Not a party picking question but more geared towards what the affect would have on your decision making process. You are looking into fronting your own small business which carries a reinvestment potential that will help a company grow but you know you will just barely carry over into the next higher tax bracket. 33 to 39% will be considered upon reflecting your vote. Does the extra 3% factor into your growth margin and so on? Not to many Warren Buffets on this board, I think! Despite your feelings about the rest of the country, it's issues and the rest of the world, you want to open that shop on the corner because that is all about you, your family and your future. Should this affect your vote, or should it?
Without question. Joe Plumber grossing $250,000 a year will see his yearly income reduced by $15,000 (given the 33 vs 39% numbers). That's about the cost of medical insurance. :grin: When you have to pay employees, that is a huge chunk of change to be losing.
"It's not that I want to punish your success. I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you, that they've got a chance for success too," Obama responded. "My attitude is that if the economy's good for folks from the bottom up, it's gonna be good for everybody ... I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody." -- BHO
I guess this portion of your thread didnt last to long. :rolleye33: Also, it does effect a person looking to get into business, if they can add that 3% to the bottom line, then it definitely helps their business. Decision making ist he key. Also, Joe the Plumber did in interview and stated that he wont make enough money to have his taxes effectively raised in Obamas plan, but he did say it was a slippery slope. Redistribution of wealth has being going on since 1976 and not one republican president that has been in office has changed the tax policy, reverse redistribution of wealth. So I guess that makes the socialist, because they didnt do anything about it.
Joe isn't going to pay 39%, he willl pay over 50%. Everyone is forgetting that his Social Security/Medicare tax rate will climb from 2.9% to 15.3%. McCain's claim that all 20+ million small business owners will be effected this way is not true. Not all of them make over 250k, and not all pay payroll taxes, but the number that do(debated between 600k - 1 million), will be directly effected. It's not an insignificant amount either. This is where jobs are actually created. The govt does not create jobs, no matter what any politician says. It merely transfers job titles or creates jobs at tax payers expense. Govt. created jobs are budget negative to America, while small business created jobs are budget positive. Plenty of people have made this case but it has been constantly ignored by Obama's claim of giving 95% of Americans a tax cut. It is also ignored that 40% of those Americans don't pay taxes but will still get a "rebate". I guess it took a plumber to make it clear. This is exactly what Obama said it was, "spread the wealth". In the end, it won't matter, because it is Pelosi and Reed that will let the tax cuts expire, so we will see them go up regardless of who gets in office. It is just depressing.
What??? That's a pretty ridiculous statement. What do you consider "reverse(ing) redistribution of wealth"? Lowering taxes for the wealthy, limiting welfare programs, flattening income tax, providing tax incentives for large businesses? All of these things have bee proposed by republicans since 1976. Just because only a handful have gone through doesn't mean they didn't do anything about it. I know your comment about being socialists was tongue in cheek but surely you can't believe this is not a republican platform.
I know its a republican platform, but they still havent achieved it since the time I mention, we have had 3 republican presidents, with more than enough votes in each chamber of congress to get more done on that front. It just hasnt been done, thats my point. ridiculous? not at all. Try to defend the republican vote on the bailout, filled with pork barell spending and redistribution of wealth. Then we can talk about ridiculous. A platform, thats all it is, they run on these talking points to create division trying to play to peoples fears and so called values. However, when they get into office, you find out, it was just selling wolf tickets. It happens on both sides.Democrats do the same crap as well. Platform or not, it doesnt happen, when the rubber meats the road.
I guess what I was trying to say was place yourself in the middle objectively given the scenario and then choose! :geaux:
Well if the republicans have not succeeded at reversing redistribution of wealth then the democrats haven't achieved a full level of redistribution. Believe it or not, we are caught somewhere in between as we are on most issues in this two party country. Then you point to the republicans over the bailout saying they were responsible. How were they responsible when they have the minority of the seats in Congress. 39 democratic senators voted yes and 34 republican senators. You can't have it both ways. If the congress can decide policy based on the majority across the board, then it was the dems who passed the bailout. By the way, I don't believe either one of the ideas in that last sentence and can't imagine you do either.:thumb:
Sadly this is true. I will say that Republicans used to stand fast against things of this nature, but this century, they have lost their way. Perhaps the next 2-4 years will help get their moral, economic compass pointing back north. Congress is just a complete betrayal at this point. It's like a bunch of guys playing poker and the citizens are the chips. Not terribly encouraging.
