Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Free Preview - WSJ.com
Candidates Would Cut Taxes
But Differ on by How Much
New Study Likely to Fuel Fight Over Policies
By DEBORAH SOLOMON
June 11, 2008 12:36 p.m.
Presidential candidates John McCain and Barack Obama would both cut taxes for the majority of Americans, with Sen. McCain, the Republican contender, awarding the biggest cut to the richest Americans and Sen. Obama, the Democrat, favoring those at the bottom of the income scale, according to an analysis of the candidates' plans released Wednesday.
Associated Press
John McCain makes remarks during a campaign event in Philadelphia Wednesday.
The study by the Tax Policy Center, a joint venture of Washington think tanks the Urban Institute and the Brookings Institution, found that both candidates' plans would also significantly boost the federal debt. The plan offered by Sen. Obama would add $3.3 trillion to the national debt over the next 10 years and Sen. McCain's plan would add $4.5 trillion. (See a side-by-side comparison of their plans.)
The study by the Tax Policy Center, a joint venture of Washington think tanks the Urban Institute and the Brookings Institution, found that both candidates' plans would also significantly boost the federal debt. The plan offered by Sen. Obama would add $3.3 trillion to the national debt over the next 10 years and Sen. McCain's plan would add $4.5 trillion.
I realize that it adds to the debt, which is rarely a good thing. But $1.3 trillion over 10 years (Obama's plan) can improve a lot of failing infrastructure, including bridges and mass transportation.
I realize that it adds to the debt, which is rarely a good thing. But $1.3 trillion over 10 years (Obama's plan) can improve a lot of failing infrastructure, including bridges and mass transportation.
Eventually, those countries buying our bonds to finance the debt now will have to be repaid.
I realize that it adds to the debt, which is rarely a good thing. But $1.3 trillion over 10 years (Obama's plan) can improve a lot of failing infrastructure, including bridges and mass transportation.
I agree, & no matter who is president it will have to be done, even if it's not planned for.
What I find extremely interesting is
Sen. Obama, plan
Those at the lowest end of the income scale -- making between $19,740 and $38,980 -- would benefit the most, with their after-tax income going up by 5.5%
The wealthiest Americans -- those in the top 1% of the income group -- would see their after-tax income decrease by 8.79% or $115,974.
Sen. McCain's plan, the study found that Wealthy Americans would benefit the most, with those making between $169,480 and $237,040 seeing their after-tax income increase by 3% or $6,264. The biggest benefit flows to those in the top 0.1% -- with incomes above $2.8 million -- who would see their tax bills decrease by $269,364 or 4.4% of income. Those at the lower end of the income scale would also see a modest tax cut, with their after-tax income increasing by 0.2% or $19.
Am I missing something here? If you are honestly being patriotic (not wearing it on your lapel only) that is looking out for what is best for our country.
Obama's plan seems to be a no brainer?
yes / No
Am I missing something here? If you are honestly being patriotic (not wearing it on your lapel only) that is looking out for what is best for our country.
Obama's plan seems to be a no brainer?
yes / No
Yes, you are missing something. Both plan to increase spending. We can't afford what we're doing now. How can we afford to cut taxes for anyone?
Why is no one looking long term? Social Security and Medicare won't be able to sustain themselves within a few years, maybe a decade? By 2040, we'll be spending almost all of our taxes just to pay for these two programs. Yet McCain wants to continue the Iraq occupation and Obama wants to give people free health care and will most likely continue the war regardless of what he says on his website.
Yes, you are missing something. Both plan to increase spending. We can't afford what we're doing now. How can we afford to cut taxes for anyone?
Why is no one looking long term? Social Security and Medicare won't be able to sustain themselves within a few years, maybe a decade? By 2040, we'll be spending almost all of our taxes just to pay for these two programs. Yet McCain wants to continue the Iraq occupation and Obama wants to give people free health care and will most likely continue the war regardless of what he says on his website.
Most of the politicians see this. It's the voters who don't want to see it.
Yes, you are missing something. Both plan to increase spending. We can't afford what we're doing now. How can we afford to cut taxes for anyone?
Why is no one looking long term? Social Security and Medicare won't be able to sustain themselves within a few years, maybe a decade? By 2040, we'll be spending almost all of our taxes just to pay for these two programs. Yet McCain wants to continue the Iraq occupation and Obama wants to give people free health care and will most likely continue the war regardless of what he says on his website.
Tax decrease to all is a fair criticism,
The problem is we will have to choose one of those two plans. While neither is even close to perfect I find Obama's plan better.
I certainly do not think the top 1% need a tax cut.
I also wish capitol gains could be maintained, as most of my income is capitol gains.
But I think if you are making under 40,000 a year you really should not be paying much if any in taxes. $500.00 to that person is worth much more than $10,000 is to the top 1%.
Most of the politicians see this. It's the voters who don't want to see it.
So the politicians are lying to get our votes? Why vote for any of them? Why don't all 300 million of us just sit home this year? They can't win without our votes.
But I think if you are making under 40,000 a year you really should not be paying much if any in taxes. $500.00 to that person is worth much more than $10,000 is to the top 1%.
Why? If you're a citizen, you should be responsible for your portion just like everyone else. I don't understand this idea that the rich can afford to pay more just because they are rich. Why can't we either all pay the same percentage or pay nothing. We can afford to pay nothing in income taxes if the government actually did only what it was supposed to.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
