Obama's Tax Plan

[DubStyle311]

If I could describe it in one word: Unfair.

Obama is the presumptive Democratic nominee and leading in the polls against McCain. So, if he wins the election, what does he have in store for us?

Obama’s tax plan has two major components. First, he promises to end the Bush tax cuts, allowing the top two tax rates to return to 36 percent and 39.6 percent. Second, he promises to end the Social Security payroll tax cap for incomes above $250,000. Individuals making more than $250,000, therefore, would face a 15.65 percent tax rate from payroll taxes in addition to a top income tax rate of 39.6 percent for a combined tax rate topping 56 percent. Individuals living in cities or states with high taxes such as New York City or California would have tax rates approaching 70 percent, levels not seen since Carter was president.

So Jimy Carter levels of taxation. Just what out ailing economy needs! Obama's plan will give us the second highest tax rate among the top 30 industrial nations.

Under Obama’s plan, the top marginal tax rate would exceed 60 percent, which means only Hungary would have a more punitive tax rate. Hungary’s 2006 unemployment rate was 7.5 percent.

I doubt Obama will settle for being number two though, and we'll soon have the highest taxes in the world. To this, we can add the windfall profit tax he wants to impose on "big oil" that will raise gas prices. We can also throw in carbon taxes or cap and trade which will further drive up the cost of energy. Oh, let's not forget biofuel mandates that like the ones that are currently driving up food prices and causing shortages all over the world.

Who cares if its change for the good or not. As long as there's change, right?

Source: Morning Bell: The Tax Man Cometh The Foundry

[generic_hippie]

rich people pay more tax, as they should

should they pay more as a percentage of the gross income?

Of course they should, their children never go to war, why shouldn't they pay for it some other way?

[DubStyle311]

Rich people do pay more.

Rich people should pay more.

My bone of contention is is specific policy that Obama has presented. Telling a family that makes over $200,000 to pay a marginal tax rate approaching 70% (after federal, state, payroll, and others) is completely absurd.

[generic_hippie]

Originally Posted by DubStyle311

Rich people do pay more.

Rich people should pay more.

My bone of contention is is specific policy that Obama has presented. Asking a family that makes over $200,000 to pay a marginal tax rate approaching 70% (after federal, state, payroll, and others) is completely absurd.

completely absurd to who exactly dub?

(Using rounded figures for ease of argument) Is it absurd to somebody who makes a measly 26K annually ($500 per week gross) that those on nearly $2000 per week pay $1400, (leaving them with $100 more than the gross wage the poor person started with)?

Certainly not absurd given the person on the lower wage is also expected to maintain a mortgage, and feed his family also.

It's about equity dubstyle, something you are totally against because the silver spoon in your mouth has you fooled that you are worth more than a poor person.

[DubStyle311]

Originally Posted by generic_hippie

Is it absurd to somebody who makes a measly 26K annually ($500 per week gross) that those on nearly $2000 per week pay $1400, (leaving them with $100 more than the gross wage the poor person started with)?

To a rational thoughtful person, yes I imagine they would think it is rather absurd too. Unless theyre motivated by jealousy or spite.

[Prophet Saddam]

[generic_hippie]

Originally Posted by DubStyle311

To a rational thoughtful person, yes I imagine they would think it is rather absurd too. Unless theyre motivated by jealousy or spite.

Spite?

Jealousy?

You perceive of yourself with great importance or worth, don't you child?

I am rational, and have seen enough fat bloated pigs feast at the trough of humanity to know that excess comfort is a genuine cause of the suffering of others.

Strangely enough, its usually these same excessively comfortable cunts who are in charge of the economy and such things as to create a multitude of minimum wage jobs which, again, strangely enough, don't provide enough currency for a decent standard of living for those blessed with intelligence meagre enough to warrant a thirty year career in the fast food industry.

Your (very) limited view of the world from so high in your parents rectal passage qualifies you to judge exactly nought.

When you've finished school and spent a few years working in the real world, paying your own way, perhaps experienced a little unforseen and unavoidable heartbreak, maybe then your opinions will show some relevance to reality and be worth more than the sum total of the cost of the electricity used to generate the ones and zeros on the screen.

[DubStyle311]

Okay, now that you got that out of you system, would you like to discuss the specific policy Obama is presenting or would you like to continue this broad ideological debate?

There is something fundamentally wrong with taking 70% of what a man earns in year (not to mention the fact that the vast majority of that tax collection will be completely wasted by the colossal federal and state bureaucracy). I'm not talking CEO's who are pulling incomes in the 8 or 9 figure range or the old money millionaires who are independently wealthy. I'm talking about the man who works hard at his job 50-60 hours a week. The man who works just as hard (if not harder given the nature of his work compared to a minimum wage job at the supermarket). The guy who also has a mortgage to pay and three kids who need to go to college. Families that dont have millions in the bank but rely on their annual income to provide for their family. The family that pays the most into the system and takes out far less than anyone else. You don't think that raising his tax bill by 15 to 20 percent is going to seriously effect his ability to make ends meet? Its too much.

I am completely for a progressive tax system. I just think it needs to be designed fairly. More tax bracket that are more fairly drawn up and reasonable tax obligations. Whats wrong with that?

[generic_hippie]

the things wrong with it are myriad dude

why should one person who works 50 -60 hours a week be paid more than somebody else who is just as committed to their (less worthy) job if the choices that put each of the respective employees in their respective positions was not either of theirs?

its called equity dubstyle, read about it

you talk about fair because of percentages, for me fair comes down to food on the table and a roof over the heads of the lesser paid individual

the guy earning a salary in the 100K+ range is still able to live, feed and house his family in a more expensive manner after his 60 hours and in your opinion, excessive tax, why should he not pay if he can?

Should his commitment to luxury for him and his family come before food for the poor people in society who don't have the opportunity to earn 6 figure salaries?

No, not in a FAIR society, they should not.

[DubStyle311]

I would really rather this not drift off into an unrelated ideological debate. My problem with your arguments on these topics is you seem to blame the gov't, society, or general environment for these inequalities you perceive. I cant remember you ever advocating any type of self responsibility or accepting that an individual, regardless of their circumstances, are largely responsible for who they are and what they do. That is the disconnect. I feel that everyone has the opportunity in the United States to live a comfortable life. I'm not saying its easy or it will happen for everyone - some people habitually make poor decisions - but the opportunity is there and the path exists. That doesn't mean I'm apathetic or callous towards the poor. There are many ways to help them and fair taxes are a good way to fund those programs.

Here's the thing though. There will always be poor people. Since time immemorium there have been people out there who do not want to contribute and that for whatever reason feel entitled to leech off the system. Once again I'm not talking about all poor people. Thats the way society is. Some people do what theyre supposed to do, they make good decisions and positive contributions to society. Some people are either lazy or degenerates who make terrible decisions and act as a drain on society. Its just the way it is.

What you're advocating is classic communism. The complete redistribution of property until everyone has the same things. A classless society. You call it equality. I call bullshit. You really dont seem to comprehend that some jobs contribute more to society than others. Thats why communism doesnt work. It goes against human nature and the natural order of things. It is a completely impossible "society". You call it a FAIR society. I call it communism.

The reason that someone makes $250,000 in the same time frame as a person making $25,000 is because one job contributes more to keeping the societal engine running. You added on to that comment that the choice for these two hypothetical employees is not theirs. Bullshit. In some cases yes, there may be genetic difference that make one person naturally smarter than the other. That does not mean that the less intelligent person is forced to work for minimum wage in a brainless job. You may not be booksmart, but you can learn a trade, develop some other type of skill, and make a contribution to society that is worth more than that $25k. That person still may not be able to make $250k, but they can develop a skill and earn enough to live comfortably. It absolutely is a choice for the vast majority of people.

Everyone has the opportunity in the United States to earn enough money to put a roof over their head and food on the table. Anything else is a luxury. Why is it that some people have to sacrifice their luxury and other do not in your model?

Communism does not work.

[HCL]

Originally Posted by DubStyle311

The reason that someone makes $250,000 in the same time frame as a person making $25,000 is because one job contributes more to keeping the societal engine running.

So you're saying celebrity/sports figure contributes more to the society than blue collar jobs? Go figure.

[DubStyle311]

No, but they contribute more than someone ringing groceries at the super-market full time for min wage.

Im sure there are exceptions to what I'm saying, but yes, pro atheletes contribute something to society thats very valueble, entertainment. That type of athletiticsm is rare. And thus valuble.

[stoneric]

Originally Posted by DubStyle311

No, but they contribute more than someone ringing groceries at the super-market full time for min wage.

Im sure there are exceptions to what I'm saying, but yes, pro atheletes contribute something to society thats very valueble, entertainment. That type of athletiticsm is rare. And thus valuble.

That person ringing groceries full time would have to work over 100 years to make what an average baseball player makes in one. Tell me that isn't skewed.

[DubStyle311]

Whats that have to do with the price of tea in china?

[JcP]

Originally Posted by DubStyle311

No, but they contribute more than someone ringing groceries at the super-market full time for min wage.

Im sure there are exceptions to what I'm saying, but yes, pro atheletes contribute something to society thats very valueble, entertainment. That type of athletiticsm is rare. And thus valuble.

God, I hope you get to experience the other side of this argument sometime in this life.

I wonder if those people ringing groceries feel they are less valuable.

[DubStyle311]

Theyre not less valuable as human beings. Anyone can bag groceries. Very few can hit a 95mph curveball. You dispute this?

[Dozer McDozer]

well what about the corruption in pro sports

[verklingen]

but which truly contributes more to the mechanics of our society: someone who can hit a curveball or someone who makes it easier for hundreds of people a day to get the groceries they need? which makes our society work and which is simply nice to look at? your sense of value is abominable, which is to say it's not much different from the mainstream (sadly). we'll wake up soon enough though, we're being forced to as we type.

edit: a baseball player makes more than a farmer, the trucker who takes the farmer's produce to the store, the stocker, the cashier, and the bagger combined. is the baseball player's contribution to our society really of more value than all these? it doesn't matter if "anyone" can do these jobs. they are important jobs that need to be done. and people do them. valuable people.