Whose tax plan will save you more money?

[Ban my account ffs!]

I do have to say that McCain's plan is easier to swallow when you believe that everything the other side says is either a lie or a conspiracy.

[Chiahead]

This still goes back to the question, why punish the ones that make money by taking it away?  Equal take rates would make the system cheaper and force the government to perform an internal audit of spending instead of throwing it around like ticker tape

THE QUESTION IS YOU, NOT YOUR PARENTS.

From Porce's sig:



The answer for me is Obama, so I'm voting for him. The tax rate for anyone richer than me is something I will never ever care about and I'll never have any sympathy for anyone making more money than me in financial matters.

[Nym90]

Obamas' plan will indirectly increase taxes on the middle class and working class by taxing companies so much that prices will increase as a result.

More than $1000/year worth of increased prices? Doubtful.

[Beet]

When you rely on the lower and middle class to pay the brunt of hte taxes, like the current system, those said classes get angry and bitter and start pushing for lower taxes at all costs.  If the tax system is fair, people feel a lot better about it.

This is nothing but a myth. The wealthy already pay most of tax revenue, and they always have.
In the fiscal year 2006, the latest data is available from, the top 1%, aka those making more than $388,806 paid 39.89% of all income tax revenue. The top 10%, those making above $108,904, paid 70.79%. The top 50% paid almost all income tax revenue, at 97.01%. Any suggestion that the 'lower and middle classes' pay the brunt of taxes is delusion at best, and deception at worst.

The wealthy also paid the highest proportion of tax revenue in the highly unequal 1920's. When did the wealthiest pay the least proportion of tax revenue? 1963, near the nadir of the gini index for the 20th century. The actual causation is the reverse of what people intuitively think. Inequality => the wealthy have a disproportionate amount of wealth => the wealthy pay a higher proportion in taxes. If you want the tax burden to be more evenly distributed, enact policies that grow the middle class, so that the middle class has the income to actually pay more taxes.

This graphic says it all:

[Nym90]

When you rely on the lower and middle class to pay the brunt of hte taxes, like the current system, those said classes get angry and bitter and start pushing for lower taxes at all costs.  If the tax system is fair, people feel a lot better about it.

This is nothing but a myth. The wealthy already pay most of tax revenue, and they always have.
In the fiscal year 2006, the latest data is available from, the top 1%, aka those making more than $388,806 paid 39.89% of all income tax revenue. The top 10%, those making above $108,904, paid 70.79%. The top 50% paid almost all income tax revenue, at 97.01%. Any suggestion that the 'lower and middle classes' pay the brunt of taxes is delusion at best, and deception at worst.

The wealthy also paid the highest proportion of tax revenue in the highly unequal 1920's. When did the wealthiest pay the least proportion of tax revenue? 1963, near the nadir of the gini index for the 20th century. The actual causation is the reverse of what people intuitively think. Inequality => the wealthy have a disproportionate amount of wealth => the wealthy pay a higher proportion in taxes. If you want the tax burden to be more evenly distributed, enact policies that grow the middle class, so that the middle class has the income to actually pay more taxes.

This graphic says it all:

Pretty good evidence that demand side economics works better than supply side. Even the rich are better off under Democrats.

[ChrisFromNJ]

McCain will save me more money

Do you even work yet?

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

Obama's (according to the chart).  Where did that come from?

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

As far as I'm concerned, Obama's will as I only make 30k or so off of investments. As for my family, McCain for sure.

I also love how BRTD doesn't seem to want to aspire to make any more money than the meager wages he brings home right now.

[phk]

Obama - for me personally.

McCain for family.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

There are sure a lot of kids with rich parents on this forum. Of course, we're in a Bush economy, so me and almost everyone I know will save more money with Obama. I'm such an elitist liberal.

[??????????]

This would be one of the first Democrats in my memory to help me in the tax code. So I really doubt that Obama wouldn't raise taxes. Of course that chart is campaign propaganda, when the real tax issues hit the table he'll sign to raise them for "Americas Good". And of course, last night McCain said he'd raise the child exemption from 3,500 per child to 7,000, which would help me incredibly.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

As far as I'm concerned, Obama's will as I only make 30k or so off of investments. As for my family, McCain for sure.

I also love how BRTD doesn't seem to want to aspire to make any more money than the meager wages he brings home right now.

If I were making $100k, it'd still be Obama, and that's not meager. It's also more money than I could possibly spend, since I'll never do anything like buy a big house in the suburbs and no matter what would always have an apartment in the inner city.

[Verily]

Obama's (according to the chart).  Where did that come from?

Washington Post.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

As far as I'm concerned, Obama's will as I only make 30k or so off of investments. As for my family, McCain for sure.

I also love how BRTD doesn't seem to want to aspire to make any more money than the meager wages he brings home right now.

If I were making $100k, it'd still be Obama, and that's not meager. It's also more money than I could possibly spend, since I'll never do anything like buy a big house in the suburbs and no matter what would always have an apartment in the inner city.

That's fine I guess if you have no aspirations to get married, have a family etc. If you just want to live in the inner city slums with low income people all around you then you're fine.

[Dan the Roman]

Neither tax plan is real. I would prefer Obama simply because Democrats live more generally in the real world in terms of economics and revenue.

McCain would actually raise my expenses.
He would just borrow massive amounts of money which would send the dollar crashing - which would in turn raise my tuition at my school in Scotland. If the dollar went back to 2.10 to a pound like last Fall it would raise my fees 8,000$ which is more than I could possibly save from McCain's make believe tax cuts.

Obama has bs ideas to but at least he is grownup enough to believe in paying for them.

[Nym90]

Neither tax plan is real. I would prefer Obama simply because Democrats live more generally in the real world in terms of economics and revenue.

McCain would actually raise my expenses.
He would just borrow massive amounts of money which would send the dollar crashing - which would in turn raise my tuition at my school in Scotland. If the dollar went back to 2.10 to a pound like last Fall it would raise my fees 8,000$ which is more than I could possibly save from McCain's make believe tax cuts.

Obama has bs ideas to but at least he is grownup enough to believe in paying for them.

Good points. One also has to consider the economic benefit to each American of the spending Obama proposes on things like infrastructure, job training, etc. Difficult to quantify, but obviously the true costs and benefits of taxes are far more than just what you pay.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

As far as I'm concerned, Obama's will as I only make 30k or so off of investments. As for my family, McCain for sure.

I also love how BRTD doesn't seem to want to aspire to make any more money than the meager wages he brings home right now.

If I were making $100k, it'd still be Obama, and that's not meager. It's also more money than I could possibly spend, since I'll never do anything like buy a big house in the suburbs and no matter what would always have an apartment in the inner city.

That's fine I guess if you have no aspirations to get married, have a family etc. If you just want to live in the inner city slums with low income people all around you then you're fine.

You mean no older married couples live in Minneapolis? News to me. I guess all those couples at my district caucus and convention must've been from way out in the suburbs who for some reason decided to drive all the way in and fake residency in the area...

[Хahar 🤔]

As far as I'm concerned, Obama's will as I only make 30k or so off of investments. As for my family, McCain for sure.

I also love how BRTD doesn't seem to want to aspire to make any more money than the meager wages he brings home right now.

If I were making $100k, it'd still be Obama, and that's not meager. It's also more money than I could possibly spend, since I'll never do anything like buy a big house in the suburbs and no matter what would always have an apartment in the inner city.

That's fine I guess if you have no aspirations to get married, have a family etc. If you just want to live in the inner city slums with low income people all around you then you're fine.

You mean no older married couples live in Minneapolis? News to me. I guess all those couples at my district caucus and convention must've been from way out in the suburbs who for some reason decided to drive all the way in and fake residency in the area...

Do you have such aspirations? I recall you saying something to the opposite effect (though I may be conmfusing you with Boss Tweed or Eraserhead).