Of course Obama didn't say it (It would be political suicide.) but he did say 95% of Americans will get a tax break under his economic plan. "The statistics speak for themselves. Only 62 percent of Americans pay federal income tax, meaning that 38 percent get a 100 percent refund of any taxes withheld. So Mr. Obama's 95 percent that will receive money from the government includes roughly 33 percent of Americans who pay no income tax. One-third of Americans pay no income taxes yet would receive a government check of perhaps $1,000 or more." http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/09/obamas_patriotic_tonic.html Nonsense. I want the middle class to get the same percentage tax cut as the upper class. The middle class tax burden was cut substantially by Bush. Obama fail's to mention that small business entrepreneurs pay the marginal tax rate and raising them will hurt them and will hurt the overall economy. And you have yet to provide any evidence that Obama's plan won't continue the same borrow and spend plan. In fact, I pointed out his proposed enormous spending programs and asked how Obama is going to pay for those and rid of us of the existing enormous deficits but you chose not to take that issue on. So are you admitting that Obama will continue with the same borrow and spend plan too?
I hope you're just referring to actual quotes from someone on this forum. If you're asking in general, then where have you been? The Democrats have been repeatedly screaming for the last few elections about the wealthiest 1% and how they're the root of all evil. It doesn't matter if they assume the majority of the tax burden...it won't be enough for those who prefer self-pity and government cheese. As they say in New Orleans...whe' my check?
Of course. Where does Obama say that? You haven't cited Obama yet--Just a blogger with an agenda. If you don't pay taxes, you don't receive refunds. You won't get it with McCain. Because I never advocated Obama's spending plans as I pointed out already. You're arguing with yourself on that one. I advocate cutting taxes by cutting programs. And you keep mentioning Obama's new spending plans without mentioning his parallel plans to make cuts. Obama vows deep cuts in spending
That's a plain and simple statement to understand, and it would be fine if we could keep the politicians out of it. But..... This precedent was set in 2001, when Dems (pre-Obama, to be fair) screamed that the poor were being left out of that rebate. So yes, people who paid no taxes got a tax rebate. Now if that ain't redistribution of wealth, the concept doesn't exist.
Link to go with that last post: http://finance.yahoo.com/taxes/article/104417/Tax-Rebate-Winners-and-Losers
Obama has outlined a budget of specific increases of over 800 billion over the next four years. He has not outlined enough specific cuts and revenue increases to cover this increase, much less do anything about the current budget deficit, or the $700 billion bailout increase in the deficit that is likely coming. You can google all you want. Fact is you have advocated responsible fiscal policy as raising taxes, and cutting spending. Obama advocates raising taxes and increased spending. Your cute little article says he will cut construction costs that will garner him $40 billion. He goes on to name some nice sounding things like, "funding for programs that waste your money"(but doesn't name one or give us a $ amount), and "we will use lessons from the private sector to improve efficiency". Efficiency in govt? :rofl: And what kind of gorilla math says $40 billion offsets $200 billion? Where are the rest of the cuts, except "words, just words?" You may want Obama to win because he is not a republican and that is perfectly fine, but claiming he fits your oft-stated ideas of fiscal responsibility is laughable.
i believe its "95 % of WORKING americans" that gets shortened during some speeches/conversations. and just like with capital gains taxes, rich and poor pay the same taxes. if the poor made tons of money theyd pay 39% on income over 250k, too.
If the able bodied, non-productive poor would make any significant contributions to this country, we wouldn't need to rely on a small percentage picking up the tab. Rewarding people for sitting on their rear, committing crime, and having tons of babies isn't the responsibility of the taxpayers. I bet one of these candidates would disagree.
Semi-off topic, but I keep seeing it come up and I think that $250k/year in income is too low of a point to be considered the highest tax bracket. It should be higher.
What I like about Obama is that he's not afraid to tax big business and the super wealthy. The Republicans have gotten way too closely aligned with big business/the super wealthy and they do not share enough of the tax burden. McCain would only continue that. However, I am completely against Obama's windfall profit tax on oil companies, so I am chosing between the lesser of 2 evils here - but it is a very big issue to me & one where I side with Obama. I will say that primary reason I've started to favor Obama is because I believe he'll be more effective at uniting the 2 sides & finding solutions. While I won't agree with all of his solutions, I'd rather see something getting done than more of the same crap.