Obama's plan is to redistribute the wealth.

Discussion in 'Congress' started by AllieBaba, Oct 13, 2008.

  1. Vintij
    Offline

    Vintij Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2007
    Messages:
    1,040
    Thanks Received:
    105
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Anaheim, CA
    Ratings:
    +105
    I am tired of this stupid argument. If your going to call Obama a socialist, you might as well call out john mccain when he voted TWICE against the Bush tax cuts....only recently did he switch his opinion on that. You may also call Mccain a socialist for voting in favor of the 700 billion dollar redistribution of wealth from tax payers to banks. Dont forget his 300 billion dollar morgage buyout plan. THank you very much.
     
    Last edited: Oct 23, 2008
  2. xaxeptance449
    Offline

    xaxeptance449 Xaxe449

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2008
    Messages:
    77
    Thanks Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Ratings:
    +7
  3. pegwinn
    Offline

    pegwinn Top of the Food Chain

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2004
    Messages:
    2,549
    Thanks Received:
    329
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    Texas
    Ratings:
    +329
    Additionally I have to ask.... How do you feel about religion forcing it's morality on you?
     
  4. Care4all
    Offline

    Care4all Warrior Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2007
    Messages:
    38,099
    Thanks Received:
    8,041
    Trophy Points:
    1,370
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +15,528
    i'm a strange but unique :) character pegwinn....

    i live my religion, or try my best at it...:eek:

    i would never try to force it on to anyone and do believe in the first amendment, where our gvt shouldn't be doing such either, but also believe in the first amendment in FULL which means the gvt should not be dictating to churches how they should be either.

    as someone who is religious, i do feel very strongly that we were all given individual free will for a reason...our own individual test...but overall this means...to each- his own!

    care
     
  5. pegwinn
    Offline

    pegwinn Top of the Food Chain

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2004
    Messages:
    2,549
    Thanks Received:
    329
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    Texas
    Ratings:
    +329
    I agree.

    And...
    You have closely articulated just one of the reasons I oppose the progressive income tax that I have not mentioned yet. It is a case of someone imposing their moral view on me and enforcing it via the courts and cops. Obama feels a moral obligation to be Robin Hood and to heck with those of us that disagree.

    We would not stand for it if it was directed at us from a church pulpit by the Reverend President.

    Why do we stand for it when it is wrapped up in the flag, written into the tax code, and called our "patriotic duty" by Mr. Biden?

    Bet you thought I was going waaaaaaaaaay off topic huh? :eusa_whistle:
     
  6. jreeves
    Offline

    jreeves Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    6,588
    Thanks Received:
    315
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +315
    Care I was responding to this post by you.


    no, the poor pay their FICA taxes, and we are using FICA's money in the federal budget spending for things other than SS retirements etc....IN WHICH INCOME tax revenues SHOULD BE PAYING....

    If EIC was designed and actually does offset FICA taxes. Then why would Obama want to give an extra approximately $600 in a refundable tax credits(not EIC BTW) to low income wage earners. On top of the current EIC, the expansion of EIC he would spread the wealth by giving them an additional $600. That goes way too far to provide an incentative to work. BTW....Here are the actual thresholds for EIC...

    Next Tax Year 2008
    Earned income and adjusted gross income (AGI) must each be less than:


    $38,646 ($41,646 married filing jointly) with two or more qualifying children;
    $33,995 ($36,995 married filing jointly) with one qualifying child;
    $12,880 ($15,880 married filing jointly) with no qualifying children.

    Tax Year 2008 maximum credit:


    $4,824 with two or more qualifying children;
    $2,917 with one qualifying child;
    $438 with no qualifying children.
    Investment income must be $2,950 or less for the year.

    The maximum Advance Earned Income Tax Credit (advance EITC) for TY 2008 the employer is allowed to provide throughout the year with the employee's pay is $1,750.
    EITC Thresholds and Tax Law Updates

    That's just a tad more than 17K a year....


    Also I never claimed that MCcain would get rid of EIC. The contrast between Obama's and Mccain's tax plan can clearly be seen in these two income groups.
    MCcain would give the under 19k income earners an additional $19, while Obama would give the same income group $567.

    Then if you make, $112-161K you would get a tax cut of $2614 under Mccain's plan. Obama's tax plan would give the same income group $2204.

    So if you look at it objectively Mccain gives larger tax cuts to the taxpayers that pay more. While Obama's plan gives large tax cuts to people who pay no income taxes and actually draw from the tax pool.

    The question to keep in mind when comparing the two plans is this; Do you think the people who draw from the tax pool should get larger tax cuts(welfare) or the people who actually fund the EIC program?
     
    Last edited: Oct 24, 2008
  7. AllieBaba
    Offline

    AllieBaba BANNED

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2007
    Messages:
    33,778
    Thanks Received:
    3,648
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +3,659
    No, she's not. Because big oil OWES Alaska that money, for the privilege of using the State of Alaska.

    It's capitalism pure and simple. And Palin takes those payments, made to the STATE OF ALASKA, and she distributes them among the TAXPAYERS of Alaska, who are the owners.
     
  8. Care4all
    Offline

    Care4all Warrior Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2007
    Messages:
    38,099
    Thanks Received:
    8,041
    Trophy Points:
    1,370
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +15,528
    then why isn't this done with oil companies that drill on federal land, can we charge them more than the pennies for their leases on our land and get a check for it too, and if we did do such, would you really not come to the aid of the oil companies and say to us that if we did this it would just make the price of gasoline and oil higher? doesn't matter to alaska, they get their share from the oil companies and the rest of america pays the bill with higher oil and gas prices i would suppose....? after all, all corps put their bills in to the price of the product as many chant....?

    EDIT:

    btw allie, i am truely not against the deal she worked for alaskans from the oil company, i think it was good and we all should share in the profits of the oil companies that are using our federal land as well and get a check every year from our gvt via the oil companies.

    but know, this is what republicans in general, would call socialism....a redistribution of wealth or ''spreading the wealth around'' imo.

    care
     
    Last edited: Oct 24, 2008
  9. editec
    Offline

    editec Mr. Forgot-it-All

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    41,426
    Thanks Received:
    5,595
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +5,630
    Yeah...that's basically a form of socialism.

    Good for Alaska!
     

Share This Page