Finally

[EasyEJL]

finally mccain is hitting the core issue of why an obama presidency goes against american values... I'm appalled by the idea of the government handing out money on a regular basis to people who pay no taxes. Thats welfare, and income redistribution

McCain suggests Obama tax policies are socialist

CHARLOTTE, N.C. – Republican presidential candidate John McCain on Saturday accused Democratic rival Barack Obama of favoring a socialistic economic approach by supporting tax cuts and tax credits McCain says would merely shuffle wealth rather than creating it.

"At least in Europe, the Socialist leaders who so admire my opponent are upfront about their objectives," McCain said in a radio address. "They use real numbers and honest language. And we should demand equal candor from Sen. Obama. Raising taxes on some in order to give checks to others is not a tax cut; it's just another government giveaway."

McCain, though, has a health care plan girded with a similar philosophy. He proposes providing individuals with a $5,000 tax credit to buy health insurance. He would pay for his plan, in part, by considering as taxable income the money their employer spends on their health coverage.

McCain leveled his charge before a pair of appearances aimed at restoring his lead in critical battleground states. In both North Carolina and Virginia, where McCain was to speak later in the day, his campaign has surrendered its lead to Obama in various polls. President Bush, a Republican, won both states in 2004.

The state dips mimic larger national trends that have given Obama a lead over McCain following Wall Street chaos that focused the race on who is best equipped to restore the economy.

On Sunday, McCain was to travel to Ohio, where he might appear with "Joe the Plumber," the Holland, Ohio, plumber Joe Wurzelbacher whom the senator has been portraying as emblematic of people with concerns about Obama's tax plans.

Wurzelbacher became the focal point of the final presidential debate after he met Obama earlier in the week and said the Democrat's tax proposal could keep him from buying the two-man plumbing company where he works. However, reports of Wurzelbacher's annual earnings suggest he would receive a tax cut rather than an increase under Obama's plan.

Obama has said his tax policies would cut payments for 95 percent of working Americans, while increasing them only for families making more than $250,000 a year. McCain has argued that 40 percent of Americans don't pay income taxes, either because they are seniors or don't meet minimum earnings thresholds, so the only way to cut their taxes is to give them various credits.

"In other words, Barack Obama's tax plan would convert the IRS into a giant welfare agency, redistributing massive amounts of wealth at the direction of politicians in Washington," McCain said in the radio address.

An Obama spokesman did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The last Democratic candidate to win North Carolina was Southerner Jimmy Carter in 1976 when the Republicans were reeling from President Nixon's resignation following the Watergate scandal. Virginia has not voted for a Democratic nominee since President Johnson's landslide victory in 1964.

 

[SilentBob187]

Commie Pinkos!

 

[Arrogant]

finally mccain is hitting the core issue of why an obama presidency goes against american values... I'm appalled by the idea of the government handing out money on a regular basis to people who pay no taxes. Thats welfare, and income redistribution

Are you as equally appalled by income distribution when it benefits, oh...I don't know... The Republican Vice Presidental nominee?

You know... The Alaska Permanent Fund.

Sarah rages on against "income distribution" and those evil "socialist" programs unless they benefit her.

 

[CDB]

If it's a key issue then McCaine is guilty of the same thing. All political candidates do is redistribute wealth these days, it's just a question of who it goes to. There hasn't been a genuine tax cutter in office in decades.

 

[Dwight Schrute]

Are you as equally appalled by income distribution when it benefits, oh...I don't know... The Republican Vice Presidental nominee?

You know... The Alaska Permanent Fund.

Sarah rages on against "income distribution" and those evil "socialist" programs unless they benefit her.

The APF doesn't redistribute personal income.

 

[Fastone]

Sorry Michelle Bachman, WRONG!!!! McCain needs to hit his running mate who's loose lips are sinking ships. Yes and Obama needs to smack his too.

:bruce3:

 

[Dwight Schrute]

Sorry Michelle Bachman, WRONG!!!! McCain needs to hit his running mate who's loose lips are sinking ships. Yes and Obama needs to smack his too.

:bruce3:

Did you know western PA is racist?


:lol:

 

[Arrogant]

The APF doesn't redistribute personal income.

If "less taxes on the middle class/more taxes for the rich" qualifies as income redistribution, then how is "less taxes on the rich/more taxes for the middle class" any different??

Let me get this straight - since income is already redistributed in a way that favors the rich, then that makes it okay, and for McCain to alter the tax policy that favors the rich even MORE is still okay, but to flip the script and have the middle class get the better tax break is Socialism???

It is this kind of stupid logic that will ultimately cost the Republicans the Presidency.

 

[Arrogant]

A recent study by the Tax Policy Center shows that a hard working individual with a total income of $19,000 would see a $100 savings under McCain's plan compared to a $900 savings under Obama's plan. So what happens to that $800 under McCain's plan? All of that money, plus some, instead goes to the family that makes $225,000, where McCain's plan gives them $4,400 in tax breaks instead of the $2,800 in tax breaks that Obama's plan does.

In other words, McCain takes $800 from someone making $19,000 a year and gives it to the family that makes $225,000.

That, my friends, is truly unfair income redistribution, brought to you with a smile and a wink by John McCain.

It's always amazed me how the party of corporate elites managed to grab hold of low income families by using buzz words like MINORITY, ABORTION, MORALS, and GOD. But then once in office, they don't do anything about those hot button issues, they bow down to corporate policies that, for example, helped wipe out many farmers in Kansas.

The election cycle comes around again, and guess what? Let's talk about gay marriage and immigration!!!11! It's hilarious how people will vote for these issues, while being raped on the economic front.

 

[AE14]

If it's a key issue then McCaine is guilty of the same thing. All political candidates do is redistribute wealth these days, it's just a question of who it goes to. There hasn't been a genuine tax cutter in office in decades.

reps to you sir

 

[Dwight Schrute]

If "less taxes on the middle class/more taxes for the rich" qualifies as income redistribution, then how is "less taxes on the rich/more taxes for the middle class" any different??

Let me get this straight - since income is already redistributed in a way that favors the rich, then that makes it okay, and for McCain to alter the tax policy that favors the rich even MORE is still okay, but to flip the script and have the middle class get the better tax break is Socialism???

It is this kind of stupid logic that will ultimately cost the Republicans the Presidency.

In your hastiness you defend your leftist point of view, you didn't realize that all I said it was that it didn't redistribute personal income. That's all.


I'm for helping the rich in any way I can. I love the rich. I want to be them someday.


:lol:

 

[EasyEJL]

A recent study by the Tax Policy Center shows that a hard working individual with a total income of $19,000 would see a $100 savings under McCain's plan compared to a $900 savings under Obama's plan. So what happens to that $800 under McCain's plan? All of that money, plus some, instead goes to the family that makes $225,000, where McCain's plan gives them $4,400 in tax breaks instead of the $2,800 in tax breaks that Obama's plan does.

In other words, McCain takes $800 from someone making $19,000 a year and gives it to the family that makes $225,000.

That, my friends, is truly unfair income redistribution, brought to you with a smile and a wink by John McCain.

you apparently have no skill at math. The family making 225 is already paying 30-50x as much in taxes as the person making 19 a year. as a matter of fact, the person making 19 a year likely pays $0 a year in taxes, so the family making 225 is paying an infinite amount more. So making one person pay less than they currently do, while making someone else pay the same as they already do is redistributing income? I guess with math skills like those you will love the Obama change, counting the change in your pocket that is because its all that you will have.

 

[Arrogant]

you apparently have no skill at math. The family making 225 is already paying 30-50x as much in taxes as the person making 19 a year. as a matter of fact, the person making 19 a year likely pays $0 a year in taxes, so the family making 225 is paying an infinite amount more. So making one person pay less than they currently do, while making someone else pay the same as they already do is redistributing income? I guess with math skills like those you will love the Obama change, counting the change in your pocket that is because its all that you will have.

Number one, RE: Math:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/06/09/ST2008060900950.html

Number two:
What makes more of a difference? A person earning $19k a year that receives $800 more in tax cuts, or a person earning $225k and their NEED for $2000 MORE in tax cuts from McCain?

If you feel as though the $225k earner is in desperate need of that additional $2k SO MUCH that $800 should be taken away from a $19k earner....well then we have nothing left to discuss here because our opinions are vastly different.

 

[RUNNER 67]

you apparently have no skill at math. The family making 225 is already paying 30-50x as much in taxes as the person making 19 a year. as a matter of fact, the person making 19 a year likely pays $0 a year in taxes, so the family making 225 is paying an infinite amount more. So making one person pay less than they currently do, while making someone else pay the same as they already do is redistributing income? I guess with math skills like those you will love the Obama change, counting the change in your pocket that is because its all that you will have.

Apparently you are fortunate enough to never have struggled to make ends meet. I used to but now am fortunate enough to have more than the nrom. This however does not mean that we should turn our backs on the nations poor or middle class. It's people like John Mccain who have lost touch with real working families in America. More and
more blue and white color people are losing their jobs EVERYDAY. It is these people who are going to need the tax breaks just to survive and maybe spend a little more than they previously could. You see it is the middle class who by far spend the greater percentage of their income on houses, cars, food, etc. If we give them a little bit more, how does that not spur economic revival??? If you give the rich a little bit more, that money goes into investments and ultimately does very little to change the economy now. Then there's the issue of the growing national debt... don't even get me going.... But honestly, do you really think either candidate can change the way America does business, both here and abroad, that much. Neither Mccain or Obama is going to be able to accomplish much during there first term except maybe change our foreign policy (which is desperate for changing). whomever wins will more than likely be the next Jimmy Carter, facing a huge challenge, not getting reelcted, and not realizing what a good president he was until years later.

 

[Dwight Schrute]

You see it is the middle class who by far spend the greater percentage of their income on houses, cars, food, etc. If we give them a little bit more, how does that not spur economic revival???

OMG. Did you really just ask this considering where we are as a country?


Wow.

 

[RUNNER 67]

OMG. Did you really just ask this considering where we are as a country?


Wow.

That was more rhetorical. You see a family of five that makes $40,000 per year spends a good portion of that just getting buy. If we do nothing for them now, under Mccains proposal, things will only get worse for them. However, if we give them a tax break now, under Obamas proposal, perhaps they spend a little more than they could if not given the break. And I don't know if you Know this, but there are a hell of alot more families living with a combined income of under $80,000 a year than over. More people spending more money causes economic growth, causes increase in jobs, causes increase in profits for big business... pretty simple way of looking at it, but maybe we should give this a try. It worked fine before.

 

[Dwight Schrute]

That was more rhetorical. You see a family of five that makes $40,000 per year spends a good portion of that just getting buy. If we do nothing for them now, under Mccains proposal, things will only get worse for them. However, if we give them a tax break now, under Obamas proposal, perhaps they spend a little more than they could if not given the break. And I don't know if you Know this, but there are a hell of alot more families living with a combined income of under $80,000 a year than over. More people spending more money causes economic growth, causes increase in jobs, causes increase in profits for big business... pretty simple way of looking at it, but maybe we should give this a try. It worked fine before.

Actually, according the data over the last 10 years, median income has gone up and class mobility is at an all time high, with the majority of mobility going from middle to upper class.

Basing any plan on one year of data, a year of massive deleveraging due to unrealistic growth, is ridiculous.

Tax brackets for the middle class are at an all time low (actually the last 80 years)...a fact most people do not know.

 

[RUNNER 67]

Actually, according the data over the last 10 years, median income has gone up and class mobility is at an all time high, with the majority of mobility going from middle to upper class.

Basing any plan on one year of data, a year of massive deleveraging due to unrealistic growth, is ridiculous.

Tax brackets for the middle class are at an all time low (actually the last 80 years)...a fact most people do not know.

agreed, until the last 18 months. I think you will find that the fall out from the housing market, the impending market corrections, notice I didn't say crash, and massive corporate layoffs are going to change that model you have. Things have been good as of late, not late 90's great, but I think we are in for an economic change unseen in two generations. Just my thought, I am not trying to hat on John Mccain (I voted for him during the primary, he just lost me with the vp pick).

 

[Dwight Schrute]

agreed, until the last 18 months. I think you will find that the fall out from the housing market, the impending market corrections, notice I didn't say crash, and massive corporate layoffs are going to change that model you have.

Which was caused by an ideology of propping up the poor and government intervetnion in the first place.

Things have been good as of late, not late 90's great,

The rise of the 90's is the same thing that happened form 2002-2007. Massive growth with a bubble bursting. They are one and the same, only this time, its real estate.

but I think we are in for an economic change unseen in two generations. Just my thought, I am not trying to hat on John Mccain (I voted for him during the primary, he just lost me with the vp pick).

Neither have a clue, but with Obama and a Democratic Congress, you can expect one thing...spending like you haven't seen in a very long time.

Taxing the rich and handing that money in the form of a check to 40% of the population who don't even pay taxes isn't going to solve one thing.

 

[RUNNER 67]

Which was caused by an ideology of propping up the poor and government intervetnion in the first place.



The rise of the 90's is the same thing that happened form 2002-2007. Massive growth with a bubble bursting. They are one and the same, only this time, its real estate.




Neither have a clue, but with Obama and a Democratic Congress, you can expect one thing...spending like you haven't seen in a very long time.

Taxing the rich and handing that money in the form of a check to 40% of the population who don't even pay taxes isn't going to solve one thing.

Let's just agree to disagree. The last thing I saw on the proposed budgets was Mccain outspent Obama by 250,000,000,000 over the next four years. We have differing views on how the middle class and poor affect our nations economy. I know I won't change your mind on these points, and conversly, you won't change mine. All I know is this, if people like Joe the Plumber want to buy a business, they will find a way. But when the middle class don't have any extra income to buy a new toilet, or install a whirlpool tub or shower, then what's the point of owning a business? Don't you think we should get America back on track before we lose any more of it to China, India, et.al. Best of luck to you and your candidate, I think you don't give the people who are the real backbone of this great country enough credit. Alot of them want to make more money, and then pay more taxes, but right now, that surely doesn't seem like a possiblity.

 

[Dwight Schrute]

Let's just agree to disagree. The last thing I saw on the proposed budgets was Mccain outspent Obama by 250,000,000,000 over the next four years.

That is an estimate based on tax cuts, not spending programs overall. It also doesn't even include the negation of the Bush tax cuts or not. It simply is a very broad estimate that is bad for both.

We have differing views on how the middle class and poor affect our nations economy.

No, we don't. I understand the role of the middle class. What you don't seem to understnad that at this point in time, the middle class has the least amount of moeny being taken from them in the last 80 yrs in terms of income tax. Where are we?

We spend more than ever before and thats driven by the middle class.

I know I won't change your mind on these points, and conversly, you won't change mine.

I don't try. I want you to look at the actual data instead of listening to political parties who won't tell the truth at all. I own a business. I follow the financial markets. I do invest. I do my own research...

All I know is this, if people like Joe the Plumber want to buy a business, they will find a way. But when the middle class don't have any extra income to buy a new toilet, or install a whirlpool tub or shower, then what's the point of owning a business?

The problem is that same middle class took loans on houses they couldn't afford....the middle class charged everything in the last 10 years with the 9 credit cards they have in their wallets..... thats the reason they can't buy the toilets, whirlpool tub, shower, etc...for that house. We grew too fast, spent too much and that came from the middle class....not the rich. The middle class managed their money horribly.

Don't you think we should get America back on track before we lose any more of it to China, India, et.al. Best of luck to you and your candidate, I think you don't give the people who are the real backbone of this great country enough credit.

You talk like this is something new that hasn't been integrated into this economy for the last 30 years. In the 80's, it was Japan. In the early 90's it was the Middle east (buying up Citibank during the commerical bank crash).

Now its China and India. Go look at their economies right now and let me know how they are doing. They are tanking..why? No middle class. Investors will ALWAYS come back here because we have the strongest middle class in the world. That hasn't changed.

Alot of them want to make more money, and then pay more taxes, but right now, that surely doesn't seem like a possiblity.

They have in the last 30 years. I'm sorry if everyone doesn't realize the pattert doesn't go up every day of every year. The government gave the lower and middle class the rope to hang themselves on with cheap credit and guaranteed loans. They hung themselves with it.

 

[RUNNER 67]

Look I don't want to argue. I am a project manager for a multimillion dollar construction company. I worked my way up the ranks for 20+ years. I donate alot of time and money to local charities and groups. I have never seen the spending cuts by major manfacturers this big in a long time. I look at this as a challenge to everyone, rich or poor, to stay at it and fight. I have seen a downturn in the economy not unlike that in the mid 80's. But this time I feel it will have a greater impact and longer lasting. I agree with you in theory on most of your points. But what do we do to fix it? Why will giving the people with the highest income levels and bigger businesses tax breaks help the economy. Do you think that any of the big 3 will hire more people if they get this break? Hell no. the only way they will rehire any of the layoffs is if people start buying American made cars again. The same can be said for a lot of material goods. I am not preahing Obama, I just think the country can not keep going down this path and survive. We need to look at a plan for the long term health of this nation, not just keep adding to the problem finding short term fixes.

 

[Dwight Schrute]

Look I don't want to argue. I am a project manager for a multimillion dollar construction company. I worked my way up the ranks for 20+ years. I donate alot of time and money to local charities and groups. I have never seen the spending cuts by major manfacturers this big in a long time.

Thats because you haven't see that much growth in that long of a time. Cutbakcs this large happen for a reason...not out of the blue.

I know all about the boom. I flipped lots for over a year and I never looked at one of them. I bought them off satellite views and flipped them the next day. It was crazy the amount of money being poored into this by everyone....people taking home equity loans out on their house to flip lots in the middle of Florida. It wasn't reality....it was pure perception and emotion and your getting the polar opposite now to bring the economy back down to earth.

I look at this as a challenge to everyone, rich or poor, to stay at it and fight. I have seen a downturn in the economy not unlike that in the mid 80's. But this time I feel it will have a greater impact and longer lasting. I agree with you in theory on most of your points. But what do we do to fix it?

Stop having government dictate ideology to the free market. Now since that will never happen especially with the new administration that will take over, people have to buy items and live within their means...not Citibank's.

Why will giving the people with the highest income levels and bigger businesses tax breaks help the economy.

Ask John Kennedy. "A rising tide floats all ships".

You seem so focused on what the rich do you forget that the people who pay the least taxes and need the most help are ALREADY GETTING IT. Tax's don't make or break an economy. You have the lowest taxes among the poor and middle class and what has it got you? You are focusing on the wrong issues because thats how politicians get you angry. Pitch the rich against the poor.

If you like the 90's then you can thank Reagan for cutting the top tax bracket from 70% to 28%.

Do you think that any of the big 3 will hire more people if they get this break? Hell no. the only way they will rehire any of the layoffs is if people start buying American made cars again.

Some will, some won't. Expecting industry to come back thats been gone for decades is unrealistic and to expect the government to fix it is even more unrealistic. Is not going to happen. Either you adapt, or you fail. We are in a global market, not an isolated 1950's America. Your compentition is the world now....not America.

The same can be said for a lot of material goods. I am not preahing Obama, I just think the country can not keep going down this path and survive. We need to look at a plan for the long term health of this nation, not just keep adding to the problem finding short term fixes.

What path?

The reason you have such job cuts is because you had 52 straight months of job increases....under Bush. You keep thinking its some path we've been on for decades and its not. This nation has seen the biggest boom its ever seen in teh last 25 years. The biggest problems and subsequent corrections in those times have been GOVERNMENT CAUSED.

Bottom line, government enabled us to grow too fast...and now you are seeing the back end.

I'm not trying to argue with you but before you can answer the question of how to fix it, you need to know how we got here first...

 

[CDB]

That was more rhetorical. You see a family of five that makes $40,000 per year spends a good portion of that just getting buy. If we do nothing for them now, under Mccains proposal, things will only get worse for them. However, if we give them a tax break now, under Obamas proposal, perhaps they spend a little more than they could if not given the break. And I don't know if you Know this, but there are a hell of alot more families living with a combined income of under $80,000 a year than over. More people spending more money causes economic growth, causes increase in jobs, causes increase in profits for big business... pretty simple way of looking at it, but maybe we should give this a try. It worked fine before.

Except that it's totally wrong I'm sure it will work great.

Spending does not cause economic growth, it merely directs the form of production. Savings and investment that raise invested capital per head of labor and which increase productivity are what cause economic growth.

Any way you cut it, taxes taken mean less demand from spenders and less investment among savers, which means less real wealth total for the given population.