Presidential economics ...abridged version for people who don't like detail

Obama Plan

redistribute wealth...giant step to socialism...
bigger government...more taxes
tax the rich and business more to make up for token dole to 95%
raise capital gains tax, raise estate tax
add a national health plan and increase taxes to cover, add more bureaucracy, $$$$$
limited drilling, develope other energy sources, wind, solar, maybe nuclear

McCain

maintain Bush tax cuts
do away with inheritance taxes
reduce capital gains
cut government spending
drill, drill, drill.....develope other sources, wind, solar, nuclear
tax breaks for business to encourage growth and jobs

The problem with FactCheck and Urban-Brookings as posted, is they only give you what you ask for to confirm or deny a candidate's talking point. What is conspicuously absent, by omission or design, is where is Obama going to get the money to fund his grand promises. If the response was totally honest, it would have included the significant tax increases on the wealthy, corporations and businesses that he intends to impose to make up for the cuts.

The IRS reports that, "The Internal Revenue Service has released data on tax year 2003 that show the top 1 percent of taxpayers, ranked by adjusted gross income, paid 34.3 percent of all federal income taxes that year. The top 5 percent paid 54.4 percent of the whole, the top 10 percent paid 65.8 percent, and the top quarter of taxpayers paid 83.9 percent."

Kahuna, what reactions will the above group, already paying the highest tax rates, pursue if their taxes are greatly increased? Would the wealthy reduce their expenses, lay off help, sell off and stop buying real estate, cars, etc. ? Would big business reduce their work forces, pass on to the public their increases in higher prices for goods and commodities with the net result of taking more money out of the pockets of the masses, negating the alleged tax relief, and forcing them to cut their own expenses thereby driving the working man's cost of goods and the economy down further?

The growth of government under Obama's plan is frightening. Health care alone will require a monumental bureaucracy and concurrent regulations and regulators. When is the last time government has run anything efficiently? In New Jersey, Governor Corzine,
a liberal democrat and Obama supporter, pushed a rebate check to the masses. Great political tool for votes. Why didn't he just reduce our taxes by the amount of the rebate check and save the millions it cost to administer the program? Multiply that by Obama's big government ideas and prospects are frightening. If you want to see the future under the Obama plan, look at Corzine's New Jersey, the most highly taxed state in the union with businesses and taxpayers fleeing the state.

McCain's plan is the lesser of two evils in my opinion. The last I heard, the Democratic controlled Congress had a 9% approval rating. Gee, I wonder who that 9% is. I've heard the 1 out 10 people in America is on the government payroll. Hmmmm. Factor in relatives of Congress and ...........fill in the blanks.

Cabo:

Good post. I agree the lesser of two evils .

The lesser of 2 evils is always best...............
here is what i see, to steal a phrase... Correct me if I am WRONG !!!
1. It dont matter which candidate wins, you will always have taxes go up. Unless we have another Tea Party in the famouse place.....
2. You cant argue that Obama doesnt have the experience to run the country, when in deed Mccain's health is not the best, if he goes we got Gov. of ALaska running the show. Now there is the Pot calling the Kettle black.
3. McCain wasnt for change untill someone in the Rep Party woke up and seen that Obama and Hillary had everyones attention!!!
4. Obama really doesnt have a proven track record to run a country, but then again Mccain has been around for ever, but the country still runs the same since i was knee high to a grasshopper..
5. WHEN ARE WE GOING TO HOLD PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR PROMISES.
6. I agree with the Enough is Enough speech. Stop the slander and bickering like tots arguing over he said she said stuff. Get down to busniess. i would hope that someone would make the problems with drugs in the schools and our society as important as who said who was the pig with lipstick on???????????????????????
Thanks for your time..

Originally Posted by GMONEY

The lesser of 2 evils is always best...............
here is what i see, to steal a phrase... Correct me if I am WRONG !!!
1. It dont matter which candidate wins, you will always have taxes go up. Unless we have another Tea Party in the famouse place.....
2. You cant argue that Obama doesnt have the experience to run the country, when in deed Mccain's health is not the best, if he goes we got Gov. of ALaska running the show. Now there is the Pot calling the Kettle black.
3. McCain wasnt for change untill someone in the Rep Party woke up and seen that Obama and Hillary had everyones attention!!!
4. Obama really doesnt have a proven track record to run a country, but then again Mccain has been around for ever, but the country still runs the same since i was knee high to a grasshopper..
5. WHEN ARE WE GOING TO HOLD PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR PROMISES.
6. I agree with the Enough is Enough speech. Stop the slander and bickering like tots arguing over he said she said stuff. Get down to busniess. i would hope that someone would make the problems with drugs in the schools and our society as important as who said who was the pig with lipstick on???????????????????????
Thanks for your time..

1. Agree.
2. On any given day, our Maker can call any of us, regardless of age or thought that we are bulletproof. If a Pres. Obama could no longer serve, the next is Sen. Biden, who can be described as a more liberal version of Sen. McCain (both with 25-35 years as Senators). If a Pres. McCain could no longer serve, the next is Gov. Palin, who can be described as a conservative version of Sen. Obama (3-year age difference, arguments about 'experiece" cut both ways). So, either way it's weird.
3. Every candidate the last 150 years (except Pres. Lincoln in 1864 and Pres. Roosevelt in 1944) has campaigned waving the Change banner to include the incumbents. The fact is that there is little they can change because existing laws (especially 'entitlements') are there because somebody lobbied for them and still controls campaign contributions. So, the promise of change keeps coming around, but despite all the candidates who have campaigned as being the change agent of the future, how often has any substantive change of any kind ever happened? It's the golden election promise which always turns into tin - and"we" keep falling for it.
4. See #3 above.
5. Probably as soon as we hold Members of the House of Representatives and the Senate responsible for fulfilling their campaign promises. Yet, most of those folk spend more time in office than union bosses - and held to lower standards.
6. Agree.
Thanks!

I get so confused! Why do the Republicans keep saying that Obama is going to raise taxes! IT'S JUST NOT TRUE! He said he will raise taxes on people making over $250,000 a year. Gosh, all you Republicans must be in that bracket to be bellyaching and lying about it all the time. Geesh, at least listen to what the man is saying!

chels

does it confuse you that Obama will let GW"s tax cuts expire in 2010?? If I recall the number right that will mean a $ 2900.00 tax increase for middle income people.

Is there a number or a percentage that is enough or high enough for the productive people of America to pay?? Or some amount your willing to allow those hard working people to keep?? Or is a complete socialistic system what you want??

That trashy guy you want taken out of the White House has increased proceeds to the treasury 20% since those tax cuts.

OOOimsoinexperienced... Benj

Originally Posted by chelsea24

I get so confused! Why do the Republicans keep saying that Obama is going to raise taxes! IT'S JUST NOT TRUE! He said he will raise taxes on people making over $250,000 a year.

Your words.

I think your right Obama will raise taxes.


OOOilovethedailykos.... Benj

Chelsea, with all due respect to your post, namecalling not withstanding, what do you think will be the consequences if Obama "just" raises the taxes on those making more than $250,000, corporations and businesses? By the way, I have listened and read everything I can get my hands on about Obama. I gave my opinion in a post above that seems to preempt the point of yours. I'd like to hear your response. Will corporations pass on tax hikes to the public? Isn't that just another form of taxation? Most businesses, big and small are 90% manpower intensive. The largest cost in doing business is payroll. When business needs to make adjustments to meet tax responsibilities, will they layoff people?

The Big Bad Oil Companies

From 2003 to 2007 Exxon Mobil's income grew by 89%. What the tax and spenders in Washington won't mention is that their taxes grew by 170%

In 2007 Exxon Mobil had profits of 40.6 billion dollars and paid 30 billion dollars in taxes.

You will hear the tax and spend crew fire the public up by noting, "In the first quarter of 2008 Exxon Mobil earned a record 10.9 billion dollars." What you won't here from them is that they paid 9.3 billion in taxes.

Exxon pays 49% tax rate on GROSS income. Factor operating costs and draw your own conclusions.

In the interest of full disclosure, I am a stockholder in Exxon Mobil.

What is the breaking point of taxation for big business? Big question, I hope you give it an honest try, how much of big business's tax burden is "passed on" to the consumer and isn't that just another way Washington picks the pockets of the working class?

The most frightening factor is the integral part that the oil industry plays in national defense. Our country should be doing more to encourage oil companies to expand and do what they were intended to do....supply fuel to our nation. That expansion could also create jobs. Like other big business, oil companies are demonized by the liberals and the left. This country was founded and grew on the backs of big business, oil companies, railroads, risk takers, and hardworking people who created something. Today, Obama and the libs just want people to sit in front of their TV's and collect government checks in exchange for votes, while the government takes care of everything. It secures those big salaries and pensions in Washington. It's called socialism and it didn't work in Europe and it didn't work in the old Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.Perhaps your not old enough to remember when the wall came down. I'm sure Kahuna was just a child. China, Russia, and Europe are going Capitalistic and we are leaning Socialistic. Go figure.

CHELSEA...have you ever totalled up all he has promised including the now in congress "global Poverty act" to determine how much he wants to SPEND ?

And despite your claim, all Republicans are not liars as not all Democrats are either. You are just consumed with not liking folks unless they agree with you it seems !

Cabo Excellent post. I've lived in a socialist country. You are absolutely right. Many countries are finally figuring out socialism doesn't work and are changing their tune. The US seems to be going more and more towards socialism. Have we learned nothing!!! As you said, go figure.

Cabo Excellent post. I've lived in a socialist country. You are absolutely right. Many countries are finally figuring out socialism doesn't work and are changing their tune. The US seems to be going more and more towards socialism.
__________________________________________________ _________________-

This is the single biggest item on my personal agenda....I actually have trouble comparing the candidates stand on the major issues because I think the turn to the far left is the biggest danger !

Kahuna, you started this interesing thread, where are you?