The Obama Administration thread

[Smoking Guns]

Honest question here...under the Obama tax plan, a family earning $500,000 a year will see an annual tax increase of $11,200.

How on earth are these rich folk going to survive on $488,800 per year?  Smoking Guns, I know back during the pre-election build-up we tried to go item by item to show how a family could get by on $20,000/year.  Care to offer some advice to the poor souls earning 1/2 a mill per year???

 

With not debt, you can survive of $30,000 is what I said, especially if you are single, that is what I said.  If you have a family of 4 with $60,000 and live where cost of living is low, you can have a modest lifestyle.  Not everyone lives in Boston, New York, San Francisco, or Vail, Colorado.  Ha.

[russkwtx]

On the news today they said that for a family making over 250K a year, for every $10,000 more they make their taxes go up $300. My thought was that is entirely reasonable and they can afford it. After all, the last 20-25 years in this country (US) has seen an unprecedented increase in stratification. In other words, the rich got much richer, and the poor got much poorer. It is time to adjust that trend, and this seems to be an entirely reasonable way to do it. Obama not only is intelligent himself, but has some very smart people around him.

[D]

Would u listen to yourselves though?

Why should someone be so punished for busting their ass and being successful?

So someone who put themselves through school, sacrificed and worked very hard to get where they are and because of that, they get to foot the bill for everybody else?

I just don't necessarily agree with that.

I agree multi millionaires etc but 500k isn't the fortune most people are trying to make it out to be. Especially if that family has kids etc they are trying to put through college.

[russkwtx]

Would u listen to yourselves though?

Why should someone be so punished for busting their ass and being successful?

So someone who put themselves through school, sacrificed and worked very hard to get where they are should be penalized?

It is not punishment. It's called shared responsibility. The last 20 years have been very kind to the well off. Now it is their turn to help society and they have the means. To call it "punishment" is selfish. We all live here and benefit from public goods. We have shared problems. Those who are able to pay more should do so. If everyone only thought about themselves there would be no society and no community.

[C0ma]

Honest question here...under the Obama tax plan, a family earning $500,000 a year will see an annual tax increase of $11,200.

How on earth are these rich folk going to survive on $488,800 per year?  Smoking Guns, I know back during the pre-election build-up we tried to go item by item to show how a family could get by on $20,000/year.  Care to offer some advice to the poor souls earning 1/2 a mill per year???

 

Come on now, that is 11k extra on top of the 150k or so they already are gonna pay right?

True.  How ever will they live on only 10x the average household income? 

D just beat me to it... why should there be a punishment for being successfull?
I don't understand taxing a larger percentage of someone who makes more money... if it were a flat tax they would still be contributing the larger percentage of the total amount collected... why should the rich make the poor richer... why don't they try a little harder to make themselves richer.

Granted there are people in generally bad situations, but there are a fair number of people who just don't put forth the effort.

shared responsibility? in 2006 the top 10% paid 60% of the total tax collected... where is the sharing? raising that number is punishment.
source: http://www.taxfoundation.org/news/show/250.html

[D]

I think like I said multi Millionaires fine

but 500k to me isn't that much.

u figure 33 percent already goes to taxes, so they are already paying 165k or so!

So they bring in 335k

u factor in mortgage, car payment, child's education etc etc

Maybe they want to spend their elder years traveling the world? I think if people bust their ass and make something of themselves, they should have the ability to put some money away.


Take my friend for instance. Went to Dental School and yeah, he makes a lot of money BUT after he pays his business loan, student loans and employees, 500k doesn't go as far as u think it does, especially when u are paying out a couple hundred grand in salary, worker's comp, payroll tax etc etc

[russkwtx]

Excuse me, are you aware that the present tax system already "punishes" the "successful." Are you aware that higher income households pay a higher percentage? Have you ever heard of a graduated income tax system (which we have) whereby tax rates rise as income goes up? Hello, join the real world . You are presenting a bogus argument if you are attributing a progressive tax system to Obama. This progressive tax system, which is used throughout all capitalist nations, has existed for decades. And further, most of the "increase" will be due to letting the temporary Bush cuts expire, the cuts that reduced the top rate from 39 to 35 percent. That reduction led to an unprecedented shift in income in favor of the rich. So Obama will be returning to the norm, undoing the extreme prejudice of Bush in favor of the rich.

[russkwtx]

I think like I said multi Millionaires fine

but 500k to me isn't that much.

u figure 33 percent already goes to taxes, so they are already paying 165k or so!

So they bring in 335k

u factor in mortgage, car payment, child's education etc etc

Maybe they want to spend their elder years traveling the world? I think if people bust their ass and make something of themselves, they should have the ability to put some money away.


Take my friend for instance. Went to Dental School and yeah, he makes a lot of money BUT after he pays his business loan, student loans and employees, 500k doesn't go as far as u think it does, especially when u are paying out a couple hundred grand in salary, worker's comp, payroll tax etc etc

33 percent is the marginal tax rate. It is not on gross. There are deductions and exemptions. For example, we are in the 25 percent tax bracket.  But after all the exemptions and deductions the reality is that we pay about 12 percent of adjusted gross.

Do you people even know what you are talking about, in terms of real tax policy and real tax rates, or is this just all emotion?

[D]

I've always found it interesting how we give so much aide to all these countries, but yet we have no healthcare, our country is rotting from the inside out......  Japan and China and whoever else can come here and start industries, job outsourcing.... there has to be  a way to pull in the reigns, get this country back on its feet and then start being everyone's savior after our stuff is squared away.

I know so many 3rd world countries depend on our aide, but look at the inner cities right here in our own back yards.

The tax thing Russ. I see what u are saying and u are right. I know my mom owns several daycares, makes about 150k and after deductions etc, she ends up paying around 15-20 percent or so.

[C0ma]

I understand the graduated tax system... but why continue to turn to the top 10 percent to bail everyone out?

At the rate that "the savior" is pissing money away, it doesn't matter who pays what, generations will be paying off his budget presented today. Which is funny considering he made a pledge to cut earmark spending lastnight, then presented a budget with over 9000 earmarks worth over 7.7 billion dollars.

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1881855,00.html?iid=tsmodule

He plans on balancing the budget by the end of his first term, but presented a budget with a 1.75 trillion dollar deficit.

[SLCPUNK]

Yes, and why is he forced to spend in such a fashion? It couldn't be because the entire floor has dropped out from under everything could it?

[SLCPUNK]

Excuse me, are you aware that the present tax system already "punishes" the "successful." Are you aware that higher income households pay a higher percentage? Have you ever heard of a graduated income tax system (which we have) whereby tax rates rise as income goes up? Hello, join the real world . You are presenting a bogus argument if you are attributing a progressive tax system to Obama. This progressive tax system, which is used throughout all capitalist nations, has existed for decades. And further, most of the "increase" will be due to letting the temporary Bush cuts expire, the cuts that reduced the top rate from 39 to 35 percent. That reduction led to an unprecedented shift in income in favor of the rich. So Obama will be returning to the norm, undoing the extreme prejudice of Bush in favor of the rich.

You have to give it to Rove. If you can convince a portion of the public to defend this, many of whom are working class everyday Americans, then you're one helluva salesman.

[C0ma]

Yes, and why is he forced to spend in such a fashion? It couldn't be because the entire floor has dropped out from under everything could it?

This is the spending that is needed because the floor dropped out??:

projects such as $1.8 million for swine odor and manure management in Iowa, $190,000 for the Buffalo Bill Historical Center in Wyoming, $400,000 to combat bullying in Montana and $2.2 million to study grape genetics in New York... and on and on... there are 8996 more just like those. the 7.7 billion in pet projects is really going to help dig us out of the hole.

[SLCPUNK]

Infrastructure, jobs, research, whatever...anything to get it moving along.

What percentage of the stimulus does this make up? I've asked this before and have not received an answer.

Where were you from 01-08? I heard not a peep when Bush spent us deep into the red. Where were you then? Any concern about spending during the "conservative" administration?

If I recall I said Bush was bankrupting this country for nearly the last five years. I also claimed that his economy was basically a ponzi scheme and somebody would get left holding the bag. Guess what happened?

 Now it's time to fix it. You've got two very crappy choices, one is much worse than the other. Which one would you like to choose?

D just beat me to it... why should there be a punishment for being successfull?

Was it punishment for "being successful" when McCain voted against the tax cuts? Or when the cap gain rate was the same under Reagan? Just curious.

[SLCPUNK]

So here is a quick question for you. What would a project for manure management require? What would it produce (besides cow poo)?

Same for funding in regards to infrastructure. I heard my GOP MIL bellyaching about this. My reply was, who will lay the sod in the new park? Who will maintain it? Who will visit the new park? Who will irrigate it? What makes up the process and what is the end result? Is this more or less effective then sending everybody a check for 600 dollars?

You can throw the word "Pork" at anything you don't like, or just to make it ugly. But AIDS research/prevention does what? Does it create a job for somebody? Does it educate? Does it benefit society in anyway? How many spokes are on that one wheel alone? How does it help a community?

What does revamping a historical center do for a community? Could it bring in more visitors, thus increasing the overall revenue stream for the city? How would nearby restaurants be effected? Movie theaters? Hotels? Would this create a demand for repaving the city roads in the immediate area? Would that create jobs? On and on.....

So in that regard, I think what Obama is doing is unique and rather smart. He's taking a low point in America, and using it as a means to rebuild it from the ground up, figuratively and literally.

[SLCPUNK]

FACT CHECK: GOP adrift on small business claim

WASHINGTON ? Claims that President Barack Obama's tax plans are an assault on small business skirt the likelihood that most job-producing small businesses wouldn't feel that pinch at all.

Obama is proposing to raise taxes on households earning over $250,000 by increasing the rate on the top two tax brackets and limiting deductions, starting in 2011.

Republicans and other critics, knowing they will get little mileage from defending the rich, instead are casting the plan as a tax hit on people who run industrious little companies driving job growth.

That's not likely, according to one in-depth analysis, which found that more than 95 percent of small business owners would be off the hook.

Obama does not propose higher business taxes.

But critics reason that owners of many small companies report business income on their personal tax returns instead of filing corporate taxes. That exposes their business's earnings to Obama's higher tax rates on the wealthy.

To be sure, some business owners would get caught in that net.

But for one thing, most small businesses don't create jobs. They tend to be lawyers, accountants and other professionals who earn some of their money from partnerships or otherwise organize themselves as a business entity.

As well, many small businesses with employees don't earn enough to put their owners over the threshold for the higher tax rates.

Indeed, most of them ? like Joe the Plumber of presidential campaign fame ? would probably get Obama's tax break for the middle class.

Obama also proposes to eliminate capital gains taxes on small businesses and make a research tax credit permanent. He would expand a provision that allows money-losing companies to get refunds from taxes paid in previous years, when the companies were profitable.

Still, Obama is not cutting taxes for 95 percent of Americans, as his supporters often say. The president himself asserted Thursday that he's giving a "a middle-class tax cut to 95 percent of hardworking families."

An independent analysis estimated that 75.5 percent of all U.S. households would get his tax credit for workers. A higher percentage of working families would get it.

THE CLAIMS:

_"In fact, a majority of those penalized by the proposed tax increase in this budget are small businesses." ? Republican Rep. Eric Cantor of Virginia.

_"Small businesses and the entrepreneurs who lead them have been the primary drivers of job growth over the past decade. This plan would punish them with higher taxes, resulting in less government revenue, less economic growth, and fewer jobs ? not more." ? Bruce Josten of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

THE FACTS:

The U.S. has roughly 6 million businesses that employ people, and 20 million businesses without employees.

The latter group includes solo operators, professionals in partnerships and those who organize themselves as a business for tax purposes but earn little if any income from the enterprise.

Small businesses are defined as having fewer than 500 workers each.

Sizable companies within that group wouldn't be snagged by Obama's personal tax rates simply because they are too large to report income on the individual return of the owner.

Many truly small operations simply don't make enough to qualify for the tax hit.

Last year the Tax Policy Center run jointly by the Urban Institute and Brookings Institution examined the likely effects of Obama's plans to raise taxes on couples making over $250,000.

The analysis estimated that 663,000 taxpayers who report business income or losses fall in the two tax brackets whose rates would go up under Obama. Many are small businesses on paper, without workers.

Millions of other small-business owners would be clear.

[freedom78]

Would u listen to yourselves though?

Why should someone be so punished for busting their ass and being successful?

So someone who put themselves through school, sacrificed and worked very hard to get where they are and because of that, they get to foot the bill for everybody else?

I just don't necessarily agree with that.

I agree multi millionaires etc but 500k isn't the fortune most people are trying to make it out to be. Especially if that family has kids etc they are trying to put through college.

First, I reject the idea that taxes are a punishment.  Without them, we have no roads, no national defense, no schools, etc.  Libertarians want you to believe that the market would provide these things.  What would REALLY happen is that the market would provide great roads and schools where rich folks are concentrated, and jack shit elsewhere.

500K is ten times the average HOUSEHOLD income (numbers that need adjusting, given that those rich folks are firing all the poor/middle class folks).  So, let's say you make 500K.  Your top income falls into the 35% bracket, and overall you pay just over 150K in taxes.  You now have 350,000 on which to live.  You have two kids in college.  I'll average the public/private costs, and say that this means you're spending 30,000 on college that year, assuming that they didn't put any of their meager income away to save for college (i.e. they're retarded).  Down to a pittance...only $320,000!  Now, let's assume that they live in Manhattan.  $320,000 there is like living on $132,000 in the suburb where I live.  Granted, it's their own fucking fault for living there, right, and they could make up that amount by living in another part of NYC.  Anyway, $132,000 is enough to live very well pretty much anywhere in the country (keeping in mind that it's REALLY $320,000, but we're downgrading it because our example lives in Manhattan).  Now, if Obama has his way, those Bush tax cuts on such individuals will roll back those upper tax brackets.  An estimate from the tax policy center estimates that those making 500K would pay another 12K in taxes under the Obama plan.  That means $308,000.  Which is still, after paying taxes and tuition, SIX TIMES the average household income BEFORE those people pay their own taxes.   

Now, let's take a normal person.  You make $30K, and that's $26,000 after taxes.  Boy, you're gettin' off easy.  Those low taxes are the key to the good life!  Now, you put your two kids through school, and suddenly you have -$4000.  You pay your rent, food bills, and all that...CONGRATULATIONS!  You're living the fucking American dream! 

Sorry, D, but it's time to reward those who bust their asses to MAKE some people rich.  The amount of money you make is not highly correlated with the extent to which you're a "hard worker".  Shame, really.  A meritocracy for the self-motivated?  I think most people could accept that.  But we have a meritocracy for the trust fund kids and people who just had the sheer dumb luck to not be born into poverty. 

Maybe they want to spend their elder years traveling the world? I think if people bust their ass and make something of themselves, they should have the ability to put some money away.

With the $308,000 they have left after tuition and taxes, I'm willing to bet they can pay the mortgage and still save for retirement.

[C0ma]

I love how you word it to make it seem like making 10 times the average annual household income is a crime. Or that living in an area with a higher cost of living than you is their 'fault'.

I understand there are people born into bad situations and they could give 500% of themsleves and never do better than almost scraping by... but at the same time there are plenty of people who do this to themselves by dropping out of highschool. Last I checked public highschool didn't require tuition so poverty has nothing to do with graduation... that is pure and simple lazyness. Lack of money doesn't make you too stupid to graduate... an auto plant in Detroit shutting down doesn't somehow make kids unable to go to school 180 days a year.

It's those people who dominate the 'poverty bracket'...

So I ask, why raise the already higher tax rate on the successfull to help out a large number of people who don't do enough to help themselves... after all if you removed the people who have done this to themselves from the handout line, then there would be more to go around for the people who have been born into generally bad situations or have been dealt a very bad hand later in life (and I don't mean lack of education based on dropping out).

I just cannot get on board with the people who have been 'responsible' having to be responsible for those who weren't.

[C0ma]

So here is a quick question for you. What would a project for manure management require? What would it produce (besides cow poo)?

Same for funding in regards to infrastructure. I heard my GOP MIL bellyaching about this. My reply was, who will lay the sod in the new park? Who will maintain it? Who will visit the new park? Who will irrigate it? What makes up the process and what is the end result? Is this more or less effective then sending everybody a check for 600 dollars?

You can throw the word "Pork" at anything you don't like, or just to make it ugly. But AIDS research/prevention does what? Does it create a job for somebody? Does it educate? Does it benefit society in anyway? How many spokes are on that one wheel alone? How does it help a community?

What does revamping a historical center do for a community? Could it bring in more visitors, thus increasing the overall revenue stream for the city? How would nearby restaurants be effected? Movie theaters? Hotels? Would this create a demand for repaving the city roads in the immediate area? Would that create jobs? On and on.....

So in that regard, I think what Obama is doing is unique and rather smart. He's taking a low point in America, and using it as a means to rebuild it from the ground up, figuratively and literally.

How many full time employees do you think the Buffalo Bill Center in Wyoming will require? That one should pack the hotels in greater Cheyenne.

Manure cleanup... other than getting rid of the greatest cause of 'Global Warming' (methane gas) will create several jobs for a short period of time...

My biggest complaint about all of this job creation is that they are planning a job spike around government infrastructure projects (which tend to last a few years), so what happens when that bridge, or re-paving job is complete? Why don't you ask the pool of laid off workers in MA who were brushed aside when the Big Dig ended.
Government job creation like this is a flimsy band-aid. A temp fix that is around just long enough for people to pat themselves on the back for 'fixing' the problem.

So while I agree that something needs to be done, I don't belive that this trillion dollar bailout, or Obama's new 3.5 trillion dollar budget (that puts us another 1.75 trillion dollars in the hole) will accomplish a whole lot.

I hope I'm surprised and he can accomplish what he claims he will by the end of his first term... but I don't see how pushing thru the spending he is talking about (while only raising taxes on 250K+) will lead to balancing the budget. He will need to lower that ceiling from 250K, but where does that stop?

[TheWalkinDude]

Would u listen to yourselves though?

Why should someone be so punished for busting their ass and being successful?

So someone who put themselves through school, sacrificed and worked very hard to get where they are and because of that, they get to foot the bill for everybody else?

I just don't necessarily agree with that.

I agree multi millionaires etc but 500k isn't the fortune most people are trying to make it out to be. Especially if that family has kids etc they are trying to put through college.

First, I reject the idea that taxes are a punishment.  Without them, we have no roads, no national defense, no schools, etc.  Libertarians want you to believe that the market would provide these things.  What would REALLY happen is that the market would provide great roads and schools where rich folks are concentrated, and jack shit elsewhere.

500K is ten times the average HOUSEHOLD income (numbers that need adjusting, given that those rich folks are firing all the poor/middle class folks).  So, let's say you make 500K.  Your top income falls into the 35% bracket, and overall you pay just over 150K in taxes.  You now have 350,000 on which to live.  You have two kids in college.  I'll average the public/private costs, and say that this means you're spending 30,000 on college that year, assuming that they didn't put any of their meager income away to save for college (i.e. they're retarded).  Down to a pittance...only $320,000!  Now, let's assume that they live in Manhattan.  $320,000 there is like living on $132,000 in the suburb where I live.  Granted, it's their own fucking fault for living there, right, and they could make up that amount by living in another part of NYC.  Anyway, $132,000 is enough to live very well pretty much anywhere in the country (keeping in mind that it's REALLY $320,000, but we're downgrading it because our example lives in Manhattan).  Now, if Obama has his way, those Bush tax cuts on such individuals will roll back those upper tax brackets.  An estimate from the tax policy center estimates that those making 500K would pay another 12K in taxes under the Obama plan.  That means $308,000.  Which is still, after paying taxes and tuition, SIX TIMES the average household income BEFORE those people pay their own taxes.   

Now, let's take a normal person.  You make $30K, and that's $26,000 after taxes.  Boy, you're gettin' off easy.  Those low taxes are the key to the good life!  Now, you put your two kids through school, and suddenly you have -$4000.  You pay your rent, food bills, and all that...CONGRATULATIONS!  You're living the fucking American dream! 

Sorry, D, but it's time to reward those who bust their asses to MAKE some people rich.  The amount of money you make is not highly correlated with the extent to which you're a "hard worker".  Shame, really.  A meritocracy for the self-motivated?  I think most people could accept that.  But we have a meritocracy for the trust fund kids and people who just had the sheer dumb luck to not be born into poverty. 

Maybe they want to spend their elder years traveling the world? I think if people bust their ass and make something of themselves, they should have the ability to put some money away.

With the $308,000 they have left after tuition and taxes, I'm willing to bet they can pay the mortgage and still save for retirement.

I love your continued attack on Libertarianism as if it had been tried and failed.  I guess the industrial revolution and the existence of the US up until the New Deal is just a smudge on the paper.  I know you've got a Marx complex and are one of those few, young Academics who continue to portray the idea that Marxism just hasn't been given a real shot, despite the millions killed and affected by its execution.  I though Jundt did a good amount of work in labeling modern Marxists as intellectually laxy, but I guess some still persist. 

Taxation as itself isn't punishment; it's a necessity for the continued existence of our government.  Taxing individuals differently based on their income and redistributing it to others in lower brackets is punishment and at the same time, rewards those who make bad decisions.  People just don't magically wake up one day with a house they can no longer afford and a family they can't feed.  I know no one likes to make personal judgements under the guise of moral ambiguity, but if you're losing your home, it is more than likely because YOU made bad decisions and didn't live within your means.  We can sit here all day and toss pies back and forth at each other as to whom is to blame, but at its most basic cause is the failure of Joe and Jane America to behave fiscally responsible.  I know, I know, our government under Bush didn't set a proper example of fiscal responsibility.  Well, so what?  Since when did looking to the government for advice become a good idea or even the "American" thing to do.

The economy is going to rebound in a bout a year without any action from Obama or Congress.  I realized this under Bush and now see it under Obama; they're using scare tactics to push control down our throats.  Bush is ultimately responsible for all of this as he set every ounce of ground work, but Obama is chugging right along and doing his part to dramatically expand the size and scope of the government.  A flat tax is the way to go.  We need massive downsizing of our government; not one federal employee was let go during these hard times.  Much of the garbage that was put into the stimulus bill is business as usual and can be found in any bill in Washington.  Users fees and tolls would alleviate much of the fraud, waste and abuse that comes from the government.  This country was doing quite fine while it followed Libertarian principles, only as it has grown in size and added regulations have issues risen.