Obama/Biden vs. McCain/Palin

[Thunderbird]

Dirty dirty ;) Let the trick's begin.

[coldcreation]

.

 

 

 

Watch your wallet

 

 

 

 

CC

[Moontanman]

The oil industry pays the same 'Corporate Tax' as any other business. Congress has decided, exploration is essential to National Security and does grant money for that. Farmers do get subsidized, for a number of reasons. Right now the big one is corn (their product) for ethanol production and R/A.

Some get grants for maintaining cattle or in fact growing or NOT growing certain products. Its an attempt to maintain some kind of consistency in agricultural production. No it really doesn't go on and on to any degree and much of the 'Farm Bill' is 'Food Stamp'.

 

The Federal does spend a great deal of money (around 1.5 trillion), through departments. NASA who receives funds through various department and a small amount directly from the budget, is a big spender. The Defense Department and National Security through many departments are big spenders. They follow set procedures to let these contracts and far in advance of any one administration and allocated funds come directly through Congressional Approval.

 

I do not agree with all thats said to be in the National Interest, nor should it be accepted by the public. This is the premise of the McCain/Palin campaign and Palin does have the Alaskan Check book on line, everything their legislature spends is listed and McCain has opposed pork spending back to and including the Reagan period. However IMO, if its in the National Interest, effects all 50 States, then the expense is warranted, even to a much smaller degree than done, to some social issues. Education and tiny amount that goes to each state, a still fair expense. An example the other direction, road construction (non-interstate) started out at about 5% and now near 95% and growing, with special projects always 100%. Remember gas/deisle taxes in many States are 2-3 times the federal, yet pay 1/10th or less the cost both taxes are collected for.

 

NASA is a big spender? Define big spender! NASA has been sucking hind tit for decades in the funding area. Even during the Moon race NASA didn't spend but a small fraction of the Federal Budget, not even significant compared to military BS that never worked. More money is wasted In a couple of months in Iraq than NASA gets in a year. NASA does not waste huge sums of money.

 

The Space Review: Putting NASA’s budget in perspective

[jackson33]

NASA is a big spender? Define big spender! NASA has been sucking hind tit for decades in the funding area. Even during the Moon race NASA didn't spend but a small fraction of the Federal Budget, not even significant compared to military BS that never worked. More money is wasted In a couple of months in Iraq than NASA gets in a year. NASA does not waste huge sums of money.

 

The Space Review: Putting NASA’s budget in perspective

 

I certainly didn't mean to infer NASA was THE BIG spender, having argued many times they should receive more. I mentioned them because they do let contracts, opposed to cost of the operation, more than most. The 1.4 Trillion or so I left open, is cost of the Federal and Welfare programs, which includes, retired military obligation to food stamps...

 

However NASA, for all practical purposes is the "Science Department" of the Federal Government. When I said "small amount directly from the budget", I assumed this would be understood. Anything science to Government goes

to NASA through other departments or Congress as grants from them, weather related, the current study of earth's outer atmosphere (current) or research and development on hundreds of topics. I would agree NASA waste the least of any department and by all measure has shown the most results over the years...

 

Since this is an us/them thread, I would suggest Science and/or NASA, would take THE back seat on the bus, under Obama/Biden.

[Moontanman]

I certainly didn't mean to infer NASA was THE BIG spender, having argued many times they should receive more. I mentioned them because they do let contracts, opposed to cost of the operation, more than most. The 1.4 Trillion or so I left open, is cost of the Federal and Welfare programs, which includes, retired military obligation to food stamps...

 

However NASA, for all practical purposes is the "Science Department" of the Federal Government. When I said "small amount directly from the budget", I assumed this would be understood. Anything science to Government goes

to NASA through other departments or Congress as grants from them, weather related, the current study of earth's outer atmosphere (current) or research and development on hundreds of topics. I would agree NASA waste the least of any department and by all measure has shown the most results over the years...

 

Since this is an us/them thread, I would suggest Science and/or NASA, would take THE back seat on the bus, under Obama/Biden.

 

Since NASA is already in the back somewhere under the buss tied on the under carriage by a thread and a prayer I see no reason for this to be relevant. Far too many people use NASA as some sort of whipping boy as an example of waste. I've heard "Oh so many people could be helped with all the million spent by NASA" from both Liberals and Conservatives over the years anytime a point needed to be made about wasteful spending I don't think either side really has a grip on how important NASA really is or even what waste is. Both sides are equally guilty of BSing people into believing they and only they have a handle on what should be and what shouldn't, I am not impressed by anyone on that level. If I had a ten dollar bill for every time I've some ignorant but all knowing loud mouth say "We need to stop spending all those billions in space and use them to make the Earth a better place!" I could own Mars by now and the first ten cities on the surface. NASA is used as a bad example by anyone and everyone who needs a scape goat. Not only sad but scary when you consider the space program has the potential to save us all in several different ways. It would be hilarious if those ignorant know it alls got space exploration stopped world wide just in time to see an asteroid strike the earth and end our civilization.

[Galapagos]

Horizon: The President's Guide to Science http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1424386236177531815

The President's Guide to Science

 

Horizon asks some of the biggest names in science to have a quiet word with the new President, be it Obama or McCain. The United States President is quite simply the most powerful man on earth, but past Presidents have often known little about science. That is a problem when the decisions they make will affect every one of us, from nuclear proliferation to climate change. To help the new President get to grips with this intimidating responsibility, some of the world's leading scientists, from Dawkins to Watson, share some crucial words of advice.

 

Apparently the BBC cares more about having a scientifically aware president than do any of our American TV stations.

[coldcreation]

Here's an email that got forwarded to me today.

 

...

INCOME TAX

 

MCCAIN (no changes)

 

Single making 30K - tax $4,500

Single making 50K - tax $12,500

Single making 75K - tax $18,750

Married making 60K- tax $9,000

Married making 75K - tax $18,750

Married making 125K - tax $31,250

 

OBAMA

(reversion to pre-Bush tax cuts)

S ingle making 30K - tax $8,400

Single making 50K - tax $14,000

Single making 75K - tax $23,250

Married making 60K - tax $16,800

Married making 75K - tax $21,000

Married making 125K - tax $38,750

 

 

Under Obama your taxes will more than double!

...

 

 

Why changes the subject (i.e., to NASA)?

 

 

This is what will affect every one in the very near future.

 

My choice is clear. ;)

 

 

 

CC

[Donk]

More Tax Deceptions

August 8, 2008

Updated: August 12, 2008

McCain misrepresents Obama's tax proposals again. And again, and again.

Summary

McCain released three new ads with multiple false and misleading claims about Obama's tax proposals.

 

* A TV spot claims Obama once voted for a tax increase "on people making just $42,000 a year." That's true for a single taxpayer, who would have seen a tax increase of $15 for the year – if the measure had been enacted. But the ad shows a woman with two children, and as a single mother, she would not have been affected unless she made more than $62,150. The increase that Obama once supported as part of a Democratic budget bill is not part of his current tax plan anyway.

 

* A Spanish-language radio ad claims the measure Obama supported would have raised taxes on "families" making $42,000, which is simply false. Even a single mother with one child would have been able to make $58,650 without being affected. A family of four with income up to $90,000 would not have been affected.

 

* The TV ad claims in a graphic that Obama would "raise taxes on middle class." In fact, Obama's plan promises cuts for middle-income taxpayers and would increase rates only for persons with family incomes above $250,000 or with individual incomes above $200,000.

 

* The radio ad claims Obama would increase taxes "on the sale of your home." In fact, home-sale profits of up to $500,000 per couple would continue to be exempt from capital gains taxes. Very few sales would see an increase under Obama's proposal to raise the capital gains rate.

 

* A second radio ad, in English, says, "Obama has a history of raising taxes" on middle-class Americans. But that's false. It refers to a vote that did not actually result in a tax increase and could not have done so.

 

These ads continue what's become a pattern of misrepresentation by the McCain campaign about his opponent's tax proposals.

 

Update, Aug. 12: The tax falsehoods continued with the release of a McCain Web ad Aug. 11 claiming that the "perks" of joining the Obama "fan club" include "a tax incease for everyone earning more than $42,000 a year."

Why on earth do you let people get away with this stuff??

 

A useful rule: if someone tells lies, it's because the truth would hurt them.

[coldcreation]

Why on earth do you let people get away with this stuff??

 

A useful rule: if someone tells lies, it's because the truth would hurt them.

 

 

You seem well informed. Maybe you can fill in the blanks with the correct numbers:

 

INCOME TAX

 

MCCAIN (no changes)

 

Single making 30K - tax $4,500

Single making 50K - tax $12,500

Single making 75K - tax $18,750

Married making 60K- tax $9,000

Married making 75K - tax $18,750

Married making 125K - tax $31,250

 

OBAMA

Single making 30K - tax ________?

Single making 50K - tax ________?

Single making 75K - tax ________?

Married making 60K - tax ________?

Married making 75K - tax ________?

Married making 125K - tax ________?

[Donk]

As far as I know the "Bush tax cuts" are time-limited - they'll expire unless voted on again. You're implying that McCain has promised to extend those cuts, while Obama has declared that he won't. Is that true?

 

Since it isn't my election, I'm not particularly well-informed. I just dislike seeing people telling lies and getting away with it.

[freeztar]

You seem well informed. Maybe you can fill in the blanks with the correct numbers:

 

INCOME TAX

 

MCCAIN (no changes)

 

Single making 30K - tax $4,500

Single making 50K - tax $12,500

Single making 75K - tax $18,750

Married making 60K- tax $9,000

Married making 75K - tax $18,750

Married making 125K - tax $31,250

 

OBAMA

Single making 30K - tax ________?

Single making 50K - tax ________?

Single making 75K - tax ________?

Married making 60K - tax ________?

Married making 75K - tax ________?

Married making 125K - tax ________?

 

The point in posting that email forward was to get people to research and do the fact checking themselves. It makes it much more interesting that way and also is the most effective way of knowing the truth and dispelling the rumors, imho.

 

So, to answer the above, I go to the source:

 

Middle class families will see their taxes cut – and no family making less than $250,000 will see their taxes increase. The typical middle class family will receive well over $1,000 in tax relief under the Obama plan, and will pay tax rates that are 20% lower than they faced under President Reagan. According to the Tax Policy Center, the Obama plan provides three times as much tax relief for middle class families as the McCain plan.

 

Barack Obama and Joe Biden: The Change We Need | Taxes

[coldcreation]

The point in posting that email forward was to get people to research and do the fact checking themselves. It makes it much more interesting that way and also is the most effective way of knowing the truth and dispelling the rumors, imho.

 

So, to answer the above, I go to the source:

 

Barack Obama and Joe Biden: The Change We Need | Taxes

 

Yes Freezy I understand. And I did do about an hours worth of research after your email post, and found some interesting figures, as you did

EDIT: (though I did not find the source of those figures in the email. So I could not confirm their validity, nor could I refute them).

 

I found, for example:

 

Throughout his Senate career' date=' [b']John McCain [/b]has a consistent record of cutting taxes. As president, he will fight efforts to increase the current tax rates, and will require a 3/5 majority vote in Congress to raise future taxes. He will keep the current rates on dividends and capital gains, while permitting businesses to immediately deduct the cost of equipment and technology, a powerful incentive for business expansion and job creation.

 

He'll also keep America competitive in the global economy by reducing taxes on businesses and giving a tax credit for the hiring of research and development workers. America levies the second-highest business tax rate of any industrialized country. To attract jobs here, that has to change.

 

John McCain will also provide tax relief for the middle-class families who need it the most. He will protect middle class families from the Alternative Minimum Tax and double the exemption for children and other dependents from the current $3,500 to $7,000. He will also provide relief for families struggling with high gas prices by suspending the Federal gas tax.

 

 

 

Barack Obama has very different proposals regarding taxes. Despite the current economic uncertainty, he has proposed a variety of tax increases, including hikes on income taxes, capital gains taxes, dividend taxes and Social Security taxes.

 

During his short time in the United States Senate, Obama has already voted in support of higher taxes 94 times. This is consistent with his record in the Illinois State Senate, where he supported hundreds of tax increases on businesses and families. In spite of his rhetoric about only raising taxes on the "rich," Obama has actually voted to increase taxes on people earning just $42,000 a year.

SOURCE, CNN.com

 

 

My point was that before calling the figures lies, the correct figures should be known. Donk apparently is not well informed, and yet and yet...

 

 

CC

[freeztar]

Yes Freezy I understand. And I did do about an hours worth of research after your email post, and found some interesting fugures, as you did.

 

I found, for example:

 

SOURCE

 

 

My point was that before calling the figures lies, the correct figures should be known.

 

I'd like to point out that your source posted above is from one of McCain's advisors (an ex-HP CEO). She claims that Obama has voted on bills to tax individuals that make $42,000 a year. She does not give sources for this info unfortunately.

 

Here's a good link (IMHO) that I found:

FactCheck.org: Do middle-income persons pay lower federal income taxes under Bush than they did under Bill Clinton?

[jackson33]

Absolutely every person paying taxes will pay more under Obama, if in deed he reverts back to the Clinton years, and for more than a few reasons.....

 

2000;

0-26250 15%

26250-63550 28%

63550-288350 36%

over 288350 39.6%

 

2008;

0-8025 10%

8025-32250 15%

32250-78850 25%

78850-164550 28%

164550-357700 33%

over 357,700 35%

 

This for a single tax payer and based on taxable income. Taxable incomes are after deduction or credits, which in the past 7 years have increased. Exemptions per child to credits for many items. In all ways the Bush tax program, was designed to increase 'small business' encourage those people to maintain business private (not going corporate). Any business can Incorporate for about 250.00, then filing either Individual or both Private and Corporate Tax forms. They can and have always, controlled what is due by controlling their own incomes from one to another.

 

Corporate Taxes on profits of about 150k to a million are 39% and above a million about 35%...not a typo. SS/Medicaid/Medicare payment by individuals are not paid under corporate and currently cease at 97K of earned income.

The small business person, pays all of each, but on profits or self paid income only, about 14%. The working person pays half, but on all income paid as does his/her employer, deductions of no concern.

 

I'll put it a different way; Taxes paid by the 'so called wealthy' are determinable, controllable and government receipts will come down. The average tax payer will be punished and in a big way. The infamous Email is not only correct, but has taken reasonable incomes to show the differences.

 

Google *US Tax Brackets* or go to "moneychimp.com/features/tax-brackets.htm" where they have a nice little caculator...

[Moontanman]

So I guess a few percentage points in taxes is more important than the economy, the deficit, lying and cheating to start a war, feeding the country to Haliburton, Global warming, having a job, and honor and respect in world politics? Do we go with McCain to save a few bucks or with Obama to try and save the country? Hard decision I know......

[coldcreation]

Absolutely every person paying taxes will pay more under Obama, if in deed he reverts back to the Clinton years, and for more than a few reasons.....

 

[...]

 

The infamous Email is not only correct, but has taken reasonable incomes to show the differences.

 

[...]

 

I had a feeling those numbers were not too far off. Thanks for the confirmation. I'll check out your links.

 

 

So I guess a few percentage points in taxes is more important than the economy, the deficit, [...] Do we go with McCain to save a few bucks or with Obama to try and save the country? Hard decision I know......

 

The idea is to keep taxes low, and at the same time work out the problems of the economy and deficit. Tax payers did not cause all the problems (like the morgage/credit crisis) and so should not be made responsible to fix them.

 

There are other means besides stealing from the rich (the old Robin Hood tactic, but without giving to the poor) to deal with the important economical issues at stake for the U.S. (and indeed for the global economy).

 

For example; more government regulations (but not too much) on firms (like Fannie Mae, which owned or guaranteed about half of the U.S.'s $12 trillion mortgage market or Morgan Stanley, or Lehman Brothers, and other financial institutions, e.g., other investment banking securities brokerage firms).

 

That is one way to prevent drastic downturns as we now see, but it will not eliminate them. For the past 250 years there have been cycles in the U.S. and global economies (even with gov. reg.). These are natural and nothing will prevent them from taking place again (the Art Market may be next). But at least the damage can be limited.

 

 

Both candidates will attempt to "save the country."

 

But only one will save you a few bucks.

 

 

CC

[jackson33]

So I guess a few percentage points in taxes is more important than the economy, the deficit, lying and cheating to start a war, feeding the country to Haliburton, Global warming, having a job, and honor and respect in world politics? Do we go with McCain to save a few bucks or with Obama to try and save the country? Hard decision I know......

 

The Economical Foundation, is still strong (I am not running for anything), employment high, interest rates low, most major industry showing profit, purchasing power and incomes high. Despite all thats gone on in the past eight years, including commodity/fuel prices, 20 million 'so called' illegals, two wars, and a host of natural 'so called' disasters and an AGING POPULATION.

 

Why not get on Google Corporation's case, they have the THE highest income when per employee is considered, while Halliburton has struggled for years as a labor based corporation. Get your priorities in order...

 

Global warming??? Thought we were in Global Cooling again, or are you just concerned with air quality or something. Government mandates are not going to cure anything and the people can't afford what has been suggested.

 

Cheat and start a war??? Please not again, I didn't promote those 19 idiots flying our plains into buildings or the idea the West is a degenerate society, needing to be wiped out.

 

In my little town, they are begging for help. If you can breath, walk and see and under 100yo, you can work here and I think many places. Honor and respect from what world leaders. Seems like they find us often enough when help is needed or their people have when applying of entrance, still only accept one in ten of those applicants. Save a country or equalize the people?

No matter what he or any one thinks they can do, will make urban living like living in the country.

 

Yes, a few percentage points today, a few more tomorrow, add in States, County and City/Town Taxes (to cover mandates) and we will challenge Cuba for the purest Socialistic Country. BUT, that was not my point; Obama and his followers (guess your one) are falsely telling ALL the people, taxes will not go up, that we need to go back to Clinton's rates and that only rich folks will get hurt. How many lies can you accept and not be concerned with just how another Liberal Administration could affect this country. After all Obama is said to have the highest Liberal Rating of them all, or is it just behind Biden?