Yet Another Obama Smear E-mail
Recently I and three hundred of my correspondent’s closest friends received an e-mail claiming that Barack Obama would be raising taxes on home sales, dividend taxes, income taxes, inheritance taxes, and would also be creating a handful of new taxes on common expenses. This same e-mail claims that Senator McCain will make no changes on the current tax rates and will add no new taxes. What a noble thing to do, Senator. However, much to the chagrin of the McCain camp, this e-mail is entirely untrue.
Though Obama may raise some of these taxes, none of the increases would be nearly as high as the e-mail claims, and even then the raise would only affect those who make $250,000 a year or more. Seeing as the economy is in horrible shape, very few people are making that kind of salary, and those who are can afford the minimal extra taxes. Additionally, Senator Obama has not proposed any of the ridiculous new taxes brought up in this e-mail.
For reputable information, it’s best to turn to Barack Obama’s own statements. Barackobama.com is an excellent resource for Obama’s stances on a multitude of issues, and also offers videos of the senator discussing his plans for the future.
For more information on the lack of authenticity of the latest smear e-mail, see: http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/would_obama_tax_my_profits_if_i.ht...
And remember, anyone can write and send an e-mail. Know your sources.
- Sarah Thornborough's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- 668 reads
Taxes - Another perspective
From Sarah Thornborough - "very few people are making that kind of salary, and those who are can afford the minimal extra taxes..."
I agree Sarah. No one I personally know has a salary in excess of $250,000. However, many people I know EARN in excess of $250,000. My salary is zero. My EARNED income last year was $261,342. I worked about 85 hours a week to EARN that income. I could argue that I should be exempt from the Obama tax increase since on a full time basis I earned about $122,000 (my income based on a 40 hour workweek).
Most of my friends in Granville EARNED an income as great or greater than mine. None of us has a salary. We take considerable risks to earn a very nice income. My taxes last year were just over $109,000 federal, state, local, property and self-employment taxes. Obama and you believe that I can afford the "minimal" extra taxes. The $109,000 I paid last year don't seem very minimal. With my "surplus" income I can reinvest back into my business or pay more taxes. If I reinvest here in Granville, I'll likely support a few good people who receive a salary less than mine.
For the first time in my adult life (sounds erieily like Michelle Obama)I chose to reinvest into property outside of the United States. The anticipated Obama tax increase makes it a much easier decision to reinvest my "surplus earnings subject to Obama taxation" in a foreign country where the bribes to conduct business are far less than the tax burdens in Ohio.
For me at least, the taxes to do business in Granville have passed the "minimal" level. Additional taxation will drive my earnings and capital out of North America.
earned and unearned income
Not to get overly technical, but I'd like to remind people that "earned income" includes wages, salary, tips, commissions and bonuses. Unearned income includes interest, dividends and capital gains. Business profits are considered "income" for tax purposes -- "earned income" in Ohio but not everywhere. Federally, business profits are considered income, but the earned/unearned distinction has no relevance.
I think there's an effort here to add a moral overtone to "earned income" and conflate it with an economic meaning. In fact, "earned income" as a tax concept, an economic idea and a moral value share a name but not always a meaning.
Buknut is on the right track when he implies that marginal tax rates are important. Good tax policy covers a wide range of income and has low marginal tax rates. The policy of broad base/low rates creates a tax system that doesn't distort the economy. However, our political system grants hundreds of tax breaks -- for mortgages, retirement funds, oil drilling, capital gains, children, etc. We compensate with higher marginal rates. An affluent Granville resident faces a top marginal rate (state/local/federal) of about 42%. This is fairly low compared to other industrialized nations, but still high enough to potentially slow economic growth. This rate can be deceptive, though, because it applies only to "taxable" income and that can be raised and lowered, especially by businesses, to meet tax needs. In other words, there are two sides of the equation -- taxable income and tax rates -- that make up the real-world effective tax rate.
I'd be happy to go on. Tax policy is so fascinating. Why do people avoid me at parties?
Give the kid a break ;o)
how's the quote go about all college kids should be liberals until they EARN their first paycheck, then they become republicans.
Nospin-
Thank you for your “defense” of me, but there is no need to protect me from big bad buknut. I may be young, and, yes, I’m still dependent on my parents, but that does not mean I am so sheltered that I am oblivious to how thinks really work. I work for paychecks. I’ve had my pay checks taxed. Hell, the only thing I’ve bought to treat myself in the last two weeks was a $3 sub sandwich. At this point I’ve started to pay for more practical things—medical care, toiletries, GASOLINE—and, though on a smaller level, I know what it feels like to have money be tight. Despite this, I still prioritize the ideals of the Democratic Party above my greed for spare cash. I don’t vote based on how the outcome will affect my personal situation, but instead based on how the decision will affect the country as a whole. If this makes me naïve, then I only hope I can stay naïve well into my adult life.
Sarah:
My comments weren't really in 'defense' of you or your positions, I just felt you had the right to speak you mind with regard to taxation, the economy, and you politics. I have a pretty fair grasp on taxes and the economy as much of my business focuses on exactly those areas.
I'm sure we disagree on the much of the political spectrum, and my comment about college political perspective and post college politics was simply a thought to the PJ O'Roarke quote. Nothing more. I have several friends in the mid to late 30s who are really starting to make a lot of money, and I know that politically, they are all over the map. I don't discount their friendship over national politics, and truthfully the whole vitriolic tone of today's political 'debates' are really unappealing to me.
It's great that you're starting to pay your own way, and that you are involved in various endeavors for all the right reasons.
I tend not to mix tax policy and politics. Most politicians don't understand tax policy, but feel they deserve a place at the decision making table. No party has done well with tax policy power in hand, and even those that tried to "fix" our tax policy issues (think: Contract with America) couldn't live under the new rules, so they ALL simply went back into their tax and spend ways. Both parties are guilty, and are so hungry for power that they've forgotton who they work for in DC.
Any way, I'll lay low as too many people get their panties in a bunch over some of the silliest things.
good luck
What is fair taxation?
"A tax that someone else has to pay."
But seriously, what are the the most reasonable options and the advantages and disadvantages of each?
Good question....
Flat tax....everyone above a certain income (?)pays the same rate,including corporations?
Suggested reading for Sarah
The Tipping Point (Malcolm Gladwell) reminds us that individuals and society will tend to move in one direction until a critical point is reached where the next small increment will cause a major event. Taxation and the public confiscation of private rights (and responsibilities) have seen this previously and I suggest we at at the brink of the tipping point again. One more dollar of unnecessary taxation will result in a major anti-tax, anti-government shift.
After you've finished the Tipping Point, try the Federalist Papers (those written by Hamilton are the best) and then the complete works of Gingrich. You still are in need of an education.
The audacity of judging
So I guess anyone who disagrees with you is "in need of an education"? Why assume she hasn't already read your recommendations? Perhaps she'd have a reading list for you. The best democracies have disagreement (uncensored) and debate- graciously. Perhaps there's a book on patriotic investiing? That would serve your paycheck AND the country.
right on, sarah! singlepie
right on, sarah!
singlepie
Forget about them......
Don't feel as though you ever have to explain yourself to people like buknut. A forum such as this is the only place where folks like him(her?) can feel like their opinions matter to other folks...the name calling,slander and disrespect for others opinions is pathetic.
Oh the irony
Might I be the first to say that hypocrisy looks good on you?
too much time???
Submitted by ct on Wed, 07/09/2008 - 13:17.
The GPress has too much time on its hands ,eh, cyclenut? You're on this site at least as much as anyone. I guess you get a break from pulling wings off of flies and burning ants with a magnifying glass when it rains like it has this last week.
Touche'...
Good one. I was out of line with my comments.
Perhaps....
In response to NoSpin's comment re the naiveté of college students and other democrat/liberal leaning people learning to be Republicans by seeing their paychecks docked taxes, perhaps there's another way to look at it. Perhaps those naive college students believe that there's more to life than the size of the paycheck. Perhaps they very wisely believe that good, hardworking people can fall on hard times and need programs those all-important tax dollars pay for like job retraining. Perhaps they realize that it could be anyone who has the special needs child, or mentally ill parent or friend who needs those tax-paid programs that improve their lives and lessen the burden and fears of those who love them. Perhaps they believe that it's important to practice their faith of helping those who need help rather than just sitting in a church pew. Perhaps it's not all about the size of the paycheck.
So.....
If Sarah will end up a Republican when she cashes her first paycheck, then that would mean that her parents are Neo-Cons,right?
The quote you mentioned nospin was from PJ O'Rourke,by the way.
Ooh, I want to gang up on college student liberals too!
The day that Sarah's parents turn into Neo-Cons is the day I turn into Hunter S. Thompson.
I think that some sort of flippant remark about college students and liberalism is a big intellectual cop-out..."oh, I can pretty much ignore all of this, because she doesn't have any realworld experience/perspective/mommy and daddy pay for everything blahblahblah". Maybe I'm biased too, but I don't think thats the case here at all.
I believe that YesMan's numbers are the correct ones. Bucknut does off up a possibly valid concern straight from GOP central casting...if we raise taxes on the rich, they might very well move their investments elsewhere. Its possible (although if high taxes were your major concern, you're not making a brilliant move by living in Granville). However, That risk doesn't change the fact that we pretty much just paid of two wars on credit, and we're going to have to come up with some more bread to pay that off. Its a drag...but blame it on Bush. Obama didn't start any wars.
the college kid has it right
If a tax increase applies only to income above $250,000, the increase in taxes on $269,000 would be relatively small. Obama wants to eliminate the Bush tax cuts on income over $250,000, which would raise the marginal rate from 35% to 39.6%. That would cost buknut about $875 -- less than 1% of buknut's total tax burden. The $875 would be redirected to tax cuts for lower income groups.
By comparison, the Bush tax cuts saved about $15,000 a year for someone making $269,000 a year -- more if the income was generated by dividends or capital gains.
A shift in the distribution of taxes is not the same thing as a tax increase or a tax decrease. You have to net the numbers. There's a strong argument to be made that taxes should increase to starve the best -- that is, to limit government spending. When people feel the cost of their consumption, they limit spending. These tax-cut-and-spend Republicans have pursued an illusion of free-riding that has created huge fiscal and economic problems. But, then, I'm a fiscal conservative, so it's natural that I'd have an anti-Republican bias.
Shall we attack the messenger?
Why don't you comment on the message instead of attacking the credibility of the messenger?
At least she uses her name instead of hiding behind some silly name that isn't even original with you, but was coined by Bill O'Reilly.
a deft style
buknut is punking us, is he not?
taxes? Please
How can you talk about boring stuff like taxes when a MUSLIM EXTREMIST IS RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT! ARE YOU AWARE THAT THIS MAN IS BLACK TOO?
I got this email too actually. Clearly, my Republican friends cannot be trusted with email anymore.