I Dare Ya'

Check out the Obama Tax Cut Calculator. And then come back here and tell me in the comments what it tells you. Come on, I'll tell you mine if you tell me yours...What, are yous cared it will tell you something you don't want to hear? But really, why should you believe anything you see on the internet? Well, maybe because the numbers are from the non-partisan Tax Policy Center. As you know, I don't really think this will change any people's minds, but I think it is interesting as I absolutely love online calculators (almost as much as I love taking tests...seriously).

Also, a number of people in my life have told me scary things about Barack Obama's policies and/or the Democratic Party Platform. When I have asked them where they heard this stuff, they tell me they "read it somewhere." So I beg you to ignore the spin and the interpretations of other people and go read for yourself. FYI, I think everyone should read the Republican Party Platform and John McCain's policies as well. Yes, it is many pages of dry, dull text. Yes, we all have better things to do with our time. However, wouldn't you rather get the information for yourself and draw your own conclusions as opposed to having other people tell you what to think?


kp said…
ok - just to play a fun and respectful game of devil's advocate: what about ...
1. Capital Gains Taxes (Mc 0% on home sales up to $500k vs. BO 28% on all home sales)
2. Dividend Tax (mc 15% vs BO 39.6%)
3. Inheritance Tax (Mc 0 vs BO Restore Inheritance tax)
4. New taxes on homes over 2400 sqft
5. New Gas Tax (windfall gas tax which would be passed on to us, no matter what anyone thinkg)
6. New tax on natural resource consumption (heating gas, water, electricity)
7. New tax on retirement accounts
8. New tax to to pay for universal health care
9. plus how are we going to pay for the 845 billion global poverty act
10. anyone making over 250k is going to get increased social security tax but the obama tax plan check goes from 200k up to 500k so if you are just a little over the 250k amount, that tax will also increase substantially
* not 100% sure about all this because there is so much stuff on the internet so I'm not saying all this is God's truth...
alimum said…
Thanks for your comment.

First things first: what number did you get?

As for the other points, some of these I will need to check on before I reply (to make sure I am giving you accurate information).

While I am doing my research, you may be interested in reading these arguments from Libertarians who support Obama.

http://www. marginalrevolution. com/marginalrevolution/2008/09/why-libertarian. html
http://www. libertariansforobama. org/2008/02/01/why-libertarians-for-obama/
http://liberalvaluesblog. com/?p=2693

Thanks once again for reading and commenting!
alimum said…
Alright, I am still doing more research, but I found this on snopes which debunks the original email which circulated these very points.


(all these points are cut and pasted from the above website...go there for more information or if you want further clarification---they have swanky spreadsheets over there which always make discussing taxes more interesting)

1)The statement that Senator Obama proposes instituting a 28% tax "on profit from ALL home sales" is false. Both candidates' proposals would leave intact an existing capital gains exemption for the first $500,000 per household of profit from the sale of a primary residence. Homeowners who realize a profit higher than the current exemption amount from the sale of their primary residences might pay more capital gains tax under an Obama presidency than they would now, but those instances currently constitute a very small minority of all home sales. (For the purposes of this article, the term "per household" refers to married couples who file taxes jointly.)

The mention of Obama's imposing a 28% capital gains tax as president is also misleading. Senator Obama has indicated he would likely raise the capital gains tax rate, but he has not specified by how much — the 28% figure is a previous (i.e., pre-Bush) capital gains tax rate which Obama stated he would certainly not exceed while noting that his capital gains tax rate would likely be "significantly lower"

2) The notion that Senator Obama is proposing raising the tax rate on dividend income from its current 15% level to a 39.6% is unfounded. Obama has proposed taxing dividends at the same rate as capital gains, and although he hasn't yet specified a figure for the latter, he has already stated (as noted above) that he "certainly would not go above" 28%. Also, the proposed increase would only affect households with income of more than $250,000 per year (a figure that encompasses about 2% of U.S. households.)

3) Pretty much everything asserted about the inheritance tax (also referred to as "death tax" or "estate tax")— that President Bush repealed it, that Senator McCain would maintain it at 0%, and that Senator Obama would "restore" it — is wrong.

4, 5, 7) Senator Obama has not proposed a tax on "homes that are more than 2,400 square feet," any "new gasoline taxes," or "new taxes on retirement accounts."

6) The phrase "taxes on natural resources consumption" presumably refers to Senator Obama's "cap and trade" proposal for reducing carbon emissions, a proposal which would likely impose additional costs on polluters but isn't technically a "tax" (--my note, the suggestion that we should never impose taxes or penalties on companies in order to effect change could have been used to argue against child labor laws and safety standards, it doesn't make those things wrong.)

8) Barack Obama has not advocated a new tax to pay for health care. Senator Obama has proposed funding his health care plan through additional revenues generated by not extending the Bush administration's temporary tax cuts for persons making more than $250,000 per year. Whether allowing a portion of already-scheduled expiration of temporary tax cuts to take place really constitutes "new taxes" is a matter of semantics.

These are my responses, not cut and pasted from snopes

9) In Barack Obama's policy papers, these two proposals may address that:

Reinstate PAYGO Rules: Obama believes that a critical step in restoring fiscal discipline is enforcing pay-as-you-go (PAYGO) budgeting rules which require new spending commitments or tax changes to be paid for by cuts to other programs or new revenue.

End Wasteful Government Spending: Obama will stop funding wasteful, obsolete federal government programs that make no financial sense. .

So maybe that is where he will get the money.

I have a suggestion for how to pay for some of it: Maybe we should stop sending our tax dollars to one of the richest states in the union, the one which generally gets the most federal dollars per citizen and has a budget surplus when most stand are struggling to make ends meet (all while managing to avoid imposing a state income tax or sales tax and giving a stipend to its citizens each year)--hey, if states like Alaska stopped getting earmarks, we may actually have money to pay for other things.

10) This, along with many of the other points, will not effect the vast majority of Americans. Only around 3% of Americans make more than 250K (according to US Census figures). So, yes, there are a small fraction of Americans who will not see their tax burden decrease under Barack Obama, but no one ever suggested that everyone would see their taxes lower, only that MOST Americans would find their taxes lowered.
alimum said…
One last thing...here is the tax policy center's analysis of both candidates tax policies


And I feel I would be remiss if I didn't mention that many would argue that the real choice for fiscally conservative Republicans is Ron Paul. You can write him in. Viva La Revolution!
Tracy said…
OK, so if I say single, my tax cut would be $1600, and if I say married, single earner, it would be $500. There's no option for head of household, which is my filing status....

overall, this was less fun than the Harry Potter husband quiz.

Popular Posts