ABC News: Obama Claus

[The Paperboy]

From ABC:

Once you get past the soaring oratory, to experience a speech by Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., is to be hit with an astoundingly lengthy list of promises.

"I don't know how any reasonable person" could think he'd really be able to accomplish everything he's pledging to do, said the mother-in-law of a colleague, a Missouri woman who intends to vote for Obama.

Just today in Sarasota, Fla., the Democratic presidential nominee said that he'd:

• "give a tax break to 95 percent of Americans who work every day and get taxes taken out of their paycheck every week";
• "eliminate income taxes on Social Security for seniors making under $50,000";
• "give homeowners and working parents additional tax breaks";
• not increase taxes on anyone if they "make under $250,000; you will not see your taxes increase by a single dime –- not your income taxes, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains tax";
• "end those breaks to companies that ship jobs overseas";
• "give tax breaks to companies that invest right here in the United States";
• "eliminate capital gains taxes for small businesses and start-up companies that are the engine of job creation in this country";
• "create two million new jobs by rebuilding our crumbling roads, and bridges, and schools -- by laying broadband lines to reach every corner of the country";
• "invest $15 billion a year in renewable sources of energy to create five million new energy jobs over the next decade";
• "reopen old factories, old plants, to build solar panels, and wind turbines";
• build "a new electricity grid";
• "build the fuel efficient cars of tomorrow";
• "eliminate the oil we import from the Middle East in 10 years";
• "lower premiums" for those who already have health insurance;
• "if you don't have health insurance, you'll be able to get the same kind of health insurance that members of Congress give themselves";
• "end discrimination by insurance companies to the sick and those who need care the most";
• "invest in early childhood education";
• "recruit an army of new teachers";
• "pay our teachers higher salaries, give them more support. But ... also demand higher standards and more accountability";
• "make a deal with every young person who's here and every young person in America: If you are willing to commit yourself to national service, whether it's serving in our military or in the Peace Corps, working in a veterans home or a homeless shelter, then we will guarantee that you can afford to go to college no ifs ands or buts";
• "stop spending $10 billion a month in Iraq whole the Iraqis have a huge surplus";
• "end this war in Iraq";
• "finish the fight and snuff out al Qaeda and bin Laden";
• "increase our ground troops and our investments in the finest fighting force in the world";
• "invest in 21st century technologies so that our men and women have the best training and equipment when they deploy into combat and the care and benefits they have earned when they come home";
• "No more homeless veterans"; and
• "no more fighting for disability payments."
• This on top of his 30-minute infomercial last night, and the myriad other pledges and promises he's made throughout the last 21 months.

It's quite a list!

He does call for some sacrifices, though nothing that would equal the cost of these measures.

Story continues here

 

[rayboyusmc]

And McMoney promises the middle class higher taxes and continuation of spreading the wealth upward to the rich and corporations.

 

[bk1983]

Obama's tax plan would add $3.4 trillion in debt relative to current law by 2018.
McCain's tax plan would add $5.0 trillion in debt relative to current law by 2018.

This figure was complied by non partisan tax policy center.

 

[The Paperboy]

And McMoney promises the middle class higher taxes

Link please.

and continuation of spreading the wealth upward to the rich and corporations.

How does a government spread wealth upward? Please explain.

 

[USJD]

Both candidates are promising more than they can deliver without either increasing the debt or raising taxes. In the end both will have to raise taxes and cut way back on other programs. You can bet that when we finally pull our troops out of Iraq that there will be major cuts in our national defense as there should be. The days of the US playing the world's policeman are over. We can no longer afford it. Our "allies" need to step up to the plate and pay for the defense of their own countries because we simply cannot afford it.

 

[The Paperboy]

Obama's tax plan would add $3.4 trillion in debt relative to current law by 2018.
McCain's tax plan would add $5.0 trillion in debt relative to current law by 2018.

This figure was complied by non partisan tax policy center.

Very possible. The difference is that McCain's policies would have more chance of growing the economy and increasing tax revenues.

Obama's would be a job killer on top of the trillion he wants to spend.

 

[dilloduck]

Both candidates are promising more than they can deliver without either increasing the debt or raising taxes. In the end both will have to raise taxes and cut way back on other programs. You can bet that when we finally pull our troops out of Iraq that there will be major cuts in our national defense as there should be. The days of the US playing the world's policeman are over. We can no longer afford it. Our "allies" need to step up to the plate and pay for the defense of their own countries because we simply cannot afford it.

When the US no longer plays the role of the world's policeman, will there be a role in the world left for us to play ? One that we can afford of course.

 

[bk1983]

Very possible. The difference is that McCain's policies would have more chance of growing the economy and increasing tax revenues.

Obama's would be a job killer on top of the trillion he wants to spend.

I have a hard time believing that, the Clinton admin's economic policy is similar to Obama's and created more jobs, and millionaires,billionaires then the Bush admin.

 

[The Paperboy]

I have a hard time believing that, the Clinton admin's economic policy is similar to Obama's and created more jobs, and millionaires,billionaires then the Bush admin.

Not sure I understand your point but I will say that government does not create wealth. People do. The only thing the government does is collect the people's money and distribute it as they see fit.

 

[bk1983]

Not sure I understand your point but I will say that government does not create wealth. People do. The only thing the government does is collect the people's money and distribute it as they see fit.

Exactly but policies affect the ability to gain wealth. The tax policy determnies how that wealth is distributed. The government role is to balance the budget. Read Warren Buffet's policies and why he supports Obama, I think one of the richest men in the world knows a thing or two about revenue,spending,etc..

 

[The Paperboy]

Exactly but policies affect the ability to gain wealth.

Give me some specific examples.

 

[Zoom-boing]

* "give a tax break to 95 percent of Americans who work every day and get taxes taken out of their paycheck every week";

95% is both true and false. 95% of working families w/see this break; but that is not 'everyone'. 81% of 'everyone' would see a break. Probably not a real big difference in numbers but . . . skewed. I can't post urls yet. The info is on politifact dot com under 'many will get tax cuts, but not that many'

As for the 'who work everyday and get taxes taken out of their paycheck every week' . . ok, that's us. But we get all our taxes back each year (um, just to turn around an pay our property taxes with it). We are already getting a break by not paying these taxes but someone is paying them for us. So we would get an additional $1,000 each year under Obama's plan? I don't want or need welfare which is how I see this money. Why should someone else have their money taken from them so that I get a break . . when I'm already getting a break to begin with?

not increase taxes on anyone if they "make under $250,000; you will not see your taxes increase by a single dime –- not your income taxes, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains tax";

I wasn't aware that it's $200,000 for singles and $250,000 for married. Please see the politifact dot com reference above

"end those breaks to companies that ship jobs overseas";
"give tax breaks to companies that invest right here in the United States";

Are these two reading as the same? Is 'companies that invest right here' the same as creating or keeping jobs in the US - that is, not 'shipping jobs overseas'?

"reopen old factories, old plants, to build solar panels, and wind turbines";

I think this is a great idea. Reuse what is already there instead of building new.

build "a new electricity grid";

I don't know what this means. Anyone have information?

"if you don't have health insurance, you'll be able to get the same kind of health insurance that members of Congress give themselves";

I assume that Congress has great health insurance. Of course, I could be way off on this. How much would this cost the individual?

"make a deal with every young person who's here and every young person in America: If you are willing to commit yourself to national service, whether it's serving in our military or in the Peace Corps, working in a veterans home or a homeless shelter, then we will guarantee that you can afford to go to college no ifs ands or buts";

I like this idea of service. I see it as a benefit to both the country and the individual. Where would the guaranteed money come from for college?

"end this war in Iraq";
"finish the fight and snuff out al Qaeda and bin Laden";

Are these in reverse order?

 

[bk1983]

Give me some specific examples.

http://www.ppionline.org/documents/Performance_Index.pdf

 

[Navy1960]

The Clinton model and the Obama model are completely different. I hear the two compared on daily basis. Yes , indeed Bill Clinton's ecnonomy was a good one, and there were many jobs created. The Clinton tax plan was created as a "DEFICIT" reduction tax plan. Below was the Clinton tax increase.

An increase in the individual income tax rate to 36 percent and a 10 percent surcharge for the highest earners, thereby effectively creating a top rate of 39.6 percent.
Repeal of the income cap on Medicare taxes. This provision made the 2.9 percent Medicare payroll tax apply to all wage income. Like the Social Security payroll tax base today, the Medicare tax base was capped at a certain level of wage income prior to 1993

A 4.3 cent per gallon increase in transportation fuel taxes.

An increase in the taxable portion of Social Security benefits.

A permanent extension of the phase-out of personal exemptions and the phase-down of the deduction for itemized expenses.

Raising the corporate income tax rate to 35 percent.

The other thing that has not been mentioned is that when the Clintion era tax rise was enacted there were 8 consecutive quarters of growth in the economy. In addition to that in 1997, another tax act was passed that reduced taxes across the board and virutally eleminated the Cap gains tax that further proved fuel for the economy. The Barack Obama economic plan is nothing at all like the Clinton model other than perhaps having an association with the same political party. It is however closer to the Hoover model than Clintons.

Hoover expanded civil service coverage of Federal positions, canceled private oil leases on government lands, and by instructing the Justice Department and the Internal Revenue Service to go after gangsters for tax evasion, he enabled the prosecution of gangster Al Capone. He appointed a commission which set aside 3 million acres (12,000 km²) of national parks and 2.3 million acres (9,000 km²) of national forests; advocated tax reduction for low-income Americans (not enacted); closed certain tax loopholes for the wealthy; doubled the number of veteran's hospital facilities;

 

[xsited1]

And McMoney promises the middle class higher taxes and continuation of spreading the wealth upward to the rich and corporations.

Uh, no. The wealthy already pay a higher percentage in taxes than the poor and middle class. This, of course, is known as a progressive tax. What McCain is proposing is a reduction in the marginal rate. However, the rich will still pay MORE in taxes. This has the net effect of growing the economy and providing more tax revenues for the government because of the economic growth.

One thing that I do not agree with is corporate welfare. This practice should be stopped immediately, but both major parties have a vested interest in this so I seriously doubt anything will be done about it.

 

[9 Volt]

When the US no longer plays the role of the world's policeman, will there be a role in the world left for us to play ? One that we can afford of course.

Actually, we don't play the role of the World Police. That's a smokescreen. If it were true, we'd be deployed in dozens of countries right now. We only occupy in the name of potential new markets and "economic reform". Military conflict is big business these days. When I went to Kuwait in 1990, we lived in tents and ate MREs or terrible mess hall food. In the green zone today there is shopping, fast food, air conditioning etc. Guess who pays for it? The taxpayer. Haliburton and other contractors have profited immensely from this. This war, mostly privatized, is itself a new market. In the old days, war profiteers were the weapons contractors. Now the profiteers are our own elected and appointed cabinet members and other administration officials who actually line their pockets through the stock they own in companies that profit from war and other disasters. 9/11 made Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney and many, many others VERY RICH men.

 

[dilloduck]

Actually, we don't play the role of the World Police. That's a smokescreen. If it were true, we'd be deployed in dozens of countries right now. We only occupy in the name of potential new markets and "economic reform". Military conflict is big business these days. When I went to Kuwait in 1990, we lived in tents and ate MREs or terrible mess hall food. In the green zone today there is shopping, fast food, air conditioning etc. Guess who pays for it? The taxpayer. Haliburton and other contractors have profited immensely from this. This war, mostly privatized, is itself a new market. In the old days, war profiteers were the weapons contractors. Now the profiteers are our own elected and appointed cabinet members and other administration officials who actually line their pockets through the stock they own in companies that profit from war and other disasters. 9/11 made Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney and many, many others VERY RICH men.

Exactly--so remind me. Why are we still voting to install one of the same two parties again ?

 

[9 Volt]

Exactly--so remind me. Why are we still voting to install one of the same two parties again ?

Good question! It's a vicious circle my friend.

 

[dilloduck]

Good question! It's a vicious circle my friend.

Then maybe we should all stop pretending one half is somehow better than the other. We deserve what we get for being so stuck on stupid. I'm amazed at the bickering over whose campaign promises are better. Haven't we learned by now that it's all bullshit ?

 

[bigbroodmaster]

I'm not a fan of huge spending sprees. Attacking the debt is one of the most important things that either candidate could do. I'm really dissapointed that neither candidate has addressed the need to attack the 10 trillion dollar debt that the US has dug itself into.