Wayne Huizenga wants to sell Dolphins before Barack Obama raises tax

[Care4all]

If I misspoke on 20% my apologies. But I think it can be agreed on that Bush tax cuts lowered taxes for everyone and tax receipts went up.

Obama will allow Bush tax cuts to expire, raise taxes on those making 200K or more (including small businesses), increase capital gains taxes and renew government welfare by sending checks to the 40% of tax filers who pay no federal tax.

He also promises one trillion in new spending.

And this is just the start.

Obama, Pelosi and Reid are an economic tsunami waiting to happen.

FYI...looks like tax DECREASES for small businesses to me and anyone that can comprehend what they read paperboy!

Election 2008: Obama on the Economic Issues - BusinessWeek

Obama on Taxes

• Income Taxes: Senator Barack Obama (D-Ill.) would hold most income tax rates steady, making permanent the Bush tax cuts for the vast majority of individual taxpayers. With those cuts scheduled to expire in 2011, he would allow rates for households making more than $250,000 (or individuals making more than roughly $200,000) to return to earlier levels. Earners who now pay today's maximum 35% rate would see their top marginal rate go back to the 36.9% in effect in the Clinton years, for example.

• Estate Taxes: Obama proposes setting inheritance taxes permanently at 45% on estates over $3.5 million.

• Capital-Gains Taxes: Obama would again limit any increases in capital-gains rates, as well as taxes on dividends, to households making more than $250,000 or individuals bringing in more than $200,000. For those folks, he proposes increasing the maximum rate to somewhere between 20% and 25%.

• New Tax Cuts: Obama has proposed a handful of new tax credits and other adjustments aimed at helping struggling families, students, and others. He would institute a refundable tax credit of 6.2% of earnings, up to a maximum of $8,100, for example, along with a refundable mortgage credit equal to 10% of loan payments for homeowners who don't itemize their deductions. Students would be eligible for a $4,000 annual credit to help defray college costs, while Obama would eliminate income taxes for seniors making less than $50,000.

• Economic Stimulus: Obama has proposed giving businesses a $3,000 tax credit this year and next for every net new job they create to help jump-start the stalled economy. He would also temporarily eliminate taxes on unemployment benefits and calls for legislation that would allow struggling individuals to take up to $10,000 from their IRA or 401(k) retirement accounts this year and next without paying the normal tax penalty for early withdrawals.

• Business Taxes: Obama has proposed eliminating all capital-gains taxes on investments in small business. He would also make permanent the R&D tax credit and credits for renewable energy production. But elsewhere, he would eke more revenue out of the corporate sector: He would like eliminate loopholes that he says favor oil and gas companies, for one. And he favors shifting the tax code to favor companies that create jobs in the U.S. and increase taxes on those that move jobs overseas.

Obama on Jobs

• Job Creation: Obama wants to steer $50 billion into an economic stimulus. He proposes that $25 billion go into a "Jobs and Growth Fund" to prevent cuts in road and bridge maintenance, and to fund school repair. He says this effort will save more than 1 million jobs.

• 'Green' Jobs: Obama wants to create 5 million new "green jobs" and invest $150 billion over 10 years in biofuels and fuel infrastructure, plug-in hybrids, commercial-scale renewable energy, low-emissions coal plants, and a new digital electricity grid. He also wants to expand federal transportation investments to the tune of $60 billion over 10 years, which he says will create 2 million jobs.

• Unemployment: Obama is calling for a temporary expansion of the unemployment insurance program for those who have exhausted their current benefits. He'd also extend unemployment insurance to a bigger pool of workers, including some part-time workers.

• Trade: Obama says he opposes new deals that lack labor and environmental safeguards. Obama wants to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement with Canada and Mexico so it has more favorable terms for U.S. workers. He wants to expand the Trade Adjustment Assistance program, which trains workers who lose their jobs because of offshoring.

• Labor Rights: Obama wants to strengthen the ability of workers to organize unions through what's known as the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA). The bill allows workers to join a union if a simple majority sign authorization cards instead of holding an election. He has won the support of the two major U.S. labor federations, the AFL-CIO and Change to Win, whose leaders say EFCA is their top legislative priority.

 

[Care4all]

Tax receipts have gone up near every year that the income tax has been in effect, whether changes to the tax code were made or NOT....they grow with the growth of an economy, NORMALLY.

However, tax cuts in 2001 and 2003 of president bush's, DID NOT produce an increase in tax revenues from our level in the year 2000 before the tax cuts, until 2005....

and I don't believe these tax cuts have made up for the estimated taxes that would have been brought in from the tax rate levels of 2000 and normal increased growth.....for 2001-2004.

 

[PheloniusRM]

Seems to me the problem is that the people that implement tax cuts are also the same people that are completely unable to control their spending. So while the tax cuts have produced increased revenues, we continue to increase the national debt. So what are we to do? Btw; Who was president when we had our last balanced federal budget?

 

[user_name_guest]

Rich people contribute a lot more to charitable organizations than poor people do. What does that say to people who don't make a lot? Karma. What's more effective, bigger government leads to increase deficiencies. So who would you rather give your money to? A charitable organization that targets the key demographics or government who target the key special lobbyists and pork handouts?

To the poster above, lower taxes, lower spending. You can't have either/or. It's neither/both. Bush = compassionate (secretive word used to cover up his liberal policies).

Lower taxes didn't create the deficit. Increased spending has. Next president is going to have $1 trillion in deficit. Raising taxes for the top 5% isn't going to cover that trillion. With the economy heading to a nose dive, government revenue will fall as a result of the economy and increased taxes. The bottom-up approach will not work. If it did, we would have used it many eons ago. What needs to change is government being influenced by an invisible/corrupt hand of a few (giant, big) organizations that use government to advance their competitive advantage (see special interest/lobbyists in Washington). In the form of taxes, it's the top-down. In the form of wealth, it's the top-down. In creating economic prosperity, it's the top-down. Give an example of a bottom-up approach that has worked.

 

[strollingbones]

Wayne Huizenga: will he be selling off his interests in real estate etc?

he is a major developer in western nc.

 

[Care4all]

Rich people contribute a lot more to charitable organizations than poor people do. What does that say to people who don't make a lot? Karma. What's more effective, bigger government leads to increase deficiencies. So who would you rather give your money to? A charitable organization that targets the key demographics or government who target the key special lobbyists and pork handouts?

To the poster above, lower taxes, lower spending. You can't have either/or. It's neither/both. Bush = compassionate (secretive word used to cover up his liberal policies).

Lower taxes didn't create the deficit. Increased spending has. Next president is going to have $1 trillion in deficit. Raising taxes for the top 5% isn't going to cover that trillion. With the economy heading to a nose dive, government revenue will fall as a result of the economy and increased taxes. The bottom-up approach will not work. If it did, we would have used it many eons ago. What needs to change is government being influenced by an invisible/corrupt hand of a few (giant, big) organizations that use government to advance their competitive advantage (see special interest/lobbyists in Washington). In the form of taxes, it's the top-down. In the form of wealth, it's the top-down. In creating economic prosperity, it's the top-down. Give an example of a bottom-up approach that has worked.

there is NO TOP without a BOTTOM.

 

[Toro]

Er, Wayne, 15% to 20% is not "doubling" or "almost doubling." That's a third. And it is lower than it was under Ronald Reagan.

Not that I feel sorry for you. Its hard living on a billion dollars these days.