Obama's "redistribution of wealth"

[immts007]

I agree will Smallville, it has decreased, no matter what you say. You say it's for families. The question was asked at what level are the "rich" going to be taxed. The answer was 200k. There were no butt-ins for singles or anything like that.

No matter what the facts say. No matter what anyone says. No matter what reality is.

Oh, I don't recall anyone asking that question, so it seems you create your own arguments as you go - so it's just as well you have them with your self.

[T.J.K.]

No matter what the facts say. No matter what anyone says. No matter what reality is.

I am pretty sure that Obama has always said "the top 5%" and then put a number too it. I haven't heard that # change.

[firstcut]

• Families making more than $250,000 will pay either the same or lower tax rates than they paid in the 1990s. Obama will ask the wealthiest 2% of families to give back a portion of the taxes they have received over the past eight years to ensure we are restoring fairness and returning to fiscal responsibility. But no family will pay higher tax rates than they would have paid in the 1990s. In fact, dividend rates would be 39 percent lower than what President Bush proposed in his 2001 tax cut.

Ya, that's nice if it wasn't completely disingenuous to the way the average American increases their pay over time. There are plenty of families who are just hitting their 250k earning potential that never saw these great tax breaks you speak of in the 90's. The world isn't made up of 55 year olds. The "new earners" are now being told that working hard and making more money is a bad thing and that they should be punished for it.

IMHO, it's pretty simple really. People that work their asses off for the money they make should not be punished for it. That's what ANY system that taxes people at a higher % for making more money does. This plan just furthers it. We should be figuring out how to build a better and EQUAL tax plan, not gunning down high earners (and spenders) who keep the economy going. If Obama was really about change, that's what he would be doing, equalizing the tax field. What he's doing now is taking the easy way out and using a faulty tax plan to raise votes.

[jonanthans]

I don't think you people are listening.

Finally, an intelligent post....

[jmoc]

Under $200,000 = tax cut

I'm thankful for all the posters trying to help BHO keep his tax cut numbers straight, but I'll just go with the numbers as given by the Messiah or his Chosen. Here goes: Obama - tax cut for under 250K Obama - tax cut for under 200K Biden - tax cut for under 150K Richardson - tax cut for under 120K We are now down to less than half of what his original Tax cut number was. We would all do well to remember Clinton's famous speech one month into his Presidenticy, when he campaingned promising a "Middle Class" tax cut and then he said "I tried... I tried as hard as I could" but he could not find a way to keep his promise. Then made his Tax INCREASE retroactive to before he was president. Can't wait for my chance to be "unselfish" and "patriotic" at the same time...... jmoc

[Chilli Dipper]

Where the hell is Richardson's number coming from?

[jonanthans]

It doesn't matter who gets elected, it's all the same old crap coming out of these guys mouths. It's easy to stand up there and say you are going to do this and that, however the past elections have shown that what is said during the campaign and what actually happens after they are elected are nowhere near close. Taxes are inevitable. The US Goverment operates on our tax dollars, if the taxes are cut, then what spending gets cut? What officials are going to take pay cuts? What programs get shut down? None. If taxes are cut at all, it would simply be a short term fix, which we will pay for at a later date. Our goverment spending goes up every year. Where do you guys think the money to sustain it is going to come from? WE are the product, OUR taxes run this country.

The tax rate should be equal for every man and woman earning a wage in this country.Why should a more succesful man pay a higher tax rate than a middle class guy? That makes no sense at all. There will always be poor people, middle class and rich people, it is inevitable. Taxes should be paid on a flat rate, the same flat rate for every wage-earning individual in this country.

As I've said before, this country needs to be ran like a business. Every dollar accounted and answered for. Programs that are approved are allocated the appropriate funds to sustain them. The "slush" money goes away, it falls directly to the bottom line, which goes directly towards erasing the national debt.

[erniebanks]

Where the hell is Richardson's number coming from?

I don't know but I heard an Obama spokeslady say the middle class is 45,000 to 50,000. You can expect that to be the next number to be the cutoff.

Poverty level is currently around 20,000. The liberals will try to tax us all down to that level. Actually, I believe there will be no tax cut. A tax on all people making more than poverty level is my best guess. These are liberals. The plan is for all of us to be dependant of the federal government for everything. I rue the day we get "universal health care".

[jmoc]

Where the hell is Richardson's number coming from?

Radio interview in Colorado on Friday, check youtube :, and

http://newmexicoindependent.com/7856...obama-tax-plan BTW, the last time BHO got the opportunity to vote on a tax increase the Dems put up, the "no tax increase" line was $41,600. Why do I have the feeling I'll be seeing that number in a press release sometime after 5 Nov?... jmoc

[immts007]

Hey jmoc, I'm tired of providing arguments and facts to counteract bullshit like yours, I'd give you a link to factcheck.org but I assume you've read through this thread and just don't give a crap about the truth and would rather lie and misrepresent.

Every single thing you've said has been debunked. And you know what I think? I think you know it. But you keep saying it anyway.

[Chilli Dipper]

In the summer of 2002, after I had written an article in Esquire that the White House didn't like about Bush's former communications director, Karen Hughes, I had a meeting with a senior adviser to Bush. He expressed the White House's displeasure, and then he told me something that at the time I didn't fully comprehend -- but which I now believe gets to the very heart of the Bush presidency.

Reality is not something that conservatives hold in high regard.

[jmoc]

Hey jmoc, I'm tired of providing arguments and facts to counteract bullshit like yours, I'd give you a link to factcheck.org but I assume you've read through this thread and just don't give a crap about the truth and would rather lie and misrepresent. Every single thing you've said has been debunked. And you know what I think? I think you know it. But you keep saying it anyway.

That's a rather harsh and borderline personal attack. I generally quote what the man (or authorized individuals speaking/campaigning on his behalf) has said or can be verified having done/voted. Granted, the commentary that follows is my own opinion, but I believe that is clear to most readers. Clinton did raise taxes, retroactive to before he was president. The BHO Tax Increase numbers I've posted are actual statements made and verifiable, hardley BS. I've even avoided using Fox, finding my back up at other sources. It is clear we will not change each others minds, and I do not belieive that to be the point of these posts, but at least between a few of the posters, civil discourse can be had... or perhaps not.... jmoc

[juanrjackson]

I am retired from the military & consider McCain's service to the country as honorable....but the time is just not right for his policies. After 8 years of Bush's polices is anyone really better off than they were in 2001? Not the country in general. McCain voted with Bush 90% of the time. Can the country really afford a continuation of polices that have not worked?

"Redistribution of wealth" is just a slogan....taxes has always been around & always will be. As a person that makes less than 200K per year I do not want my health benefits taxed. I could care less about some health tax credit.

Just my two cents.

[paperclip]

I just a dumb Canuck looking at this thread and got quite a few snickers. As an outsider watching the election fun from a distance (notwithstanding the fact that my wife is an American and has a big interest in this stuff), I love the lies, slander, mudslinging, slime, etc. that is going on, esp. in the media (the New York Times is so unbiased that it makes Pravda read like a Dr. Seuss book and the LA Times is Democrat-leaning but bashes Nancy Pelosi over the head occasionally). I would love to see Keith Olbermann and Sean Hannity in a steel cage match, but I digress.

You get what you wish for, my feeling is that Pelosi and Congress are the real problem, not Obama or McCain. Bush's economic policies did not cause meltdowns, Congress with their inaction and lack of oversight did.

My feeling is that with Obama, you'd better hang on to your wallets. Any sort of "redistribution" or "reallocation" of wealth spells socialist in my book and will take away incentive. That's eventually why the Soviet Union collapsed. I don't believe that McCain will follow Bush's economic policies, if he's elected, Pelosi and Congress will block him on everything anyway. If Obama is elected, look out.

As a Canadian, yes, I have access to "free, universal health care". Sounds sexy, until you get sick or need to have something done. Health care spending is out of control up here and consumes at least 45% of our budgets. That's why Canadian taxes are so high. And that's why we pay approximately 20% more for gasoline vs. the US. If you are complaining about your taxes now and if you vote in Obama, you ain't seen nothing yet. If you think that Obama will cut your taxes, I have a bridge in Brooklyn for sale. The repeated mantra of "change, change, change" has a brainwashing effect.

I generally feel that the devil you know is better than the devil you don't. Something tells me that I would rather take the chance on a retired Vietman vet fighter pilot who gave his soul for his country as opposed to a rookie senator whose sole experience is as a social worker, it doesn't matter that his background is unquantifiable.

Go ahead and flame me if you want, I could have a lot of fun with this!

[Chilli Dipper]

I just a dumb Canuck looking at this thread and got quite a few snickers. As an outsider watching the election fun from a distance (notwithstanding the fact that my wife is an American and has a big interest in this stuff), I love the lies, slander, mudslinging, slime, etc. that is going on, esp. in the media (the New York Times is so unbiased that it makes Pravda read like a Dr. Seuss book and the LA Times is Democrat-leaning but bashes Nancy Pelosi over the head occasionally). I would love to see Keith Olbermann and Sean Hannity in a steel cage match, but I digress.

Blaming Pelosi for the financial crisis is like blaming the interim coach of a college basketball team for the failures of a program he inherited in midseason because the previous head coach was fired for overseeing boosters paying off recruits, half the players were dismissed for having accepted said cash gifts, and the NCAA imposed a postseason ban and took away athletic scholarships as punishment.

[PEZGolf]

There is a diffenence in taxing to pay for things like the Military and Schools, and taxing to make things "fair".

Question: when the comparison between the average pay of the real worker and the average pay of the "real boss"---the CEO----- becomes such a large multiple that it is almost laughable, what does that tell us? In my opinion, four things: 1. It is capitalism at work------------"Greed is GOOD" if YOU are the one benefitting 2. Boards of Directors are "good ole boys" who like to reward "their boy" 3. The stockholders could care less as long as the price of the stock continues to climb 4. The workers will accept it, work hard for the company, and not complain as long as their pay is "fair" for what they do Capitalism is always full of distortions: why should brokers on Wall Street "earn" HUGE bonuses for simply trading instruments and NOT creating wealth? Why should professional "athletes" make more money than surgeons who save lives or first responders such as police officers, fire fighters, or EMT's? Some people think that all Socialists are Marx-Lenin supporters and want to copy the Soviet model. Some people never heard of "democratic socialists" who recognize the flaws of capitalism and want to ameliorate the worst distortions. Redistribution of wealth, to a limited extent, can be accomplished with the progressive income tax. The problem with that is the inherent flaw in the US system of "representative democracy". If lawyers, lobbyists, wealthy contributors, etc. can exert a lot of influence on the legislative and executive branches, then "loopholes" and special clauses in the tax law can defeat the purposes of a progressive income tax. SO--------------is "redistribution of wealth" possible in the US? Not really. Does it make sense to debate the subject? Not really. Do some people want to discuss it because it is a way to attack a particular candidate for elective office? Come on----does that EVER happen in an election in the US? All US elections have ONLY informed, intelligent debates about subjects important to the voters. But you knew that, did you not?

[nykfan4life]

the freer the market, the freer the people. We are already a halfways socialist country. Progressive income tax, social security, wall street bailout, etc etc.


The reason capitalism isn't working in this country is because we don't have true capitalism. While capitalism isn't perfect, I believe true capitalism is the least flawed political system. And what we have now is not true capitalism.

Mccain wants to keep this one foot in each camps system, and Obama wants to go all in socialism. Both have it wrong. Unfortunately for us, these are our only choices.

[mapa94]

I just a dumb Canuck

You're not dumb, you are just the first conservative Canadian I've encountered. I thought both the Canadian Liberal Party and the Canadian Conservative Party are considered left of center when compared to the US political spectrum. I golf with Canadian snowbirds during the winters in the Palm Springs area and they are usually warm, friendly, and have good sense of humors. They especially like to poke fun at Mr. Bush.