What is Digg?Warning: The Content in this Article May be Inaccurate
Readers have reported that this story contains information that may not be accurate.983 Comments
- WillObamaCutMyT, on 09/29/2008, -72/+242Very helpful tool. Hopefully this will help combat the perception that Obama is just another "tax and spend liberal."
- hokie47, on 08/28/2008, -16/+165Your tax cut would be a lot bigger with Ron Paul, but you can forget about universal health care.
- Yookji, on 08/28/2008, -27/+129 Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:
The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that's what they decided to do.
The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20." Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?' They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay. And so:
The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.
"I only got a dollar out of the $20," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man," but he got $10!"
"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I!"
"That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!"
"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!"
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier. - idc5, on 08/28/2008, -16/+110100,000-125,000 = no tax cut
150,000 = tax cut of $235.76
how does that work? - kdawg1012, on 08/28/2008, -43/+137I'd get around a $400 tax cut under Obama and a tax hike of approximately $300 under McCain. That's not what McCain is saying and I wonder why?
- cowguin, on 08/28/2008, -16/+105I don't want tax cut. I want the people who aren't paying taxes like Donald Trump to START paying taxes.
- macromorgan, on 08/28/2008, -5/+92I'm more interested in the Obama or McCain government spending cut. Let me know when there's a website that calculates that.
- meese, on 08/28/2008, -16/+95That's correct, you don't get one, because Bush already gave you one.
- Echota, on 01/05/2009, -99/+157This is great! I'm sending it to everyone I know!
Obama/Biden 08!
No Way,No How, NO McCAIN! - amoses7178, on 08/28/2008, -8/+65If you want to keep your Tax Cut then you MUST cut spending or those "saved" dollars will be worth much less.
Why?
Days of balanced budget:
$10 income
- $3 for taxes.
Government gets +$3
Government spends -$3
With Tax Cut and INCREASED Spending:
$10 income
- $0 for Taxes (yay! right?)
Government gets $0
Government spends -$4
Government must borrow from China, Germany, Australia, etc. $4
Interest charged from international community $1
Government pays it by printing money (technically we're tied to debt so this happens automatically) +$5
YOUR $10 is now added to a pool that has $5 dollars that weren't there before. (10+5) = $15 in the world when there was $10 before.
Your $10 still says $10, but it is now worth about $6.
You just paid your taxes using inflation AND the government STILL owes $4.
You've been suckered into a VERY bad deal! - samimnot, on 08/28/2008, -3/+60Here's a side by side comparison...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story ... - AlchemyToday, on 08/27/2008, -13/+69Depending on the number of dependents you have and whether you file as single or married, etc, the tax cut you'll get in that income range is practically identical for McCain and Obama. If your own person fortune (or lack thereof) is your primary concern, instead consider who will be best for the broader economy. Obviously, I have my own biases there so I won't try to convince you one way or the other.
The one anecdote that is compelling to me is that I made a lot more money in the stock market between 1992 and 2000 than I did between 2000 and 2008. Both periods saw a bust (tech in the late 90s, housing in the late 00s), but Democrats did better. Remember that a war is supposed to be GOOD for the economy, and Bush has still overseen disaster, with McCain having no policies that show any serious difference from Bush's. - Jerryskid02, on 08/28/2008, -0/+53In theory.....why are you having kids if you only make 10k a year?
- meese, on 08/27/2008, -8/+60Actually, no. Within the top 5% only the top 1% will actually see tax increases, and those tax increases will be minor. And they will not be bearing an "increased tax burden" that offsets everyone else's tax cut.
However, Obama will be closing corporate offshore tax loopholes, so yeah, those companies exploiting offshore loopholes will have to pay their fair share. - credential101, on 08/28/2008, -33/+85Taxes will never be cut....let's face it.
- whiskeymb, on 08/28/2008, -32/+84Silly Patrick, thinking that facts matter to republicans...
- fromaworld, on 08/28/2008, -13/+61he may say he's going to lower taxes on all these people, but there's no way he can pay for all of his social programs, like free health care, without raising taxes on *everyone*.
and don't think that raising taxes on people making over $250,000 won't affect you. Doing that raises taxes on small business owners. SB owners provide 70% of the jobs in America.
If there's less profit because of taxes, do you think the business owner is going to lower their salary or yours? - uncertainty, on 08/28/2008, -1/+47No idea. But single, no dependents and making 200k gets you a $2,775.62 tax cut. They should really post HOW they get this data and the process they use, but unless Obama's tax system uses some weird math I think this website is broken.
- eh123, on 08/28/2008, -58/+103"Your Obama Tax Cut is: You will probably not get an Obama Tax Cut"
Not surprised. - superkendall, on 08/28/2008, -100/+141You are a complete fool if you think a single American will see a net gain in income under Obama. A tax cut in income is more than made up for being drained by a thousand increased taxes - oil companies passing along punishing tax hikes are but one of them.
- plasticmind, on 08/28/2008, -27/+66I love how it drops the "John McCain would tax you $XXX.XX MORE than Barack Obama." if it's McCain would tax you less. If you're proud of taxing the rich and untaxing the poor, then at least have the balls to say so.
- WillObamaCutMyT, on 09/29/2008, -7/+46That's quite a one-dimensional way of picking your President.
1) Future Federal budget deficits from McCain's lower individual and corporate marginal rates could completely offset any of their benefits. To quote the Tax Policy Center's report: "Senator McCain has proposed substantial tax cuts, offset only very partially by proposals to broaden the tax base. Some of these tax cuts would have positive economic benefits, but adverse effects of the resulting increased deficits may make the net effect of the plan economically harmful. "
Also:
"More government debt eventually translates into higher interest rates, which discourage business investment and consumers’ demand for homes and such durable goods as automobiles, or, alternatively, into increased debt owed to foreigners, which mortgages the nation’s long-term economic future..." - TPC
According to the TPC's report, McCain's plan would add $4.3 trillion to the national debt over the next 10 years (2009-2018). To be fair, Obama's plan would add $3.3 trillion to the national debt over the same period, but at least his plan is more fiscally responsible to the tune of $1 trillion dollars. - Ajajadude, on 08/28/2008, -7/+45I don't know, it worked great during the 90's. The problem with Bush is the tax cuts coupled with insane amounts of spending, primarily on the Iraq. You can't cut income while increasing your spending like Bush has done. No "liberal" is going to be that dumb.
- inactive, on 08/28/2008, -6/+42Bush didn't cut taxes properly. He cut them primarily for investors, and smart investors have been buying up stocks in emerging markets, not the USA. Obama's tax cuts are targeted towards middle class consumers, and middle class consumption will almost certainly create jobs HERE IN AMERICA where those consumers live. When you boost spending power in the U.S, you incentivize production in the U.S. where those consumers live. More importantly, you give a big boost to the service sector which for the most part cannot be outsourced, period.
- zephc, on 08/28/2008, -3/+38Here's the Ron Paul Federal Income Tax Calculator table: http://i33.tinypic.com/2pobea0.jpg
- acroyear2, on 08/28/2008, -3/+38You should stick it to the RNC. They stiffed the American people by tossing Paul aside.
- SRSco, on 08/28/2008, -16/+51This is lame.
- Ajajadude, on 08/28/2008, -8/+40Tell you what, I'll take your income and you can have mine. That way, you can pay less taxes and I can bitch about making so much money I get taxed more than other people.
- sickpatriot, on 08/28/2008, -42/+71I get a $600 tax cut and pay an extra $200 under McCain! McCain is lying to me!
Send it to everyone!!! - geobabe13, on 08/27/2008, -32/+59You probably don't get a tax cut right now, buddy. The revenue generated by abolishing the Bush tax cuts for the upper 0.5% will actually be able to pay for programs such as univeral healthcare. Your out of pocket expenses will decrease, and therefore your takehome income will increase.
- TiMMY8765, on 08/28/2008, -2/+27anytime anyone uses the term "tax and spend liberal" I point out that it's better that a "borrow and spend" rebublican
- mbm985, on 08/28/2008, -9/+33I was really hoping somehow that that little thing at the end would rhyme.
- Nothlit, on 08/28/2008, -9/+32You misunderstand the web site. When it says "John McCain would tax you $____ MORE than Barack Obama" it doesn't mean McCain would raise your taxes by that amount. Reading comprehension FTW...
- diggproof, on 08/28/2008, -1/+23So McCain's "Obama will raise your taxes" commercials fail to mention is that it will only happen if you make over 600,000 a year.
- ReallyFunGuy, on 08/28/2008, -1/+23He's a cut taxes, eliminate tax loopholes, increase fiscal responsibility and government bloat liberal.
The cornerstone of modern economic liberalism is not redistribution of wealth, or equality of economic outcome (marxism and communism); it's about fiscal responsibility and accountability. The rich, and corporations, use much, much more governmental resources than the average person; there's entire governmental institutions used almost exclusively by the rich and corporations. Because they use more government, it is common sense to expect them to pay more. By eliminating the loopholes that allow almost all corporations to pay zero taxes (including by sending money overseas to tax havens), revenue will be increased.
As for education and healthcare, that falls under equal opportunity, not outcome. In order to compete in the market, you need to be in good health so you can work, and have the opportunity for education so you have the potential to be competitive. In addition, it is essential for a healthy democracy that the population be as educated as possible so that they can make informed decisions regarding the complex issues a voter faces. The specifics of how and by what means to ensure that the most people possible have healthcare and education, is the issue.
To cut government spending, Obama proposes to withdrawal from the unnecessary, illegal war in Iraq, and to re-examine and eliminate some of the no-bid contracts that Bush has given his cronies. - Nosferotu, on 08/28/2008, -0/+22And what's the deal with airline food, am I rite?!
- Sublimin4L, on 08/28/2008, -11/+33I want the rich to donate 90% of their income to me. Is that going to happen? Hell yes, as soon as I marry the rich girl I'm currently stalking.
- meese, on 08/27/2008, -24/+46In case the site is overloaded, here's a cached copy:
http://alchemytoday.com.nyud.net/obamataxcut/ - pcmart03, on 08/28/2008, -6/+28So, who runs this website and why should I believe them? (Sorry, the composition teacher in me wants to evaluate the source).
- Arramol, on 08/28/2008, -0/+21Ulsterwrod, read: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
If the calculator uses the actual numbers Obama and McCain have announced, then the figures it gives are accurate regardless of source, whether it was made by an Obama supporter, a McCain supporter, or the ghost of Josef Stalin. - Prosequi, on 08/28/2008, -5/+25Ok - but BOTH plans (Obama's and McCain's) increase the deficit; Obama by over 3 trillion and McCain by over 4 trillion. So neither of them have any business offering tax cuts unless they are going to be serious about cutting services.
- IpecacNeat, on 08/28/2008, -1/+21Striker, do you really think that is the way it is? Everyone making under 100,000 dollars is a deadbeat, who didn't complete college? How wrong you are. A strong middle class leads to a strong economy. More money in the pockets of middle class families means more spending. More spending means more profit for companies. Do you see how this works?
- diggproof, on 08/28/2008, -2/+22Remember that one old lady at one of McCain's town halls. "You tax us when we're born, you tax us when we die. You tax us when we eat, you tax us when we sleep... Get off our backs"
- robz2k, on 08/28/2008, -25/+44i get no tax break, does that mean i vote mccain?
- tastypaste, on 08/28/2008, -3/+22McCain is a POW. You're not suggesting that a POW would lie about tax cuts, are you?
/sarcasm - meese, on 08/27/2008, -10/+29Yeah, he plans on ending the war, for starters, which would save us over $100 billion per year. That's a pretty useless "program".
Obama has fought to make government spending more open and accountable already, and would continue to. Check out what you can find out via USAspending.gov, created by Obama's legislation:
http://dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/2/14/115223/079 ... - dysfunction, on 08/28/2008, -6/+24jason210: You do realize flat taxes tend to be regressive, and thus achieve the opposite effect of what you desire?
- cavitator, on 08/28/2008, -0/+18Because at 10k with 2 kids you probably already qualify for the EIC. The government is probably already giving you back money.
- ironpirate, on 08/28/2008, -25/+42Yes, lets make the rich pay all our taxes, then they'll stop spending and move out the country and their businesses...smart
- remotehuman, on 08/28/2008, -2/+19if you are voting based on one website that isn't 100% correct, you should either look into you're candidates more or just stay away from the polls on vote day.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 1003 discussions
Catch all of your favorite Digg shows in one place, including Digg Dialoggs, Diggnation, The Digg Reel and More!
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 