Its not about me, its about you.....

[USRufnex]

quote:Originally posted by Hometown

That was some serious propaganda.  Did you notice the Roman columns?  The giant adoring crowd?  That rivaled some of the all time greatest propaganda I have ever seen, including WWII newsreels.  I didn't know Dean and the Obama campaign had it in them.  They have definitedly added a new chapter to the play book.

I can hear the McCain campaign today, "Find me a stadium -- now."

His one line of outreach to Latinos was somewhat lacking though.  He was trying to appease the old union crowd at the same time.  But the remark about not dividing families was appreciated.

Al's speech reached for greatness.  It was outstanding too.

then there's Ronald Reagan....

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by Hometown

That was some serious propaganda.  Did you notice the Roman columns?  The giant adoring crowd?  That rivaled some of the all time greatest propaganda I have ever seen, including WWII newsreels.  I didn't know Dean and the Obama campaign had it in them.  They have definitedly added a new chapter to the play book.

I can hear the McCain campaign today, "Find me a stadium -- now."

His one line of outreach to Latinos was somewhat lacking though.  He was trying to appease the old union crowd at the same time.  But the remark about not dividing families was appreciated.

Al's speech reached for greatness.  It was outstanding too.

A Roman Temple?

Our Redeemer Barack Hussein Obama in a Temple?

No, a manger maybe.

His mother reportedly had a virgin birth, too.  Had to be.  

She was three months pregnant when she wed Barack Sr.

[:O]

[iplaw]

quote:Originally posted by Chicken Little

Lots of policy details explained effectively:

Out of Iraq
Foreign oil independence in 10 years
Tax relief for 95% of working families
Equal pay for equal work

Surely you must be kidding...Yes, he SAID those things during his speech, but subsequently failed to provide any information for acheiving those goals.  What "details" are you talking about?

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

quote:Originally posted by Chicken Little

Lots of policy details explained effectively:

Out of Iraq
Foreign oil independence in 10 years
Tax relief for 95% of working families
Equal pay for equal work

Surely you must be kidding...Yes, he SAID those things during his speech, but subsequently failed to provide any information for acheiving those goals.  What "details" are you talking about?

He's not mentioned how he would return the hallowed Clinton "surplus" whilst cutting taxes on 95% of the population.  What cuts was he planning on making?

[Gaspar]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

quote:Originally posted by Chicken Little

Lots of policy details explained effectively:

Out of Iraq
Foreign oil independence in 10 years
Tax relief for 95% of working families
Equal pay for equal work

Surely you must be kidding...Yes, he SAID those things during his speech, but subsequently failed to provide any information for acheiving those goals.  What "details" are you talking about?

He's not mentioned how he would return the hallowed Clinton "surplus" whilst cutting taxes on 95% of the population.  What cuts was he planning on making?

Increasing the tax rate on small business to 50.3% will suck!
But who cares.  I'm sure no one here is employed by a small business.

Edit:  50.3% not 53%

[we vs us]

quote:Originally posted by Gaspar

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

quote:Originally posted by Chicken Little

Lots of policy details explained effectively:

Out of Iraq
Foreign oil independence in 10 years
Tax relief for 95% of working families
Equal pay for equal work

Surely you must be kidding...Yes, he SAID those things during his speech, but subsequently failed to provide any information for acheiving those goals.  What "details" are you talking about?

He's not mentioned how he would return the hallowed Clinton "surplus" whilst cutting taxes on 95% of the population.  What cuts was he planning on making?

Increasing the tax rate on small business to 50.3% will suck!
But who cares.  I'm sure no one here is employed by a small business.

Edit:  50.3% not 53%

So, uh, where'd you find that number?  That sounds a little, oh, inflated, I'd say.

Also, like flat out fear mongering on your part.

But hey, I could be wrong.

[waterboy]

Seems I remember upper income tax rates at nearly 70% back in the sixties when the economy was booming for almost every economic class. The rich were still real rich because they used the tax code to protect their interests and of course those lovely off shore accounts. Effectively, no one paid that much. And its doubtful anyone on these pages is in jeopardy of paying 50% tax rates even if they happened.

The devil is in the details and you're not going to get those till the legislation is proposed, revised, gutted and (if Bush cronies are in place), finally vetoed.

Its getting too serious around here for me and I have pressing concerns of my own. Unless I see something resembling an issue that is relevant I'm limiting my posting. (I know that is reason for glee in some quarters).

I may post some Obama health proposals that looked interesting later on. Someone e-mail me if those Palin modelling pics ever surface!Carry on.[8D]

[Friendly Bear]

quote:Originally posted by pmcalk

I had several favorite lines, but I especially liked"

"We are the party of Roosevelt. We are the party of Kennedy. So don't tell me that Democrats won't defend this country. Don't tell me that Democrats won't keep us safe."  

I also liked the discussion on how we truly messure a successful economy--not by the fortune 500, number of millionaires, etc..., but how the average person is getting by.

I enjoyed the most the full-on-the-lips open mouth kiss that Obama gave Joe Biden's wife.

A Face suck. BIG-time.

[iplaw]

quote:Originally posted by we vs us

So, uh, where'd you find that number?  That sounds a little, oh, inflated, I'd say.

Also, like flat out fear mongering on your part.

But hey, I could be wrong.

Under Obama's plan to let the scheduled 2011 tax rate hikes occur, and his plan to raise the self-employment tax on those making more than $250,000, the S corporation rate would rise from 35 percent to 39.6 percent. The sole proprietor and partner rate would rise from 37.9 percent all the way up to a staggering 50.3 percent. Many Democrats in Congress have proposed making all small businesses (including S corporations) pay this 50-plus percent rate. A small business tax rate that high would be the highest marginal rate faced by them in nearly a quarter-century.

Here is the rest of the story if you're interested.  It might be scarry with all the fearmongering and number baiting in it.

[Breadburner]

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

quote:Originally posted by Chicken Little

Lots of policy details explained effectively:

Out of Iraq
Foreign oil independence in 10 years
Tax relief for 95% of working families
Equal pay for equal work

Surely you must be kidding...Yes, he SAID those things during his speech, but subsequently failed to provide any information for acheiving those goals.  What "details" are you talking about?

O hell man..The details will work themselves out.....

[Gaspar]

quote:Originally posted by we vs us

quote:Originally posted by Gaspar

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

quote:Originally posted by Chicken Little

Lots of policy details explained effectively:

Out of Iraq
Foreign oil independence in 10 years
Tax relief for 95% of working families
Equal pay for equal work

Surely you must be kidding...Yes, he SAID those things during his speech, but subsequently failed to provide any information for acheiving those goals.  What "details" are you talking about?

He's not mentioned how he would return the hallowed Clinton "surplus" whilst cutting taxes on 95% of the population.  What cuts was he planning on making?

Increasing the tax rate on small business to 50.3% will suck!
But who cares.  I'm sure no one here is employed by a small business.

Edit:  50.3% not 53%

So, uh, where'd you find that number?  That sounds a little, oh, inflated, I'd say.

Also, like flat out fear mongering on your part.

But hey, I could be wrong.

Pick a source.  I chose the lowest # cited by Politico.

Washington Post has it at 54.9%
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/12/AR2008081202849.html

The way he expresses his "tax relief" neglects to mention the expiration of the Bush tax cuts and a roll back to Carter era tax rates on any business registered as an LLC or S corporation.

A good analysis of the fuzzy math is here:
http://www.american.com/archive/2008/august-08-08/the-folly-of-obama2019s-tax-plan

The American Spectator has a great list of the new tax credit system used to camoflauge the complexity of this money shifting.  It's a very impressive way of purchasing votes from precisely the same people who would never understand they are being squeezed.

The big trick behind the Obama tax plan is that his refundable tax credits would primarily go precisely to those who pay little or nothing in federal income taxes. The latest CBO data shows the bottom 40% of income earners already pay no federal income taxes. Indeed, they receive a net payment from the federal income tax system, meaning from the taxpayers, equal to 3.8% of all federal income taxes, because of the refundable tax credits under current law. The middle 20% of income earners, the true middle class, pays 4.4% of federal income taxes. Overall, the bottom 60% of income earners pay less than 1% of federal income taxes on net.

When "tax credits" primarily go to this group in the form of checks from the government rather than a reduction in their tax burden, such tax credits are not tax cuts. They are government spending programs hidden in the tax code. I call it The New Tax Welfare. Here is a complete litany of Obama's proposed new spending programs disguised as tax cuts:

* The fully refundable Making Work Pay Tax Credit would pay $500 to each worker and $1,000 to couples. This is reminiscent of George McGovern's 1972 election proposal for the government to send a $1,000 check to everyone.

* The Mortgage Interest Tax Credit would provide a 10% refundable credit to offset mortgage interest payments for lower and middle income families.

* The American Opportunity Tax Credit would provide a $4,000 fully refundable tax credit for the first $4,000 of college tuition expenses.

* The Obama campaign says, regarding Health Care Tax Credits, "Obama's health plan centers around tax credits that...will ensure that health insurance is available and affordable for all families." These include "a new refundable 50 percent health tax credit on employee premiums paid by employers."

* The Savers Credit would be made fully refundable and would be expanded "to match 50% of the first $1,000 of savings for families that earn under $75,000."

* The Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit would be made refundable and expanded to allow "low-income families to receive up to a 50 percent credit on the first $6,000 of child care expenses."

* The already refundable Earned Income Tax Credit would be expanded to "increase the number of working parents eligible for EITC benefits, increase the benefits available to noncustodial parents who fulfill their child support obligations, increase benefits for families with three or more children, and reduce the EITC marriage penalty, which hurts low-income families." This, of course, is a welfare program, not a tax cut, because it doesn't reduce anybody's taxes, it pays money to low income tax filers.

* The Tax Credits for Clean Vehicles includes a $7,000 tax credit "for the purchase of advanced technology vehicles." Presumably, this would be refundable as well because surely Obama would not deny it to the great majority of families.


The total package allows him to say he's going to reduce taxes on this group and that group, but in reality it increases taxes on all but those who take advantage of each and every new tax credit.  Of course this does not apply to business that file taxes under a sole proprietorship, LLC, or S Corporation.  They would be liable to the new rates without the ability to claim most of the credits.

That's why the estimates float between 50% and 54%.  The new plan is so complex that an accurate number is still convoluted.

It will be interesting to see how big the new tax books will be.  The new Obama version of TurboTax will take up my whole hard drive.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

quote:Originally posted by we vs us

So, uh, where'd you find that number?  That sounds a little, oh, inflated, I'd say.

Also, like flat out fear mongering on your part.

But hey, I could be wrong.

Under Obama's plan to let the scheduled 2011 tax rate hikes occur, and his plan to raise the self-employment tax on those making more than $250,000, the S corporation rate would rise from 35 percent to 39.6 percent. The sole proprietor and partner rate would rise from 37.9 percent all the way up to a staggering 50.3 percent. Many Democrats in Congress have proposed making all small businesses (including S corporations) pay this 50-plus percent rate. A small business tax rate that high would be the highest marginal rate faced by them in nearly a quarter-century.

Here is the rest of the story if you're interested.  It might be scarry with all the fearmongering and number baiting in it.

Someone explain to me how this is a good thing?

Smaller companies, as they pass along higher tax rates to their customers, are going to fail as they will not be able to compete with larger corporations and foreign corporations.

What would the solution be?  Oh well, operate more efficiently, get lean, let workers go.

There are many unintended consequences of raising tax rates on S corps and LLC's.  That's an expense in buying votes from people who already don't pay taxes as it is.  Unfortunately, there are a whole lot of idealistic politicians who don't understand d!ck about economics, as very few have ever taken an active role in running their own small business.

It's becoming more obvious why Dims are raking McCain and Palin over the coals, they are trying to cover up the imminent Ell Train Wreck.

We need real change, not chump change.