A List Of Taxes The Democrats Are Going To Raise

The Whistler • March 6, 2008

Democrats are claiming that they can balance the budget in four years. In order to do that, though, the Dems are going to force Americans to pay lots and lots of new taxes. But the odd thing is that they’re not actually talking about raising any new taxes but are instead engaging in a rhetorical gimmick that has them saying they’re going to let tax cuts expire.
The problem is, though, that letting those tax cuts expire is in fact a tax hike. And just to give you a good idea of just how pervasive that tax hike will be, take a look at all the specific tax relief the Dems (led by Kent “budget hawk” Conrad) are thinking about ending:
# The Child Tax Credit will shrink from $1,000 to $500 per child.
# The 10 percent bracket will be eliminated, raising the income tax burden of many workers by 5 percentage points.
# Income tax rates will increase between 3 and 4.5 percentage points in each bracket for all income earners.
# Marriage penalty relief will be eliminated resulting in adverse tax treatment for double income earners.
# Capital gains tax rates will increase to 10 or 20 percent depending on income.
# Dividend taxes will double from the current capital gains tax rate to the individual income rate.
# The estate tax will go from zero in 2010 to 55 percent in 2011, and the exemption rate will drop to $1 million (which is less than it is today).
That’s a big list that impacts just about every American in the country.
So ask yourselves which you’d rather see happen: More of your hard-earned money taken from your wallet so that these politicians don’t have to clamp down on wasteful spending? Or more of your money staying in your wallet and politicians finally facing hard realities about government spending?
I know which one I’d rather choose.

Tags: North Dakota News, Politics

http://www.valleydeals.com/cgi-bin/board2/YaBB.pl Kevin

Looks like they want to follow the lead of “Republicans” in North Dakota, who really aren’t Republicans.
http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

Thankfully the Republican candidate is full square ready to develop our domestic oil resources to cut our dependence on foreign oil from the Arabs and folks like Chavez.

Oh wait, John Sidney McCain has the same energy policy as the Democrats.

But yeah, he seems to be ok on Bush’s tax cuts. That is now he is.
robert108

won’t opec cut production to stabilize the price if we pump additional oil?

Actually, that would cut their income even more. We can always cut our price to get their market share, so they will probably increase production and cut prices to remain competitive with us. You lefties just don’t get the “competition” thing.
Mark D

Doc
That’s why I’m voting republican. I want a tax cut AND more spending.

TW

develop our domestic oil resources to cut our dependence on foreign oil from the Arabs and folks like Chavez.

Don’t forget those other evil doers that charge us $104 a barrel, Canada, Mexico and Alaska…….oh wait….we own Alaska.

Perhaps we should think about strengthening the dollar.
Oil jumps to new record on dollar’s fall
The weaker dollar that has propelled oil and other commodities prices higher sent light, sweet crude for April delivery past $103.76 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange. That’s the level many analysts consider to be the true record high for oil, after its $38 barrel price from 1980 is translated into 2008 dollars.
Mark D

lT

and this funding upturn occurred so late in President Clinton’s term that most of it was not reflected in increased expenditures until the early years of the Bush Administration.

Kinda like the war spending and prescription drug plan is gonna effect the next pres……..hey is that why you guys aren’t backin mccain, coz of the pile of shit ya created is startin ta stink?
Mark D

Vote republican.
They will cut taxes, increase spending and that will bring us out of this…..uh….slowdown or period of uncertainty.

Halatbis

As the economy faces a headwind from the cost of oil

damn arabs. If only we knew someone that could, or would want to, do something about it……….
Mark D

lt

So, my question is do you think it really helps convince anyone that your case is valid if your comments always seem to originate from a default position that isn’t intellectually honest?

And you are gonna tell me that others here do not originate from a default position? Please.

I am voting republican and there is no changing my mind. why would anyone want to change course?
I’m not a “cut and run” republican.
http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

They’re going to charge the market price of oil. However we could be getting a million barrels a day from ANWR and probably that much from other domestic sources. (90% of the facts on the internet are made up, but the ANWR figure is accurate, the excess capacity on the Alaskan pipeline).

What would keeping the equivelent of 2 million barrels a day do to the dollar as well as our economy. At these prices that’s $200,000,000 a day $73 Billion dollars a year.
Mark D

tw

What would keeping the equivelent of 2 million barrels a day do to the dollar as well as our economy. At these prices that’s $200,000,000 a day $73 Billion dollars a year.

What does that have to do with the strength of the USD?

ken

So you want him to invade Saudi Arabia?

Who said anything about invading saudi arabia?
that would piss exxon-mobil and the gang off and we don’t want that now do we. besides dicks new headquarters are just next door in dubai. too close in case one of them smart bombs go dumb.
docdave

Those tax increases are only the first tier tax increases. When all the liberal welfare programs are implemented, taxes will have to be raise significantly more to support these programs. If you don’t believe that look to Europe where in some countries the tax rate exceeds 50 percent (Sweden-55%). After all the government is going to take care of you from cradle to grave, why do you need any money?
http://rotstar.blogspot.com/ LifeTrek

Mark in the past I have seen you think and analyze things logically, however your default position seems to be the platitudes of the fever swamps of the far left blogosphere. For example

Vote republican.
They will cut taxes, increase spending and that will bring us out of this…..uh….slowdown or period of uncertainty

Yet the facts are:

Some may think the President’s recent attempts to squeeze domestic appropriations are being made in response to an explosion of domestic discretionary funding during his Administration’s first six years. But this is not correct: there has been no such funding explosion for domestic discretionary programs. Between fiscal year 2001 (the last year for which appropriations levels were set under President Clinton) and fiscal year 2008, funding for domestic discretionary programs has been more constrained than any other area of the budget and has shrunk both as a share of the budget and as a share of the economy.

One aspect of the budget that is rarely noted is that domestic spending levels are increased when economic surges occur, such as the dot com bubble

and this funding upturn occurred so late in President Clinton’s term that most of it was not reflected in increased expenditures until the early years of the Bush Administration.

Another:

damn arabs. If only we knew someone that could, or would want to, do something about it.

So soon you forget Kerry and the Dems in 2004

NY Times:Last week Mr. Kerry said that the president had allowed gasoline prices to rise 12 percent, suggested that he could do a better job of ”jawboning” countries like Saudi Arabia into producing more oil

Of course the unsubstantiated claim that Bush doesn’t use diplomacy doesn’t contradict your claim at all does it?

So, my question is do you think it really helps convince anyone that your case is valid if your comments always seem to originate from a default position that isn’t intellectually honest?
DKK
http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ proof_positive

that’s coz we don’t own them. big oil does.

Mark D Minus: Thanks for illustrating the

pile of shit… startin ta stink

with your logic, reasoning and grasp of the facts!
R. Hogan

All that oil sitting in Alaska, just waiting for extraction. Let’s go into the ANWR region and start drilling. But no, it’s more fun to whine and cry and blame about profits, evil oil companies…Of course the democrats have the answer, the only answer: “Raise Taxes”.
Mark D

r108
LOL…..you crack me up

We can always cut our price to get their market share

Who’s gonna tell exxon-bush-mobil they have to take a cut in profits………you?
Tell ya what, why don’t you give ol dubya a call and see if he can call his buds and start this price cut theory of yours.

Yes tw

let’s open anrw so foreign oil companies can take our oil. boy that would suck if CNOOC was the high bidder, hey… how about if Saudi billionaire Prince Alwaleed bought the rights…….he already owns 3.5% of citi group…..he could fly over it with his private jet…..an Airbus A380. with 500+ seats he got plenty of room to swing by and pick up dick and george on the way.
http://rotstar.blogspot.com/ LifeTrek

Mark:

And you are gonna tell me that others here do not originate from a default position? Please.

I would never tell you anything of the sort, as a matter of fact Rob has even called me pedantic for calling him out for similar actions. But even at his worst his points based in facts.

But that wasn’t the question was it?

By the way, I could care less who you are voting for, only that you present factual information rather then the hyperbole dredged up from the swamps.
DKK
docdave

Yep, Mark, we should all vote Democrat as they will sharply raise taxes AND spending (got to fund all those welfare programs especially national health) and increase our dependance on Arab oil by denying our oil companies the finding exploiting other local oil sources (oil shale for one) and building more refineries.
Mark D

LT
so sorry if I disappoint you. But between you and me….I don’t give 2 fuckaroonies.

there has been no such funding explosion for domestic discretionary programs.

Wow thanks for clearing that up. So the Iraq war did only cost 40 to 50 billion, just like they said it would. Oh…. the wars and increased defense spending doesn’t count. OK.

So soon you forget Kerry

He was president?
Please, I don’t call dancing, holding hands, hugs and kisses with the worlds #4 worst dictator diplomacy.
http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

What does that have to do with the strength of the USD?

Cutting imports would tend to do that would it not?

won’t opec cut production to stabilize the price if we pump additional oil?

Even with the price of oil higher, we’d be keeping the money in the country so we’d still be better off.
http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

Output from the northern state peaked at over 2 million bpd in the late 1980s, but has more than halved since then.

Which is why that if Bill Clinton had NOT vetoed the ANRW bill in 1995 we’d have a billion barrels a day more coming on the pipeline.
http://rotstar.blogspot.com/ LifeTrek

Whistler said:

Which is why that if Bill Clinton had NOT vetoed the ANRW bill in 1995 we’d have a billion barrels a day more coming on the pipeline.

Even more damning to the Democrats is this little tidbit:

(A)t the time ANWR was established it was understood that all of the land within its boundaries, including the coastal plain, would be open to oil leasing. At the press conference in 1957 at which he announced that the Eisenhower administration would support the establishment of ANWR, Secretary Seaton emphasized that “while this area will be closed to all forms of land entry which leads to appropriation of the title to the surface, it is our intention to permit the land to be opened to mineral leasing–oil, gas, potassium, sodium, phosphate, oil shale.” And the public land order Seaton signed in 1960 establishing ANWR implemented that policy decision by withdrawing all federal land within ANWR, including the land now denoted as the coastal plain, “from all forms of appropriation under the public land laws, including the mining but not the mineral leasing [i.e., oil leasing] laws.” That was the understanding vis-Ã -vis oil leasing inside all of ANWR until 1977 when President Jimmy Carter and the Alaska Coalition, the organization that environmental organizations created to lobby Congress to enact H.R. 39, repudiated it.

Two years later we had lines at gas stations due to foreign control of oil, thirty years on and we continue to refuse using our own resources.
DKK
http://rotstar.blogspot.com/ LifeTrek

there has been no such funding explosion for domestic discretionary programs.

Wow thanks for clearing that up. So the Iraq war did only cost 40 to 50 billion, just like they said it would. Oh…. the wars and increased defense spending doesn’t count. OK.

Wow, after I included it in the quote you still manage to remove the context.

You really don’t know that Kerry wasn’t elected? Because I never said he was, however he was the nominee and believed that the President failed to participate in diplomacy

Oh, so it only counts when offering to talk, dance, or whatever to any and all dictators like Raul Castro and Ahmadinejad? Thanks for clearing that up.

Your comments only reinforce what I said about intellectual honesty.
DKK
Hoss

It’s not exactly lost on us that you don’t say shit about all the proposed spending that the dems want to do. Instead, just deflect about BushhitlerMcCheney or whatever you guys usually do. Solid.

And you hate all the oil companies so much, do you also hate all those teachers/firemen/policemen, etc., that have a substantial amount of their savings invested in those companies through individual stocks and groups. Of course, those potential retirees/retiress wouldn’t have to stoop so low if they weren’t forced into throwing good money after bad into the government’s forced retirement program.
halatbis

As the economy faces a headwind from the cost of oil the Dem’s want to raise taxes on the productive part of our economy. That’s a way to incent those hard workers and investors—work harder–for less money.
Mark D

we continue to refuse using our own resources

that’s coz we don’t own them. big oil does.
Harvey Levy

It is a gimmee, a fact of life that Dems will raise taxes. That is their solution to every thing since I first began paying attention to politics in 1964. This all started (I think. Maybe really began with FDR) with LBJ’s war on poverty and the Dems have not looked back since. Why should this be big news?

On the subject of energy dependence the Dems do not offer any solutions except for sacrifice. Smaller cars, more regulations, legislation mimicking tree hugger sentiments. And I don’t see much difference in what MaCain offers. The only real solution, IMO, is to build lot’s of nuclear power plants and scratch all this alternative energy solutions like biofuels and wind driven tech. They’re innefficient, costly, and, in some cases, end up using more oil. Nuclear energy is safe, clean and uses zero oil. The US should also build more refineries. We’re still going to depend on foreign oil because it’s impossible to make up the difference between what we produce and what we consume but we will make a huge dent in our dependence on foreign oil.
Hoss

It’s not exactly lost on us that you don’t say shit about all the proposed sepnding that the dems want to do. Instead, just deflect about BushhitlerMcCheney or whatever you guys usually do. Solid. The lowest form of discourse, congrats.

And you hate all the oil companies so much, do you also hate all those teachers/firemen/policemen, etc., that have a substantial amount of their savings invested in those companies through individual stocks and groups. Of course, those potential retirees/retiress wouldn’t have to stoop so low if they weren’t forced into throwing good money after bad into the government’s forced retirement program.
http://insanereindeer.blogspot.com/ Kenny

Doc
That’s why I’m voting republican. I want a tax cut AND more spending.

As opposed to a tax RAISE and a LOT LOT LOT more spending.

damn arabs. If only we knew someone that could, or would want to, do something about it……….

So you want him to invade Saudi Arabia? Damn that war mongerer…not starting wars…
carrick

Rob, hate to break this to you, but there’s a flaw in your list. The real list almost certainly much longer than this.

Whistler:

Oh wait, John Sidney McCain has the same energy policy as the Democrats.

Man that is a low blow. Are you suggesting that McCain is a closet Australian now?
http://www.fileitunder.com/ Hoodlumman

Hopefully the Reps can raise holy hell if the Dems try and draft legislation that picks and chooses which will expire and which won’t.

Otherwise, if they all expire and every American that takes home a paycheck gets kicked in the junk all fingers will point to Reid and Pelosi.
Mark D

tw

Even with the price of oil higher, we’d be keeping the money in the country so we’d still be better off.

Or some of it…….BP holds just over 25 percent of Prudhoe Bay, which opened up a new era of U.S. oil exploration when it was discovered in 1968. It is expected to pump over 14 billion barrels over its lifetime.

Output from the northern state peaked at over 2 million bpd in the late 1980s, but has more than halved since then.
Mark D

but our consumption increases by 400k to 500k per day annually. so what do we do 2 years from now?

won’t opec cut production to stabilize the price if we pump additional oil? why didn’t they raise output yesterday? should we send dubya back to saudi arabia to dance with the worlds #4 dictator?

why don’t we fix the dollar?
http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

Why work when the government will steal your money and give it to someone who doesn’t like working.

SayAnythingBlog.com

A List Of Taxes The Democrats Are Going To Raise

Create a SAB Readerblog

Recent Comments