Holy tax increase!

[pdisme]

Not sure how much truthiness there is to this article but if it's accurate, I know who I'll have to vote for come fall:

http://money.cnn.com/2008/06/11/news/economy/candidates_taxproposals_tpc/index.htm?postversion=2008061111

BREAKING DOWN THE NUMBERS

Here's how the average tax bill could change in 2009 if either John McCain's or Barack Obama's tax proposals were fully in place.


Income Avg. tax bill Avg. tax bill

Over $2.9M
McCain -$269,364
Obama +$701,885

$603K and up
McCain -$45,361
Obama +$115,974 :wtf:

$227K-$603K
McCain -$7,871
Obama +$12

$161K-$227K
McCain -$4,380
Obama -$2,789

$112K-$161K
McCain -$2,614
Obama -$2,204

$66K-$112K
McCain -$1,009
Obama -$1,290

$38K-$66K
McCain -$319
Obama -$1,042

$19K-$38K
McCain -$113
Obama -$892

Under $19K
McCain -$19
Obama -$567

[norcal2]

Also realize that capitol gains tax is not indexed..so in real dollars this will and has increased exponentially as the cost of living increases, I think the last figure I heard in todays dollars it is at around the tax is 35% ...with the increased costs this year that figure could go to 50% by next...something has to change...

[Tofu]

This is personal income tax?

Frick me I need to move.

I paid about 50% on the portion of my income that was taxable last year :(

[toplesswhitegal]

This is personal income tax?

Frick me I need to move.

I paid about 50% on the portion of my income that was taxable last year :(


Yes we get hosed in Canada for taxes, not to mention the friken gas. It is around $6/gallon and we make the shit right here in Alberta!

[Tapout]

Yes we get hosed in Canada for taxes, not to mention the friken gas. It is around $6/gallon and we make the shit right here in Alberta!

Wow. They're raping you guys. :wtf:

[PhxDiablo]

Time to move to the Cayman Islands.:tdown:

[pdisme]

This is personal income tax?

Frick me I need to move.

I paid about 50% on the portion of my income that was taxable last year :(

:owned: What you guys spending the money on? I can't imagine socialized healthcare costs that much, and you're not fighting with half the countries in the world. :lol2:

[Tofu]

Not really sure....poutine and hockey skates?

[pdisme]

As the tax plan solidifies, anyone who makes over $200k is definitely going to be in trouble under Obama if he gets elected. At a town hall earlier today, someone in the audience asked Biden about the concerns those making $250k or more had about the taxes, his response was it's time to be more patriotic. I didn't realize losing an additional 15% of my income is required to be patriotic. :wtf: :icon_anal:

http://www2.tbo.com/content/2008/sep/03/biden-tells-sarasota-crowd-hell-help-rebuild-middl/news-politics/

The crowd of about 2,000 people, black and white, retirees and high school students, cheered his response to a woman who asked what she should say to her affluent friends who are concerned about tax increases for people with incomes over $250,000.

Tell them, Biden said, "it's time to be more patriotic."

[RAiMA]

I didn't realize losing an additional 15% of my income is required to be patriotic. :wtf: :icon_anal:

Quite a sad day for Americans :(

The world really needs a charasmatic, strong and affluent leader to lead right now.

[cantwait2]

Obama's got the mix right imo...under McCain everyone gets a tax cut, what a load of shit, if you expect that to eventuate then I would think again...the war has put america in a really shitty financial postion and unless you want to be bending over and asking China to tune you up even more, then someones going to have to contribute to get the country back on it's feet, I agree...time to be patriotic.

Everyone earning under 160k is getting a good tax cut...those over are in more of a position to sholder a tax increase.

fact is that most of the very high income bracket are business owners and once they have finished with their right offs and moving numbers around they are realistically paying proportionately the least tax anyway, what ultimate slips through the net and is declared "income" is likely only a portion of theie true earnings.

[pdisme]

I don't agree with McCain either, I don't think a tax cut for anyone is justified right now, particularly his proposed 10% corporate tax cut. I think the first goal should be to cut spending before cutting revenue. And I do agree with Obama's proposed estate tax increase on large estates.

I have a big problem with my personal income tax going up to 39% though while others would be paying far less. I bust my ass for 14 hours/day and don't think I should be penalized for the fact that I have the motivation and desire to work hard and get ahead while someone who chose to drop out of high school and goofs off though half their 40 hour work week before going home and knocking up the old lady for their fifth kid gets benefits from my hard work. Obviously a great over simplification but that's the general idea.

In my specific case, let's say he does get elected and passes all the proposed changes. Currently my partner and I both work extremely long hours while slowly finding the right employees to help us grow and reduce our workload. We cut our own income each time we make a hire and ideally it ultimately translates into additional growth and a return of that income but at the very least it results in less hours worked by us which we're willing to pay for. The tax increase will likely result in us working more hours and holding off on hiring because both the increase and our normal hiring patterns would reduce our disposable incomes to a lifestyle-changing level and I work hard to live the way I currently do.

Ugh; no win situation.

[Matt]

The part I find absolutely crazy is that if you're in the $227-603K bracket, your tax only goes up $12 with obama. but if you make a thousand dollars more it goes up $116k!? who the hell figured that one out!?

[cantwait2]

yeah I hear what you're saying but ultimately from the point of view of a potential leader on an entire country he has to look at things in an aggregate. Your position whilst frustrating is still a premium position.

No doubt lots of losers out there but many more hard working families who's problems are on a vastly different plane that yours or mine, as a leader I feel you need to look at firstly protecting that sector and secondly stimulating the economic factors that can begin to rebuild the economy, ultimately that will come from the masses not the few.

Those taxation figures would be general at best and totally fabricated at worst so probably a mute point anyway but hey now we can say we've brought some political discussion to TL :lol2:

[pdisme]

I think they should focus more taxes on the big C-corps, maybe some kind of rule with taxation based on revenue and then discounts off of that based on number of employees and median salary with the top 5% earners stripped so huge CEO salary doesn't benefit them. This way highly profitable but low employing companies pay more tax (such as myspace before they were bought, $1 bil with only a few hundred employees?), lower profit but heavy employing (manufacturing, service industry, etc.) pay less. S-corps should continue to pass taxation to the shareholders.

As far as struggling families, many of those families are in trouble because of their own decisions both in the number of children they chose to have and living beyond their means in housing, lifestyle, etc. I don't like paying for someone else's kids because daddy couldn't get some condoms. I'm ok with there being some kind of health plan, medical is incredibly expensive in this country and not everyone can afford insurance, but there's limits to how far these social programs should go. I feel for our Canadian neighbors who are paying crazy taxes.

All I know is it comes down to if someone affects my ability to race cars, I'm gonna be really pissed off! :lol2:

[RAiMA]

I have a big problem with my personal income tax going up to 39% though while others would be paying far less. I bust my ass for 14 hours/day and don't think I should be penalized for the fact that I have the motivation and desire to work hard and get ahead while someone who chose to drop out of high school and goofs off though half their 40 hour work week before going home and knocking up the old lady for their fifth kid gets benefits from my hard work. Obviously a great over simplification but that's the general idea.

I think you're right on the money here. Most government these days penalise the achievers and reward the less productive. It discourages people from moving forward and encourages people to do less. It's almost like it's creating it's own problem for it to try to solve.

[blackbull]

I wonder why eliminating the income tax and replacing it with a sales tax structure has never really been attempted. It seems this would be a much fairer system. People would be taxed on what they spend not what they earn.

[pdisme]

I would be ok with that too; a sales tax structure combined with a higher estate tax means you either spend it and get taxed or you get taxed when you die and someone inherits it. And municipalities are still free to tax tourist and luxury goods at higher rates; most big cities have tax surcharges on hotel rooms, etc. If they want to help the disenfranchised, municipalities could even have the option to reduce tax on food items and clothes below a certain dollar amount. They didn't do it this year because the state economy is a mess, but for most of the past decade Florida has had a week-long sales tax holiday in the back to school time where clothes up to a certain dollar amount and school supplies are not taxed. They also tend to waive tax on generators and similar items when state of emergencies have been declared for hurricanes. So it's definitely possible to customize the tax to benefit the poor in a way that is also not unfair to the wealthy; I'm ok paying a higher tax on something who's only purpose is personal enjoyment rather than a necessity in the same way I am not ok paying a higher tax because I work harder than someone else.

[artherd]

Flat tax. problem solved.

[feelingBULLISH]

McCain's economic policy makes complete sense while Obama's is just unreal. Low corporate and personal tax, combined with regulated government spending will encourage investment and increased consumer spending. Don't forget, the Federal Reserve is lending lots of money to banks that claimed loses. Under McCain, we'll pay off most of our debt and decrease our trade deficit, indefinitely.

[zzzzdoc]

I know many, and am, a small business owner. If anyone thinks that raising taxes will help the little guy, they are crazy. The most common conversation I hear from small business owners is how they will have to let people go if taxes go up. So if the goal is to increase unemployment and get more people on the government dole, then go ahead and raise taxes on the wealthy.

What both candidates know, but conveniently choose to ignore, is that way too small a proportion of the population has high incomes. You can't balance the budget by taxing the rich. You have to raise taxes significantly on the middle class, which they WILL do.

Of course, none of this means anything until government spending is slashed dramatically. Which no one will do. Hence, my kids future could be quite bleak unless someone with fiscal management skills is elected President, and Congress is replaced by people with similar mindsets. And none of that is likely to happen.

[pdisme]

The data doesn't lie:

http://perotcharts.com/images/challenges/challenges01-640.png

http://perotcharts.com/images/challenges/challenges04-640.png

[FLNICK26]

I know many, and am, a small business owner. If anyone thinks that raising taxes will help the little guy, they are crazy. The most common conversation I hear from small business owners is how they will have to let people go if taxes go up. So if the goal is to increase unemployment and get more people on the government dole, then go ahead and raise taxes on the wealthy.

What both candidates know, but conveniently choose to ignore, is that way too small a proportion of the population has high incomes. You can't balance the budget by taxing the rich. You have to raise taxes significantly on the middle class, which they WILL do.

Of course, none of this means anything until government spending is slashed dramatically. Which no one will do. Hence, my kids future could be quite bleak unless someone with fiscal management skills is elected President, and Congress is replaced by people with similar mindsets. And none of that is likely to happen.

this IS very true. it's not just one party, it's both. and we do need an president along with the entire congress to get this under control. we all get screwed !forget party lines

[BLK85]

We just need to implement The Fair Tax system.

[pdisme]

Fair is in the eyes of the beholder unfortunately, we just need to make sure the correct eyes are voted in.

[j0nnywalker]

2008 - 10.5 TRILLION deficit.
11.2 Trillion deficit, including the ~700B bailout. YIKES!!!!!!!!!!!!

gotta buy some gold and silver bullions real brief!

[pdisme]

I love the Obama ads. He's running one here in FL talking about Corning closing a plant in Pennsylvania that laid a few hundred people off, then those people were hired back to help disassemble the plant to ship the parts to China. "John McCain voted to cut taxes for companies that ship jobs overseas..."

Umm, so Obama is saying that raising their taxes would have kept them from laying those people off and closing the plant?! :lol2: :lol2:

[demetri]

hmm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-PFY-Zm8j0E&feature=user

[pdisme]

HAHAHAHA

[BLK85]

Fair is in the eyes of the beholder unfortunately, we just need to make sure the correct eyes are voted in.

Dont like paying as much in taxes dont buy as much. I think its a great idea. Who wants to vote for me. :grinning-smiley-003

[pdisme]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iivL4c_3pck