McCain Discovers Plumber's no Ordinary Joe

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
41

[quote]Bondslave wrote:
I lol at all the leftist d-bags that still think nobama is going to lower taxes. What is it about his voting record, his truthfulness in general, the democratic party, the current economic situation, or his giant spending agenda that would lead you to believe he is actually going to lower taxes?

You have no reason to believe him, so you are just one of the sheep that takes every word out of obamassiah’s mouth as gospel. [/quote]

Other than democrats generally favor progressive tax policies, and obama voting for both middle class tax relief and returning taxes on the top quintile to previous levels?

42

[quote]100meters wrote:
returning taxes on the top quintile to previous levels?[/quote]

I imagine your talking about capital gains tax?

43

Anti-Obamanomics: Why Everyone Should Be in Favor of Tax Cuts for the ‘Rich’
http://georgereisman.com/blog/2008/08/anti-obamanomics-why-everyone-should-be.html

44

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
100meters wrote:
returning taxes on the top quintile to previous levels?

I imagine your talking about capital gains tax?[/quote]

I was talking income, but yes capital gains for all intents and purposes is a top quintile issue.

45

[quote]Sloth wrote:
Anti-Obamanomics: Why Everyone Should Be in Favor of Tax Cuts for the ‘Rich’
http://georgereisman.com/blog/2008/08/anti-obamanomics-why-everyone-should-be.html[/quote]

That a promoting the supply-side, trickle down economic theory. There is more than one theory out there…

*"The progressive personal income tax, the corporate income tax, the inheritance tax, and the capital gains tax are all paid with funds that otherwise would have been saved and invested.

All of them reduce the demand for labor by business firms in comparison with what it would otherwise have been, and thus either the wage rates or the volume of employment that business firms can offer. For they deprive business firms of the funds with which to pay wages."

Um last I checked there were penalties for “saving” funds on a corporate level. And tax effects many things directly, but not ‘labor demand’, but indirectly yes it does. There are many other expenses to trim, not just labor.

Most corporations trim labor first, because they foolishly think it is a great place to start. It can often cost more to slash labor rates.

*“By the same token, they deprive business firms of the funds with which to buy capital goods. This, together with the greater spending for consumers’ goods emanating from the government, as it spends the tax proceeds, causes the production of capital goods to drop relative to the production of consumers’ goods.”

This happens natually, you don’t buy a new machine every year, but you do buy sneakers every year. Aside from higher Cap Gains tax makes investors want to buy and hold, giving corps the capital they need.

*“The individual and corporate income taxes, and the capital gains tax, of course, also powerfully reduce the incentive to introduce new products and improve methods of production.”

What?

I’m going to stop there. Yes supply side works short term, but long term it makes the next recession deeper, and requires MORE supply side, and as the cycle continues the debt gets deeper and deeper, and you spiral further down the rabbit hole. You end up with a few SUPER rich, and many super poor.

I have no problem with some having way more than others, but I do have a problem with government getting in the middle. Whether it be Dem or Rep’s view on things.

46

[quote]100meters wrote:
countingbeans wrote:
100meters wrote:
returning taxes on the top quintile to previous levels?

I imagine your talking about capital gains tax?

I was talking income, but yes capital gains for all intents and purposes is a top quintile issue.[/quote]

Bush never fixed AMT. Many rich people paid quite a bit of income tax.

Cap Gain is a double edged sword. Good and bad. The current crisis isn’t being helped by people pulling out. So a higher rate would help that, but then again why should they be forced to potentially lose everything… Double edge sword.

47

Economics in One Lesson
by Henry Hazlitt
The Lesson Applied
Taxes Discourage Production

http://jim.com/econ/chap05p1.html

48

[quote]Sloth wrote:
Economics in One Lesson
by Henry Hazlitt
The Lesson Applied
Taxes Discourage Production

http://jim.com/econ/chap05p1.html
[/quote]

HA HA. That is pretty funny. It’s like this…

If your profit is 10 and you pay 50% tax, your tax expense is 5 right?

Okay, so when your profit is 10, your revenue is at least 30. That means you have expenses that are much higher than 5.

Most business owners I know, understand this, aside form the fact, there are these things called bonuses. Any small business that pays tax, needs a better accountant.

49

Taxes are often one of the smaller expenses on the Income Statement, and still on the smaller side on the Statement of Cash Flows.

While it should be a concern, most business worry about it less than other expenses.

50

[quote]100meters wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
100meters wrote:

And all would benefit more under Obama more than McCain. Hence the humor of a guy willing to shoot himself in the foot to help support a quintile he’s not remotely close to. Odd really.

Why is that odd? That’s what every person who doesn’t make a quarter million dollars a year but votes Republican has done the past 20 years.

It’s actually old hat for the GOP- it’s what their success was built on.

I suppose you’re right. It is funny though to see those McCainiacs cheering him on while he derides Obama’s tax policies that so clearly benefit the people booing them. McCain talks about “spreading the wealth” and they boo, too dumb to realize they’re cheering the “concentration of wealth”.

More precisely McCain’s stump is I’m going to give me and Cindy $700,000 (what Joe the plumber makes in 20 years) and I’m going to give you (the crowd) a kick in the ass! And the rubes just cheer and cheer.

On the other hand Obama is black. So gotta priortize these things.

[/quote]

Gees, have you ever read a single book on eocnomics? Obama’s tax plan will benefit no one. We’ll mabey tax accountant. I am sure there will plenty of people that rush to hide their money like I will be doing.

Between living in MN and Obama, I will be losing half my salary. That is insane. I spend most of the week on the road away from my familiy. I have three young childeren that I get to see on the weekends most weeks. I work insanely long hours on the road. I make these sacrifices for my familiy, not to benefit someone who choses not to make the same sacrifices. I just don’t see how anyone can justify this?

51

[quote]100meters wrote:
Bondslave wrote:
I lol at all the leftist d-bags that still think nobama is going to lower taxes. What is it about his voting record, his truthfulness in general, the democratic party, the current economic situation, or his giant spending agenda that would lead you to believe he is actually going to lower taxes?

You have no reason to believe him, so you are just one of the sheep that takes every word out of obamassiah’s mouth as gospel.

Other than democrats generally favor progressive tax policies, and obama voting for both middle class tax relief and returning taxes on the top quintile to previous levels?[/quote]

Why don’t we just “return” the top bracket to 78% then. Imagine how well off we would all be?

52

I honestly don’t see much wrong with the current state of the IRC. I have a few minor gripes, but all in all it is pretty clean, and the only reason people get bent about the rich not paying taxes, is because they have more options. More often than not I see people with an AGI over 1,000,000 paying between 20-28%, while the few we do under 200,000 is roughtly 12-18% depending on how fucking stupid their portfolio is.

dhickey: yes we accountants will make some cake from either of the two fools plans.

53

[quote]dhickey wrote:
100meters wrote:
Bondslave wrote:
I lol at all the leftist d-bags that still think nobama is going to lower taxes. What is it about his voting record, his truthfulness in general, the democratic party, the current economic situation, or his giant spending agenda that would lead you to believe he is actually going to lower taxes?

You have no reason to believe him, so you are just one of the sheep that takes every word out of obamassiah’s mouth as gospel.

Other than democrats generally favor progressive tax policies, and obama voting for both middle class tax relief and returning taxes on the top quintile to previous levels?

Why don’t we just “return” the top bracket to 78% then. Imagine how well off we would all be?[/quote]

Or to lower them to zero? But seriously Joe the plumber is worse off now than 8 years ago despite aggressively lowering taxes for the top quintile. Clearly we need to return to a more sensible tax policy.

54

Here is a fact you might not have noticed. It certainly seems to have slipped by most Americans. The typical US household would get a bigger tax cut under Mr McCain’s proposals than under Mr Obama’s. I know a few politicians who could do something with that…

55

The Tax Policy Center seems to say otherwise. Under Obama most Americans will pay less.

http://money.cnn.com/2008/10/13/news/economy/voting_for.moneymag/index3.htm

Scroll down for a side-by-side comparison.

56

[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
The Tax Policy Center seems to say otherwise. Under Obama most Americans will pay less.

http://money.cnn.com/2008/10/13/news/economy/voting_for.moneymag/index3.htm

Scroll down for a side-by-side comparison. [/quote]

The number for the top 1% is very missleading. Anyone can run wild with that.

Included in that number are AGI’s of 35,000,000, that is alot different than 700,000. So the + & - numbers are skewed.

God damn CNN more details.

57

[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
The Tax Policy Center seems to say otherwise. Under Obama most Americans will pay less.

http://money.cnn.com/2008/10/13/news/economy/voting_for.moneymag/index3.htm

Scroll down for a side-by-side comparison. [/quote]

“Does note include health-care provisions.”

58

[quote]100meters wrote:
Tiribulus wrote:
100meters wrote:
rainjack wrote:
LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
Mick28 wrote:
This is just more of the same from the lefties. If you can’t control the message attack the messenger.

Who the fuck cares about Joe the Plumber?

This is just more of the same distraction from talking about issues.

You are about a stupid motherfucker.

Go back to your theory books. Every time you venture into reality, you say stupid shit like this.

There are millions of Joe the Plumbers out here in the real world: They are the backbone of our economy and our society.

And all would benefit more under Obama more than McCain. Hence the humor of a guy willing to shoot himself in the foot to help support a quintile he’s not remotely close to. Odd really.

But you’ve accidentally nailed the point of providing targeted tax relief to the “backbone of our economy”, and that’s obviously why Obama wants to give “Joe” the “plumber” that tax cut.

From the people’s republic of Mass.

Wadda shock.

Yes, I live in Mass., but reality is not unique to just this state.
[/quote]

No, reality boycotted your state decades ago.

59

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
100meters wrote:

And all would benefit more under Obama more than McCain. Hence the humor of a guy willing to shoot himself in the foot to help support a quintile he’s not remotely close to. Odd really.

Why is that odd? That’s what every person who doesn’t make a quarter million dollars a year but votes Republican has done the past 20 years.

It’s actually old hat for the GOP- it’s what their success was built on.[/quote]

So you two are surprised that there are still people out there that do not base their vote on short term economic gains but on long term considerations including moral reasoning?

Well, me too, but I do not see the problem.

60

[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Sloth wrote:
Anti-Obamanomics: Why Everyone Should Be in Favor of Tax Cuts for the ‘Rich’
http://georgereisman.com/blog/2008/08/anti-obamanomics-why-everyone-should-be.html

That a promoting the supply-side, trickle down economic theory. There is more than one theory out there…

*"The progressive personal income tax, the corporate income tax, the inheritance tax, and the capital gains tax are all paid with funds that otherwise would have been saved and invested.

All of them reduce the demand for labor by business firms in comparison with what it would otherwise have been, and thus either the wage rates or the volume of employment that business firms can offer. For they deprive business firms of the funds with which to pay wages."

Um last I checked there were penalties for “saving” funds on a corporate level. And tax effects many things directly, but not ‘labor demand’, but indirectly yes it does. There are many other expenses to trim, not just labor.

Most corporations trim labor first, because they foolishly think it is a great place to start. It can often cost more to slash labor rates.

*“By the same token, they deprive business firms of the funds with which to buy capital goods. This, together with the greater spending for consumers’ goods emanating from the government, as it spends the tax proceeds, causes the production of capital goods to drop relative to the production of consumers’ goods.”

This happens natually, you don’t buy a new machine every year, but you do buy sneakers every year. Aside from higher Cap Gains tax makes investors want to buy and hold, giving corps the capital they need.

*“The individual and corporate income taxes, and the capital gains tax, of course, also powerfully reduce the incentive to introduce new products and improve methods of production.”

What?

I’m going to stop there. Yes supply side works short term, but long term it makes the next recession deeper, and requires MORE supply side, and as the cycle continues the debt gets deeper and deeper, and you spiral further down the rabbit hole. You end up with a few SUPER rich, and many super poor.

I have no problem with some having way more than others, but I do have a problem with government getting in the middle. Whether it be Dem or Rep’s view on things. [/quote]

why do idiots always refer to classic economics as trickle down economics. What do you consider Smith, Von Mises, Hayek, Rothbard, Friedman, Haslett, etc?