Obama Tax Plan: Now down to $150,000

[Turboswede]

Really..

On average, the annual cost of the welfare system amounts to around $5,600 in taxes from each household that paid federal income tax in 2000. Adjusting for inflation, the amount taxpayers now spend on welfare each year is greater than the value of the entire U.S. Gross National Product at the beginning of the 20th century.

Yes Really...

We haven’t addressed how state taxes are apportioned so State spending on welfare is not relevant to the argument about Obama’s Federal Income Tax Policy. In addition, my state does not have an income tax so that our system is probably what the right would love to see, an 8.5% flat consumption tax.

Anyway, using the same logic applied in your referenced article FEDERAL Welfare spending boils down to $313B and that is $4040 per family and 74% of the GDP of the US in 1900.

If we take defense, homeland security and the war on terror that’s $660B or $8,525 per family or 1.5 times the US GDP in 1900.

If welfare spending is out of control, military spending is in control and leads the deficit and debt around by the nose.

I thought I would throw in some illustrations of how defense spending has just become outrageous. Here is a breakdown, in 2007 dollars, of the costs ou US Wars from the OMB:


Iraq and Afghanistan To Date $808 billion
Vietnam War $670 billion
World War I $364 billion
Korean War $295 billion
Persian Gulf War $94 billion
Civil War $81 billion
(both Union and Confederate costs)
Spanish-American War $7 billion
American Revolution $4 billion
Mexican War $2 billion
War of 1812 $1 billion

So, besides WW II the war on terror has been the most expensive to date.

And here is a visual representation of our military spending vs the rest of the world.

I guess the reason for the size of our defense budget is that we need to be able to fight and defeat every military on the planet simultaneously.

So, our defense spending is rational, but providing health coverage to uninsured children isn’t?

 

[glockmail]

Did you read the argument? It states that the reason the wealthy pay more as a prcentage of income in tax (i.e. the tax rates are progressive) it that they recieven the largest benefit from government spending. The wealthy don't want spending cut, just an elimination of progressive taxation.

I read yours, and boiled it down as I stated previously. Ignoring my answer won't make it go away.

 

[glockmail]

.....

So, our defense spending is rational, but providing health coverage to uninsured children isn’t?

You libs always bring up health care. First of all, buy your own damn health care. Second, if we didn't defend your silly ass with a strong military then you wouldn't have any health to care for, never mind being able to whine about having to pay for it.

 

[Turboswede]

You libs always bring up health care. First of all, buy your own damn health care.

I have great healthcare through a PPO that is SUPER expensive

Not providing healthcare just bites us in the ass as Emergency rooms care for individuals regardless of their ability to pay and then pass the costs on to us through the insurance companies. Universal health insurance isn’t just the right thing to do, it’s also the cheapest.

Its not just healthcare we “libs” talk about, I would be all for eliminating the food stamp program if the con’s were ok with ending farm subsidies.

Libs like Social security too, so that the private sector doesn’t need to pick up the full cost of retirement plans.

Second, if we didn't defend your silly ass with a strong military then you wouldn't have any health to care for, never mind being able to whine about having to pay for it.

Considering no one has attacked Russia since 1941 and the last ones that did got their asses handed to them, how about keeping our military budget 10% higher than Russia’s, that should keep anyone from attacking my silly ass, especially if we have NATO’s help.

 

[elvis]

The 15 percent bracket will become 30 by the time his first year is up.

 

[Turboswede]

Since jschuck12001 skirted my question I'll ask it of you: how can a progressive tax be fair to all Americans? It's socialism, plain and simple.

It’s not really a question then is it?

You are not interested in what Socialism is because you have already decided how you will define the term and you have also decided that a progressive tax system can’t be fair to all Americans, regardless of why generations of political economists feel it is the only fair method of taxation.

 

[auditor0007]

All this nonsense about tax cuts is really stupid. Obama plans to spend an additional $1.4 trillion on top of our current $400 billion deficit. I'm no rocket scientist, but I am intelligent enough to understand that kind of spending is not going to be supported by a tax cut. In case you don't realize it, $1.4 trillion is about 10% of our GDP. To support this spending, we will need an 80% tax increase to have a balanced budget.

But all will be well; Obama said so.

 

[Turboswede]

All this nonsense about tax cuts is really stupid. Obama plans to spend an additional $1.4 trillion on top of our current $400 billion deficit. I'm no rocket scientist, but I am intelligent enough to understand that kind of spending is not going to be supported by a tax cut. In case you don't realize it, $1.4 trillion is about 10% of our GDP. To support this spending, we will need an 80% tax increase to have a balanced budget.

But all will be well; Obama said so.

$1.4Trillion in addition? so he is going increase the federal budget by 1/3rd? where are you getting that from?

 

[auditor0007]

$1.4Trillion in addition? so he is going increase the federal budget by 1/3rd? where are you getting that from?

I just wanted to see if anyone was paying attention. The actual cost of Obama's plan is a total of $1.4 trillion which will cost us about $250 billion more per year. That still is in addition to the current $400 billion deficit.

 

[Turboswede]

I just wanted to see if anyone was paying attention. The actual cost of Obama's plan is a total of $1.4 trillion which will cost us about $250 billion more per year. That still is in addition to the current $400 billion deficit.

Ok, thats right, just shows that any talk about anyone getting a tax cut is just a pipe dream.

 

[glockmail]

I have great healthcare through a PPO that is SUPER expensive

Not providing healthcare just bites us in the ass as Emergency rooms care for individuals regardless of their ability to pay and then pass the costs on to us through the insurance companies. Universal health insurance isn’t just the right thing to do, it’s also the cheapest.

Its not just healthcare we “libs” talk about, I would be all for eliminating the food stamp program if the con’s were ok with ending farm subsidies.

Libs like Social security too, so that the private sector doesn’t need to pick up the full cost of retirement plans.




Considering no one has attacked Russia since 1941 and the last ones that did got their asses handed to them, how about keeping our military budget 10% higher than Russia’s, that should keep anyone from attacking my silly ass, especially if we have NATO’s help.

Again you ignore the fact that the government fucks up nearly everything it touches, and can never meet the efficiencies of a profit-driven private sector. Profit motive works for the consumer while political motive usually works against it.

I'd rather keep our military budget 1000% bigger than Russia so that they and any other peon wouldn't even think of attacking us.

Excuse me but do you actually think that we should rely on NATO for our defense?

 

[Turboswede]

Again you ignore the fact that the government fucks up nearly everything it touches

Except the military, and space exploration, and scientific research and.. I think you are assuming that everyone person feels the same way about the government that you do. Would the USDA be more effective under private control? What about the CDC?

 

[user_name_guest]

You people are idiots, its always been the same, if you make 201,000 - $250k you will see no increase or decrease. Everything below $200 will get a decrease but under $150k is where you will see the most. Spin it how you want but its never changed and none of you make that kind of money anyway.

Per the Tax Policy Center, here is how Obama's tax plan breaks down for individuals:
$0-$18,891 = $567 tax cut
$18,982-$37,595 = $892 tax cut
$37,596-$66,354 = $1,118 tax cut
$66,355-$111,645 = $1,264 tax cut
$111,646-$160,972 = $2,135 tax cut
$160,973-$226,918 = $2,796 tax cut
$226,919-$603,402 = $121 tax increase
$603,403-$2.87 million = $93,709 tax increase
$2.87 million-plus = $542,882 tax increase

Why do people making $66,355 to $111,645 get a $1,264 tax cut and a person making less than $18,891 only gets $567 tax cut. That's not fair. to Sealybobo.

 

[Redneck]

Anyone who thinks they're gettin a "tax cut" is nuts...When the Bush tax cuts expire Everybody's taxes will go up...

 

[glockmail]

Except the military, and space exploration, and scientific research and.. I think you are assuming that everyone person feels the same way about the government that you do. Would the USDA be more effective under private control? What about the CDC?

Actually, the military farms out a huge percentage of its operations, and probably 100% of its equipment design and construction to the private sector. I'm not sure about NASA but I'm sure they're fairly similar.

I'm not going to go through every non-enumerated agency with you, but as an example the department of education could be a small office with less than 5 employees. They would track the most successful school districts and use that set standards for the others to follow. The information could be organized onto a web site that parents could access to find out where the best schools were, and use local vouchers to help defray costs to send their kids to them.

 

[Turboswede]

Actually, the military farms out a huge percentage of its operations, and probably 100% of its equipment design and construction to the private sector. I'm not sure about NASA but I'm sure they're fairly similar.

I'm not going to go through every non-enumerated agency with you, but as an example the department of education could be a small office with less than 5 employees. They would track the most successful school districts and use that set standards for the others to follow. The information could be organized onto a web site that parents could access to find out where the best schools were, and use local vouchers to help defray costs to send their kids to them.

Oh thats right, the government does farm out a lot of its projects to it chief political contributors, and foreign contractors forgot about that one.

The Dept of Ed runs the student loan program, which should be elimitanted?

 

[glockmail]

Oh thats right, the government does farm out a lot of its projects to it chief political contributors, and foreign contractors forgot about that one.

The Dept of Ed runs the student loan program, which should be elimitanted?

Nice deflection of the issue being discussed, but these contractors contribute to both sides of the isle. If you have a problem with that then by all means lobby for better ethics legislation. And admit it that you lost the argument because the private sector is more efficient and effective.

If the government didn't have student loan programs then college tuition wouldn't have risen at twice the rate of inflation. It's less affordable now compared to when they started the program. If it was more affordable and the government didn't compete for the business then the private sector could easily loan the money. If the government really wanted people to go to college than they would let students deduct the costs of their education, just like they can deduct the interest costs on a home mortgage.

 

[editec]

If the government really wanted people to go to college than they would let students deduct the costs of their education, just like they can deduct the interest costs on a home mortgage.

Deduct those expenses from what incomes? Their work study jobs?

 

[Turboswede]

Nice deflection of the issue being discussed, but these contractors contribute to both sides of the isle. If you have a problem with that then by all means lobby for better ethics legislation. And admit it that you lost the argument because the private sector is more efficient and effective.

If the government didn't have student loan programs then college tuition wouldn't have risen at twice the rate of inflation. It's less affordable now compared to when they started the program. If it was more affordable and the government didn't compete for the business then the private sector could easily loan the money. If the government really wanted people to go to college than they would let students deduct the costs of their education, just like they can deduct the interest costs on a home mortgage.

Sorry, I keep forgetting what the issue is.

I thought it was that Obama will raise taxes on people making more than $150K per year?

Then I thought it was what is socialism?

Then I thought it was why is progressive taxation fair?

Then I thought it was that the Government Fucks up everything it touches?

Then I thought it was that everything the government doesn’t fuck up is run by the private sector?

I just pointed out that the government farming programs out to the private sector smacks of graft and corruption, was that off point? Sorry I must have gotten confused.

I hope Obama raises taxes on everyone making more than $150K so we can try and reduce the deficit. I am counting on him eliminating the wage base for SS taxes, that would make me happy.

The rich get richer and the poor get poorer, I would like to see that trend reversed for a while, and if you work for a living you should too.

 

[Redneck]

Sorry, I keep forgetting what the issue is.

I thought it was that Obama will raise taxes on people making more than $150K per year?

Then I thought it was what is socialism?

Then I thought it was why is progressive taxation fair?

Then I thought it was that the Government Fucks up everything it touches?

Then I thought it was that everything the government doesn’t fuck up is run by the private sector?

I just pointed out that the government farming programs out to the private sector smacks of graft and corruption, was that off point? Sorry I must have gotten confused.

I hope Obama raises taxes on everyone making more than $150K so we can try and reduce the deficit. I am counting on him eliminating the wage base for SS taxes, that would make me happy.

The rich get richer and the poor get poorer, I would like to see that trend reversed for a while, and if you work for a living you should too.

And the "poor" are in such bad shape with cable TV, cell phones, high speed internet connections...PLEASE....Ya sound like ya only believe there is only so much money in the world, and if the rich get more they are takin it away from someone.....