achieve the American Dream. For that I am grateful.

Your proposals will take an additional 12% out of our annual family budget by increasing the marginal tax rate and increasing payroll taxes. We aren't struggling yet but we will be if your tax proposals pass. We will have to stop or severely limit college savings, with one child only 3.5 years from college and the savings down 30%. Last year we paid enough in Federal Taxes to supply 240 individuals with a Bush stimulus check, similar to the stimulus plan you propose if you are elected (I guess that continuation of the same Bush economic polices is good). I have no doubt that some of what we paid went to wasteful government projects and earmark spending that did not help any struggling families. You say $18 billion in earmarks is not a lot of money to you but 12% of my family budget is a lot to me and my children. I do not begrudge what we already give the government, but I will argue that we are doing our share. I argue we are patriotic and we are neighborly.

We are upper middle class, we are not like your friends, Oprah and Warren Buffet. Our priorities are saving for our retirement, our kids college and paying off our house. We can comfortably do those three things now, though we are worried about the economy like everyone else.

I am a registered Democrat and have always believed in social programs for those who need them. I still believe in them. But I do not understand why when you speak that it sounds as though my family is getting something over on this country. That we aren't doing our part. That we don't pay enough tax. That we don't do enough to lift others up. I say we are doing a lot by not asking anything from the government. I say it is the government that is letting the American people down, not us.

If this economy gets worse my husbands job will be at risk. We could lose our home along with the remainder of our savings. The only good news I see coming from the Democrats is that maybe then we can have the government contribute to our children's college education, we'll get a tax cut and might finally see one of those stimulus checks. Then you'd finally get your chance to lift my family up.

Pennsylvania Mom
http://openlettertobarack.blogspot.com/

Pennsylvania Mom http://openlettertobarack.blogspot.com/

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-24-2008
Tue, 10-21-2008 - 5:18am

<>


Because employers will be able to get cheaper coverage in other states.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-24-2008
Tue, 10-21-2008 - 5:30am

Eek.

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-24-2008
Tue, 10-21-2008 - 5:32am
I agree.
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-24-2008
Tue, 10-21-2008 - 5:41am

Again, it's a state law requirement, not an "employer requirement."

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-24-2008
Tue, 10-21-2008 - 6:06am

On the contrary, Social Security is alive and well and many say, "fixable."

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-16-2008
Tue, 10-21-2008 - 8:33am

>>>(Studies show 20 million employees would lose insurance because employers get to shop around to other states for different, perhaps cheaper insurance, or insurance which bars pre-existing conditions, or insurance which no longer covers procedures previously covered.) <<<

Hogwash, there are plenty of insurance options in your own state if the employer wanted to choose them, that would be cheaper and cover less. Your employer chooses a plan now that will be good for the employees, they will not be suddenly motivated to choose a plan that is bad for the employees and that the employees will hate. I have lived in 3 states and worked had insurance through many employers, from the time I was making less than $10/hour to making a strong middle class salary, and never once were pre-existing conditions not covered. That won't change for employers under McCain.

>>>Yes, thank goodness that currently many employers pay our premiums with pre-tax dollars. Plus, employers pay part of our premiums and costs out of their own pockets too. <<<<

Yes and the credit more than makes up for the tax you will have to pay. The employer portion is still a business expense and business expenses remain deductible to the employer.

Pennsylvania Mom http://openlettertobarack.blogspot.com/
iVillage Member
Registered: 10-16-2008
Tue, 10-21-2008 - 8:39am

>>>Because employers will be able to get cheaper coverage in other states. McCain is incentivizing employers to shop across state borders for cheaper plans. Further, the new plan may exclude pre-existing conditions. It may not cover anything but catastrophic injuries/disease. It may not cover the same tests, procedures, etc. that the current plan does. *The employee has no recourse when the employer changes plans.*<<<<

There do exist cheaper, major medical plans in every state today. Your employer has that option now. An employer has that option under Obama. An employer who offers insurance today is not motivated to offer it's employees a plan that does not cover pre-existing conditions now, so wouldn't be so motivated under McCain or Obama.

It could happen under Obama, if a company who cannot afford insurance and does not offer it now for that reason, is forced to buy it, they can go out and find the cheapest, worst plan available and offer it to employees only, not spouses and children.

But an employer who provides coverage today? Opening borders might allow them to get a better, more comprehensive plan for less, that doesn't mean they'll go out and find a crap plan.

Pennsylvania Mom http://openlettertobarack.blogspot.com/
iVillage Member
Registered: 05-06-2007
Tue, 10-21-2008 - 8:49am

<>


If the employer is primarily motivated by costs then they could very well choose a plan that may not be in the best interest of the employees.


Chrissy
mom to Aidan 8/21/03
Grayson Blaine 12/30/07

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-16-2008
Tue, 10-21-2008 - 8:53am

>>>McCain will change all that. So, basically, the employee will be taxed on about $13,000 under McCain. Not just the employee's share. <<<<

The credit should be more than the tax, a lot more if you are in a low income tax bracket, only a little if you are in my tax bracket. http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/19ba2f1c-c03f-4ac2-8cd5-5cf2edb527cf.htm

I'll reword my other sentence: If don't get employer provided benefits and you want to buy them now, you have to pay all year long with no credit at the end. Getting a credit on April 15 is better than no credit at all. Under Obama that same person would need to buy insurance too, all year long, and some might get a tax credit but 1) we don't know how much the plan will cost 2) we don't know who would be eligible for the credit. We can't really compare the two, except to point out under McCain everyone gets a credit and under Obama only some get a credit.

Pennsylvania Mom http://openlettertobarack.blogspot.com/
iVillage Member
Registered: 05-06-2007
Tue, 10-21-2008 - 9:00am

<>


Excuse me, but didn't you have a problem with a similar scenario regarding the college tax credit Obama was offering? You seemed outraged that Obama would be offering the credit to all college students regardless of income and yet you seem fine with the fact that McCain would be doing the same thing with his health care credit. That doesn't make sense to me.


Chrissy
mom to Aidan 8/21/03
Grayson Blaine 12/30/07

Pages