Obama’s tax plan would offer middle class families three times more than McCain’s.
Obama’s tax plan would offer middle class families three times more than McCain’s.
According to a non-partisan analysis of the presidential candidates’ tax plans, Barack Obama “offers three times the break for middle class families” than proposals of John McCain, who “would steer the bulk of the benefits to the wealthiest families”:
Families making between $37,595 and $66,354 of annual income with Obama would get an average tax cut of $1,042 per family while McCain’s tax cut for this group would be $319, the report states.
The Wonk Room has more on the study by the Tax Policy Center.
UPDATE: In 2001, McCain said of the Bush tax cuts: “I cannot in good conscience support a tax cut in which so many of the benefits go to the most fortunate among us, at the expense of middle-class Americans who most need tax relief.” McCain is now proposing tax cuts that are more regressive than the Bush tax cuts.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
But, but, but… what about those poor families making only $200k/year? According to McCain, they aren’t rich. Since they make more, aren’t they entitled to more tax breaks?
Let the spinning begin!
PEACE
June 12th, 2008 at 9:53 amIt seems like they can keep it simple and say republicans want to lower taxes for the rich and democrats want to lower taxes for the middle class
June 12th, 2008 at 9:53 amOf course many of the people in the sweet spot of that group will STILL vote for Johnny Boy. It is in their genetic make-up to ignore facts and vote Repug. Amazing what a lack of education and too much reality TV can do, isn’t it?
June 12th, 2008 at 9:58 amYou wanna win over some of Appalachia? Make sure they know about this. They might continue, in public, to be racists, but you can be sure that in in the privacy of the voting booth, many will vote for the person who serves them best.
June 12th, 2008 at 10:00 amIn addition to this difference in middle class tax relief, the overriding issue is the extent to which Obama’s and McNumbNuts’ tax plans would increase the deficit and add to the national debt.
In this regard, McNumbNuts is clearly another GDumbya. We don’t need this old fart in the White House piling up more interest on the national debt to be paid by a generation that he will never live to see.
June 12th, 2008 at 10:02 amMcPutz: “my friends, I pledge that I will continue the great program of my predecessor, George W. Bush in that NO billionaire will be left behind.”
June 12th, 2008 at 10:03 amIn addition to this difference in middle class tax relief, the overriding issue is the extent to which Obama’s and McNumbNuts’ tax plans would increase the deficit and add to the national debt.
In this regard, McNumbNuts is clearly another GDumbya. We don’t need this old fart in the White House piling up more interest on the national debt to be paid by a generation that he will never live to see.
Of course, Little Johnny says that he will pay for his tax cuts by reductions in spending. He lies.
June 12th, 2008 at 10:03 amupside99 Says: Of course many of the people in the sweet spot of that group will STILL vote for Johnny Boy. It is in their genetic make-up to ignore facts and vote Repug. Amazing what a lack of education and too much reality TV can do, isn’t it?
I heard that it’s down to 25%. People like my brother who simply will not ever admit that the were wrong in the first place and live in a reality of ’selective hearing’ (while they whine about gas prices and their inability to afford healthcare).
I’m hoping that the entertainment mindset of the mass media will make this the newest version of reality t.v. The public has been paying attention to politics lately, and well, they are in for a good fight this year. For once, tehir greedy little machinations might actually work to our advantage.
June 12th, 2008 at 10:04 amThe effort to eliminate oil company tax breaks is spun as INCREASED taxes for the oil companies. The media doesn’t have time to ‘correct’ these statements.
Obama’s plan is already getting the same spin. No facts, just drivel from the MSM. Meanwhile, McShitforbrains is rarely called out with the truth.
This is going to end. McCain’s ’shine’ is wearing thin, even on Republicans. I can’t wait for some 1:1 debates, townhall meetings, or what ever they call them. These should be formatted to exclude talking head input. The candidates should be allowed 5 minute policy speeches and then open it up to Q&A.
Can you imagine how McFriends is going to react to people’s REAL questions? I believe their’s a good chance we could see him explode on stage, showing America who this Panderer Bear really is.
June 12th, 2008 at 10:18 amHey Rogers,
June 12th, 2008 at 10:20 amYou left out the part about Obama wanting to end the war in Iraq on which we spend $12Bn per month. I would call that a reduction in spending wouldn’t you? Johnny Boy wants to cut taxes for people who don’t deserve it and his plan costs more than Obama’s, while at the same time keeping the Iraq Occupation going for 100 years…
just so you know, 100 years X 12 months in a year X $12Bn/month = $14.4 Trillion
June 12th, 2008 at 10:23 amAnd that’s just Iraq. Once we get into Iran, Syria et al during those hundred years, it will more likely be 3 times that, or 42 Trillion.
June 12th, 2008 at 10:24 amObama’s Tax Fairness Plan
For decades, America has been victim to an anti-tax sentiment that has led to tax cuts that favor wealth, not work. And for decades, the gaps in wealth in this country have grown wider, while the costs to working people have increased. This year alone, the average person in the wealthiest 1 percent of
Americans will receive more than $55,000 from the Bush tax cuts, while the average person in the bottom 20 percent of Americans will get about $70.
Our tax code is riddled with loopholes and special tax breaks that benefit Washington special interests. There are corporate carve-outs that serve no national purpose; tax breaks that allow companies to stash their profits overseas; a government that’s paralyzed when dealing with offshore tax haven countries; an overloaded tax code that’s too complicated for ordinary folks to understand, but just complicated enough to work for someone who knows how to work the system. When big business doesn’t like something in the tax code, they can hire a lobbyist to get it changed. But nobody lobbies for working people. Instead of honoring that core American value – opportunity for all – we’ve had a system in Washington where our laws and regulations have carved out opportunities for the few.
That fact the Obama calls it his “TAX FAIRNESS PLAN” says it all. For the first time in many years it will actually be fair to the majority. What a refreshing idea.
We as middle class Americans have bore the burden for most of our lives. We are the ones that except the responsibility to our children (through funding schools), to the infastructure of our country, to support all the great programs that have helped so many in need and support of the military that defend our great country. It’s about time that the rich pay their share and except part of the responsibility.
June 12th, 2008 at 10:26 amFR,
June 12th, 2008 at 10:30 amDon’t you mean ‘accept’ instead of ‘except’?
ahhh — trolls, trolls, thy name is Republi-CANT.
Despite your overflowing compassionate conservatism and your ability to be uniters, not dividers, when it comes to fiscal responsibility, your claim on that is finished.
June 12th, 2008 at 10:38 amOT, but important:
I mentioned this on another thread, Conyers may be more apt to go for Impeachment than we think…
I’ve read in a few places now that Conyers may be able to force Pelosi to recuse herself from any Impeachment hearings or proceedings, indeed, to recuse herself from the very decision to have the hearings itself. The reason? She may be forced to TESTIFY as a MATERIAL WITNESS since in her capacity in congress, she was briefed on the NSA Warrantless Wiretapping BEFORE it hit the news, same goes for torture.
June 12th, 2008 at 10:49 amthe US is increasing its dept at a rate of billions per month further bankrupting our children’s future.
Why is anyone talking tax cuts for anyone?
Does the insanity ever stop?
Are actual grownups ever going to be in charge?
Pandering, be it from a Democrat or a republican is still pandering, but admittedly, pandering that benefits the middle class and disadvantaged is far preferable to further enriching the already obscenely rich.
June 12th, 2008 at 10:55 am.
Good point, #17, Liberal Traitor.
I’d like to say I have faith that Conyers will find the balls to move forward on this, but I’m turning blue from holding my breath, waiting for the Dems to act on impeachment.
We owe it to Barak Obama to act on this. Global opinion is awaiting some kind of significant sign from America to show them we’re as sick & tired of lies, corruption & corporate welfare as they are. Impeachment proceedings for Bush & Cheney will allow Obama a ‘clean start’ in Jan. ‘o9.
June 12th, 2008 at 10:56 am#15 WaltTheMan Says:
FR,
Don’t you mean ‘accept’ instead of ‘except’?
Thank you Walttheman. Not enough tea and I type too fast. I need to proofread more.
Have a good day!:)
June 12th, 2008 at 11:00 ampluege Says:
the US is increasing its dept at a rate of billions per month further bankrupting our children’s future.
Make that $1.59 BILLION per DAY. Fiscal conservatives my arse.
PEACE
June 12th, 2008 at 11:29 am______
spencers mom Says:
But, but, but… what about those poor families making only $200k/year? According to McCain, they aren’t rich. Since they make more, aren’t they entitled to more tax breaks?
Let the spinning begin!
PEACE
June 12th, 2008 at 9:53 am
June 12th, 2008 at 11:47 am______
Those making 200k certainly don’t need a tax cut. In fact a SLIGHT increase is in order until the deficit is sufficiently reduced some years from now. But 200k hardly makes one rich.
liberal traitor Says:
I’ve read in a few places now that Conyers may be able to force Pelosi to recuse herself from any Impeachment hearings or proceedings, indeed, to recuse herself from the very decision to have the hearings itself. The reason? She may be forced to TESTIFY as a MATERIAL WITNESS since in her capacity in congress, she was briefed on the NSA Warrantless Wiretapping BEFORE it hit the news, same goes for torture.
If this is true, when put in context it sure explains her inactions. In my opinion this makes her complicit in much of what the bush cabal has perpetrated.
June 12th, 2008 at 11:56 am______
upside99 Says:
Of course many of the people in the sweet spot of that group will STILL vote for Johnny Boy. It is in their genetic make-up to ignore facts and vote Repug. Amazing what a lack of education and too much reality TV can do, isn’t it?
June 12th, 2008 at 9:58 am
______
Then, of course, there are those who are educated and will vote for McCain, even against their own financial interest, because Obama will back programs that go against their moral values and/or sense of personal responsibility.
June 12th, 2008 at 11:57 ampluege Says:
Why is anyone talking tax cuts for anyone?
Does the insanity ever stop?
The wealthy only favor tax cuts for themselves. Not for the great unwashed. Tax cuts for the middle and lower classes would more than be offset by the rich fcukers paying their fair share. Thus the Tax Fairness Plan.
June 12th, 2008 at 11:59 amObama’s tax plan would offer middle class families three times more than McCain’s.»
Looking forward to the debates where this truth can debunk all the crap and lies spewed by those that hold 95% of the air waves.
June 12th, 2008 at 1:13 pmupright left Says:
______
upside99 Says:
Of course many of the people in the sweet spot of that group will STILL vote for Johnny Boy. It is in their genetic make-up to ignore facts and vote Repug. Amazing what a lack of education and too much reality TV can do, isn’t it?
June 12th, 2008 at 9:58 am
______
Then, of course, there are those who are educated and will vote for McCain, even against their own financial interest, because Obama will back programs that go against their moral values and/or sense of personal responsibility.
MORAL VALUES? Where does the philandering, war-monger Johnny Boy provide that kind of option for you?
And what “personal responsibility” are we talking about? Choosing to be born into a military royalty? Finishing 4th from the bottom of his class at the Naval Academy and JOKING about it?
You go, Dude! Vote for that upright candidate. WOW!
June 12th, 2008 at 1:15 pmToday: Obama 304 McCain 221; the blue is becoming bluer while the red is turning pink.
June 12th, 2008 at 1:24 pm______
upside99 Says:
MORAL VALUES? Where does the philandering, war-monger Johnny Boy provide that kind of option for you?
And what “personal responsibility” are we talking about? Choosing to be born into a military royalty? Finishing 4th from the bottom of his class at the Naval Academy and JOKING about it?
You go, Dude! Vote for that upright candidate. WOW!
June 12th, 2008 at 1:15 pm
______
Actually, I’m voting for Obama. Upright enough for ya? You’ll notice I didn’t say the candidate who lives the values, but whether he supports the moral and personal responsibility policies of the voters. I have very little hope for politicians regarding morality. However, if we only support candidates who have no transgressions, there will be no one for whom to vote.;)
June 12th, 2008 at 2:09 pmUpright Left,
I apologize if I misread your post. I took it that you were inferring that Johnny Boy was a more moral person than Obama.
My Bad!
June 12th, 2008 at 3:53 pmSo the “Tax Fairness Plan” would make things more fair, huh? In every other context, “fair” would mean equal treatment…kinda like a flat tax rate, no? Close all the loopholes, credits, deductions, etc. you want. Gimme a (low) flat personal and corporate tax rate and let’s be done with all the hand-wringing. Now tell me why that’s not fair?
And by the way, if that’s not enough to pay the bills of our bloated government, then we better figure out where to tighten the belt. Oh yeah, and for you liberals, if you think cutting back on defense spending is the first place to start, I might remind you of Bill Clinton’s “peace dividend” back in the 1990’s which didn’t quite work out the way you donks thought it would….gutting the military and our intel ranks certainly didn’t help matters considering the bombing of the Cole, the Kobar Towers and of course 9/11, did it?
June 22nd, 2008 at 4:50 pmI really hope some of this blog is actually recognized by Obama, because there are so many great points. The reason I’m posting is because I like most of you posting have a problem with Obama’s tax distribution. Obama has a great idea, I have to admit. Taking from the rich and giving to the poor is great, but who is rich. Well, supossedly, “family’s who have an income of $250,000 or more are rich” In today’s economy, that is not even close to true. Yes, they are defined as upper class, but depending on where they live, are they really? I live in a family, whose income comes from capital gains. My father is a private equity executive. “Oh, he’s so rich” Yeah, %40 some percent of the world’s billionares profit from capital gains, but for every billionare, there are at least 100 “little guys” like my father, who no matter what they’re title, are not the wall street executives that bring home $50M paychecks. My family, like millions of others, has been severly hurt by the recession. We have to budget, and pay the bills with money from savings just like everyone else. My family doesn’t own 10 houses, or buy a new car every six months, or even fly business class. We fly coach on a very occasional budget vacation. Are all the executives rich hoarders Mr. Obama? Does my family sound very rich to you Mr. Obama if you are reading this? What Mr. Obama has to do to make his plan really work and be liked by the vast majority of people, is to either redefine upperclass, or not even attempt to change how things are now, especially in the middle of a recession. In my opinion, the rich are not the people making $250,000, a year because most of the people making about $250,000 a year right now have a gaping hole in their wallet. The rich, are those who fly around on big private jets, and drive their Ferrari to work every day, and take home multi-million dollar paychecks. And for capital gains, the same idea should apply, that taxing those literally dozens of billionares reaping the benefits of a %15 tax rate is fine, but for all of the literally tens of thousands of family’s just scraping by with a %15 tax rate, rasing it is absolutely unacceptable. For me, that means that occasional vacation, no more. Summer Camp? No more. Friends who I have known since before I could read? No more. I would have to move, because my family could no longer afford to live in our quiet suburb outside of New York City. Overall, the message that I want to, and I’m sure most of you reading this want to communicate to Mr. Obama is that taxing the rich, to help the poor and middle class is fine, as long as you are actually taxing the rich, and not the thousands who are struggling to pay their bills, who would he would be taxing with his current plan. Mr. Obama needs to get with the program, and look at who he is really hurting. And for capital gains, he has started, by recently announcing he may allow “small” ventures to avoid the tax increase. My father’s firm is classified as mid-size, but yet, my family is having financial problems just like everybody elses. So once again, with our current economy, Barack Obama is either going to have to re-write the book on who’s rich and who’s poor, and what companies and firms are large, and which are small, because the definitions right now are long out of date, and a lot of people are going to financially hurt even more then they already are if Barack Obama doens’t change his views. Thank you all of you who took the time to read this long post, and I hope you agree with me on this issue that “the book” on who’s rich, and who’s poor, what’s large, and what’s small, has to be re-written. Once again, thank you all.
June 24th, 2008 at 11:10 pmWhy can’t liberals understand that tax policy has implications for people’s behavior. Tax something more heavily and you take away the incentive to produce more. Conversely, tax something less and you get more of it. By the same token, if I’m getting taxpayer financed handouts, what incentive do I have to work harder and find a way to create a better life for me and my family. Look at what happened after welfare reform in the 1990’s…voila…millions came off welfare and got a job.
And by the way, envy is no reason to tax the rich. So what if a guy makes a zillion dollars before lunch….this is America isn’t it? It has no bearing on my life and my responsibility to myself and my family. It’s not the rich guy’s job to work his butt off his whole life so that he can hand over an ever increasing amount of money to me and others with less. Tell me why that’s fair….and don’t give me this “moral responsibility” garbage. If he wants buy a hundred foot yacht, or give it away to charity or, heck, even cut a bigger check than he owes on April 15th, that’s his decision to make. Where’s the outrage over Brad and Angelina’s 14 mansions around the world? They clearly don’t need that many homes. My view is that they can do whatever they want, but liberals are great at being hypocritical.
As an aside, what if Bill Gates had been taxed to the hilt? I’ll tell you what….more money for “Bridges to Nowhere” and less money to invest in new job-creating ventures and probably less money to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
Politicians are hardly good stewards of capital. And welfare (of all kinds) is hardly an incentive for people to take care of themselves and/or learn from poor decisions that have landed them among the “have-nots.” Remember what your parents always told you…life isn’t fair. Deal with it.
June 25th, 2008 at 6:08 pm