"...what about Obama's policies are making you vote for him?"
Well, just to name a handful of things : There's the fact that Obama wants rich people to pay more taxes and poor people to pay less, rather than McCain's reverse theory. There's the fact that Obama has more interest in alternative energy sources, while McCain seems to think extra oil drilling in protected areas will be good enough. And, on the same subject, Obama seems to recognize that McCain's "gas tax holiday" thing was the exact opposite of a good idea. There's the fact that Obama would most likely treat other countries with diplomacy rather than belligerence. There's the fact that, when Supreme Court vacancies almost certainly come up in the next few years, Obama is pretty unlikely to nominate anyone from the Scalia/Thomas/Alito school of judgery (while McCain would).
Do you need more? I'm sure I could find something else, if necessary.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
WizArtist II
"How can you have a yellow alert in Spacedock? "
Member # 1425
Note: Representatives of the Obama campaign have informed the authors that the campaign is not committed to the full 12.4 hike in the payroll tax. An increase in the payroll tax is merely one of many different tax increases that are being considered for those making over $250,000. The Obama campaign implies that the tax increase on those earning over $250,000 may not be limited to earnings but also cover different types of income. Despite questioning, the campaign has not provided any more details.
Presidential hopeful Senator Barack Obama (D–Ill.) has unveiled his economic plan of raising taxes on the successful. His plan would boost the top marginal rate to well over 55 percent—before the inclusion of state and local taxes—resulting in many individuals seeing their marginal tax rate double. The consequences of this policy would be a return to the bad old days of tax avoidance, with taxpayers disguising personal income as business income or capital gains and the migration of capital from the United States to abroad.
Among the more prominent elements of his tax proposal, Senator Obama would end the Bush tax cuts and allow the top two tax rates to return to 36 and 39.6 percent. He also would allow personal exemptions and deductions to be phased out for those with income over $250,000. The real kicker, though, is that Senator Obama would end the Social Security payroll tax cap for those over $250,000 in earnings. (The cap is currently set at $102,000.) These individuals will then face a tax rate of 15.65 percent from payroll taxes and the top income tax rate of 39.6 percent for a combined top rate of over 56 percent on each additional dollar earned.
High-income individuals will be forced to pay even more if they live in cities or states with high taxes such as New York City, California, or Maryland. These unlucky people would pay over two-thirds of each new dollar in earnings to the federal government.
How the Obama Tax Plan Compares to Other Countries
Senator Obama's new tax rate would give the United States one of the highest tax rates among developed countries. Currently only six of the top 30 industrial nations have a tax rate for all levels of government combined of over 55 percent. Under this tax plan, the United States would join this group and have a higher top rate than such high-tax nations as Sweden and Denmark. The top marginal rate would exceed 60 percent with the inclusion of state and local taxes, which means that only Hungary would exceed Senator Obama's new proposed top tax rate.
The costs in economic terms of such high taxes are real. For example, of the six countries with higher tax rates than 55 percent, the average unemployment rate is 7.35 percent (see chart). This figure includes Denmark, which appears to have a very low unemployment rate of 3.9 percent. However, Denmark spends over 5 percent of its GDP on unemployment programs and benefits, thereby increasing its unemployment rate.[1]
A Return to the Bad Old Days
Historically, Senator Obama's tax rate would be the highest individual tax rate since the Jimmy Carter days. Tax shelters and tax avoidance strategies were common when the top marginal rate was 70 percent or higher. This new top tax rate will again encourage these gimmicks, reducing investment and economic growth as resources are squandered in an attempt to avoid punitive taxation.
Many individuals will attempt to transfer their compensation from wages to capital gains, since capital gains would only be taxed at 25 percent, or less than half of the top rate on wages. This would put a great deal of pressure on a company to do anything it could to make its stock quickly increase in value. Other individuals would try to incorporate so they could pay business taxes instead of having to pay taxes on their wages. Again, these resources would be diverted away from more productive uses and slow the economy.
High tax rates also encourage capital and income flight to lower-taxed areas. There is ample evidence in the United States of individuals and businesses moving to states such as Florida or Delaware to take advantage of their tax-friendly laws. A higher federal tax rate would encourage individuals to move assets abroad to take advantage of lower tax rates in countries such as Canada, France, and Great Britain.
These high tax rates could also have a large impact on the labor force. Many workers could choose to reduce their hours or simply retire in the face of such high taxation. Economists usually argue a great deal about what effect minor changes in the tax code will have on incentives to work. However, the Obama plan calls for a tax increase so large that economists will be focusing on the harm to the overall economy rather than just the isolated effects on labor and on capital.
A Finite Source of Revenue
Perhaps a larger worry than the damage to the economy is the long-run budget problem of the United States. While Senator Obama raises taxes a great deal on upper income individuals, the overall tax plan increases the national deficit. As a result, the country will be even less prepared to pay for current and future Social Security and Medicare obligations. When money is needed to pay for those programs, it will be hard to tax the rich even more, given that the top rate will already be so high. Instead, in order to pay the government's spending and entitlement shortfalls, taxes would fall most heavily on middle-income Americans. After all, even successful taxpayers are not an infinite source of revenue.
Rea S. Hederman, Jr., is a Senior Policy Analyst and the Assistant Director, and Patrick Tyrrell is a Research Assistant, in the Center for Data Analysis at The Heritage Foundation.
END OF ARTICLE
OK, how is it fair that an individual is punished for being skilled or educated enough to earn a large income? What is the incentive to better yourself if you know that Sammy is going to take OVER HALF what you make and then distributing it to the welfare addicts like Sharon Jasper?
The real problem is that the U.S. Congress does not have a clue about how to run a country fiscally. Not only should a country make sure that its spending does not exceed its source of revenue, it should also plan a cushion to meet unforseen or projected needs. Most of America's basic infrastructure is over two centuries old and in need of replacement/upgrade. But instead of planning ahead to make these necessary changes, our glorious representatives have instead taken a 'band-aid' approach. When something breaks they just throw some money at the temporary problem and worry about the source later. They typically do not go to the underlying root of the problem and work out a true solution. I swear its like they are on a sinking ship and they decide to drill a hole in the bottom of the boat to let the water out.
-------------------- There are 10 types of people in the world...those that understand Binary and those that don't.
Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
posted
Well, they sure lowered taxes on the rich in the last eight years, and the rich got richer while the poor got poorer, with an ever-widening deficit. I don't like high taxes either, but lowering taxes merely widens the gap between the rich and poor if government structures aren't reformed first - and that is going to take a lot of collaboration from both Democrats and Republicans.
As for why I'm supporting Obama:
He makes incredibly clear and conscious observations and addresses the root of a problem instead of pandering to one side or another -- e.g. when he made the speech on race after the Rev. Wright debacle. And most recently in his convention speech, one of the things that stood out for me was when he said, "One of the things that we have to change in our politics is the idea that people cannot disagree without challenging each other's character and each other's patriotism."
He's not divisive, and he tries to speak to the concerns of people who disagree with his issues. He doesn't demonize. He tries to resolve differences rather than fan the flames. As president, I think he has the potential of taking the political climate to a place where it's not so polarized along party lines.
Most government problems are not black and white with one "right" solution. The labels, like "taxation" or "immigration" are merely one symptom or facet of complex interrelated issues. Obama is someone who can see that and get to the bottom of things, rather than just putting a band-aid on the symptom. Any candidate can say they'll take care of your problems, but clarity, consciousness, and a spirit of collaboration are not things you can fake.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Shik
Starship database: completed; History of Starfleet: done; website: probably never
Member # 343
posted
I love how a century on, people still want programs from the feds, but refuse to be willing to pay for them.
-------------------- "The French have a saying: 'mise en place'—keep everything in its fucking place!"
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Reminds of a documentary not to long ago about credit in America where this guy talks about a couple who came to his store and told him in effect how they would vote Republican because they didn't want be "forced" to pay for others which the owner of the store found funny considering they came to his business to buy body armor for their son in Iraq.
Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
WizArtist II
"How can you have a yellow alert in Spacedock? "
Member # 1425
posted
There is NOTHING the government can give you that it has not first TAKEN AWAY from you.
I'm not really interested in arguing back and forth or convincing anyone else. You asked a question and I answered. I'm just going to say that "not divisive" does not mean never criticizing or never saying things that offend other people - that would be impossible. You can't control what people want to get offended by. "Not divisive" to me means that he does not take every opportunity to attack his oppenents, that he listens and addresses concerns of people, that he sees issues as complex grays rather than black and white. Yes, you will find occasional examples to the contrary, but then he is a presidential candidate, not the messiah.
P.S. I happened to think that Obama's "bitterness" quote was a keen observation.
posted
I'd really like to see this thread stay on the topic of alternate parties, if at all possible. If you'd like to debate the relative merits or demerits of the major party candidates, I would appreciate a new thread for that discussion.
-------------------- "This is why you people think I'm so unknowable. You don't listen!" - God, "God, the Devil and Bob"
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Shik
Starship database: completed; History of Starfleet: done; website: probably never
Member # 343
posted
I'M voting National Bocialist this year...!
-------------------- "The French have a saying: 'mise en place'—keep everything in its fucking place!"
Registered: Jun 2000
| IP: Logged
quote:Presidential hopeful Senator Barack Obama (D–Ill.) has unveiled his economic plan of raising taxes on the successful. His plan would boost the top marginal rate to well over 55 percent—before the inclusion of state and local taxes—resulting in many individuals seeing their marginal tax rate double. The consequences of this policy would be a return to the bad old days of tax avoidance, with taxpayers disguising personal income as business income or capital gains and the migration of capital from the United States to abroad
Firstly, that's an incredibly right-leaning article, secondly consider this: The Bush administration has eliminated 75% of the IRS' staff that prosecute and recover unpaid taxes from the most wealthy 1% of companies and indivuals. They were re-assigned to presue middle and lower-class people behind in their taxes. Over half of all owed taxes come from the most wealthy 10% and from large corporations- the same people most likely to donate to a political campaign.
Not only is this horribly (in fact criminally) wrong, it clearly shows how the "trickle-down" economics does not, and never has worked. This policy of self-policing corporations supposedly taking their huge profits and re-investing in the American infrastructure by creating new and better paying jobs is a bad joke when job outsourcing is at an all-time high- as the decade-high unemployment rate clearly shows.
As to McCain: He refers to his time a a P.O.W. as much as Bush does 9/11. It's a dodge on real issues that the repblicans cant debate on due to their poor record in, well, everything.
As much as I respect McCain's military service, he's not talking about the issues- or even anything that's happened IN MY FUCKING LIFETIME!
Seriously- being tortured does NOT make a person presidential material- particulraly when he's flipped on the issue of waterboarding to side with Bush and his cronies. If he wanted to be a "maverick" he should have stuck to his guns on the immorality of torture- even if it cost him the nomination.
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
Bush mentioning 9/11? Not as much as Giuliani. That cocksucker still mentioned 9/11 in RNC even as he was ripping Obama for being a community organizer.
Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
posted
Bush mentioned it from his safely-distant hidey-hole via video relay. Maybe he was avoiding all the "boos" his appearance would have caused- the republicans must surely be thanking God for yet another hurricane hitting New Orleans- thus providing a semi-plausable distraction to keep the President and Vice President away from their own party's convention. Maybe they'll blame that one on the city's "sinful" nature.
But yeah, Gulianni's a cock.
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
Daniel Butler
I'm a Singapore where is my boat
Member # 1689
posted
My boss is right - I'm voting for Spongebob...
Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic