Thursday, September 11, 2008

Barack Obama versus John McCain Tax Cuts

Here is the full breakdown of Obama vs. McCain tax policy explained.

Source: Washington Post

Who Pays for Progress in Capitalism

In our capitalist society, whenever you espouse liberal ideas you are called anti-American or you plan on destroying market competitiveness. Countless single mothers have been given a helping hand in their worse hours so that they can feel human and have the dignity of hope.

Whoopi Goldberg proudly tells everyone that she was once in that position and she used the system to get back on her feet and we can all point to her success today. What if she did not have that chance, where would she be now? We know the benefit but we always listen to the well-to-do in our society who always complain that the government is not our aunt Suzie.

What could be wrong with a system that looks after the most vulnerable in our society and offer hope to anyone that's looking to better their standard of living. In life there's no free lunch so our infrastructure has to be maintained and paid for by the government. That is we the people: the government for the people, by the people in other words, the taxpayers.

The Tax Policy Center recently did some number crunching to demonstrate how Obama and McCain's tax policy would play out in the real world. It showed that people below the poverty line, under $19K would get $567 back under Obama whereas under McCain they would get a meager $19.

This simple arithmetic clearly shows who McCain cares about, where the emphasis for his presidency would focus and whom he would truly represent. If you earn between $227,000 to $603,000 per year, McCain would give you back $7,871 but if you make $19,000 per year, he would only give you $19. Listen - action speaks louder than words - Sarah Palin is a woman with 5-kids but is she really like you? Is she a Walmart mom as the Republicans like to refer to you?

The question that you must ask yourself today before you vote on November 4th. Which person do you feel most deserves a tax break and which person can better take care of herself? One person earns $227,000 gets $7,871 the other makes $19,000 but gets only $19. Who is McCain representing, the rich or the poor?

On the other hand, Obama gives you $567 if you earn $19,000 and he asks the woman that earns $227,000 to pay $12. Is this unreasonable? Can you see who has your interests at heart? Obama knows you are hurting and struggling to make ends meet so he gives you the break you deserve. This is a simple example but a powerful one in terms of a focus on the national issues because more people earn $19,000 a year than make $227,000.

You could argue that you could bake the best cherry pie but the best pie is determined by those eating the pies. Don't be fooled again, you need change that you can believe in.

1 comment:

Cameron said...

Don't forget this is supposed to be a tax cut, not free money. The lady who makes $19,000 only pays $460 today (10% of (19,000 - standard deduction - exemption)), yet Barack wants to not decrease her tax liability but actually give her money back...along with all the services the government provides (safety, medicare, schools, security). That woman would be paid to live here!

On the other hand, the person who earns $227,000 would currently pay $55,909 in taxes. And you think she should pay even more while the $19,000 person not only gets their tax bill wiped out but gets more money on top of that.

I agree that McCain's plan should provide more than $19 to the woman earning only $19,000 since that's only a 4.13% decrease while the rich woman gets a 14.08% decrease. Otherwise that's making the tax system less progressive, which is not a good thing. But those who currently pay more taxes SHOULD get more dollars back than those who pay less in taxes.

What I think would be fair is if they BOTH received 14.08% back. So the woman making $19,000 gets $64.77 taken off of her tax bill of $460. That way she will pay only $396 and the other woman will still pay a full $48,038. That gives an effective tax rate of 2.08% to the poor woman and an effective tax rate of 21.16%.

Don't forget that these are not handout checks - they are reductions in the tax that one must pay. I agree that if someone were giving away money that it would be good to give everyone the same amount or give poor people more, but that's not what this is. When everyone is given the same percentage tax cut, the tax system is still progressive and taxes wealthy people significantly more, as you can see in the difference between the tax rates: 2.08% and 21.16%.