Tax plans, Obama Vs Mccain
#1
10-29-2008 | 09:25 PM
Thread Starter
|
Ketchum & Killem
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 12,065
Tax plans, Obama Vs Mccain
A friend sent me this.
Im generally pretty damn skeptical of any infromation that i cannot easily validate myself, or at least track back to a reliable source.
Any thoughts on this? Comments?
Evan im sure you have some. lol.
If you still haven't decided who to vote for, consider the following proposed changes in taxes after 2008 General election. The best proposed new taxes are at the bottom. Tax me once, shame on you. Tax me twice, shame on me.
John
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CAPITAL GAINS TAX
MCCAIN
0% on home sales up to $500,000 per home (couples). McCain does not propose any change in existing home sales income tax.
Sale of stocks and investments 15%.
OBAMA
28% on profit from ALL home sales.
Sale of stocks and investments 35%.
DIVIDEND TAX (received from stocks, Money Market accounts, bonds, etc)
MCCAIN 15% (no change)
OBAMA 39.6%
INCOME TAX
MCCAIN (no changes)
Single making 30K - tax $4,500
Single making 50K - tax $12,500
Single making 75K - tax $18,750
Married making 60K- tax $9,000
Married making 75K - tax $18,750
Married making 125K - tax $31,250
OBAMA
(reversion to pre-Bush tax cuts)
Single making 30K - tax $8,400
Single making 50K - tax $14,000
Single making 75K - tax $23,250
Married making 60K - tax $16,800
Married making 75K - tax $21,000
Married making 125K - tax $38,750
INHERITANCE TAX
MCCAIN: 0% (No change, Bush repealed this tax)
OBAMA: Restore the inheritance tax on cash, homes, land, property, stocks, bonds, etc.
NEW TAXES BEING PROPOSED BY OBAMA
* New government taxes proposed on homes that are more than 2400 square feet.
* New gasoline taxes.
* New taxes on natural resources consumption taxes (heating gas, water, electricity).
* New taxes on retirement accounts. (Contributions will no longer be tax deferred).
* National absorption of 401K accounts into the Social Security system (They take your 401K at Aug 2008 levels. The Feds contribute $600 per year. You have to contribute 5% per year. You draw an extra $500 from this account when you go on Social Security. When you die, 50% of what's left goes to your heirs and the Feds keep the other 50%).
* New taxes to pay for socialized medicine
Im generally pretty damn skeptical of any infromation that i cannot easily validate myself, or at least track back to a reliable source.
Any thoughts on this? Comments?
Evan im sure you have some. lol.
If you still haven't decided who to vote for, consider the following proposed changes in taxes after 2008 General election. The best proposed new taxes are at the bottom. Tax me once, shame on you. Tax me twice, shame on me.
John
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CAPITAL GAINS TAX
MCCAIN
0% on home sales up to $500,000 per home (couples). McCain does not propose any change in existing home sales income tax.
Sale of stocks and investments 15%.
OBAMA
28% on profit from ALL home sales.
Sale of stocks and investments 35%.
DIVIDEND TAX (received from stocks, Money Market accounts, bonds, etc)
MCCAIN 15% (no change)
OBAMA 39.6%
INCOME TAX
MCCAIN (no changes)
Single making 30K - tax $4,500
Single making 50K - tax $12,500
Single making 75K - tax $18,750
Married making 60K- tax $9,000
Married making 75K - tax $18,750
Married making 125K - tax $31,250
OBAMA
(reversion to pre-Bush tax cuts)
Single making 30K - tax $8,400
Single making 50K - tax $14,000
Single making 75K - tax $23,250
Married making 60K - tax $16,800
Married making 75K - tax $21,000
Married making 125K - tax $38,750
INHERITANCE TAX
MCCAIN: 0% (No change, Bush repealed this tax)
OBAMA: Restore the inheritance tax on cash, homes, land, property, stocks, bonds, etc.
NEW TAXES BEING PROPOSED BY OBAMA
* New government taxes proposed on homes that are more than 2400 square feet.
* New gasoline taxes.
* New taxes on natural resources consumption taxes (heating gas, water, electricity).
* New taxes on retirement accounts. (Contributions will no longer be tax deferred).
* National absorption of 401K accounts into the Social Security system (They take your 401K at Aug 2008 levels. The Feds contribute $600 per year. You have to contribute 5% per year. You draw an extra $500 from this account when you go on Social Security. When you die, 50% of what's left goes to your heirs and the Feds keep the other 50%).
* New taxes to pay for socialized medicine
#3
10-30-2008 | 05:05 AM
blank
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,451
From: North Jersey
When I see the wiki article comparing the two in which it posted tax cuts for all income levels (though each concentrated the cuts differently), I knew their tax plans were complete BS. Just one of the reasons why I voted for Barr: instead making the current system even more complicated and less efficient like the two bozos, he's for the FairTax. Oh, and that's another thing, someone is going to vote for Obama and he doesn't even know the difference between a consumption tax and a flat tax. Yeah, his tax judgement is going to much better, especially when he spreads the wealth around. In fact, Obama has come out w/ a new product, a result of his taxes:
#4
10-30-2008 | 08:01 AM
KWITCHERBITCHIN
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 6,024
From: Gallatin, TN
McCain's version of "cutting taxes" is basically less government spending and leaving the Bush tax cuts in place (which had the economy rockin' two years ago before Dems. took the house and senate.)
Obama's version of cutting tax.. Well, he has no version, except in his speeches.. But I'm not going to argue, because I'll get my head bashed in like every other republican in a room full of democrats.
All I can say is that a proposed $800,000,000,000 +/- in extra government spending by Obama doesn't come with tax cuts. Pretty simple to see.
McCain's Tax plan is better, his housing plan is better, his healthcare plan is heads and shoulders better than Obama's.. Not sure that leaves much for Obama.
Obama's version of cutting tax.. Well, he has no version, except in his speeches.. But I'm not going to argue, because I'll get my head bashed in like every other republican in a room full of democrats.
All I can say is that a proposed $800,000,000,000 +/- in extra government spending by Obama doesn't come with tax cuts. Pretty simple to see.
McCain's Tax plan is better, his housing plan is better, his healthcare plan is heads and shoulders better than Obama's.. Not sure that leaves much for Obama.
#5
10-30-2008 | 08:42 AM
Super Moderator
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 6,075
Whats the incentive of moving ahead and busting your hump when the government is going to keep most of it and give it to those who choose to do nothing. Im all for a hand up but not a hand out. Have you ever noticed that government employees give the worst service and have an I dont care mentality. Anything the government gets involved with ends up being corrupted and taken advantage off.
I think either Obama or McCain will promote change however I will never forget that they both voted for the Bail out plan which was a bad move and against what the majority of the people wanted. Remember its the government that caused all this panic with Fannie and Freddy with loans catered to those who could not really afford a home. In the end those who have money will still have it and those who dont will have a little more with Obama but will be paying more to live as a result.
I think either Obama or McCain will promote change however I will never forget that they both voted for the Bail out plan which was a bad move and against what the majority of the people wanted. Remember its the government that caused all this panic with Fannie and Freddy with loans catered to those who could not really afford a home. In the end those who have money will still have it and those who dont will have a little more with Obama but will be paying more to live as a result.
#7
10-30-2008 | 09:19 AM
blank
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,451
From: North Jersey
McClain isn't much better. In order for him to give out health care credits, he needs the money somehow. Plus his plan to "take down state lines" for this will only drive prices up since insurance companies base their prices on a state by state basis. True, some states will get their insurance rates lower but the ones who are already low are going to go sky high when insurance companies have to factor in NJ and CA. And if McClain was serious about cutting spending, he wouldn't have been a proponent of the bail-out, would demand no involvement at all in health care (tax credits or not), etc. However, overall, his plan is better than Obama's, especially for small businesses but the real tax plan we need is the FairTax, not making the current system even more of a PITA, especially on 4/15.
#8
10-30-2008 | 11:23 AM
Super Moderator
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 6,075
At least we know Obama supporters still believe in the almighty $$$. How could so many follow Obama that has been in meetings and parties with domestic and foreign terrorists, gone to church for 20 years that preached reverse racism and hate towards the USA, involved in Acorn that has many fradulent voters registered and openly preaches to vote for Obama yet asks for government money.
Im picking the lesser of two evils. Btw I would make more money with Obama and less with McCain but Im putting my Country first and my wallet last.
Im picking the lesser of two evils. Btw I would make more money with Obama and less with McCain but Im putting my Country first and my wallet last.
#9
10-30-2008 | 11:32 AM
Pocket Rocket
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,791
From: Grand Rapids MI
I'd pay less in taxes with obama aswell but I understand that giving tax breaks to wealthy people keeps them in america and then they can pick up the tab
Bar stool econ class
Bar stool econ class
Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:
The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that’s what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. ‘Since you are all such good customers, he said, ‘I’m going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20. Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. What happens to the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his ‘fair share?’ They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody’s share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man’s bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.
And so:
The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% savings).
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28% savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.
‘I only got a dollar out of the $20,’ declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, ‘But he got $10!’
‘Yeah, that’s right,’ exclaimed the fifth man. ‘I only saved a dollar, too. It’s unfair that he got ten times more than I!’
‘That’s true!!’ shouted the seventh man. ‘Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!’
‘Wait a minute,’ yelled the first four men in unison. ‘We didn’t get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!’
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
The next night the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important.
They didn’t have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.
#11
10-30-2008 | 01:11 PM
blank
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 2,451
From: North Jersey
But you can't say much from that. Remember, politicians say this and that just to garner votes. When it comes time for action, it depends on what Congress wants to do and how much more inefficient, costly, and complicated they want the tax code to become. It's amazing to think that in 1986, we had 2 tax brackets only and I think like 4,000 lines of text. Now God knows how many brackets there are and it's now 400,000+ lines of text.
Venom, though Obama says he will give tax breaks to the lower classes, you still will be poorer under that plan than McClain's. Remember, those tax cuts are made up for by tax hikes in other places. Those places will be in Capital Gains, Corporate, or even FICA. Either of those taxes will either translate to your paycheck where your wages will be cut or raises delayed or in the price of goods since it will go up (remember, 22% of the price of something is just taxes alone). Sure your income tax may decrease but you pay for it every where else (especially if those taxes drive your company out of the country). McClain's plan is to essentially keep the status quo, which is better than Obama's but the current system is a complete drain regardless.
Venom, though Obama says he will give tax breaks to the lower classes, you still will be poorer under that plan than McClain's. Remember, those tax cuts are made up for by tax hikes in other places. Those places will be in Capital Gains, Corporate, or even FICA. Either of those taxes will either translate to your paycheck where your wages will be cut or raises delayed or in the price of goods since it will go up (remember, 22% of the price of something is just taxes alone). Sure your income tax may decrease but you pay for it every where else (especially if those taxes drive your company out of the country). McClain's plan is to essentially keep the status quo, which is better than Obama's but the current system is a complete drain regardless.
#13
10-30-2008 | 02:10 PM
KWITCHERBITCHIN
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 6,024
From: Gallatin, TN
plus, remember this litttttttle fact..
PALIN ISN'T GOING TO BE THE PRESIDENT!!!
Why is that so hard for people to figure out? We have a guy running for president that has little, if ANY more experience than the VP of the other candidate, yet you are going to trash the VP because she scares you, or because you think she's a moron... Ohhh, big bad moose killin' Sarah Palin!
Sarah Palin is refreshing, she's not a "typical politician," she'll fight for what she believes in and won't even let her own party stop her. Bah! Don't even get me started again, this is rediculous.
Need I say more?.....
Last edited by WNRacing; 10-30-2008 at 02:20 PM.
#15
10-30-2008 | 02:28 PM
jjtgiants
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 4,177
From: Dublin, CA
Palin is a moron? Have you seen Biden lately? Click Here.
plus, remember this litttttttle fact..
PALIN ISN'T GOING TO BE THE PRESIDENT!!!
Why is that so hard for people to figure out? We have a guy running for president that has little, if ANY more experience than the VP of the other candidate, yet you are going to trash the VP because she scares you, or because you think she's a moron... Ohhh, big bad moose killin' Sarah Palin!
Sarah Palin is refreshing, she's not a "typical politician," she'll fight for what she believes in and won't even let her own party stop her. Bah! Don't even get me started again, this is rediculous.
Need I say more?.....
plus, remember this litttttttle fact..
PALIN ISN'T GOING TO BE THE PRESIDENT!!!
Why is that so hard for people to figure out? We have a guy running for president that has little, if ANY more experience than the VP of the other candidate, yet you are going to trash the VP because she scares you, or because you think she's a moron... Ohhh, big bad moose killin' Sarah Palin!
Sarah Palin is refreshing, she's not a "typical politician," she'll fight for what she believes in and won't even let her own party stop her. Bah! Don't even get me started again, this is rediculous.
Need I say more?.....
#17
10-30-2008 | 02:49 PM
KWITCHERBITCHIN
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 6,024
From: Gallatin, TN
I'll stand with Sarah Palin, because she is a good person with morals and one that isn't afraid to speak her mind even if you don't like it! PLUS she is from the north, and I hate to say it, but I don't know many from the North that really sound all that intelligent, and just because you don't sound intelligent doesn't mean that you aren't, Keyword *Joe Biden.*
#18
10-30-2008 | 03:08 PM
jjtgiants
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 4,177
From: Dublin, CA
Romney or Huckabee would have been a good choice for VP, but I personally think that the Huck should have been the Rep. Nominee for President..
I'll stand with Sarah Palin, because she is a good person with morals and one that isn't afraid to speak her mind even if you don't like it! PLUS she is from the north, and I hate to say it, but I don't know many from the North that really sound all that intelligent, and just because you don't sound intelligent doesn't mean that you aren't, Keyword *Joe Biden.*
I'll stand with Sarah Palin, because she is a good person with morals and one that isn't afraid to speak her mind even if you don't like it! PLUS she is from the north, and I hate to say it, but I don't know many from the North that really sound all that intelligent, and just because you don't sound intelligent doesn't mean that you aren't, Keyword *Joe Biden.*
Do you know Palin personally? Just wondering cause she's had her fair share of scandals. I have no problem with her speaking her mind, I actually think that's great, but I just think she's isn't very bright and this country doesn't need anymore idiots in leadership positions.
Just because you don't agree with Bidens policy doesn't mean he's an idiot. I personally don't think Palin isn't very smart...that's all, it's my opinion. I'm not trying to compare the two VP candidates, I'm just saying in my opinion I don't think Palin is smart. very simple stuff.
Last edited by jjtgiants; 10-30-2008 at 03:13 PM.
#22
10-30-2008 | 03:24 PM
Pocket Rocket
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,791
From: Grand Rapids MI
http://vodpod.com/politics/watch/963...allies-of-fear
what I hate is dumb voters who vote because they say they are "afraid" of one candidate because they are to stupid to understand why they support the one that they do. So they talk about fear as if the cadidate they don't want would distroy america do they really think that the next president will have that much power
what I hate is dumb voters who vote because they say they are "afraid" of one candidate because they are to stupid to understand why they support the one that they do. So they talk about fear as if the cadidate they don't want would distroy america do they really think that the next president will have that much power
#24
10-30-2008 | 03:36 PM
jjtgiants
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 4,177
From: Dublin, CA
http://vodpod.com/politics/watch/963...allies-of-fear
what I hate is dumb voters who vote because they say they are "afraid" of one candidate because they are to stupid to understand why they support the one that they do. So they talk about fear as if the cadidate they don't want would distroy america do they really think that the next president will have that much power
what I hate is dumb voters who vote because they say they are "afraid" of one candidate because they are to stupid to understand why they support the one that they do. So they talk about fear as if the cadidate they don't want would distroy america do they really think that the next president will have that much power
#25
10-30-2008 | 03:37 PM
KWITCHERBITCHIN
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 6,024
From: Gallatin, TN
So, we agree?.. 'Cause you just said that she is smart... You don't think she isn't smart, so you're saying you think she is.. You're confusing, either that or you're like the woman in that video who made an unfortunate mix-up of words at an inoportune time. lmao
#27
10-30-2008 | 03:41 PM
jjtgiants
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 4,177
From: Dublin, CA
just a typo....I didn't edit my post before hitting submit. Just to be clear....I don't think she is very smart.
#28
10-30-2008 | 03:43 PM
jjtgiants
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 4,177
From: Dublin, CA
I totally agree with you. Both sides use the "fear" strategy.
#30
10-30-2008 | 04:06 PM
Pocket Rocket
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 3,791
From: Grand Rapids MI
I agree both parties use the fear tactic and it pisses me off because I encourage rationality in everything (sometimes my wife calls me emotionally constipated).
But a stupid R or D will take one of the fear tactic ads and run with it till they will tell you the other guy has horns a tail and eats baby hearts for breakfast (it offends those of us that do
)
What I'm trying to say is I blame stupid people for all the worlds problems
greedy stupid people are even worse.
But a stupid R or D will take one of the fear tactic ads and run with it till they will tell you the other guy has horns a tail and eats baby hearts for breakfast (it offends those of us that do
) What I'm trying to say is I blame stupid people for all the worlds problems
greedy stupid people are even worse.