Obama's Tax Plan
By ZephyrSun
@ZephyrSun (7381)
United States
October 27, 2008 7:38pm CST
Lets talk about Obama’s “redistribution of wealth”. I can see by the discussions here that the conservatives are having a really hard time understanding this. So, I am going to try and put this into simple terms so that everyone can understand it.
Obama is not stealing from the rich to get money to the poor. Obama is going to raise the current highest tax rate by 3% and he is going to cut taxes on the lower tax brackets. It will put more money in middle class, working class, and the poor. The whole thing is WORKING people making under $250,000 will receive tax breaks.
This whole plan is like the opposite of Bush’s or the Republican Party whichever you would like to say. But, instead of giving more tax breaks to the rich with the hope they will let it trickle down the tax breaks will go to middle/working class and they will go out and buy/spend.
Everyone understand now? Any questions/comments? Sorry but this is really getting on my nerves.
5 people like this
12 responses
@jonesy123 (3948)
• United States
28 Oct 08
Oh, I understand that part. The point is that taxing the rich more will not bring in that much more money as he will lose in giving tax breaks to those who earn less than $250k. In order for the government to function the money has to come from somewhere, especially with those lofty programs he wants to introduce like Universal Healthcare which, yes, the people will pay a premium to get the government insurance, but really, it will still be subsidized. Yes, Obama will lower your income tax, great, but he will be forced to make cuts elsewhere, which he already admitted to in the debates. Where do you think those cuts will be. My guess is in other government spending like for example the money that goes to the individual states. That is if he doesn't want to raise other taxes. If he gives less money to other programs, or the individual states, those programs/states will seek funding elsewhere. How? By increasing their tax. IMO, the federal tax savings I will get under Obama's plan will be erased by an increase in other taxes, such as gasoline tax, property tax, sales tax, school and local tax... I actually might end up spending more on tax. Let's face it, the money has to come from somewhere.
In essence, neither plan will really give you a re-distribution of wealth, lol.
On the other hand, Obama's plan will put a strain on businesses already struggling to stay afloat. On top of more tax, he also wants to force them to provide health insurance or pay a fine. There are jobs at stake.
I'm not saying the Republican plan is better, both plans suck in regards to tax and healthcare. And neither will be able to provide us with a boost economywise.
My question is more what sacrifices we will have to make for the 'greater good and greater purpose'.
4 people like this
@thedogshrink (1266)
• United States
28 Oct 08
Good points, jonesy! Zephyr's post is like Obama's plan: oversimplified. It just isn't that easy, and there is no way that he can do it without adding more taxes. He HAS voted those 94 times for no cuts or higher taxes, and those times were NOT just for the wealthy. How long before he adds more to everyone's taxes. How long before he decides that those making $80,000 a year can afford to give more to run his big plans?
The risk to small businesses from the Obama plan are DIRE. Sure, if you are an individual, working for some big company and you make $200,000 (the income level that the tax kicks in for single people), you are doing OK But if you run a small business, employing a few people, like most of us have in our neighborhoods and around town, that $250,000 has to cover a LOT.
The take home pay of that business owner is NOT going to be $250,000.
These businesses cannot afford such a strain, esp at this point in our country's financial situation. McCain's plan may not be perfect, but it hurts no one, and makes much more sense. He does NOT just give the rich a tax break and wait for it to trickle down! He is NOT for taxing any higher period.
McCain's health care is better than Obama's, as well. May not be perfect, but it's a reasonable start -- esp compared to Obama's laws, fines, and high taxes.
2 people like this
@ZephyrSun (7381)
• United States
28 Oct 08
the,
"He HAS voted those 94 times for no cuts or higher taxes, and those times were NOT just for the wealthy. "
Why don't you reseach those bills and see what was attached to them. That's what I did. You can also go to factcheck and look at it as well. It's old news.
"But if you run a small business, employing a few people, like most of us have in our neighborhoods and around town, that $250,000 has to cover a LOT. The take home pay of that business owner is NOT going to be $250,000. "
Lets see Obama said no capital gains tax on small business owners. Tax cuts for small business' that offer health benefits. And, my final note on the subject and I've only said this 100 times here, IF small business is so worried about it set up an Llc. It is actually so much better for business owners than a sole proprietor and has much more protection for the business owner.
1 person likes this
@thedogshrink (1266)
• United States
28 Oct 08
McCain's plans have been totally misrepresented. He is NOT saying an across the board tax cut! He is saying keep the taxes where they are, He wants to stop capital gains tax for I think 2 years, to help get thru this crisis where people have lost their retirement or most of it. He is just wanting to keep taxes basically where they are. He wants to freeze spending except on necessary things, such as medicare, defense, etc, for one year, while we go thru the budget and decide what needs to be cut, improved, changed, whatever. He wants to cut out all the excess spending -- not needs, but pork barrel nonsense. He wants to BALANCE the BUDGET. That IS the number one thing that needs to be done, in order to put the US on strong financial footing again: stop the crazy spending and BALANCE the BUDGET.
Obama says he will raise taxes only on the smallest percent of the population. He will fine small businesses and PARENTS -- did you hear that in the 2nd debate -- for not providing health care, but he does not really explain HOW they will provide it if they can't afford it. he wants 1 TRILLION dollars in new spending! That's 1 trillion in addition to the huge amount our government is spending right now. But he doesn't make it clear how/where he will get the money, and no one I've heard can see how he can do it. What is he going to cut? Barney Frank says they will cut defense by one quarter??? While we're at war? Even tho Obama wants out of Iraq, he wants to go full force into Afghanistan. He's also mentioned going into Pakistan, "taking out" Iran. And he wants to bring back the draft?????? All while cutting the defense budge by one fourth???? There is just too much going on here. I can't put my faith in a plan with so many holes and unanswered questions. I agree Obama is a charming and personable man. He is a fantastic public speaker. But in all honesty, he really is not showing anything that he WILL do, that we can COUNT on, that he CAN do. At least with McCain, we know who he is and what he stand for. We know for a fact he is FOR less crazy spending and FOR a BALANCED BUDGET. There's only so much harm he can do. He is for reasonable, normally accepted foreign relations, not spouting off about who he will invade, in a campaign, as Obama has done.
We're at a very critical moment in our history. We just cannot afford Obama right now. Maybe his time should be in 4, 8, or 12 more years. I want someone who has a real record that I can see and check into. Obama really hasn't done that much, and what he has done doesn't square with his promise of not raising taxes on us who make less than his cut off. the real facts just don't support his plans or his promises.
1 person likes this
@lilwonders456 (8214)
• United States
28 Oct 08
I understand his plan. But I still do not think it is right. By raising taxes on the rich and lowering them on the poor he is causing the rich to be the ones to pay for the majority of our government spending and social programs the poor use. Which means they are taking money from rich to use it for the poor. Charity should be a choice not a mandate.
Do you see them cutting the spending in washington? No. They are just changing who is going to pay the bill. They are going to make the rich responsible for paying part of the rest of our taxes.
The rich are ones who own companies and create jobs in this country. Less money in their pockets means fewer jobs created for the rest of us to work at. The poor do not hire people, the rich do. What we need are more jobs in this country, so it seems counter productive to be taking money from them that they could be using to hire more people. That 3% increase could may not sound like much to you but it is a substantial dollar amount. It would pay alot of peoples salaries for the year. DO you think the rich are going to cut back on their life styles with this tax raise? Cut their salaries, Sell the jet, not buy that third home? Nope. They will just tighten their budgets at their companies. Hire fewer people. Create fewer jobs, maybe layoff some people to make up for the losses due to increased taxes. Which means it will hurt the rest of us and our ecomony in the long run.
Wonder why all those jobs are leaving American and going over seas? Because America has the second highest tax rate on companies (only japan is higher).
They are leaving because other countries are offering them substancely better deals on taxes. Let me use this example.... you want to a dvd player. One store has it for $100.00 the other has the exact same one for $70.00. Who are you going to buy it from? The cheaper one. That is why Walmart is so huge. People love a good deal. Well corporations are the same way. If America wants to be competitive in the global job market than we have to start offering companies tax deals more on par with the rest of the world. If we do not then more and more jobs are going to continue to go over seas and when a company is thinking of expanding and creating new jobs, it will not be here in America that they do it.
Which would you rather have...a tax cut or a job? I pick the job.
3 people like this
@ZephyrSun (7381)
• United States
28 Oct 08
Well your answer sounds good in theory but business has been running on Bush policies for 8 years and we have more unemployment now than the Clinton years. So for the past 8 years business' have had that tax cut, where the hell are the jobs?
"Wonder why all those jobs are leaving American and going over seas?"
Because Bush and the Republican House and Senate allow for tax cuts for companies sending jobs overseas.
"Because America has the second highest tax rate on companies (only japan is higher). "
The lastest number that I read on this, 2/3's of all American companies pay NO (Zero) federal taxes. So if they are running off to other countries it isn't because of the US tax code.
2 people like this
@thegreatdebater (7316)
• United States
28 Oct 08
Lil, we have tried lower taxes on the rich, and here we are today. The idea of Trickle down economics has been tried twice in the last 25 years, and both times has led to huge deficits, a recession, and huge government bail outs. You say that the rich would be the ones paying for the majority of our government spending and social programs that the poor use. But, you forgot about the most expensive welfare: Corporate Welfare. To date, the American people have spend $1.3 trillion dollars bailing out the ultra rich CEO's of investment banks, and insurance companies that knew that they would privatize their profits, and socialize their loses. This is just one example of Corporate welfare, it is estimates that US corporations receive over $3 trillion dollars a year in welfare, even companies that don't pay a dime in US corporate taxes. Now, John McCain won't tell you about this welfare, and nor will you EVER hear a republican talk about this, because it doesn't fit their cause.
Here is the other problem with your comment, our economy is based on consumption, if the American people stop buying, then our economy will collapse. So, by providing normal Americans with more money, they will send that money right back into the economy, thus spending our way out of this economic crisis created by Trickle Down economics.
Do you want the truth about Wal-Mart? I will give you the truth about Lee Scott (the most anti-Ameircan person in the world, and I am sure that when he leaves this earth Sam Walton will be waiting with a baseball bat), this is a man that is the largest supporter of communism in this country, and is the biggest supporter of export American jobs. He has said on TV that all American companies should leave the United States, and move to communist China where they will support a communist government that our own government says is our BIGGEST threat. Mr. Scott believes that Americans should not produce anything that he puts in his stores, and he has sent over $500 million to the communist government of China to make sure that Wal-Mart can explot their cheap labor, and dictate labor laws in the country. Lee Scott, and Wal-Mart will destroy this country, and pave the way for our friends the Chinese to take over our country. Take some time and look at who is buying all of our national debt, and who is starting to buy all of our cheap houses. Our communist friends Russia, and Lee Scotts friends China. This should scare you, but you are a republican, and I am not going to hold my breathe.
2 people like this
@lilwonders456 (8214)
• United States
28 Oct 08
The reason the jobs are going over seas is because Bush did not stay proactive and competitive in the global market (I am no Bush fan and his ecomonic plan does not represent most republicans).The rest of world started offering big tax breaks and incentive for companies to come over there. We offered them nothing to stay. So not only did they get huge tax breaks but the employees in those countries would work a lot cheaper. It greatly lowered the companies overhead and meant more profit in their pockets and their stock holders.
Yes there are more tax breaks to corporations in this country than for you and me. But they do pay taxes (both fed and state) and they pay more here than they would in other countries, which is why they are leaving. The people in those countries are just as educated and able to do the job as we are but they will work cheaper, plus they save hugely on taxes. It a win win situation for the companies to go there. Heck some of those countries offer to actually pay corporations to come there. Are we offering to pay companies to come here? Then how are we going to compete?
We have got to start competing with these countries to create jobs. That means giving them a reason to stay or come here. We have to offer them just a good a deal.
I think ending all tax breaks for companies that outsource may backfire on us.I do not think they deserve them but if we do that and do not offer those companies some kind of compensation on the same level as other countries to stay, then they will just pick up and go completely to another country.
2 people like this
@lloydanthony111 (4698)
• United States
29 Oct 08
This is what I don't understand about those who oppos Barack Obama's tax plan.
Where were these same people when George Bush was giving tax breaks to America's wealthiest citizens? Did they think that was fair?
Why aren't these people up in arms over the tax breaks that were given to multi-billion dollar companies such as EXXON/MOBILE?
How many of these people earn over $250,000 per year? And if they don't, why are they working against their own self-interests?
I think the answer is that they don't want to see Barack Obama elected under any circumstance even if things work out to their own advantage.
They'd rather support someone who supports the same failed policies of the last 8 years rather than someone who wants to provide America's middle-class with some relief.
This just doesn't make sense to me. There has to be some other reason why these people oppose Barack Obama so strongly. It just doesn't make sense to me.
Lloyd
@ZephyrSun (7381)
• United States
29 Oct 08
Thank you Lloyd for the very thought provoking questions. It amazes me that so many Americans do not make that much money but there are so many people that are willing to pay the way for corporate America. Seems so silly. I have no interest in supporting corporate America anymore than I already do by buying their products. Coporate Welfare is not capitalism! Why don't these people understand this?
My father and I supported Hillary, I turned my father into an Obama supporter. My mother was a McCain supporter, I turned her into an Obama supporter. I will be out this week trying to try other McCain supporters into Obama supporters. I wish that I would have supported him from the beginning but, to make up for it LOL I will try to help as much as I can. I fully believe that he is the best person for the job of CIC.
2 people like this
@xParanoiax (6987)
• United States
29 Oct 08
Even though I'm not conservative (or anything really), and not even an Obama supporter...I do understand his plan. It's not really THAT complicated.
Or really a very radical new idea, even.
Are people forgetting that ALL taxes are a way of redistributing wealth?
As for all this "ZOMG SOCIALISM" stuff...heck, what about McCain and the bail out?
Seems like you'll be getting a taste of socialism unless you vote third party...so I wanna tell 'em all to STFU. Lol.
3 people like this
@ZephyrSun (7381)
• United States
29 Oct 08
LMAO You are probably one of the fairest people on here. And, I always enjoy your imput. I think that some Republicans and some Democrats are "blinded" by their party and forget that their candidate is doing the same thing that they are bytching about lol.
2 people like this
@xParanoiax (6987)
• United States
29 Oct 08
*tips my hat* Thankee kindly ^_^
I think that's true -- or at least it seems that way to me as well.
It seems particularly easy for the whole "MY SIDE is right" thing for alot of people...even when that sort of thinking has no real relevence to the issue (or just actually impossible to accurately ascertain to be relevent).
Maybe there's a psychological explaination...but I think it's rather annoying of people, .
Some objectivity'd be nice, huh?
2 people like this
@anniepa (27955)
• United States
28 Oct 08
What gets me is all the McCain supporters who constantly talk about Obama wanting to raise taxes when he's said many times he'll only raise the top tax bracket back to where they were under Clinton; do they remember those years where everyone's income went up, inflation was nonexistent and we had a budget surplus? Guess not...lol!
I've always said that without building the middle class up and helping working people at least get to the middle class our economy can't possibly prosper. Fine, it's the rich and the big corporations that provide jobs but even most of them won't have any business to hire people if nobody but the rich can afford to buy most of the goods and services these businesses provide. Conservatives love to claim liberals are only concerned with giving handouts to those who don't work but that's not the case. There are far too many "working poor" and that shouldn't be. Many on the right consider the Earned Income Credit, which is basically what Obama's talking about when he says he'll give a tax cut to 95% of working Americans, to be a form of welfare, giving a check to people who don't pay any taxes but that's inaccurate because these people certainly DO pay taxes, they just don't earn enough to end up owing any FEDERAL INCOME TAXES after taking their deductions and exemptions. The irony is that their "God", Ronald Reagan, was the one who either initiated the EIC or expanded it after he took office. Even he, with all his "trickle down economics" ideas believed in that.
Also, it's not all because of taxes that American jobs get outsourced, it's because of dirt-cheap labor often done by children and non-existent environmental standards. Oops, my bad - I forgot some (NOT all) conservatives don't want to hear anything about the environment or worker safety.
Annie
1 person likes this
@ZephyrSun (7381)
• United States
28 Oct 08
Bravo! What I would like to know is why don't the conservatives believe in corporate welfare? lol I think the business concept is very hard for a lot of conservatives to understand. You know that concept that you write off everything until your tax liability become almost zero.
1 person likes this
@ZephyrSun (7381)
• United States
28 Oct 08
Sorry lil I'm not really sure where you got your business degree but the college that I went to for mine and the major that I took had a big international business. With that said Annie is correct. American business' move oveseas because of:tax breaks, cheap labor, cheap materials, no health insurance costs, no safety costs, no unemployment payments, no workers comp payment. I could list much much more but I think you get the point. It goes well beyond tax breaks. And again we have to go back to the fact that 2/3's of American business do not pay federal and a lot of companies pay little state and local taxes due to tax abatements.
You are right about our faltering education system. But, yet, ask yourself why do we continue to except our president to be a "C" student or better yet, "5th from the bottom of the class". If we don't demand that our most powerful position is held by a person with an education that is lesser than a lot we can't change it. As long as we live in a society that a "C" is great, we have no reason to fix our education system.
We want the best and brightess? Start by electing them, not the ok and dim.
1 person likes this
@lilwonders456 (8214)
• United States
28 Oct 08
I agree that jobs are leaving for a lot of reasons.
Those countries are offering great tax breaks and deals. We are not.
There people will work cheaper. It is not just sweat shop jobs that are leaving. Look at india. They have just about taken over the I.T. jobs. Those are good paying jobs. But they can be done from a distance and the labor is cheaper and the people are just as qualified as Americans are. A lot of high technology, high paying jobs are leaving. Why? Because the companies can get a better deal all around by going to those countries. The only way we are going to compete with them is to offer them just a good of a deal.
We can not tell other countries what deals they can offer. We can not tell companies where in the world they will have offices and jobs at. Yes we can take away the tax break they get if they outsource their jobs (by the way our federal government is one of the biggest outsourcers), but that is going to cause more jobs and corporations to leave because then the other countries are really offering them a better deal. If the tax breaks we offer is not big enough to offset the money they would save outsourcing than why would they bother?
This is one of biggest changes I have noticed in the world. In world war II we were just about the only developed country not bombed to heck and back. So we got the jobs while they rebuild. Well they have recovered and add to that other underdeveloped countries are now catching up with us and we have major competition for corporations. Those countries want jobs for their people just like we do and they are willing to offer incentives to get them. Add to that our education crisis that has been going on for decades. American workers are not longer seen as the smartest, best workers. But we are seen as the most expensive and our government is no longer offering the best deal for the money.
1 person likes this
@dizzblnd (3073)
• United States
29 Oct 08
BUT, don't you WANT to be able to make $250,000 a year? I know as a small business owner I want to be able to make that kind of money. But, if I was getting close to making that kind of money.. that tax plan stops me from achieving my goal. Why? Because I will be taxed MORE money than if I just laid off a bunch of my employees, turned down jobs in order NOT to be taxed. With that tax break we would end up making only say $170,000 (just throwing out a number.. it's not exact) verses being able to give our employees bonuses or raises, or expanding the business. Keeps from giving health care etc.. things that everyone NEEDS.
To me, this is counteractive to people that WANT to achieve that small business owner income. I just don't see how that helps achieve the American dream
1 person likes this
@dizzblnd (3073)
• United States
29 Oct 08
And not only that but $250,000 isn't the same amount of money country wide! How do I figure? Someone making $250,000 in CA is barely scraping by because everything costs more there. Someone making $250,00 in a little city like mine is considered rich, properties aren't worth as much as they would be in NY or CA, money goes a little farther here.
So how can everyone be considered making the same amount of money, if the same amount of money doesn't go as far in different parts of the country? STILL doesn't make sense
But I still love ya
2 people like this
@ZephyrSun (7381)
• United States
29 Oct 08
Well with all of my work in business and with my degree I would highly recomend anyone in small business making that much in profits to set up an Llc or reinvest in the business. An Llc will protect the owner in many ways and limited liability is probably the biggest.
Well an not to mention that Obama said he will stop the capital gains tax on small businesses where as McCain wants to just lower it 7 1/2%. I know I don't have to tell you but 0 tax is better than 7 1/2
2 people like this
@littlefranciscan (18327)
• United States
29 Oct 08
I agree Obama's tax plan is suppose to help out those who make less and maybe take a little from those who have more then enough.. I don't think the little raise is going to make anyone who is clearing more then 250,000 in a year and unbearable pain.
@ZephyrSun (7381)
• United States
29 Oct 08
LOL I don't think it will either. I just can't believe how many people that aren't making 250,000 is sooooo worried about it.
@gitfiddleplayer (10362)
• United States
28 Oct 08
I'm not having a hard time understanding socialism, plus, you need to check the facts, B.O. and Biden have lowered the ceiling from 250k to 100K, what's to drop it lower. Bottom line, everybody is going to get taxed, even you. The "tax breaks" to the rich are intended for business owners, the people who generate wealth and jobs, what's wrong with being an acheiver in the USA?
1 person likes this
@ZephyrSun (7381)
• United States
29 Oct 08
Hmm...I just checked the website and the tax plan has not changed. "An Obama-Biden administration will provide tax cuts for almost all American families and will not raise any tax rate on families making less than $250,000 a year. This plan will cut taxes for middle class families by three times more than Senator McCain's tax plan. Americans will pay the same tax rates that they paid in 1990s, when President Clinton was in office."
I don't think there is anything wrong with being an acheiver in the US. The problem is that we have been on trickle down economics for a very long time (yes 8 years is long) and the midwest is dying.
1 person likes this
@DoriLentrich (1016)
• United States
28 Oct 08
I understand his plan. What I can't seem to get a grip on is what version of mathematics he's using to come up with this "tax cut," you're talking about. I've looked at his spending and this plan of raising taxes on the top tiers, and somehow I don't see how the numbers equal out. What I do see is a Democrat running on a tax cut platform (sort of like Clinton) making huge promises about what he'll "do" for the American people (sort of like Clinton), and I can't help but wonder if it will turn out just like Clinton (biggest tax hike in history, on everyone).
How does his plan defy redistributing wealth? All taxes is a form of wealth redistribution. It takes money from one group and gives it another whom the government deems needful of it. Obama would like to increase that and thus "spread the wealth."
@ZephyrSun (7381)
• United States
28 Oct 08
Maybe you will have to explain how spreading the wealth to the wealthy has helped the US over the last 8 years. Since this Bush has taken office the state I live in has lost over 300,000 manufacturing jobs, gas at one point was triple what it was in the Clinton years, the surplus Clinton left is now a huge deficit, food prices are way up and honestly I could go on. Can you explain where the "better good" is?
@marianstallings (201)
• United States
28 Oct 08
Personal politics aside, I'm glad to see people doing research on the candidates. It really bothers me when people don't bother to check up on the people they vote for or against. I think you MyLotters are very intelligent. Just a side note, I'm from Illinois, I don't know if any of you are. Senator Obama has not made any great strides here. He has not made much of a splash at all as a Representative of Illinois. He has been in the center of a lot of controversy and sprinkled throughout some other not so high profile controversy. He also endorsed our town's Mayor who is so corrupt it's not even funny. He had a choice when there was a candidate running against the Mayor that had a reputation of honesty and integrity,who had a proven record. The opponent's office is the most efficiently run office in the Illinois solely because of who's in charge of it. The budget is balanced, the employees are happy and not at risk of being laid off. He made a choice and it was based on his political aspirations, not on what's right for the city and that bothers me.
I won't vote for Obama because he hasn't proven himself in a state that did elect him. He made promises that have not come to fruition. In my opinion, if you can't keep small promises to one state, you certainly can't be trusted to keep any big promises to an entire country. The players are bigger, the pressure is greater, and I haven't seen any integrity in him on the smaller issues. I think integrity is needed for bipartisanship to ensure things get done. So I am not so quick to jump on his promises of utopia just yet.
@ZephyrSun (7381)
• United States
29 Oct 08
I live in Ohio. I understand your position and respect it.
1 person likes this
@big_paparoch (111)
• United States
28 Oct 08
it shouldnt be to hard to understand i mean thats what i thought it was give breaks to the poor and middle class so they can spend money and not worry about what there going to eat tomorrow that why our country is in the crap holes its in now because the country rides on the middle class people and when you make the middle class weak you make the country weak and if it stay weak for so long the you start to see what we have now bail outs and god knows what else if they dont get smart and get the reds out of the white house i pray that they are that smart this time