[jebfour]

I don’t believe that I’ve ever posted in PAWN so if this has been covered, I apologize. I’m also not trying to start a flame-fest (although it will end up in one) but can the Obama supporters answer a couple questions for me? I just don’t understand this guy….


Question #1

Obama plans to close “tax-loopholes” for businesses. In an economy that is effectively crap, why would someone make it less attractive for businesses to due business in the USA? The only effect of this seems to be:

A: Businesses laying people off due to increased taxes and not being able to meet profit expectations as set by their owners (Wall Street). Doesn’t Wall Street have enough problems right now?

B: Businesses close their doors (See “A”)

C: Businesses move to off-shore production

D: All of the above.


Question #2

Obama wants to “lower taxes for 95% of Americans”. Obviously, to make up for this, he will need to tax someone else into oblivion to cover this. “Someone else” would be those that make more than $250,000/yr. Now, these individuals (I am not part of this group BTW) already pay 80% of the taxes in this country. Why should they be penalized more? Isn’t this essentially penalizing success?

Also, please define paying “a little bit more”. Is that 1% more? 10% more?


Don’t bring other politicians into this…I’d just like answers to the above and how it makes any sense.

Thanks

 

[$tinkle]

not an obama supporter, but one who's trying to understand the issue on both sides

for those small businesses who are 100% in country, i would expect they cannot afford to move production overseas. traditionally, businesses tend to shift their belt-tightening onto the end consumer. will most likely happen here as well i expect.

shades of grey on the "penalizing success", for if you view current taxes adequate/fair/just, then i guess i see the "penalizing success" argument as little more than rhetoric for what obama has proposed. i don't think we can escape a slight uptick in taxes, i just hope it's not time to kill the golden goose.

 

[jimmydean]

Not sure where you are getting your information, but here is my understanding on the tax plan for businesses:

Tax credit for businesses who create jobs here (not overseas)
Tax credit for businesses who supply health insurance.

I think the loopholes you are talking about are the tax breaks that some large businesses get WHEN they send work overseas. If you eliminate that break, then it makes sense for them to keep the work here (as in more jobs) and by giving them tax breaks for job creation (see above) it is now a win/win to be 100% American.

As far as the 80% of all taxes, not sure where you get that either. I think the tax code needs some work and what Obama is talking about is raising the tax percentage on people who NET $250k. It's not that he wants to punish success, but let the people who make less keep more of what they make.

Someone has to pay for the deficit that Bush created. The war he shouldn't have started (Iraq) and the war he should have finished (Afghanistan) has drained this countries funds AND military.

As a side note, I support Obama for his view on the environment, health care, and the military. I think keeping more of my own money until I hit $250k is cool, but his tax plan is not my focus and it's not why I voted for him.

I think McCain would not do much different than what we've seen for the last 8 years and I know this country is half way to hell and the handle is breaking on the basket.

 

[Defenestrated]

Fyi, even after Obama's tax increase the highest tax bracket will still only pay around the same level that they did under the Reagan administration. Many people forget that Bush Sr. and Jr. both cut taxes for the upper bracket as well.

 

[BurlyShirley]

stuff

If consumer spending is what drives the economy, putting money back into the pockets of consumers at large should theoretically keep the economy moving. It seems like robbing Peter to pay Paul to me, but let's not pretend like the problems of GM, and these other huge corporations who are struggling, stem from unjust taxation. Mostly they struggle because Americans either can't or don't buy their crap right now, or in the case of the auto industry, also because things like healthcare costs for their workers are so high that profit margins are slim. And in places like the oil industry, the recent record profits wouldn't suggest they're struggling at all.
"Depressions" would intuitively seem like bad times to raise taxes on anyone, but we shouldn't ignore that it was during the great depression when the federal income tax was really applied, at a much higher rate, to American citizens themselves and to businesses... and that money was used to kickstart all kinds of public works programs that built infrastructure to help get the country back on the right track, making it much easier for businesses small and large to flourish in the longrun.
So, while economics isn't something I have a real in-depth understanding of, it would seem to me Obama's plan is more geared toward long-term success, while McCain's does the opposite, in trying to prolong the "good times" for just a little longer. We may indeed see some businesses who are barely clinging to life fail because they can't afford a tax hike, but I doubt that will be a widespread occurrence given the current culture of corporate welfare and all the recent bailouts.
I'm sorry that I don't share the pity for these rich people though... and I only wish I had the problem of being "penalized for success."

 

[jebfour]

Not sure where you are getting your information, but here is my understanding on the tax plan for businesses:

Tax credit for businesses who create jobs here (not overseas)
Tax credit for businesses who supply health insurance.

I think the loopholes you are talking about are the tax breaks that some large businesses get WHEN they send work overseas. If you eliminate that break, then it makes sense for them to keep the work here (as in more jobs) and by giving them tax breaks for job creation (see above) it is now a win/win to be 100% American.

As far as the 80% of all taxes, not sure where you get that either. I think the tax code needs some work and what Obama is talking about is raising the tax percentage on people who NET $250k. It's not that he wants to punish success, but let the people who make less keep more of what they make.

Someone has to pay for the deficit that Bush created. The war he shouldn't have started (Iraq) and the war he should have finished (Afghanistan) has drained this countries funds AND military.

As a side note, I support Obama for his view on the environment, health care, and the military. I think keeping more of my own money until I hit $250k is cool, but his tax plan is not my focus and it's not why I voted for him.

I think McCain would not do much different than what we've seen for the last 8 years and I know this country is half way to hell and the handle is breaking on the basket.

This is what I didn't expect when I posted this - A well thought out post. Even though I believe that we are likely on polar opposites politically, I can respect someone who lays down their thoughts in a manner that explains why he believes something...and does it with out flamage.

 

[BurlyShirley]

This is what I didn't expect when I posted this - A well thought out post. Even though I believe that we are likely on polar opposites politically, I can respect someone who lays down their thoughts in a manner that explains why he believes something...and does it with out flamage.

If you ask honest questions in the PAWN and don't intend to inflame, you will get honest answers.

 

[kidwoo]

Obama wants to “lower taxes for 95% of Americans”. Obviously, to make up for this, he will need to tax someone else into oblivion to cover this. “Someone else” would be those that make more than $250,000/yr.

Obama is talking about is raising the tax percentage on people who NET $250k.

I'm going to keep posting this until it sinks in.

Unless you make 600K, your taxes will not go up under obama's plan.


These are essentially W Bush's tax rates between 250 and 600k and will not be changed.

 

[jimmydean]

This is what I didn't expect when I posted this - A well thought out post. Even though I believe that we are likely on polar opposites politically, I can respect someone who lays down their thoughts in a manner that explains why he believes something...and does it with out flamage.

Sorry, I forgot to call you an emo fag. My bad.

My wife voted for Bush in 2000 because she was a single issue voter (anti-abortion). She has conservative views (not in the bedroom thank god) and she is a gun owner. After we got together and she moved to Portland (away from small town Southern Oregon) she got a better understanding of the world. She now looks at the much larger picture.

She and I don't vote 100% alike, but she too is voting for Obama because of his environmental views.

I can not see any reason to vote for McCain with Palin as a running mate. I like Obama, don't get me wrong. But it would take some HUGE douche running against McCain for me to even consider 4 more years of this.

I'm a vet, I served under George Senior, Clinton, and GWB. I left the service BECAUSE of GWB and his foreign policies. Now you have the GOP spend more money on Palin's hair than a foreign policy advisor? Wow, sign me up for that!

 

[BurlyShirley]

Speaking of being a Vet JD, it reminds me of how, from conservatives in general and certainly from the McCain campaign this go around, we hear a lot about "Country First" and how sacrifice for the betterment of America is this noble thing. The working man sacrifices by busting is ass to feed his kids, and his kids sacrifice by joining the Army or Marines or whatever to go off to Iraq, but if we ask these multi-millionaires to sacrifice a little more in terms of paying taxes, all of a sudden we're being communists or something.

 

[jimmydean]

One better BS:

Ask the multi-millionaire to take his son to the Army recruiter.

Tax cuts for the rich = trickle down
Tax cuts for the middle = welfare.

I laugh every time someone calls Obamas plan "welfare". I would be interested in seeing how many people vote for McCain who are actually on welfare (my sister-in-law).

 

[jimmydean]

Also, jebfour, thanks for posing a question based on what you know. I am far from an expert on anything, but working in a software development field has shown me the darker side of outsourcing.

At Intel, I was offered $70k a year (about 15% bellow market rate for my skills). The VP of my business unit told my boss that they could hire 5 engineers in Shanghai for less than that.

If those 5 engineers were more qualified than I, it would not have bothered me as much. But the fact is it was the bottom line that was the driving force behind it. I left Intel and the entire project went to China. The project is now dead because the Chinese development organization didn't (and still don't) understand the open source market in the US. Nobody wanted what they were building, so nobody bought it.

I weep for that project because it was a community focused project that served a much needed niche in the US. I make more money than that now, but lack the sense of service it provided. I left the military for the same reason, lack of service.

 

[sanjuro]

I don’t believe that I’ve ever posted in PAWN so if this has been covered, I apologize. I’m also not trying to start a flame-fest (although it will end up in one) but can the Obama supporters answer a couple questions for me? I just don’t understand this guy….

Question #1

Obama plans to close “tax-loopholes” for businesses. In an economy that is effectively crap, why would someone make it less attractive for businesses to due business in the USA? The only effect of this seems to be:

A: Businesses laying people off due to increased taxes and not being able to meet profit expectations as set by their owners (Wall Street). Doesn’t Wall Street have enough problems right now?

B: Businesses close their doors (See “A”)

C: Businesses move to off-shore production

D: All of the above.

Did n8 get a second account?

Seriously, I appreciate your questions, because it forces me to investigate. This is from Obama's website: Obama's tax plan

o Reforming international tax loopholes: including reforming deferral to end the incentive for companies to ship jobs overseas and closing the offshore pension loophole;
o Closing domestic tax loopholes: including clarifying the economic substance doctrine and increasing reporting of capital gains to close the tax gap;
o Eliminating special tax breaks for oil and gas companies: including repealing special expensing rules, foreign tax credit benefits, and manufacturing deductions for oil and gas firms; and
o Closing other loopholes: including taxing carried interest as ordinary income, and closing the CEO pay loophole.

He also wants to close offshore tax havens.

Question #2

Obama wants to “lower taxes for 95% of Americans”. Obviously, to make up for this, he will need to tax someone else into oblivion to cover this. “Someone else” would be those that make more than $250,000/yr. Now, these individuals (I am not part of this group BTW) already pay 80% of the taxes in this country. Why should they be penalized more? Isn’t this essentially penalizing success?

Also, please define paying “a little bit more”. Is that 1% more? 10% more?

Don’t bring other politicians into this…I’d just like answers to the above and how it makes any sense.

Thanks

This is the reality: we have the largest deficit since post WWII (and at least we had a good reason to go to war then).

The question isn't should we raise or lower taxes, but how to lower the deficit while improving the economy. Increasing the tax base without retarding business is the trick.

There is a political side to this: while the majority of our wealth is controlled by a tiny group, pandering to the middle class, which is almost all of the voting population, gets you elected.

Raising taxes on the middle class might increase the tax base without stopping the economy, but it won't get you elected.

That's why Joe-The-Plumber is touted so often: that is who gets you elected, not Donald-The-Tycoon or Bill-The-Windows-Guy.