Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
User Panel

Site Notices
Posted: 10/17/2008 4:00:06 AM EDT
Let's say an S corporation is earning $350,000 in net income.  They are currently paying a 33% marginal rate on the amount in excess of $250,000, or $33,000.  Under Obama's plan, they would be paying $36,000.  That's a 9.1% increase!!!  Do you honestly think they are going to run out and hire people if the owner's biggest expense by far is Federal income tax????

Here's an interesting article on Obama "sharing the wealth"

www.usnews.com/blogs/capital-commerce/2008/10/16/did-barack-spread-the-wealth-obama-just-blow-the-election.html


Did Barack "Spread the Wealth" Obama Just Blow the Election?
October 16, 2008 11:37 AM ET | James Pethokoukis | Permanent Link | Print

No. Really. You're kidding me. Barack Obama actually told that Joe the Plumber guy that he wants to "spread the wealth around." What, did Obama just get done reading the Wikipedia entry on Huey "Share the Wealth" Long or something? Was he somehow channeling that left-wing populist from the Depression? Talk about playing into the most extreme stereotype of your party, that it is infested with socialists.

A while back I chatted with a University of Chicago professor who was a frequent lunch companion of Obama's. This professor said that Obama was as close to a full-out Marxist as anyone who has ever run for president of the United States. Now, I tend to quickly dismiss that kind of talk as way over the top. My working assumption is that Obama is firmly within the mainstream of Democratic politics. But if he is as free with that sort of redistributive philosophy in private as he was on the campaign trail this week, I have no doubt that U of C professor really does figure him as a radical. And after last night's debate, a few more Americans might think that way, too. McCain's best line: "Now, of all times in America, we need to cut people's taxes. We need to encourage business, create jobs, not spread the wealth around."

And by the way, I just noticed that the IBD/TIPP poll, the most accurate in 2004, has McCain down by just 3 points. If the contest is perceived by the voters as a contest between a wealth redistributor and a wealth creator, then it could be a long night come Nov. 4. This is still a center-right country, gang. Note this Gallup poll from June:

   When given a choice about how government should address the numerous economic difficulties facing today's consumer, Americans overwhelmingly—by 84% to 13%—prefer that the government focus on improving overall economic conditions and the jobs situation in the United States as opposed to taking steps to distribute wealth more evenly among Americans.

There you go.
Link Posted: 10/17/2008 4:03:16 AM EDT
[#1]
Obama gets elected, we get fucked. I like working, and making money. Other don't, and we will pay the price for their lack of willingness to contribute to society.

Gonna be a rough ride.

Oh yea, FUCK OBAMA.
Link Posted: 10/17/2008 4:18:23 AM EDT
[#2]
WHEN Obama is ushered in by the Machine behind the curtains, I WILL start scaling back my schedule and workload.   As it stands, a few extra days of work here or there could put me into that "You're phucked!" tax bracket - it really IS a question of working so much to actually lose money via the tax rates.

The scary thing is that there are a lot of guys in the $35-40K/yr lower brackets that also wouldn't be able to afford a raise or OT - and they're the guys who need it the most.  Thankfully, Obama is more concerned about the constituents he can buy - either with campaign donations or IRS "tax cut" checks to the welfare communities.

It's so perverted it's become funny to me.  

I used to work a few weekends and take that grand  or so and spend it - now, I'll sit at home and watch football.  Another +1 for the "bottom up economics."   Absofreakinglutely retarded, really.  All I can say is that all those hands-out and communists will likely get their wish, it just wont get REALLY interesting (in an "I told you so" way) for another 5-10 years.  I'll still be around to watch it unravel though.  
Link Posted: 10/17/2008 4:41:06 AM EDT
[#3]
I like how they say the "trickle down" plan doesn't work.  So how do they think their "trickle up" plan will work?
Link Posted: 10/17/2008 4:41:40 AM EDT
[#4]
Arfcom isn't spooled up over this?
Link Posted: 10/17/2008 4:51:48 AM EDT
[#5]

Quoted:
Arfcom isn't spooled up over this?


I think it's just about talked out.  We all agree he is a lying POS, race-baiting, fucker that he is.

I agree with your math, but what is quoted is what most people in the US would say.  I'm curious though.  Oshithead used to talk about dropping the tax cuts, but says, now, that would be bad for the economy the way it is(no shit).  Does he consider dropping the cuts as an increase, or just ignore it?
Link Posted: 10/17/2008 5:08:55 AM EDT
[#6]

Quoted:
WHEN Obama is ushered in by the Machine behind the curtains, I WILL start scaling back my schedule and workload.   As it stands, a few extra days of work here or there could put me into that "You're phucked!" tax bracket - it really IS a question of working so much to actually lose money via the tax rates.

The scary thing is that there are a lot of guys in the $35-40K/yr lower brackets that also wouldn't be able to afford a raise or OT - and they're the guys who need it the most.  Thankfully, Obama is more concerned about the constituents he can buy - either with campaign donations or IRS "tax cut" checks to the welfare communities.

It's so perverted it's become funny to me.  

I used to work a few weekends and take that grand  or so and spend it - now, I'll sit at home and watch football.  Another +1 for the "bottom up economics."   Absofreakinglutely retarded, really.  All I can say is that all those hands-out and communists will likely get their wish, it just wont get REALLY interesting (in an "I told you so" way) for another 5-10 years.  I'll still be around to watch it unravel though.  


I'll get this right out front... I'm not in favor of higher taxes.  I'm not in favor of lower taxes.  I'm not in favor of taxes at all.

With that being said.... you've brought up a very common misconception.  Being put in a higher tax bracket does not mean you are going to lose money.  Here's how the system works:

Lets say you make $100 a year, and this is in the lowest tax bracket of 10%.  You will pay $10 in tax, and take home $90.

Now, you get a raise and make $150 a year, which bumps you up to a 15% bracket.  You will pay $10 in tax on the first $100, and $7.50 on the next $50.  You will take home $132.50.

You get another raise, and make $200 per year, putting you in a 20% bracket.  $10 on the first $100, $7.50 on the next $50, and $10 on the last $50.  Your take home pay is $172.50.

At no point did your income go down, even though your taxes went up.  This is how our tax system is structured.
Link Posted: 10/17/2008 5:18:26 AM EDT
[#7]

Quoted:

Quoted:
WHEN Obama is ushered in by the Machine behind the curtains, I WILL start scaling back my schedule and workload.   As it stands, a few extra days of work here or there could put me into that "You're phucked!" tax bracket - it really IS a question of working so much to actually lose money via the tax rates.

The scary thing is that there are a lot of guys in the $35-40K/yr lower brackets that also wouldn't be able to afford a raise or OT - and they're the guys who need it the most.  Thankfully, Obama is more concerned about the constituents he can buy - either with campaign donations or IRS "tax cut" checks to the welfare communities.

It's so perverted it's become funny to me.  

I used to work a few weekends and take that grand  or so and spend it - now, I'll sit at home and watch football.  Another +1 for the "bottom up economics."   Absofreakinglutely retarded, really.  All I can say is that all those hands-out and communists will likely get their wish, it just wont get REALLY interesting (in an "I told you so" way) for another 5-10 years.  I'll still be around to watch it unravel though.  


I'll get this right out front... I'm not in favor of higher taxes.  I'm not in favor of lower taxes.  I'm not in favor of taxes at all.

With that being said.... you've brought up a very common misconception.  Being put in a higher tax bracket does not mean you are going to lose money.  Here's how the system works:

Lets say you make $100 a year, and this is in the lowest tax bracket of 10%.  You will pay $10 in tax, and take home $90.

Now, you get a raise and make $150 a year, which bumps you up to a 15% bracket.  You will pay $10 in tax on the first $100, and $7.50 on the next $50.  You will take home $132.50.

You get another raise, and make $200 per year, putting you in a 20% bracket.  $10 on the first $100, $7.50 on the next $50, and $10 on the last $50.  Your take home pay is $172.50.

At no point did your income go down, even though your taxes went up.  This is how our tax system is structured.


Correct.  But why the fuck should I have to give Uncle a bigger piece of my pie because I'm successful?
Link Posted: 10/17/2008 5:23:08 AM EDT
[#8]

Quoted:

Quoted:

Quoted:


I'll get this right out front... I'm not in favor of higher taxes.  I'm not in favor of lower taxes.  I'm not in favor of taxes at all.



Correct.  But why the fuck should I have to give Uncle a bigger piece of my pie because I'm successful?


Please re-read the first line of my post.  For your ease of reading, I have removed the rest.  

I'm not going to argue with you, because we share an opinion there.  
Link Posted: 10/17/2008 5:37:30 AM EDT
[#9]

Quoted:

Quoted:

Quoted:

Quoted:


I'll get this right out front... I'm not in favor of higher taxes.  I'm not in favor of lower taxes.  I'm not in favor of taxes at all.



Correct.  But why the fuck should I have to give Uncle a bigger piece of my pie because I'm successful?


Please re-read the first line of my post.  For your ease of reading, I have removed the rest.  

I'm not going to argue with you, because we share an opinion there.  


You are correct on the tax bracket issue and misconceptions.  I often see this and it stresses me out to try and explain it to people.  You did a good job of it.

 However, the bitch of it for me is that people that achieve those higher brackets through hard work and discipline are "punished" by taking more of that extra hard work.  SO, in a since, why work harder?  Yes you still net more money, but you also "get to" give more of THAT fruits of labor to the gov't, presumably to be spread around to other people.  Same with corporations that employ tons of people.  

On another level, welfare/entitlement.  Why work/achieve AT ALL if someone is going to just GIVE you money.  I for one think that if someone is going to be given money by the gov't, they should AT LEAST get off their ass and report to a work camp of some sort.
Link Posted: 10/17/2008 5:57:15 AM EDT
[#10]

Quoted:
I'll get this right out front... I'm not in favor of higher taxes.  I'm not in favor of lower taxes.  I'm not in favor of taxes at all.

With that being said.... you've brought up a very common misconception.  Being put in a higher tax bracket does not mean you are going to lose money.  Here's how the system works:

Lets say you make $100 a year, and this is in the lowest tax bracket of 10%.  You will pay $10 in tax, and take home $90.

Now, you get a raise and make $150 a year, which bumps you up to a 15% bracket.  You will pay $10 in tax on the first $100, and $7.50 on the next $50.  You will take home $132.50.

You get another raise, and make $200 per year, putting you in a 20% bracket.  $10 on the first $100, $7.50 on the next $50, and $10 on the last $50.  Your take home pay is $172.50.

At no point did your income go down, even though your taxes went up.  This is how our tax system is structured.
Its not that you're making less money overall, its that your return on investment gets crappier when you jump to the next tax bracket.

Kharn
Link Posted: 10/17/2008 7:56:43 AM EDT
[#11]
Here is the real problem: Obama is targeting the middle class for harm, specifically married couple with children.  With my wife working we may earn somewhat more than $100k.  That's not much in the DC area where a house in the 'hood still costs $325k.  But earn over $100k and Obama's tax plan puts you into 45 percent marginal tax territory, before FICA/Medicare and state taxes.  After those taxes you are into 60 percent marginal territory.  We also have kids and the local schools are terrible, so the school bill is $15k.  Essentially, we'd be better off with my wife not working, home-schooling the kids, and knocking my income down enough that we qualify for government "freebies" like free health care for our kids, and possibly ourselves (my premiums for the family are over $3,600 a year).  

There are serious long-term consequences from these policies: less married couples, and less children born in wedlock.  We see this in Europe: high marginal tax rates on married couples have resulted in a population crash.  When Europeans move to the USA their birth rates rise.  Obama is trying to use tax law to genocide the white middle class.  
Link Posted: 10/17/2008 2:33:33 PM EDT
[#12]

Quoted:
Here is the real problem: Obama is targeting the middle class for harm, specifically married couple with children.  With my wife working we may earn somewhat more than $100k.  That's not much in the DC area where a house in the 'hood still costs $325k.  But earn over $100k and Obama's tax plan puts you into 45 percent marginal tax territory, before FICA/Medicare and state taxes.  After those taxes you are into 60 percent marginal territory.  We also have kids and the local schools are terrible, so the school bill is $15k.  Essentially, we'd be better off with my wife not working, home-schooling the kids, and knocking my income down enough that we qualify for government "freebies" like free health care for our kids, and possibly ourselves (my premiums for the family are over $3,600 a year).  

There are serious long-term consequences from these policies: less married couples, and less children born in wedlock.  We see this in Europe: high marginal tax rates on married couples have resulted in a population crash.  When Europeans move to the USA their birth rates rise.  Obama is trying to use tax law to genocide the white middle class.  


Yep, it is very easy in the DC to spend $100,000 per year even if you have a fairly modest home.  $150,000 combined income is hardly "big pimpin".
Link Posted: 10/17/2008 2:39:31 PM EDT
[#13]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Arfcom isn't spooled up over this?


I think it's just about talked out.  We all agree he is a lying POS, race-baiting, fucker that he is.


Third-party candidate supporters (& DU trolls) don't think he is. That's why instead of doing everything in their power to keep Obama OUT of the White House, they are going to trash their vote in a futile third-party statement that nobody will remember.

The rest of us get it.
Link Posted: 10/17/2008 4:40:54 PM EDT
[#14]
Guys I may actual just get hosed a bit and say FBHO and move into a tent on my land and eat gubrment cheese.
Close Join Our Mail List to Stay Up To Date! Win a FREE Membership!

Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!

You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.


By signing up you agree to our User Agreement. *Must have a registered ARFCOM account to win.
Top Top