Correct. And when their poorly thought through plans fail, Obama wants to reach into YOUR pocket to protect the stupid from the consequences of their own stupidity. He terms it "neighborliness" - I call it theft.

The lowest tax bracket tax recipient will be getting back an average of 567 dollars more than the current tax plan.
The average person in the 111 to 160 thousand dollar range will be getting back an average of 2204. So we middle income people can thumb our noses at the 250k and above people too. Also since everyone making less will get something back the aboves will have plenty to shoot at. The middle of the income brackets will get more back so they will be the bigger targets. At least if they look at who's getting their money.

In that the McCain tax plan everyone gets back more. The higher income people get the most back. The lowest the lowest(makes sense although it doesn't sound right). All at a time when the country has averaged near 500 billion dollars in spending than what its collected. Also that the disparity in the wealthy and the poor is the farthest it has been.




The Obama plan reduces taxes by .3 percent. The McCain plan reduces taxes by 2 percent. Most economists attribute both plans with increasing the national debt. Mcains about 1.5 to 2 trillion more in the next 4 years depending on which analysis you look at.
Neither is right. We should not be lowering taxes. We should be lowering spending to a level where we can reduce taxes but reducing taxes first is just wrong.


Socialist,if you talk to someone who has been in Russia during the USSR years know what the difference between socialism is. To compare that to a person in his 5000sq ft house with the guy living in his title 8 apt is ludicrous.

Yes, we should be lowering spending significantly. In the current economic climate, we should also be lowering taxes on business, especially small businesses. That is the polar opposite of what comrade Obama has in mind. He remains convinced that a government may tax its way to prosperity. In other words, he is a fool.
Additionally, other than surrendering to our enemies in the middle east, what part of government have you heard Comrade Obama say he intends to cut?

Do you, or do you not, support the concept of using the internal revenue code as an instrument for redistributing wealth. It is now patently clear that is the aim of Comrade Obama.

Please answer this question. Mr Obama speaks of fairness. Let us say that a pilot has planned his year to earn $249,000.00. His year is set. However, on his last flight of the year, a snowstorm sets in and he is forced to divert to another airfied. That extra flight might be enough to have him pass the $250 mark and cost him an additional $40,000. How is that fair?

Pray tell, what would your term be for payments from collected taxes going to those who choose to porch sit rather than work?

A progressive tax system, wherein the wealthy bear a disproportionate burden of the cost of government operation is a far cry from a system that undertakes not only to relieve the indolent from paying taxes, but goes on to reward their indolence with a check from revenue sources. That is a very different issue than a progressive system of taxation.

Tallgrass, I was being sincere in my questions. What kind of a 'safety net' do you have in mind?

halliburton, agriculture subsides, corporate loopholes,

there are many types of welfare

Lowering taxes always results in increased revenue to the Govt, because it's an expansionary fuel. Of course, they need to cut spending, but "entitlements" is the largest spending category. So they cut military spending when they do happen to cut.

Here's what you do:
Eliminate the earned income credit. I know of people who are married, yet the wife files head of household on her return and gets a $5000 check back when she didnt even pay anything in, due to an "exempt" W-4. They said they have been doing it for years.
This is welfare. pure and simple...and it's being abused.

Make social security optional....IF you agree to put 1/2 that amount into your own IRA each year. (the 6.2%)

Abolish medicare. It's being abused by the health care industry.

Cut out any program that doesnt provide for the nation's defense, or builds and maintains roads, bridges, prisons or port traffic. Then cut the rest by 10% across the board, except the military. BUT....have independent auditors audit the military's espenses...and streamline/revamp the procurement procedure.

Cut the salaries and budgets of each congressman, the President and Supreme court justices by 10% too. No more Limos for anyone except the Pres and vice pres. No more trips abroad by congressmen unless they want to pay for it themselves.

Tell Iraq that it's time to ante up some free oil/petrol for our strategic reserve and military. Just pump it and ship it, ...we'll tell them when to stop.

If they get the budget balanced and in the black, there will be jobs everywhere. That's our safety net.

Oldfrog ... at least 91% correct!

actually cutting taxes only helps revenue to a certain point. Lower taxes dont always make the government more money. There is a boundary of how low u can go. If i remember right it was around a 20% corporate tax that was the sweet spot. I could be off a little on that number. Right now it is 15%

We have the second highest corporate taxes in the world. Second.

Why can the left, which whines incessantly about jobs moving offshore, understand that an anti-business tax policy encourages doing just that?

Obiden thinks it it patriotic to pay taxes. Businesses ain't patriots, they are survivors. If moving offshore to escape our business obstacles to survive is what is required, that is what they will do.

Representation without taxation is every bit as perverse as taxation without representation.

Elections should be for shareholders. If not...why have an arbitrary age restriction of 18 or older?

What Obama has in mind is very clever. If you can reach the point where a majority of taxpayers are not taxpayers, their interest lies in increasing the dole. They will never vote for anyone who is about cutting/reducing the size and scope of government. They are not in any way affected by the cost of government for they are not stakeholders in it. An increase in taxes would have no impact on them at all.

Thus, Comrade Obama ensures the long term power of the socialist party.

TG if a person loses their job the idea is to go get another. Some people have done this for years and some sit on their a$$ and whine. The most I was ever out of work was 10 days IN 44 YEARS. and that was because the landloard locked the place I was working at up. My tools were inside when I got my tools I went to work next day. I do not believe in welfare of an kind. VOTE DEMOCRAT IT IS EASIER THAN WORKING.

Is it just me, or is not the concept of "safety net" one in which upon falling, the acrobat climbs back up and get back on the high wire?

What our leftists friends have in mind is that once you fall, you lie in the net for the remainder of your life. In fact, in their world, many never even get up on the trapeze....they aspire to reach no higher than the net.

Should the safety net be a lifestyle? I think not, but then I could never be a democrat.

This does touch upon a fundamental difference. What is owed to someone who continues to make poor life choices, and fails to prepare him/herself to compete in the race we call life? Is an individual never responsible for doing the right thing?

That is pure socialism redistributing the wealth and that is exactly what Obama is-socialist, communist, pinko liberal what ever you want to call it.