Welcome to PatsFans.com

Obama's Tax Plan Is Really a Welfare Plan

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by patsfan13, Aug 19, 2008.

  1. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,745
    Likes Received:
    74
    Ratings:
    +160 / 7 / -13

    OP ED from the WSJ analyzing BO Tax plan. If you are for a socialist redistribution of wealth this plan is ofr you.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121910303529751345.html?mod=opinion_main_commentaries



    This will be a real job killer..:mad:.
  2. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,546
    Likes Received:
    178
    Ratings:
    +425 / 10 / -11

    #24 Jersey

    "The latest Congressional Budget Office data shows the bottom 40% of income earners already pays no income taxes. Indeed, they receive a net payment from the federal income tax system -- meaning from the taxpayers -- equal to 3.8% of all federal income taxes, because of the refundable tax credits under current law. The middle 20% of income earners, the true middle class, pays 4.4% of federal income taxes.

    Overall, the bottom 60% of income earners pay less than 1% of federal income taxes on net."
  3. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    39,822
    Likes Received:
    170
    Ratings:
    +537 / 2 / -9

    I can't wait until this Messiah God comes into power and starts screwing the people but of course they will find some way to blame all the Messiah's "screw ups" on the Bush Family, Reagan and Rush Limbaugh.
  4. ljuneau

    ljuneau Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2007
    Messages:
    1,286
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    Absolutely! As indictated on your quote, a new payroll tax on employers? This will cause many businesses to go out of business or simply move overseas. Of course, the great BO, says this is all in the name of "fairness".
  5. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign On the Roster

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    26,502
    Likes Received:
    134
    Ratings:
    +341 / 3 / -13

    What range is the true middle class you refer to? I'm 100% against Obama's tax plan. I already had my 401K contributions cut down to the minimum and I'm virtually cut out of contributing to Roth IRA's.

    What I really don't understand about our laws on retirement if that they don't account for hardship cases. I made peanuts for years, got laid off twice for extensive periods of time, but I'm still restricted as to how much I can contribute because I make too much. I'm not bragging at all because I'm wayyyy behind the 8-ball in retirement.

    I think the laws shouldn't apply to those who don't have enough saved. Is it me, or does that not perfect sense? If I had zero in my retirement and suddenly made $500,000/yr, I SHOULD be able to at least sock away the max of $15,500/yr. It's not about how much you make, but how much you have saved up. But there are laws against that.

    BTW...I'm dead against paying any more taxes than I've been paying.
    Last edited: Aug 19, 2008
  6. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign On the Roster

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    26,502
    Likes Received:
    134
    Ratings:
    +341 / 3 / -13

    Where I DO believe in fairness is with children. No child should get an inferior education because of where they live. All public schools should be equal. I have absolutely no flexiblility on this issue.
  7. FreeTedWilliams

    FreeTedWilliams pfadmins PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Messages:
    5,328
    Likes Received:
    54
    Ratings:
    +132 / 31 / -3

    #75 Jersey

    That as well intentioned as it is, is an absolute pipe dream. Public schools are a direct flection of the towns that they serve. The only thing the government does is screw them up even more. The highest money paid per student is in the Washington DC school district (I think it is something like $12,000 a student), and you would be better off just handing that money to the kids, and letting them either pay for a private education, or start a business or something, anything would be a better use of that money than what the DC schools do with it.

    Public schools, need to either be eliminated, (where in the constitution does it say anything about the government must provide schools?) or more likely, made to compete for their money with private schools (yes, vouchers).

    I throw every penny I pay in school taxes away into the Savannah school system, which I would not send my dog to, let alone a child. The only way to fix these schools, is to force them to get better, and the only way to do that, is to make them compete with private schools.

    Sure, back when I lived on Long Island, we had an excellent school system, that is because it was run on the town level, and most towns in Massachusetts have decent school systems, however I'm sure that your not sending your kids to school in Lynn. Name one large city whose public school system is not loaded with graft, administration, and bad tests scores.
    Last edited: Aug 19, 2008
  8. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,546
    Likes Received:
    178
    Ratings:
    +425 / 10 / -11

    #24 Jersey

    You aren't going to get public schools being equal. The best you can hope for is that all kids get a chance. Unfortunately the best way to do that is to allow expulsions for disruptive behavior when it's clear the behavior won't change. A large percentage of misbehaving kids or kids not allowing others to participate is a part of what can bring schools down.
  9. MrBigglesWorth

    MrBigglesWorth Rookie

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2006
    Messages:
    8,338
    Likes Received:
    16
    Ratings:
    +16 / 0 / -0

    donations to other countries are welfare also. We exploit other countries and make tons of money off of them and use their land and in turn give them "Aid"
  10. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,745
    Likes Received:
    74
    Ratings:
    +160 / 7 / -13



    Any specific examples here with a link??? Mostly we trade they sell them something we provide money and/or other goods/ Frequently their economic systems (lack of economic/political freedom is the issue). PJ O'Rouke's book Eat the Rich did a good and humorous job of illustrating this.
  11. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    20,367
    Likes Received:
    252
    Ratings:
    +430 / 6 / -9

    Oh oh. What if they're the kids of the lower 40%, those freeloading bastards?

    Yep, I'm for the socalled socialist redistribution.

    Get your head around this, folks: We have large institutions that can pay corporate executives in the hundreds of millions of dollars per year in bonuses. Other top level execs are similarly compensated. This money is paid from profits in good times. So far so good, they're good at what they do, rehrhehreh what the market will bear rehrehrehreh... etc.

    Then when the corporation is sucking hind tit for a year, we declare it Too Big To Fail. And we're right. It will take down concentric circles of the economy with it.

    Solution? Taxpayer bailout of the wealthy.

    Whine to me about "socialism" when we've cut out socialism for the rich.

    By the way, think about what happens in these constant bubbles we generate:

    1) Bubble begins inflating. Everybody tries to juice their future returns by buying in. Financial institutions make a killing in fees and loans to the extent these are extended (they played a huge role, of course, in the housing bubble)

    2) Financial press declares the fundamentals no longer apply (see "new economy" of the dot coms and utilities, the recent real estate oversell)

    3) Bubble peaks then collapses. Anybody who's leveraged is left with debt proportionate to the difference between peak price and collapsed price.

    4) Result: We talk about engines of wealth creation, when in fact they are engines of debt creation. In the process some things are produced, supporting the economy. But the real end product is debt.

    5) Again, the financial institutions end up as the winners - until they get greedy and create bad debt.

    6) When the financial sector overexposes itself, Taxpayers step in and foot the bill.

    Especially as we ponder retirement, we are in search of returns that can match the historical rate of the 20th century, 5.3% per annum, because we know we're looking at alpo otherwise (or at least, a sub-optimal retirement solution.)

    The trouble is that to match the 20th century's market performance, we need the Dow to hit 2 million by the year 2100. Eight years into the twenty-first century, we've got about 2000 points under our belts, and the Dow bounces around between 11,000 and 12,000. 1,987,000 to go dudes.

    This nation does less redistribution than almost any other Western industrial (or if you prefer "post industrial") economy. Predictably, our indicators of social welfare are among the poorest.

    I understand very wealthy people with the perspective that the Invisible Hand of the Market will address all ills adequately. Unfortunately for the rest of us, the Invisible Hand is typically flipping its invisible middle finger.

    PFnV
  12. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,745
    Likes Received:
    74
    Ratings:
    +160 / 7 / -13

    So I am a small businessman, I make say $300k, under BO me marginal rate is 39.6%, since there is now no limit on SS 'contributions I pay another 12.3% in payroll taxes and another 2.9% for medicare taxes. If he live in NJ or NJ he is paying another 8% in state taxes, 7% sales taxes and say 12K in prop taxes. This doesn't count the new payrioll taxes for the 'free' healthcare....

    So we are looking at 63.2% of his income, adding in the 12k against this is another 3% of his income ( I had a 1800 sq ft home and paid $7,200 in prop taxes) figuring in the 7% sales taxes you are looking at OVER $200K in taxes for a guy working 60+ hrs a week running a business.

    Ain't socialism wonderful. Eat the rich indeed.
  13. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign On the Roster

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    26,502
    Likes Received:
    134
    Ratings:
    +341 / 3 / -13

    No offense, but how foolish would it be (theoretically) for someone to buy an 1800 sq ft home and pay $7,200 in prop taxes? That doesn't sound too bright. And it certainly would be a CHOICE to pay that high a tax rate.

    On another note, you make a few valid points. No one making $300K/yr should have to pay more than half of that to the government...that would be sad. But I do think he/she should pay more as a PERCENTAGE than someone making $100K...never mind $50K
    Last edited: Aug 19, 2008
  14. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,745
    Likes Received:
    74
    Ratings:
    +160 / 7 / -13



    Taxes were $2400 ten yrs earliw=er when we bought the house. Lib gov in NJ, State totally run by dems.
  15. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,745
    Likes Received:
    74
    Ratings:
    +160 / 7 / -13

    What is a 'fair' % in your opinion?
  16. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign On the Roster

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    26,502
    Likes Received:
    134
    Ratings:
    +341 / 3 / -13

    You ALWAYS ask the same question!:rolleyes:

    What is a fair percentage for what income level? I'm not a tax expert and neither are you. But I'm a favor of a graduated system with bare minimal deductions....just straight up tax rate

    Maybe those with incomes above $500K don't need any exemptions. that would be a good place to start. Don't get me wrong, I don't favor a huge gap in the graduations. However, I STRONGLY favor eliminating shelters of any kind.

    Simplify the system so no one is fooled. Spell it out so a simpleton can understand it...Hey, do you think Tax Lawyers and accountants have a lobby to keep the system complicated PF13?;)
  17. BelichickFan

    BelichickFan B.O. = Fugazi PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    31,546
    Likes Received:
    178
    Ratings:
    +425 / 10 / -11

    #24 Jersey

    I think it's because no-one ever answers it.

    That's fine as long as you include "shelters" such as the Earned Income Tax Credit, Home Mortgage, Dependents, etc. They're tax shelters too.
  18. PatriotsReign

    PatriotsReign On the Roster

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2007
    Messages:
    26,502
    Likes Received:
    134
    Ratings:
    +341 / 3 / -13

    And that's fine, as long as the system is graduated. I had already stated that a possibility would be those earning over a certain amount (I used $500K) could not deduct for dependents. But in retrospect, that would reward having large families.

    I would rather do away with all write-offs, simplify the system so we'd all know how much everyone is paying. That's the big secret in America...no one really knows how much the other guy is paying and that should be known even before they pay thier taxes.

    No one should have problem filling out an annual tax form. It's not rocket science.

    Here is an example;

    0-20,000 0%
    20,000-30,000 8%
    30,000-40,000 9%
    40,000-50,000 10%
    50,000-60,000 11%
    60,000-70,000 12%
    70,000-80,000 13%
    80,000-90,000 14%
    90,000-100,000 15%
    100,000-120,000 16%
    120,000-130,000 17%
    140,000-150,000 18%
    150,000-160,000 19%
    160,000-170,000 20%
    170,000-180,000 21%
    180,000-190,000 22%
    190,000-200,000 23%
    200,000-240,000 25%
    240,000-300,000 27%
    300,000-400,000 30%
    400,000+ 33%

    In reviewing the above, maybe the begining tax levels would be lower and shift some other rates downward. 8% would be tough to pay for those earning 20-30K, so maybe start at 5%

    If this was applied to everyone without exception, I'd be willing to bet the IRS would collect a net increase in revenue. It's just so hard to know because we don't know what income levels have actually paid after exemptions, write-offs, etc.

    Of course, right now it would be tough to talk about eliminating a mortgage deduction.
    Last edited: Aug 20, 2008
  19. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,745
    Likes Received:
    74
    Ratings:
    +160 / 7 / -13

    Thanks I think the rates are a bit too high, but I appreciate your willing to be post your idea of fair. I of course favor a 17% flat tax with a personal expmption of ~15k indexed for inflation with no exemptions. I would apply this to both personal income and cap gains. IMO that would be very progressive.
    IE family of 4 would pay income taxes till their income went past %+$60k

    OTOH a family of 4 making a mil would have the same exemptions and would pay a fed income tax of ~ 160k, That seems fair to me.
  20. ljuneau

    ljuneau Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2007
    Messages:
    1,286
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    I believe changing the tax system to something similar to the fair tax would be best for our economy. It would encourage economic growth and personal savings.

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>