Home Mobile Archives Reader Blogs Register Login

Thursday, June 12, 2008

Obama Says Most Americans Wouldn’t See Taxes Raised If He’s President

Barack Obama, apparently trying to shed the “tax and spend liberal” title he so richly deserves, is trying to convince Americans that most citizens wouldn’t see their taxes go up if he’s President.

Is that a true statement?  Not at all, which makes it a lie.

Just as one example, let’s keep in mind that Obama favors nearly doubling the capital gains tax from 15% to 28%.  Capital gains are taxes every American pays, regardless of income, on income from investments and sales of property.  Obama says that he favors this massive tax hike out of an interest in “fairness” and not for government revenue.  Because Obama feels that only rich people pay capital gains taxes.  Which isn’t true at all.  Approximately 70% of Americans have some sort of investment in the stockmarket, and any income they get from those investments will be subject to the capital gains tax.  Further, the sale of any property (second homes, investment land, lake cabins, or even the sale of things like coin collections) can be taxed as capital gains as well.

If Obama thinks doubling the capital gains tax won’t impact most Americans he’s a full.  It will impact a majority of Americans directly, and all Americans indirectly.  After all, the tax consequences of a given investment are a deciding factor for most people.  If those consequences are twice as bad, most people will be a lot less likely to invest.  Less investment means less property purchases, and less capital for businesses.  Less purchases and less money for businesses means fewer jobs and less wealth for everyone.

As JFK (someone who Obama is inexplicably compared to frequently) said in 1963:

The tax on capital gains directly affects investment decisions, the mobility and flow of risk capital . . . the ease or difficulty experienced by new ventures in obtaining capital, and thereby the strength and potential for growth in the economy.

Finally, it’s worth noting that even just raising taxes on “the wealthy” impacts all Americans.  After all, the wealthy tend to do a great deal of business with the not-so-wealthy.  If wealthy people have more of their money taken by the government they’ll have less to spend on those transactions, which in turn will hurt the not-so-wealthy who would have benefited from them.

I know that it is a liberal article of faith that the wealthy only help the poor when their money is taken from them by the government and redistributed to the poor, but the truth is that by merely spending their money in the economy the wealthy do more to help the middle and lower classes than any government program ever has.

Comments

Avatar for Jack

Rob, the canard of “trickle-down” economics was completely discredited in the 80s, and only zealots believe in it now.

The Tax Policy Center has a much more intelligent and cogent examination of McCain vs Obama on the tax issue:

The two candidates’ plans would have sharply different distributional effects. Senator McCain’s tax cuts would primarily benefit those with very high incomes, almost all of whom would receive large tax cuts that would, on average, raise their after-tax incomes by more than twice the average for all households....In marked contrast, Senator Obama offers much larger tax breaks to low- and middle-income taxpayers and would increase taxes on high-income taxpayers.

Look, it’s just this simple: Do you want a tax break, or do you want to give your tax break to Paris Hilton?

If you think you should pay more so Ms. Hilton can pay less, then by all means vote for Sen. McCain.

Jack on June 12, 2008 at 03:40 pm

This is the same crap Bill Clinton peddled back in 1992.

Kevin on June 12, 2008 at 03:40 pm
Proof
Proof
12801 comments
Send a private message

Obama Says Most Americans Wouldn’t See Taxes Raised If He’s President

In a Clintonian way, yes! They won’t see their taxes raised… that will happen in the halls of Congress. Most Americans won’t “see” it!
What they will see is smaller paychecks, as the taxes raised behind closed doors will negatively impact their standard of living for the next four years!



Barack Obama: All hat and no cattle since 1997!


Proof on June 12, 2008 at 03:45 pm

I am going to have to call barry a liar here.


Check out:
Goon’s North Dakota Red Neck
Goon’s World

goon on June 12, 2008 at 03:46 pm
Avatar for Grey Horse

Comrade Obama is quite the jive talker, isn’t he?

Grey Horse on June 12, 2008 at 04:07 pm

Jack said, Rob, the canard of “trickle-down” economics was completely discredited in the 80s, and only zealots believe in it now.

No it wasn’t.

The rich guy gets a tax “break”. What does he do with that money? Hide it under his mattress?

No, he either spends it or is forced to invest the money or lose out to inflation.

He buys a new house and jobs are created for the plumber, electrician, etc.

Or he invests the money, where it consequently goes out to other people.

TRICKLE DOWN.

Where’s your argument?

Senator McCain’s tax cuts would primarily benefit those with very high incomes...

Tax cuts aren’t a benefit program. It is an economic strategy to keep money where it works best - the free market.

Look, it’s just this simple: Do you want a tax break, or do you want to give your tax break to Paris Hilton?

“Give your tax break”?

That’s not “simple” at all. It’s just wrong.

If you think you should pay more so Ms. Hilton can pay less, then by all means vote for Sen. McCain.

That doesn’t make any sense at all. The economy is not a fixed pie.

likwidshoe on June 12, 2008 at 04:26 pm

...the canard of “trickle-down” economics was completely discredited in the 80s, and only zealots believe in it now.

Jack,

Apparently you don’t know anything more about economics than you do journalism.  The very term “trickle-down economics” was invented by some economics-illiterate liberal who believed wrongly that glib and intelligent were synonymous and regarded the earnings of American workers and American businesses the rightful property of the federal government to redistribute as necessary to buy votes.

Cutting tax rates, particularly the tax rates on capital, dividend and cap gains, stimulates economic growth, creating more more jobs, more wealth, and more tax revenues for government from those very same taxes.  Raising tax rates, as Obama has proposed, will only feed the growth of inefficient and unproductive government and stifle private sector economic growth and job creation.


“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

Bat One on June 12, 2008 at 04:30 pm

This is the same crap Bill Clinton peddled back in 1992.

Well, to be fair, so did Bush Sr., I think that blurb cost him an election.

What I find amazing is that adults still believe politicians when they blurt out things like that while campaigning. Nobody asks “but how are you going to pay for________” and follow up by forcing an answer when they dance around the question.


"we should select our leaders on principle first, electability second.”

A young man whose wisdom far exceeds his years

Spartacus on June 12, 2008 at 04:32 pm

BatOne, well put.  Just like “uncle tom” was perverted to cover up the Democrat’s intimidation of negroes in the south by the KKK.

The very term “trickle-down economics” was invented by some economics-illiterate liberal who believed wrongly that glib and intelligent were synonymous and regarded the earnings of American workers and American businesses the rightful property of the federal government to redistribute as necessary to buy votes.

Redistribution of income.  Read:  communism


Communism is evil

Chief RZ on June 12, 2008 at 04:33 pm
Avatar for Jack

lik:

You don’t have to prove that you are a zealot---we already knew that!

Jack on June 12, 2008 at 04:41 pm

When Carter jacked up the taxes on luxury boats, in order to further his class-envy economics, the people who built those boats suffered, not the owners, who just bought other stuff that wasn’t being outrageously taxed.  Even though it always fails to accomplish what they intend(class warfare), the Dems continue with their one-trick “tax and spend” policy; they have nothing else.  The truth is that the Dems want to steal from the “rich” to give to themselves.


Save America; boycott the MSM.

robert108 on June 12, 2008 at 04:47 pm

I think bush 41’s description of Raygun’s borrowed trickle down theory was the most accurate.


Excuse me, you were saying?


realitybasedbob's signature
realitybasedbob on June 12, 2008 at 04:50 pm
Avatar for dm

Obama says “most americans wouldn’t see taxes raised if he’s president”. Yeah, I’m buying that one.

dm on June 12, 2008 at 04:56 pm

It’s not “trickle-down”, it’s “flow-down”.  In the free enterprise system, money flows from the wealthy to the less wealthy, minus what the greedy govt siphons off.


Save America; boycott the MSM.

robert108 on June 12, 2008 at 05:00 pm

It’s voodoo and it doesn’t work.


Excuse me, you were saying?


realitybasedbob's signature
realitybasedbob on June 12, 2008 at 05:13 pm

I personally remember the Carter days.  20+% inflation, no gasoline because of government “price controls”, hostages in Iran.  Blue Jeans in the white house.  Disdain for the military.  Forcing out experienced NCOs.  Putting head in the sand, negotiating with the liar Arafat.


Communism is evil

Chief RZ on June 12, 2008 at 05:16 pm
Proof
Proof
12801 comments
Send a private message

You don’t have to prove that you are a zealot

“Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice; moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.”

-Barry Goldwater


Barack Obama: All hat and no cattle since 1997!


Proof on June 12, 2008 at 05:22 pm

Did the poor kids steal your lunch money Robot108?

it’s “flow-down”.  In the free enterprise system, money flows from the wealthy to the less wealthy

You need to leave the bunker and see the world.

WOOF on June 12, 2008 at 06:11 pm

It’s voodoo and it doesn’t work.

RBB,

You are wrong!  Just as you were the last tie we had this discussion.

The tax rate on capital gains and dividends was lowered in 1983, under Reagan, in 1997 under Clinton, and again in 2003 under Bush.  Each time the rate of GDP growth increased, and each time the revenues paid in to the Treasury under these specific taxes also increased.  And those increases were over and above what had been predicted by both JCT and CBO.

The “inconvenient truth” is that saying it just don’t make it so… especially when the subject is economic and tax policy and the sayer is a glib but uninformed liberal.


“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

Bat One on June 12, 2008 at 06:23 pm
Proof
Proof
12801 comments
Send a private message

It’s voodoo and it doesn’t work.

rbb confuses voodoo with zombies, since so many dead people vote Democratic:

The Night of the Living Democrats!

Image and video hosting by TinyPic



Barack Obama: All hat and no cattle since 1997!


Proof on June 12, 2008 at 06:30 pm

dm...I think Obama conveniently left out “that I know” in that statement. Windfall tax on Soros, setting him back to living on, I dunno, $65k pre-tax per year. The wannabe boy ((youth), although I am racist simply because I won’t vote for him and I willingly accept that) wouldn’t have a pool of wealthy liberals to fall back upon for re-election campaign funds if he follows through on campaign promises


"we should select our leaders on principle first, electability second.”

A young man whose wisdom far exceeds his years

Spartacus on June 12, 2008 at 06:31 pm

negotiating with the liar Arafat

i think more people than just carter did that a little.


Yun Chu said, “You must strictly not express in words what is very significant. Both dragon and snake are killed in one blow.”

Sparkie Arbuckle on June 12, 2008 at 06:52 pm

Taxes under bush have increased, no?


Yun Chu said, “You must strictly not express in words what is very significant. Both dragon and snake are killed in one blow.”

Sparkie Arbuckle on June 12, 2008 at 06:55 pm

Sparkie.  Carter was the President of the US and state department business was and is sole responsibility.  He was fooled by the liar Arafat as were quite a few more liberal Democrats.


Communism is evil

Chief RZ on June 12, 2008 at 07:39 pm

Taxes under bush have increased, no?

Sparkie,

Its an interesting point you raise.  Under Mr. Bush, tax rates have been reduced… but tax revenues have consistently outpaced every forecast I’m aware of, JCT, OMB, and CBO.

Rates went down… revenues collected went up.


“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

Bat One on June 12, 2008 at 08:00 pm

Jack - You don’t have to prove that you are a zealot---we already knew that!

And this is the entirety of the rest of your argument which only shows us that you can not explain the rhetoric that comes out of your mouth.

To answer your attempt at a slur: guilty as charged. I am a “zealot” for economic reality. I also zealously oppose those who wish to use taxes as a class envy bludgeon. I zealously use arguments that attempt to explain what happens to money rescued from the clutches of government. You, on the other hand, jealously bring up Paris Hilton.

“realitybased"bob - same to you. Where’s your argument?

likwidshoe on June 12, 2008 at 08:46 pm

Bob’s not answering just now.  He has zero bars and is out hunting for a picture to take the place of any rational argument.


“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

Bat One on June 12, 2008 at 08:49 pm

it’s “flow-down”. In the free enterprise system, money flows from the wealthy to the less wealthy

Minus what the greedy govt siphons off.  Nice dishonest cherry-pick, leftie!
Even an economic ignoramus such as you must realize that all those jobs for union thugs are a result of people with money investing it to create businesses, so that the union drones can collect a paycheck with no risk.  You dolt!  Without “the rich”, none of you lefties would have jobs.


Save America; boycott the MSM.

robert108 on June 12, 2008 at 09:00 pm

Look at the language of the left. It is “Voodoo economics” to let you keep your own money.

They’re telling us who they are with these statements.

likwidshoe on June 12, 2008 at 09:12 pm

He wants to apply Social Security withholding to salaries above $250,000 but not to salaries between the current $102,000 maximum and $250,000. He says that it’s unfair for people making a lot of money not to contribute. Is it just a coincidence that Senatorial and Congressional salaries fall in between $102,000 and $250,000?

Article

ews48 on June 13, 2008 at 11:17 am

Could be.  Maybe if they followed the same laws they want everyone else to follow, their approval ratings might climb above 10-15% phonies


Communism is evil

Chief RZ on June 13, 2008 at 02:08 pm
Page 1 of 1        

Post a Comment


Before commenting, please recite:

Grant me the serenity to ignore the trolls,
the courage to debate with honest opponents,
and the wisdom to know the difference.

Name   
Email   
URL   
Human?
  
 

Upload Image    

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Note: Notifications will only be sent to confirmed email addresses.

    

By submitting your comment you agree to our terms of service.