Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > McCain: Obama's tax cuts are "socialist," "welfare"

McCain: Obama's tax cuts are "socialist," "welfare"
Thread Tools
BRussell
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The Rockies
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 18, 2008, 01:27 PM
 
Here's his radio address this morning.

So there you have it: A plan that would see the IRS give tax credits to lower- and middle-income tax filers is socialist. The earned income tax credit that has been supported by conservative Republicans as an alternative to government welfare programs is now being called welfare.

And even apart from the merits, this seems like a serious tactical error by McCain. We're going into the final weeks of the campaign with McCain criticizing tax credits for lower- and middle-income people. He's going to be bragging about how his tax cuts aren't for those lazy welfare slackers making $50,000 and sticking out their hands for Obama's socialist handouts. Sounds like a bad idea.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 18, 2008, 01:45 PM
 
It's annoying that people are manipulated into not recognizing the fact that there exists a balance to these extremes. Not everything is binary.
     
Mrjinglesusa
Professional Poster
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Why do you care?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 18, 2008, 01:49 PM
 
It's more annoying that McCain and other Republicans fail to recognize (or don't care) that Obama's "increase" in taxes for the wealthy only bring the rates back to where they were pre-Bush 2. McCain has gone off the deep end and is only going to further distance himself from the "average" American.
     
Powerbook
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: München, Deutschland
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 07:42 AM
 
We came a long way! Twenty years before, he would have been called "Communist", but that term is overstrained now. Maybe in another twenty years Republicans will just use "Democrat" as swear word? That would also complete the circle, since Goebbels used to say it a lot...

More seriously though, uninformed masses (a.k.a the American public) likes to make decisions with simple yes/no type of "answers". Many (right wing) politicians then simply feed to them drama about the mighty dangerous Communist, the Negro, the Muslim etc. etc. People then are happy to avoid all that "bad" stuff, by such a easy act as voting against it.

PB.
Aut Caesar aut nihil.
     
Big Mac
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 08:12 AM
 
A tax cut is a cut in the tax that people pay to a government. When 30-35% of the people in question don't pay any federal income tax per se, what Obama is promising them is not a tax cut but rather a subsidy from government, a.k.a. welfare.

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
TETENAL
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FFM
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 08:28 AM
 
Originally Posted by Big Mac View Post
When 30-35% of the people in question don't pay any federal income tax per se, what Obama is promising them is not a tax cut but rather a subsidy from government, a.k.a. welfare.
Link please!
     
Big Mac
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 08:36 AM
 
Originally Posted by TETENAL View Post
Link please!
Here's one, sir:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...triotic-tonic/

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
TETENAL
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FFM
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 09:04 AM
 
This article argues that if you don't pay taxes already, and get a tax break, you get money from the tax agency. I do not follow that argument, probably because it never can be like that in Germany. The agency for taxes only collects but never hands out any money (except obviously refunds if you overpaid them). Welfare is handled by a totally different agency under a totally different set of laws.

So if Obama is talking about a tax cut or break, it's quite obvious to me that he doesn't mean welfare.
     
hyteckit
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 09:16 AM
 
Originally Posted by Big Mac View Post
A tax cut is a cut in the tax that people pay to a government. When 30-35% of the people in question don't pay any federal income tax per se, what Obama is promising them is not a tax cut but rather a subsidy from government, a.k.a. welfare.
What? You are not making any sense.

It's not like a $300 rebate check from Pres. Bush.

If you are not paying federal income tax because you don't make enough, you are still not paying federal income tax under Obama's tax cuts. Nothing has change for you. How is that welfare?

30% of 0 (taxable income) = 0
27% of 0 (taxable income) = 0
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
ShortcutToMoncton
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Rock
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 09:30 AM
 
Originally Posted by hyteckit View Post
What? You are not making any sense.
30% of 0 (taxable income) = 0
27% of 0 (taxable income) = 0
But don't you get it? Under Obama that extra 3% of 0 will be subsidized by rich people
Mankind's only chance is to harness the power of stupid.
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 11:25 AM
 
In order for BO to "cut taxes for 95% of Americans, he first has to make the eeevil Bush tax rates permanent and lower them, thus continuing one of W's failed economic policies. If BO doesn't make the current tax rates permanent, we will ALL get our taxes raised, not just the top 5%.
45/47
     
BRussell  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The Rockies
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 11:46 AM
 
Just to be clear here: It is possible to get money back with tax credits. You have to file, but you can end up with more credits than what you owe, and so be better off after filing than before. Those tax credits currently exist, and Obama is planning to expand them.

But
1) In the past those tax credit policies (the earned income tax credit and the child tax credit in particular) have been proposed and favored by conservatives as an alternative to welfare, and
2) People will still be paying plenty of taxes in other forms - sales taxes, fees, etc.

And I can't believe the conservatives here really think this is anything but just downright terrible politics for McCain. He has to go around the country telling all those "Joe the plumbers" in the crowds that it's welfare and socialism if each of them get an extra $1000, and instead it's better that people who have already gotten rich get all that extra money. It's such a loser for him.
     
BRussell  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The Rockies
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 11:47 AM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
In order for BO to "cut taxes for 95% of Americans, he first has to make the eeevil Bush tax rates permanent and lower them, thus continuing one of W's failed economic policies. If BO doesn't make the current tax rates permanent, we will ALL get our taxes raised, not just the top 5%.
Or he can do what he has proposed: Let Bush's tax cuts on the upper-income classes expire, as the original Bush law requires, and keep them in place for everyone else.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 11:55 AM
 
What evidence do you have that supports the notion that the tax cuts have been a net positive?
     
TETENAL
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: FFM
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 11:56 AM
 
Originally Posted by BRussell View Post
Just to be clear here: It is possible to get money back with tax credits. You have to file, but you can end up with more credits than what you owe, and so be better off after filing than before.
But is it possible to get more money back than what you originally paid in taxes during that year? That is what BigMac implies, but I find it difficult to believe.
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 12:03 PM
 
Originally Posted by TETENAL View Post
But is it possible to get more money back than what you originally paid in taxes during that year? That is what BigMac implies, but I find it difficult to believe.
Yes, you can get more back than you pay in. It call the Earned Income Tax Credit.
The United States federal Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC or EIC) is a refundable tax credit. For tax year 2007, a claimant with one qualifying child can receive a maximum credit of $2,853. For two or more qualifying children, the maximum credit is $4,716.
45/47
     
finboy
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Garden of Paradise Motel, Suite 3D
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 12:33 PM
 
Originally Posted by TETENAL View Post
This article argues that if you don't pay taxes already, and get a tax break, you get money from the tax agency. I do not follow that argument, probably because it never can be like that in Germany. The agency for taxes only collects but never hands out any money (except obviously refunds if you overpaid them). Welfare is handled by a totally different agency under a totally different set of laws.

So if Obama is talking about a tax cut or break, it's quite obvious to me that he doesn't mean welfare.
Your education on the American tax system can progress one acronym at a time, starting with EITC.
     
hyteckit
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 12:44 PM
 
EITC sounds like it is part of the welfare program which encourages welfare recipients to work.

http://www.policyalmanac.org/social_...ive/eitc.shtml

However, the tax cut and the EITC are two separate things. EITC is based on your wages. The amount you received from EITC has nothing to do with the tax rate. Tax cuts have no effect on EITC.

So, this still applies:

30% of 0 (taxable income) = 0
27% of 0 (taxable income) = 0
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
BRussell  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The Rockies
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 12:46 PM
 
Originally Posted by TETENAL View Post
But is it possible to get more money back than what you originally paid in taxes during that year? That is what BigMac implies, but I find it difficult to believe.
If you look only at income taxes, yes you can. But that's really the trick: Often when American conservatives try to make this argument, they vaguely say "taxes," when they're really talking only about "federal income taxes." Of course people pay plenty of other taxes. For example, most Americans pay more in payroll taxes (to pay for retirement and medical care) than income taxes, and that's not even getting into sales taxes or state taxes, among others.

I sincerely doubt that anyone in America gets more back in tax credits than they pay in overall taxes.
     
BRussell  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The Rockies
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 12:53 PM
 
Originally Posted by hyteckit View Post
EITC sounds like it is part of the welfare program which encourages welfare recipients to work.

http://www.policyalmanac.org/social_...ive/eitc.shtml

However, the tax cut and the EITC are two separate things. EITC is based on your wages. The amount you received from EITC has nothing to do with the tax rate. Tax cuts have no effect on EITC.

So, this still applies:

30% of 0 (taxable income) = 0
27% of 0 (taxable income) = 0
hyteckit, Obama is proposing the expansion of these tax credits, rather than rate reductions. Right now, some people at the lower-end of the income scale get a net gain from filing federal income taxes, and Obama's proposals would expand the number of people who fall into the category.

Conservatives don't need to worry though, those lucky duckies in low-income jobs are still going to be using large portions of their paychecks to pay taxes of other kinds.
     
hyteckit
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 01:07 PM
 
What, California doesn't have EITC?

http://www.irs.gov/individuals/artic...177866,00.html

Seems that 22.4 million tax filers claim EITC.

http://www.irs.gov/individuals/artic...177571,00.html
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
hyteckit
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 01:16 PM
 
Originally Posted by BRussell View Post
hyteckit, Obama is proposing the expansion of these tax credits, rather than rate reductions. Right now, some people at the lower-end of the income scale get a net gain from filing federal income taxes, and Obama's proposals would expand the number of people who fall into the category.

Conservatives don't need to worry though, those lucky duckies in low-income jobs are still going to be using large portions of their paychecks to pay taxes of other kinds.
Is it similar to McCain's $5000 refundable tax credit to buy health insurance, in effect making everyone welfare recipients?
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
BRussell  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The Rockies
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 01:19 PM
 
Originally Posted by hyteckit View Post
Is it similar to McCain's $5000 refundable tax credit to buy health insurance, in effect making everyone welfare recipients?
Exactly.
     
hyteckit
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 01:23 PM
 
EITC info. Seems that many like EITC.

http://www.cbpp.org/7-19-05eic.htm

An innovative tax credit that was established in 1975 for low-income working families and has long enjoyed bipartisan support, the Earned Income Tax Credit has been found to produce substantial increases in employment and reductions in welfare receipt among single parents, as well as large decreases in poverty. Research indicates that families use the EITC to pay for necessities, repair homes and vehicles that are needed to commute to work, and in some cases, to help boost their employability and earning power by obtaining additional education or training.

The success of the federal EITC has led 18 states to enact their own EITCs that supplement the federal credit. In addition, the United Kingdom introduced a Working Families Tax Credit modeled on the EITC in 2000 that is credited with contributing to a substantial decrease in child poverty in that country.

The EITC has enjoyed substantial bipartisan support. President Reagan, President George H. W. Bush, and President Clinton all praised it and proposed expansions in it, and economists across the political spectrum including conservative economists Gary Becker (a Nobel laureate) and Robert Barro, among others have lauded it.
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
finboy
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Garden of Paradise Motel, Suite 3D
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 01:49 PM
 
Originally Posted by hyteckit View Post
EITC info. Seems that many like EITC.

http://www.cbpp.org/7-19-05eic.htm

An innovative tax credit that was established in 1975 for low-income working families and has long enjoyed bipartisan support, the Earned Income Tax Credit has been found to produce substantial increases in employment and reductions in welfare receipt among single parents, as well as large decreases in poverty. Research indicates that families use the EITC to pay for necessities, repair homes and vehicles that are needed to commute to work, and in some cases, to help boost their employability and earning power by obtaining additional education or training.

The success of the federal EITC has led 18 states to enact their own EITCs that supplement the federal credit. In addition, the United Kingdom introduced a Working Families Tax Credit modeled on the EITC in 2000 that is credited with contributing to a substantial decrease in child poverty in that country.

The EITC has enjoyed substantial bipartisan support. President Reagan, President George H. W. Bush, and President Clinton all praised it and proposed expansions in it, and economists across the political spectrum including conservative economists Gary Becker (a Nobel laureate) and Robert Barro, among others have lauded it.
I'm sure the people that get it like it. I'd like to get some cash from the govt. too.

But that doesn't address the REAL question: Is it, or is it not, welfare? Yep, it's welfare. So it works wonders in some cases, great! In other cases it doesn't. In all cases it builds dependence on the government and represents a transfer of wealth, regardless of how wonderful some folks consider it to be. The merits of the OTHER, NEW tax credits have yet to be seen, but there shouldn't be an confusion between tax "refunds" and unearned tax "credits". Heck, this one is even named in a confusing fashion "earned income tax credit", as though it was earned somehow. It wasn't.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 01:51 PM
 
I respect the conservative beliefs against wealth redistribution, but I'm frustrated that it is virtually impossible to talk about these sorts of balances in purely practical and non-ideological terms, and without bringing the partisan politics of these two campaigns into the mix. It would be great if we all could figure out how to have these sorts of conversations, because until we can these sorts of conversations are entirely pointless.
     
BRussell  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The Rockies
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 02:06 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
I respect the conservative beliefs against wealth redistribution, but I'm frustrated that it is virtually impossible to talk about these sorts of balances in purely practical and non-ideological terms, and without bringing the partisan politics of these two campaigns into the mix. It would be great if we all could figure out how to have these sorts of conversations, because until we can these sorts of conversations are entirely pointless.
The thing is, this particular issue has already long been decided. Conservative Republicans have for years proposed these kinds of tax credits and liberals have gone along with them. They have strong bipartisan support. McCain is just throwing hail marys. We should all just stand back and watch in amusement. It will all be over soon.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 05:05 PM
 
That may or may not be true, but I was speaking in general terms.

We need wealth redistribution, period. We've discussed the problems of a flat tax, and anything that is not a flax tax is by definition wealth redistribution. The question is simply how to balance everything, and simply proposing changes does not make one a socialist.
     
CRASH HARDDRIVE
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Zip, Boom, Bam
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 05:05 PM
 
If Obama isn't planning on taking money from one group and give it to another, then he shouldn't make statements like "spreading the wealth around". He shouldn't lie to lower wage earners that taking more from someone making $250,000 somehow helps them. It doesn't, and he shouldn't continue to foster a false climate where there's a pretense that it does.

Why pander to your base with blatant lies? Which is it- he's either taking money from one group and "spreading it around" or he's lying about doing so just to get votes of the type of person who thinks that concept is a good thing. Which is it?

And by the way, trying to pin any of McCain's nuttiness on conservatives is just a joke. This time last year, it was liberals wetting themselves over McCain, and conservatives criticizing him for his hopeless RINO-ness. He's no conservative, not even close.

He's merely the latest guy that partisan liberals love to demonize simply because he has an R after his name, when just a short while ago you were bending over for every lame thing the guy said. It is funny to witness though, and just illustrates the shallowness of most of the leftwing political spectrum.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 05:11 PM
 
Why doesn't it help them Crash? It seemed to work fine pre-Bush, at least as good as our current economy... What evidence do you have that Bush's trickle down philosophies have worked, in actual practice?
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 05:13 PM
 
I'm not convinced that McCain's politics haven't changed in recent years, and that his maverick days aren't long behind him. How have his economic and war policies been un-conservative? Perhaps he is socially more liberal than Bush, but then again, social issues seem to have taken a backseat in terms of our discourse within most states, thank goodness!
     
CRASH HARDDRIVE
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Zip, Boom, Bam
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 05:52 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Why doesn't it help them Crash? It seemed to work fine pre-Bush, at least as good as our current economy... What evidence do you have that Bush's trickle down philosophies have worked, in actual practice?
What evidence do you have that the poor are helped by government taking more from the rich?

One of my main arguments is actually made for me in this very thread by liberals, gleefully not even realizing they're actually arguing a very conservative point:

It's been a big MYTH that there really is any great transfer of wealth going on. The government really doesn't just take money from some rich guy and hand it over to poor people. They sure as hell don't do so for the middle class. There IS NO "Come on in and get your share of soaking the rich handout" office.

The poor and middle class DON'T get any benefit out of the rich being taxed more, except some class envy itch scratched.

Mostly, it's all just a ruse to keep the poor voting for Democrats and socialist policies, but at the end of the day, one of the key things about socialism is that it NEVER actually makes the poor any better off, or the ultra wealthy any less wealthy. It really just ends up hammering the middle class to pay for an even more bloated government, in exchange for a few pretend 'freebies' and a false sense of security.

As implemented by naive politicians like Obama, (assuming he were to get the worst of his plans accomplished) it'll probably end up just turning more middle class people into poor people, hammering small business and making it more difficult to start one, and giving us permanent European style unemployment rates.

Same snakeoil, different buyers.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 06:10 PM
 
Crash: huh? A tax code that favors the middle class so that they either pay less in tax or receive tax credits is no benefit? I don't understand your argument.
     
CRASH HARDDRIVE
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Zip, Boom, Bam
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 06:22 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Crash: huh? A tax code that favors the middle class so that they either pay less in tax or receive tax credits is no benefit? I don't understand your argument.
You reallybuy that the middle class will pay less in taxes and all the pretend freebies, new boondoggles, deficit reduction, and a million other fantasyland promises will get paid for out of soaking "the rich" a few more percentage points?

You really haven't figured out that's just a "Don't be so stupid as to pull another Mondale" campaign ruse?
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 06:32 PM
 
Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE View Post
You reallybuy that the middle class will pay less in taxes and all the pretend freebies, new boondoggles, deficit reduction, and a million other fantasyland promises will get paid for out of soaking "the rich" a few more percentage points?

You really haven't figured out that's just a "Don't be so stupid as to pull another Mondale" campaign ruse?
I don't know, because this is extremely vague. Let's focus this. Do I think that tax cuts that favor the middle class benefit the middle class? Yes, why wouldn't I?

If you want to make a separate argument about boondoogies or boonpussycats, whatever those are, make your case - preferably in an unemotional charged way if I have the luxury of a choice.
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 09:17 PM
 
Originally Posted by TETENAL View Post
This article argues that if you don't pay taxes already, and get a tax break, you get money from the tax agency. I do not follow that argument, probably because it never can be like that in Germany. The agency for taxes only collects but never hands out any money (except obviously refunds if you overpaid them). Welfare is handled by a totally different agency under a totally different set of laws.

So if Obama is talking about a tax cut or break, it's quite obvious to me that he doesn't mean welfare.
Tetenal, I think you don't get it.

Obama is promising a NEGATIVE tax rate for many.

How this would NOT be welfare or wealth redistribution, please explain.

-t
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 09:22 PM
 
Originally Posted by turtle777 View Post
Tetenal, I think you don't get it.

Obama is promising a NEGATIVE tax rate for many.

How this would NOT be welfare or wealth redistribution, please explain.

-t

We've had the earned income tax credit for years, started by Nixon, I believe.

Your point?
     
turtle777
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 09:27 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
We've had the earned income tax credit for years, started by Nixon, I believe.

Your point?
SO ? Did I say that the EITC is NOT welfare ?

-t
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 19, 2008, 09:29 PM
 
So you want to eliminate the EITC, and because Obama doesn't as well he ought to be lambasted, while McCain shouldn't receive the same treatment despite not proposing to eliminate the EITC either?

How is the negative tax rate new?
     
hyteckit
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: May 2001
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 20, 2008, 12:50 AM
 
I heard Alaska is the biggest welfare state, receiving $13,950 per capital in federal dollars.

http://www.taxfoundation.org/taxdata/show/22685.html

Alaska also receive over $1k just for sitting on their asses.
Bush Tax Cuts == Job Killer
June 2001: 132,047,000 employed
June 2003: 129,839,000 employed
2.21 million jobs were LOST after 2 years of Bush Tax Cuts.
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 20, 2008, 10:36 AM
 
sorry for the cross post.
One question yes or no: is BO going to let the current tax rates expire on 01/01/11?
45/47
     
Big Mac
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 20, 2008, 10:48 AM
 
He's already committed to letting the Bush tax cuts expire, if that's the question.

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 20, 2008, 10:54 AM
 
Originally Posted by Big Mac View Post
He's already committed to letting the Bush tax cuts expire, if that's the question.
Yes, and that means all our taxes will be raised, the bottom rate going from 10% to 15%. So much for only raising taxes on those making>250K

The video of BO saying he will the tax cuts expire need to be turned into an ad showing the graph

# the 10% bracket will be raised to 15% (income up 6K single, 12K married)
# the 25% bracket will be raised to 28%
# the 28% bracket will be raised to 31%
# the 33% bracket will be raised to 36%
# the 36% bracket will be raised to 39.6%
( Last edited by Chongo; Oct 20, 2008 at 01:11 PM. )
45/47
     
Big Mac
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 20, 2008, 11:00 AM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
Yes, and that means all our taxes will be raised, the bottom rate going from 10% to 15%. So much for only raising taxes on those making>250K
Presumably he will push through legislation maintaining the lower rates for the lower income brackets.

"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 20, 2008, 11:02 AM
 
Originally Posted by Big Mac View Post
Presumably he will push through legislation maintaining the lower rates for the lower income brackets.
That will mean perpetuating one of W's failed economic policies
45/47
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 20, 2008, 12:09 PM
 
Chongo: you aren't making it easy for people like myself to follow your train of thought. Please outline in specific terms how rolling back Bush's tax cuts represents an increase in taxes for everybody, and please account for why this wasn't the case prior to the Bush administration.
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 20, 2008, 01:10 PM
 
Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Chongo: you aren't making it easy for people like myself to follow your train of thought. Please outline in specific terms how rolling back Bush's tax cuts represents an increase in taxes for everybody, and please account for why this wasn't the case prior to the Bush administration.
The current rates, and where they will go when they sunset clause kicks in. They will revert back to the Clinton rates.
the 10% bracket will be raised to 15% (income up 6K single, 12K married)
the 25% bracket will be raised to 28%
the 28% bracket will be raised to 31%
the 33% bracket will be raised to 36%
the 36% bracket will be raised to 39.6%

Look like a tax increase to me, the 10% bracket jumping the most.
45/47
     
The Crook
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Sep 2008
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 20, 2008, 01:12 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
The current rates, and where they will go when they sunset clause kicks in. They will revert back to the Clinton rates.
the 10% bracket will be raised to 15% (income up 6K single, 12K married)
the 25% bracket will be raised to 28%
the 28% bracket will be raised to 31%
the 33% bracket will be raised to 36%
the 36% bracket will be raised to 39.6%

Look like a tax increase to me, the 10% bracket jumping the most.
Thanks for the info.

Any idea how that comports with the Obama Tax Cut Plan that cuts taxes for 95% of people?

Crooked Member of the MacNN Atheist Clique.
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 20, 2008, 01:20 PM
 
Originally Posted by The Crook View Post
Thanks for the info.

Any idea how that comports with the Obama Tax Cut Plan that cuts taxes for 95% of people?
in order for BO to cut anyone's taxes, he has to make the current rates permanent, then lower them, if he actually does. Even if BO does lower rates for 95% of the people, 40% of those who pay no taxes to begin with, the rates will automatically go up in Jan 2011, negating his "tax cut"

Oh I keep forgetting, in left wing logic, a decrease in the amount of an increase is a cut.
45/47
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Oct 20, 2008, 01:24 PM
 
I have no idea where Chongo is getting his numbers and notions from.

Obama rolls back the tax cuts on the rich, and uses that money to pay for other things. At least, that is what he has been saying. If Chongo wants to direct me to a link about this sunset clause thing, I'd gladly read it.
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:16 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,