Maximum Grilled Steelers Forum
Dec 17, 2014 at 20:47 *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
  Home   Forum   Help Calendar Media Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2  All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: How much will that Obama vote cost you?  (Read 1548 times)
Big Virgil
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 3768
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,256



« on: Nov 05, 2008 at 09:29 »

Someone I know sent this to me.  Too bad I can't get him to post on here.  He is definitely right-wing and his personal political platform is "tax the homeless".  Very entertaining.  Anyway, there is a link at the bottom of the verbage for calculations.



Calculate Just How Much You'll Miss the Bush Tax Cuts

Obama and the Democrats insist they'll repeal all the Bush tax cuts - in
fact, it's one of their signature campaign promises.  While the
following link is not an exact calculator, you can put in your taxable
income for 2008 and calculate your tax bill, and then do the same for
the tax rates of 2000, before the Bush tax cuts went into effect, and
see what the difference is.

For example, let's say you're part of a married couple, filing jointly,
with $60,000 in taxable income. In 2008, you would pay $8,198. If you
have the same amount of taxable income after the Bush tax cuts are
repealed, and tax rates return to 2000 levels, you'll pay $11,100.

You get to be more patriotic in Barack Obama's mind to the tune of
$2,902, out of your pocket and into the government's coffers. Gotta
spread that wealth around, you know.  Much better that the government
gets to spend that $3,000 than for you to spend it on, say, your
children's college fund, or some other nonsense like that.

But don't worry. Barack Obama says he won't raise taxes on people making
less than $250,000, and provide a tax cut for 95 percent of Americans.
He promised.............

 
http://www.moneychimp.com/features/tax_brackets.htm




Logged

Looks like you've been missing a lot of work lately.
I wouldn't say I've been *missing* it, Bob.
Finnegans Wake
Global Moderator
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 12196
Offline Offline

Posts: 22,400



« Reply #1 on: Nov 05, 2008 at 09:40 »

Oh, the heck with that, let's not tax the poor... Let's kill the poor.  Much tidier solution.  You won't get much tax money from them anyway.

There's a fair amount of contradictory information out there.  If you plug those numbers into the Obama tax plan site, it would say that same couple would save $1800, so where's the truth?  Well, we'll find out.
Logged

Out of my mind on Saturday night...
leighclay
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 3979
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,194



« Reply #2 on: Nov 05, 2008 at 09:47 »

Summary analysis of both plans for the Tax Policy Center http://taxpolicycenter.org/taxtopics/taxcalculator.cfm
Logged

I'm still the one with the boobs.
pensodyssey
Halfsharkalligator halfman.
Global Moderator
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 8127
Offline Offline

Posts: 9,769



« Reply #3 on: Nov 05, 2008 at 12:02 »

Oh, the heck with that, let's not tax the poor... Let's kill the poor. 

Just like Giuliani did with the homeless in NYC. 
Logged

A shabby Charlie Brown.
Preacherman0
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 5808
Offline Offline

Posts: 4,869



WWW
« Reply #4 on: Nov 05, 2008 at 12:09 »

I hate the idea of paying more taxes.

I hate the idea even more that we're running up more debt if we don't pay more taxes.

Gov. is not going to stop spending, I'm afraid.  So they're going to spend our money or keep borrowing it from China.
Logged

We have traded Christ for the religion of Christianity.
Finnegans Wake
Global Moderator
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 12196
Offline Offline

Posts: 22,400



« Reply #5 on: Nov 05, 2008 at 12:58 »

Oh, the heck with that, let's not tax the poor... Let's kill the poor. 

Just like Giuliani did with the homeless in NYC. 

I was thinking the Dead Kennedys song, but hey, whatever works.
Logged

Out of my mind on Saturday night...
Big Virgil
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 3768
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,256



« Reply #6 on: Nov 05, 2008 at 13:03 »

The summary section of th elink LC posted says "Obama's plan will cut taxes for poor and moderate income families and make up for some of those cuts by increasing taxes on higher income families".  

I have a feeling that having a two income family, both college edumacated, means I'm personally going to pay more taxes.

I think someone mentioned somewhere else that "high income" or "rich" all depends on the pond you're in.  $200,000 in Des Moines is quite different than the same amoun in a major metropolitan area.

I'd also rather pay an additional $500 per year for gas than to pay an additional $5,000 or $6,000 each year in taxes.

I don't agree 100% with either candidate or the current president elect, but since the natl debt will increase, no matter what, I'd rather keep more money in my pocket.
Logged

Looks like you've been missing a lot of work lately.
I wouldn't say I've been *missing* it, Bob.
Preacherman0
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 5808
Offline Offline

Posts: 4,869



WWW
« Reply #7 on: Nov 05, 2008 at 14:09 »

Quote
I don't agree 100% with either candidate or the current president elect, but since the natl debt will increase, no matter what, I'd rather keep more money in my pocket.

Yeah, that's kind of the problem.  The gov. needs revenue, but do you trust the people taking it from you to spend it wisely? 
Logged

We have traded Christ for the religion of Christianity.
Finnegans Wake
Global Moderator
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 12196
Offline Offline

Posts: 22,400



« Reply #8 on: Nov 05, 2008 at 15:00 »

Quote
I don't agree 100% with either candidate or the current president elect, but since the natl debt will increase, no matter what, I'd rather keep more money in my pocket.

Yeah, that's kind of the problem.  The gov. needs revenue, but do you trust the people taking it from you to spend it wisely? 

And, contrary to intuition, the McCain spending plan was the one to increase the national debt more than the Obama plan.


Virg, I don't want to get into any class wars about that $250K tax point, as I understand cost of living differentials.  But one point to make is that we all make choices about where we live, where we work, and what creature comforts we expect.  Someone living in a metro area will pay more for what that has to offer; someone living in the suburbs will pay less, but may need to offset that with a longer commute.  It's the quality of life for the city mouse versus country mouse argument.  Basically, those who get nailed because they are in high-cost areas do get some quality of life adjustment in other ways, that really can't be quantified.

What can be quantified is numbers of earners in these various tax brackets.  84% of American households (multiple earners, pre-tax amounts) make under $100,000.  (An astounding 28.22% earn under $25,000 per year; 26.65% earn $25,000-$49,999; 18.27% earn $50,000-$74,999; and 10.93% earn $75,000-$99,999.)

From there, 9.89% earn $100,000-$149,999; 3.17% earn $150,000-$199,999; 1.17% earn $200,000-$249,999; and in the tax bracket in question of $250,000+, you find only 1.50% of all earners. 

Is it any consolation that the tax bites under Obama will really only hit a small number of earners?  I suppose it depends on whether you're in that bracket.  But certainly, for the vast majority of Americans, it does not constitute an undue burden. 

One view of the Bush tax cuts:

Quote from: Paul Krugman
The economic pie is getting bigger -- how can it be true that most Americans are getting smaller slices? The answer, of course, is that a few people are getting much, much bigger slices. Although wages have stagnated since Bush took office, corporate profits have doubled. The gap between the nation's CEOs and average workers is now ten times greater than it was a generation ago. And while Bush's tax cuts shaved only a few hundred dollars off the tax bills of most Americans, they saved the richest one percent more than $44,000 on average. In fact, once all of Bush's tax cuts take effect, it is estimated that those with incomes of more than $200,000 a year -- the richest five percent of the population -- will pocket almost half of the money. Those who make less than $75,000 a year -- eighty percent of America -- will receive barely a quarter of the cuts. In the Bush era, economic inequality is on the rise...

Start with 1973. If you assume that a height of six feet represents the average income in that year, the person on the far left side of the line -- representing those Americans living in extreme poverty -- is only sixteen inches tall. By the time you get to the guy at the extreme right, he towers over the line at more than 113 feet.

Now take 2005. The average height has grown from six feet to eight feet, reflecting the modest growth in average incomes over the past generation. And the poorest people on the left side of the line have grown at about the same rate as those near the middle -- the gap between the middle class and the poor, in other words, hasn't changed. But people to the right must have been taking some kind of extreme steroids: The guy at the end of the line is now 560 feet tall, almost five times taller than his 1973 counterpart.

I'm not suggesting we penalize success, and neither is Obama.  The country did just fine under the Clinton tax rates, which is what Obama is returning to for those top earners.  The fact that he is offering the middle class a tax break that would be lower than the Clinton era is good for the middle class, though it may exacerbate the deficit.  Clearly, the answer to the deficit lies in Federal spending. 

Think for a moment where wealth in the hands of the $250K+ crowd goes, and where it goes in the hands of the middle class.  The former will invest it, so that we create market wealth, but no real domestic product activity.  The middle class is actively engaged in the consumerism that drives production, rather than paper wealth.  Now, if we can combine that sort of middle class upswing in wealth, spreading it all around the economic sectors, and we can keep that money at home, and keep those jobs at home, we could see this economic imbroglio turn into a real boom.
Logged

Out of my mind on Saturday night...
jonzr
Asst. VP, Jonzring
Global Moderator
Old School Member
*****

Karma: 11364
Offline Offline

Posts: 11,864


Have a cup o' joe.


WWW
« Reply #9 on: Nov 05, 2008 at 15:26 »

C'mon finny, you're acting like that Krugman guy won the Nobel Prize for economics or something.  Can't you find a more reliable source?
Logged

"I like David Bowie, he was always my favorite member of Tin Machine."
- Rodney Anonymous

It's a Steeler Nation
Pages: [1] 2  All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal
| Sitemap
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!