Org Mobile Site
View Poll Results: Whose tax plan will benefit you?
Obama's tax plan will benefit me
5
26.32%
McCain's tax plan will benefit me
5
26.32%
Neither candidate's plan will benefit me
9
47.37%
Voters: 19. This poll is closed
Thread: Tax Plans: Will you benefit?
This is from Deloitte, one of the "big 5" of major American accounting firms.
I stock shelves in a grocery store or work with tiny mexican children at the Y. Come to think of it due to the fact I just went to college Im unemployed. No politician cares about me
Neither, as I don't live in America. I'd be more inclined to support McCain's plan, however.
Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars:
Neither, as I don't live in America. I'd be more inclined to support McCain's plan, however.
I get the impression you're rich.Neither, as I don't live in America. I'd be more inclined to support McCain's plan, however.
Originally Posted by Koga No Goshi:
I get the impression you're rich.
Middle class. Comfortable, not even close to rich, not even close to poor.I get the impression you're rich.
Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars:
Middle class. Comfortable, not even close to rich, not even close to poor.
Everyone defines rich differently. Your description doesn't give me any frame of reference (which is fine, you are of course entitled to your privacy.) But if you aren't rich, and just think cutting rich taxes stimulates the economy and trickledown and all that, I wonder where it is. We've had 8 years for it to start kicking in.Middle class. Comfortable, not even close to rich, not even close to poor.
The graph leaves out a sizable part of the upper middle class. Going from a family of 4 making $80,000 to a family of 4 making $430,000 that's quite a big jump. I live in the Vampire...er...Empire State of New York, what the Feds don't take the State or multiple layers of county/city/village/town does. With the coming financial storm on Wall Street guess which State loses the most in income taxes? Yes, dear old New York. I doubt either Federal Tax Plan will help me.
Originally Posted by Hosakawa Tito:
The graph leaves out a sizable part of the upper middle class. Going from a family of 4 making $80,000 to a family of 4 making $430,000 that's quite a big jump. I live in the Vampire...er...Empire State of New York, what the Feds don't take the State or multiple layers of county/city/village/town does. With the coming financial storm on Wall Street guess which State loses the most in income taxes? Yes, dear old New York. I doubt either Federal Tax Plan will help me.
ALL the graphs do that, I chose this one because this was the only one I found that specified differences between single/married/with kids, and I know we have a mix of all of that here. (I did notice, as a side note, that the graphs they use on right-wing blog sites only shows pure, overall tax increase percentages without specifying WHO would get those increases, so of course the conclusion is OMG Obama is raising everyone's taxes 36%!!!!! COMMUNISM!) The graph leaves out a sizable part of the upper middle class. Going from a family of 4 making $80,000 to a family of 4 making $430,000 that's quite a big jump. I live in the Vampire...er...Empire State of New York, what the Feds don't take the State or multiple layers of county/city/village/town does. With the coming financial storm on Wall Street guess which State loses the most in income taxes? Yes, dear old New York. I doubt either Federal Tax Plan will help me.
Example:
But since under McCain there is no change up to 430,000 and Obama's change is , relatively, insignificant at 12,000 increase at 430,000, one would assume if you make like 250 or 300 you'll stay the same or perhaps see a small increase.
My (very) casual job means I don't earn enough to pay taxes anyway. Besides, I'm Aussie.
Well, I'm unmerican as well but Obama's tax plan looks better to me.
I voted Mcain cos that would mean he was in the Whitehouse which is good for Irish business which means jobs for me in Ireland. read on for my explanation
I am not able to vote in this election but as an Irish person I know that ultimately a Republican in the Whitehouse benefits Ireland because its business as usual for the big companies. Ireland is very connected to US so thats means jobs in Ireland for people like me a democrat is not bad as such for business eg Clinton for eight years and Ireland boomed along with US but it does seem that the rhetoric is on protecting jobs. How this would be done I have no idea it may have no effect on Irish companies but it could be detrimental too. Interestingly most leaders of medium to large business in Ireland which obviously include many US companies support Mcain.
I am not able to vote in this election but as an Irish person I know that ultimately a Republican in the Whitehouse benefits Ireland because its business as usual for the big companies. Ireland is very connected to US so thats means jobs in Ireland for people like me a democrat is not bad as such for business eg Clinton for eight years and Ireland boomed along with US but it does seem that the rhetoric is on protecting jobs. How this would be done I have no idea it may have no effect on Irish companies but it could be detrimental too. Interestingly most leaders of medium to large business in Ireland which obviously include many US companies support Mcain.
Neither plan will help my family very much but Obama's will certainly cost us quite a bit. 
And umm.. does this not bother anyone?
I'm wondering what all these people who are so excited about their $600 "middle class tax cut" check are going to do when they're out of work because their employer's business taxes jumped double digits!
And umm.. does this not bother anyone?
I'm wondering what all these people who are so excited about their $600 "middle class tax cut" check are going to do when they're out of work because their employer's business taxes jumped double digits!
Originally Posted by Koga No Goshi:
Everyone defines rich differently. Your description doesn't give me any frame of reference (which is fine, you are of course entitled to your privacy.) But if you aren't rich, and just think cutting rich taxes stimulates the economy and trickledown and all that, I wonder where it is. We've had 8 years for it to start kicking in.
Rich would probably be defined differently in my country than yours as well, but trust me, I am middle class. I would prefer to cut rich taxes because I don't see why it is fair that they should pay a much larger percentage of tax. They're already giving a lot more money, even if they pay the same tax percentage as everyone else.Everyone defines rich differently. Your description doesn't give me any frame of reference (which is fine, you are of course entitled to your privacy.) But if you aren't rich, and just think cutting rich taxes stimulates the economy and trickledown and all that, I wonder where it is. We've had 8 years for it to start kicking in.
Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger:
Neither plan will help my family very much but Obama's will certainly cost us quite a bit.
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publi....cfm?ID=411693Neither plan will help my family very much but Obama's will certainly cost us quite a bit.
Originally Posted by :
Although both candidates have at times stressed fiscal responsibility, their specific non-health tax proposals would reduce tax revenues by $3.6 trillion (McCain) and $2.7 trillion (Obama) over the next 10 years, or approximately 10 and 7 percent of the revenues scheduled for collection under current law, respectively. Furthermore, as in the case of President Bush's tax cuts, the true cost of McCain's policies may be masked by phase-ins and sunsets (scheduled expiration dates) that reduce the estimated revenue costs. If his policies were fully phased in and permanent, the ten-year cost would rise to $4.0 trillion, or about 11 percent of total revenues.
Although both candidates have at times stressed fiscal responsibility, their specific non-health tax proposals would reduce tax revenues by $3.6 trillion (McCain) and $2.7 trillion (Obama) over the next 10 years, or approximately 10 and 7 percent of the revenues scheduled for collection under current law, respectively. Furthermore, as in the case of President Bush's tax cuts, the true cost of McCain's policies may be masked by phase-ins and sunsets (scheduled expiration dates) that reduce the estimated revenue costs. If his policies were fully phased in and permanent, the ten-year cost would rise to $4.0 trillion, or about 11 percent of total revenues.
Originally Posted by CountArach:
http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publi....cfm?ID=411693
Forgive me as its 8am here and I've been studying all night with no sleep, but what point are you making? Less government revenue isn't necessarily a bad thing if it means more money in the hands of the people.http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publi....cfm?ID=411693
Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger:
Forgive me as its 8am here and I've been studying all night with no sleep, but what point are you making? Less government revenue isn't necessarily a bad thing if it means more money in the hands of the people.
Indeed. Who needs to bother about some silly debt!Forgive me as its 8am here and I've been studying all night with no sleep, but what point are you making? Less government revenue isn't necessarily a bad thing if it means more money in the hands of the people.
Originally Posted by makaikhaan:
Indeed. Who needs to bother about some silly debt!
If spending was cut adequately, the two are not mutually exclusive.Indeed. Who needs to bother about some silly debt!
People always identify themselves as being one or two tax brackets above what they really are.
It is this, that makes people vote for tax reductions for those wealthier than themselves. Blissfully oblivous of their objective financial interests.
It is this, that makes people vote for tax reductions for those wealthier than themselves. Blissfully oblivous of their objective financial interests.
Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger:
Forgive me as its 8am here and I've been studying all night with no sleep, but what point are you making? Less government revenue isn't necessarily a bad thing if it means more money in the hands of the people.
I guess our philosophies in that regard are different. To me more money to the people would be delivered through Government programs in an indirect sense (Ie Universal Healthcare means people don't have to spend money on insurance).Forgive me as its 8am here and I've been studying all night with no sleep, but what point are you making? Less government revenue isn't necessarily a bad thing if it means more money in the hands of the people.
Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat:
People always identify themselves as being one or two tax brackets above what they really are.
It is this, that makes people vote for tax reductions for those wealthier than themselves. Blissfully oblivous of their objective financial interests.
Pfft, I know I'm a poor slob and that's why I want higher taxes for those who can afford a yacht and a ferrari and since I'm sorta studying in the management direction I might have to pay them higher taxes myself, but guess what, I may not be able to afford a yacht for myself then but I'm sure it won't make me miss out on that PS5 and FarCry 6. People always identify themselves as being one or two tax brackets above what they really are.
It is this, that makes people vote for tax reductions for those wealthier than themselves. Blissfully oblivous of their objective financial interests.
Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat:
People always identify themselves as being one or two tax brackets above what they really are.
It is this, that makes people vote for tax reductions for those wealthier than themselves. Blissfully oblivous of their objective financial interests.
Or they don't have such a narrow minded view and realize that soaking the rich may well hurt the overall economy.People always identify themselves as being one or two tax brackets above what they really are.
It is this, that makes people vote for tax reductions for those wealthier than themselves. Blissfully oblivous of their objective financial interests.
Anyways, from a more detailed chart I remember, I'll benefit more under Obama when I first get a job next year, but I support McCain's plan.
CR
Originally Posted by Husar:
I may not be able to afford a yacht for myself
That's ok you can borrow mine I may not be able to afford a yacht for myself
Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit:
Or they don't have such a narrow minded view and realize that soaking the rich may well hurt the overall economy.
People made the same predictions about what revenue would be lost to Bush's tax cuts- yet if iirc tax revenue increased substantially after the cuts. It's foolish to think it's so simple as higher taxes=more government revenue and lower taxes=less revenue.Or they don't have such a narrow minded view and realize that soaking the rich may well hurt the overall economy.
Originally Posted by :
Anyways, from a more detailed chart I remember, I'll benefit more under Obama when I first get a job next year, but I support McCain's plan.
That's crazy- you're supposed to vote for whoever is promising you the biggest handouts, period. Anyways, from a more detailed chart I remember, I'll benefit more under Obama when I first get a job next year, but I support McCain's plan.
Besides, if McCain's plan means I pay more in taxes, it means I'm more patriotic- Biden says so.
Looking at my extended family (4 adult children, 2 grandsons) it looks like "no change" under McCain, and an net increase (but not huge) in tax under Obama.
http://alchemytoday.com/obamataxcut/
allows an actual calculation
I guess the site is accurate...$18 seems kinda ridiculous though...
allows an actual calculation
Originally Posted by :
Your Obama Tax Cut:
$896.21
This is $877.52 more than the $18.69 cut you will get from McCain.
Your Obama Tax Cut:
$896.21
This is $877.52 more than the $18.69 cut you will get from McCain.
I guess the site is accurate...$18 seems kinda ridiculous though...
Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger:
If spending was cut adequately, the two are not mutually exclusive.
Awww, how cute, you think any of the slobs in washington will actually cut spending in a meaningful way. That's adorable of you.If spending was cut adequately, the two are not mutually exclusive.
Originally Posted by makaikhaan:
Awww, how cute, you think any of the slobs in washington will actually cut spending in a meaningful way. That's adorable of you.
and you think they will spend more money on the debt. I dont know which one of you I want to take home and squeeze.Awww, how cute, you think any of the slobs in washington will actually cut spending in a meaningful way. That's adorable of you.
Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro:
http://alchemytoday.com/obamataxcut/
allows an actual calculation
I guess the site is accurate...$18 seems kinda ridiculous though...
I don't trust them - they only give you results if Obama is 'better' for you. Partisans. /skepticismhttp://alchemytoday.com/obamataxcut/
allows an actual calculation
I guess the site is accurate...$18 seems kinda ridiculous though...
CR
Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger:
If spending was cut adequately, the two are not mutually exclusive.
Exactly how far back in the world rankings do you want our public education to get? If spending was cut adequately, the two are not mutually exclusive.
And personally, I'd rather not have to fork up the money myself when there's a pothole in the street in front of my house, or a tree falls over in the middle of the street.
Originally Posted by Louis VI the Fat:
People always identify themselves as being one or two tax brackets above what they really are.
It is this, that makes people vote for tax reductions for those wealthier than themselves. Blissfully oblivous of their objective financial interests.
Agreed, I find it had to believe we have 3 people so far who make over 430k.People always identify themselves as being one or two tax brackets above what they really are.
It is this, that makes people vote for tax reductions for those wealthier than themselves. Blissfully oblivous of their objective financial interests.
Thread Ratings provided by
Thread Ratings (Lite) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2025 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2025 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2025 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO