That Middle Class tax distinction keeps going down

[ladiesbballcoach]

It seems Bill Richardson was doing an interview as an Obama surrogate and defined the middle class at $120,000 and lower.

 

Getting closer and closer to that $42,000 figure that McCain brought up.

[NobizLikeShowbiz]

^ Face it LBBC, it is not 250k, it is not 200k, taxes are going to be raised on the middle class no matter what.

[ladiesbballcoach]

^ Face it LBBC, it is not 250k, it is not 200k, taxes are going to be raised on the middle class no matter what.

 

I am not the one denying it.

 

It is the Dems who want to cling to the taxing of rich and thinking that Obama is not going to tax them.

 

I guess they cling to that like we cling to our religion and guns.

[NobizLikeShowbiz]

I am not the one denying it.

 

It is the Dems who want to cling to the taxing of rich and thinking that Obama is not going to tax them.

 

I guess they cling to that like we cling to our religion and guns.

 

:thumb:

[Hoot Gibson]

"Middle class" is an Obama code phrase that really means his constituency, regardless of their income. He will not hesitate to raise taxes on federal taxpayers as he issues welfare checks to buy the loyalty of those who pay no federal income taxes.

[The Professor]

"Middle class" is an Obama code phrase that really means his constituency, regardless of their income. He will not hesitate to raise taxes on federal taxpayers as he issues welfare checks to buy the loyalty of those who pay no federal income taxes.

:thumb: Hoot has it right! Vote buying politics at its best, with tax payers money imo, and Obama is willing to spin the dialogue and terms anyway possible to win the office.

[John Anthony]

The most in-depth comparison to date of McCain and Barack Obama's tax plans was performed by the Tax Policy Center, a joint venture of the center-left Brookings Institution and Urban Institute that is nonetheless staffed by both Republicans and Democrats -- co-director Eugene Steuerle was a deputy assistant secretary under Ronald Reagan -- and is known for its methodological rigor. Its 38-page analysis found that McCain's proposals would make the tax system even "more regressive" than permanently extending the Bush tax cuts of 2001 to 2006. McCain would accomplish this by following Bush's blueprint and then supersizing it: providing "relatively little" tax relief to low- and middle-income earners, while giving "huge tax cuts" to the highest income brackets.

 

CONT.

 

The Tax Policy Center's computations show stark differences between the Obama and McCain plans in their relative impact on middle-class and high-income taxpayers. A middle-class family making $66,000 a year would see their taxes drop by $319 a year under McCain's proposal, while a wealthy family making $604,000 a year would see a cut of $45,000. By contrast, Obama offers the biggest breaks for taxpayers at the bottom and in the middle of the income spectrum, while imposing sizeable tax increases on some of the highest earners -- those making more than $250,000 annually. Under Obama's plan, the middle-income family would receive a tax break that is three times larger than McCain's -- $1,042. The wealthy family would see a tax increase of $116,000 a year.

 

 

8 years is enough, no thanks.

[bballfamily]

Much of Obama's plan is based on giving some people a $1000. I doubt the $66,000 family will see a cut of any kind.

[MountainThunder]

Obama's plan will not be what is implemented. McCain's plan will not be what is implemented. Mark it down. Either one will have to bow down to congress as they will probably have enough votes to override any veto McCain stamps and they will have a rubber stamp from Obama.

 

REMEMBER, Clinton's proposal before he was elected was to not raise taxes on the middle class, yet within 26 days of being sworn in, he and the congress raised taxes on the middle class. Before him, Bush Sr promised 'no new taxes' and within his first few years, he and the congress raised taxes as well. What a politician tells you isn't what they will do.

 

My question is simple, ... why would you raise taxes on anyone with the financial situation as it stands? Why would you raise capital gains taxes and expect that to make the markets more liquid? Why would you want to increase spending when it is obvious it needs to be cut? Why doesn't government have to live within their means like the rest of us? Why would you think that increasing the minimum wage by 46% will create jobs and curb inflation? This thinking in Washington right now is absolutely mind boggling!

[ladiesbballcoach]

Follow the logic here, (which stands in contrast to Obama's political mindset):

 

Obama cast a vote that he says was NOT to raise taxes on those with $42,000 on up but a procedural vote (at least he didn't cast PRESENT). That those were never going to be put in place.

 

Why? It would have meant that the Bush tax cuts would have been let expired.

 

Ask yourself this question, what does Obama want to do with Bush's tax cuts?

 

O yeah, let them expire.

 

So, last time the issue of letting the tax cuts expire come up, he voted for a plan (even though admittingly it was not going to happen) that would have taxed people $42,000 and up.

 

And then this time, he wants us to forget that action and say this is REALLY what he would do?

 

In a court of law, I think that is referred to as REASONABLE DOUBT on what O will really do.

[rockmom]

Follow the logic here, (which stands in contrast to Obama's political mindset):

 

Obama cast a vote that he says was NOT to raise taxes on those with $42,000 on up but a procedural vote (at least he didn't cast PRESENT). That those were never going to be put in place.

 

Why? It would have meant that the Bush tax cuts would have been let expired.

 

Ask yourself this question, what does Obama want to do with Bush's tax cuts?

 

O yeah, let them expire.

 

So, last time the issue of letting the tax cuts expire come up, he voted for a plan (even though admittingly it was not going to happen) that would have taxed people $42,000 and up.

 

And then this time, he wants us to forget that action and say this is REALLY what he would do?

 

In a court of law, I think that is referred to as REASONABLE DOUBT on what O will really do.

 

 

LBBC, the difference is that if Obama's administration does raise taxes, it will apply to all earners, and not just the middle class. This strategy of making it more comfortable for the upper tier isn't working. Jobs are NOT being created, so don't give me that tired line.

[ladiesbballcoach]

LBBC, the difference is that if Obama's administration does raise taxes, it will apply to all earners, and not just the middle class. This strategy of making it more comfortable for the upper tier isn't working. Jobs are NOT being created, so don't give me that tired line.

I am glad to know now that Obama plans to raise the taxes on the 50% of the population THAT PAYS NO INCOME TAXES!!!!

 

I had thought he had said 95% would not see their income taxes raised.

Please point me to the link that he now is going to expect ALL EARNERS to pay income taxes.

 

Or I guess he considers only those who are in the top 5% paying already somewhere between 50 and 60% of taxes to be considered earners. How very socialistic of him.

[cch5432]

LBBC, the difference is that if Obama's administration does raise taxes, it will apply to all earners, and not just the middle class. This strategy of making it more comfortable for the upper tier isn't working. Jobs are NOT being created, so don't give me that tired line.

One inevitable recession, brought on by multitudes of factors, and all economic theory is thrown out the window.

[bballfamily]

LBBC, the difference is that if Obama's administration does raise taxes, it will apply to all earners, and not just the middle class. This strategy of making it more comfortable for the upper tier isn't working. Jobs are NOT being created, so don't give me that tired line.

 

It seems as if you do not mind Obama not keeping his campaign promise, as long as the rich are taxed.

[rockmom]

It seems as if you do not mind Obama not keeping his campaign promise, as long as the rich are taxed.

 

 

I have no problem accepting that the current state of affairs pretty much negates the ability for either candidate to cut taxes for anyone.