Figure your tax cut under Obama
- Thread starter newworker
- Start date
newworker
Well-Known Member
newworker
Well-Known Member
Bill Clinton is not running
Neither is George Bush.
brett636
Well-Known Member
So how is Obama going to pay for his $1 trillion in new government spending when he is cutting taxes?
tieguy
Banned
LOL , Wheres the bill? Did he submit it while he was in congress? If Obama is really willing to drop our tax rate then why is he waiting? Why not do it while in congress the last four years.
Catatonic
Nine Lives
That's the real question.
When government spends it is taxing that same amount.
Question is: When will those taxes be collected?
newworker
Well-Known Member
how is mccain going to pay for his programs?
If you look at the bottom line, mccain's tax cuts are overall
larger than Obama's but most benefit's to those at the top 1% with $million yearly incomes and above.
Obama's tax cut are overall smaller but benefiit those earning $100,000 and less per year.
What group are you in?
If you earn less than $100,000 per year why would you support mccain's plan to benefit the 1% at the top?
If you look at the bottom line, mccain's tax cuts are overall
larger than Obama's but most benefit's to those at the top 1% with $million yearly incomes and above.
Obama's tax cut are overall smaller but benefiit those earning $100,000 and less per year.
What group are you in?
If you earn less than $100,000 per year why would you support mccain's plan to benefit the 1% at the top?
paidslave
Well-Known Member
They haven't figured that out yet! If you make over 2.6 million you would pay $260.000 more. Lots of people here and most of the moderators make quite a bit!
av8torntn
Well-Known Member
Not according to the liar B. Hussein. He said that under 250,000 a year is middle class. Now to your little tax thing. If you do not believe me enter the numbers yourself. I am single. I have no dependents. My taxable income is 100,000. No tax cut for me. Now just for fun keep my same info and increase my income to 150,000 just for fun and see what happens.
Anyhow the liar B. Hussein said he would repeal the Bush tax cuts. Now he says he may keep the Bush tax cuts. Which is it? How do you know what his tax plan is when he does not know? He says he wants to increase payroll taxes and capital gains taxes. At one time although it has been some time now he even wanted to increase the death tax and dividend tax.
R
RU For Real?
Guest
You're single and make $100K? Why do you feel you deserve a tax break? I believe that the $250k figure was for families.
BTW, the constant use of someone's (middle) name in an attempt to belittle them reflects poorly on you, as does the use of the word 'liar'.
tieguy
Banned
Same tired rhetoric that we have heard the last 6 or 7 elections. yet history continously proves that republicans cut taxes for all of us while democrats jack them up.
Same point I have made before regardless of what new tax games Obama plays if he allows the bush cuts to expire then he raises all of our taxes. If he then decides to raise taxes for the top one percent then everyone else is still paying more taxes from the repeal of bush cuts.
tieguy
Banned
Ten Myths About the Bush Tax Cuts—and the Facts
Myth #1: Tax revenues remain low.Fact: Tax revenues are above the historical average, even after the tax cuts.
Myth #2: The Bush tax cuts substantially reduced 2006 revenues and expanded the budget deficit.
Fact: Nearly all of the 2006 budget deficit resulted from additional spending above the baseline.
Myth #3: Supply-side economics assumes that all tax cuts immediately pay for themselves.
Fact: It assumes replenishment of some but not necessarily all lost revenues.
Myth #4: Capital gains tax cuts do not pay for themselves.
Fact: Capital gains tax revenues doubled following the 2003 tax cut.
Myth #5: The Bush tax cuts are to blame for the projected long-term budget deficits.
Fact: Projections show that entitlement costs will dwarf the projected large revenue increases.
Myth #6: Raising tax rates is the best way to raise revenue.
Fact: Tax revenues correlate with economic growth, not tax rates.
Myth #7: Reversing the upper-income tax cuts would raise substantial revenues.
Fact: The low-income tax cuts reduced revenues the most.
Myth #8: Tax cuts help the economy by "putting money in people's pockets."
Fact: Pro-growth tax cuts support incentives for productive behavior.
Myth #9: The Bush tax cuts have not helped the economy.
Fact: The economy responded strongly to the 2003 tax cuts.
Myth #10: The Bush tax cuts were tilted toward the rich.
Fact: The rich are now shouldering even more of the income tax burden.
Source - http://www.heritage.org/research/taxes/bg2001.cfm
tieguy
Banned
Same Source:
In 2000, the top 60 percent of taxpayers paid 100 percent of all income taxes. The bottom 40 percent collectively paid no income taxes. Lawmakers writing the 2001 tax cuts faced quite a challenge in giving the bulk of the income tax savings to a population that was already paying no income taxes.
Rather than exclude these Americans, lawmak­ers used the tax code to subsidize them. (Some economists would say this made that group's col­lective tax burden negative.)First, lawmakers low­ered the initial tax brackets from 15 percent to 10 percent and then expanded the refundable child tax credit, which, along with the refundable earned income tax credit (EITC), reduced the typical low-income tax burden to well below zero. As a result, the U.S. Treasury now mails tax "refunds" to a large proportion of these Americans that exceed the amounts of tax that they actually paid. All in all, the number of tax filers with zero or negative income tax liability rose from 30 million to 40 million, or about 30 percent of all tax filers.[17] The remaining 70 percent of tax filers received lower income tax rates, lower investment taxes, and lower estate taxes from the 2001 legislation.
In 2000, the top 60 percent of taxpayers paid 100 percent of all income taxes. The bottom 40 percent collectively paid no income taxes. Lawmakers writing the 2001 tax cuts faced quite a challenge in giving the bulk of the income tax savings to a population that was already paying no income taxes.
Rather than exclude these Americans, lawmak­ers used the tax code to subsidize them. (Some economists would say this made that group's col­lective tax burden negative.)First, lawmakers low­ered the initial tax brackets from 15 percent to 10 percent and then expanded the refundable child tax credit, which, along with the refundable earned income tax credit (EITC), reduced the typical low-income tax burden to well below zero. As a result, the U.S. Treasury now mails tax "refunds" to a large proportion of these Americans that exceed the amounts of tax that they actually paid. All in all, the number of tax filers with zero or negative income tax liability rose from 30 million to 40 million, or about 30 percent of all tax filers.[17] The remaining 70 percent of tax filers received lower income tax rates, lower investment taxes, and lower estate taxes from the 2001 legislation.
tieguy
Banned
And again the affect of Bushs tax cuts on lower income earners:
As a result, the U.S. Treasury now mails tax "refunds" to a large proportion of these Americans that exceed the amounts of tax that they actually paid. All in all, the number of tax filers with zero or negative income tax liability rose from 30 million to 40 million, or about 30 percent of all tax filers.[17] The remaining 70 percent of tax filers received lower income tax rates, lower investment taxes, and lower estate taxes from the 2001 legislation.
As a result, the U.S. Treasury now mails tax "refunds" to a large proportion of these Americans that exceed the amounts of tax that they actually paid. All in all, the number of tax filers with zero or negative income tax liability rose from 30 million to 40 million, or about 30 percent of all tax filers.[17] The remaining 70 percent of tax filers received lower income tax rates, lower investment taxes, and lower estate taxes from the 2001 legislation.
Similar threads
