digg

Join DiggAbout

Call for questions
Submit and vote up questions you'd like to see answered by Kevin & Jay at the next Digg Townhall on 11/18.

See the original image at voices.washingtonpost.com —

Say it aint so! Joe the Plumber: Not a Licensed Plumber

voices.washingtonpost.com — Joe the Plumber is not exactly a plumber and he's "not even close" to making the kind of money that would result in higher taxes from Democrat Barack Obama's proposals.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • toetagger, on 10/16/2008, -31/+297FTA: "Wurzelbacher said he is of modest means, but worried Obama's tax plans would eventually hurt him. "You see my house. I don't have a lot of bells and whistles in here, really. My truck's a couple of years old and I'm going to have it for the next 10 years probably. So I don't see [Obama] helping me out,'' he told reporters this morning.

    He also sounded concerned about the attention he is receiving. "I'm completely flabbergasted with this whole thing and just hope I'm not making too much of a fool of myself and hope I can get my message out there," he said."----
    If Joe The Plumber thinks Obama's tax plan will hurt him, he's either just another dishonest Republican or he's ingested too much lead dust from them old pipes. What "message" would that be, Joe? That you can't do the math? Or is it just good old-fashioned disinformation and scare tactics?
    • treehugger87, on 10/16/2008, -19/+50Shouldn't that be "I hope I'm not making too much of a *tool* of myself?"
      • Smaulz, on 10/17/2008, -2/+1Kinda like these guys?
        http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/la- ...
        (Obama's campaign treasurer)

        Oops, as do his companies...
        http://webofdeception.com/obama.html#nesbitt
      • Smaulz, on 10/17/2008, -1/+1Yup, bury it quick, can't let THAT one get out!
      • treehugger87, on 10/17/2008, -1/+1Smaulz, you're being buried for posting links to meaningless CRAP. Am I supposed to derive some deep meaning from an article about how Obama plays basketball and an illegible web page claiming that Martin Nesbitt has a lien on his property? Doesn't *everyone* in Illinois have a lien on their property?
        Why not point out Andrew McCain's "two complaints alleging conversion, breach of fiduciary duty, negligence, fraud and civil Rico claims?" Links to an equally meaningless bunch of crap from the same page?
    • SpectralSounds, on 10/16/2008, -8/+109Ha! I knew it. I saw him on the news this morning and I saw right through his *****. I know master and journeyman plumbers. They don't make the kind of cash it takes to buy a business that makes over $250k a year. That would cost him well over a million bucks. This guy is just full of *****.
      • madeingermany, on 10/16/2008, -37/+9Not "being too intelligent" is a good thing in certain circles....
      • dmadip, on 10/16/2008, -118/+12Osama sucks!
      • charm803, on 10/16/2008, -16/+43@dmadip-

        Osama does suck, but what does he have to do with this story?
      • DreKor, on 10/16/2008, -6/+111@dmadip
        I think most people agree with you. Osama bin Ladin is an asshat.

        However, you're being dugg down because everyone assumes, and understandably so, that you are attempting to link Senator Obama with Osama bin Ladin because their name sound similar. And for that, you would also be an asshat. Also, following that logic, since you and Osama bin Ladin are both asshats, either he is a Digger, or you are a Terrorist.
      • beasty_dave_Mk2, on 10/16/2008, -5/+29Plumbers live by only three rules;

        "are the cheques ready yet?"

        the ubiquitous "***** runs downhill"

        and the newly implimented; "Don't lick yer fingers"

      • evanfp, on 10/16/2008, -3/+4@DreKor I've always preferred the term "ass scarf" myself. rolls off the tongue more.
      • Nairebis, on 10/16/2008, -6/+13Do you know understand the concept of business loans? No one pays cash for this sort of thing. The bank looks at the financials and sees if he can make the payments if they loan him the cash for the business. Of course, his personal credit is important and assets as far as down payments go, but he doesn't need to have a million lying around.
      • kahoona1, on 10/16/2008, -3/+17That's just what we need Nairebis...another loan to an untrustworthy person...
      • blarch, on 10/16/2008, -2/+9wouldn't osama bin laden be an assturban?
      • rondeth, on 10/16/2008, -0/+2@beasty: I would have thought the rule about the fingers would have been first on the list, but I'm not a plumber either.
      • dandonia, on 10/16/2008, -0/+1You missed the unwritten rules...... on purpose eh.
    • raytibbitts, on 10/16/2008, -35/+24What the ***** does it matter who the guy is asking the question. The only interesting thing was the answer, and the only thing that made the answer interesting was that it was Obama's answer, and that Obama simply answered the question, accepting the premise that the guy WAS going to be taxed more, as many people would be taxed more under Obama's proposal.

      Obama's answer had nothing to do with this loser really being a real plumber or not.
      • SpeedSteamBoat, on 10/16/2008, -12/+55Are you daft? It's been explained countless times this guy doesn't make anywhere near $250k (and thus WOULD NOT be taxed more under Obama's proposal). Not only that, he doesn't even have the means to buy a business that makes that much. Not only that, it's highly unlikely that the business he works for actually turns a $250,000 profit (I mean, it almost certainly doesn't). Not only that, he's got backed taxes so why would we make tax policy based on a guy who can't even be bother to pay his? Not only that, the guy is a registered republican so what are the odds do you think he actually examined both candidates plans objectively and made an educated descision.

        If you ask me, this guy isn't even worth talking about. He was played out the first time McCain mentioned him.

        I would be extremely surprised to learn Joe the Plumber even understands either candidates tax proposal and how it effects him. Sounds like Joe just watches too much Faux News, and the same goes for you. If by "many people" you mean "the top 5% of U.S. tax payers" then sure, "many people" will be taxes more under Obama's plan. However, I'll say this again since you keep missing it, Joe the Plumber is definitely NOT one of those "many people."
      • kismetropolis, on 10/16/2008, -10/+31The representation of him being a middle class American, and therefore potentially a bigger percentage of the population being taxed more is why it matters.

        McCain wanted it to look like Joe The Plumber and everybody like him would be hurting under Obama. And that's just not the truth.
      • financedude2, on 10/16/2008, -3/+7http://money.cnn.com/2008/10/15/smallbusiness/smal ...
      • oblique63, on 10/16/2008, -3/+15yes, but what the parent commenter is saying, is that Joe the Plumber's premise was most likely false (which potentially came out as such, because of the misinformed scare tactics McCain is employing)... thus making the question not really relate to the 'average person' as is it was intended, and causing it to be, overall, misleading to the people...
      • raytibbitts, on 10/16/2008, -6/+3As much as I hate admitting to making a stupid assumption, but I don't think this is the same plumber that Obama told to be happy and spread his wealth around.
        I this is the case, then yes, I was daft to assume that it was the same plumber. And, yes, both plumbers are hardly worth talking about, yet both candidates' policies are barely acceptable, and surely worth exploring.)
      • raytibbitts, on 10/16/2008, -5/+7Holy *****, this IS the same guy.

        I am surprisingly NOT DAFT. (after 30 minutes of googling to be sure.)

        An YES, the only thing that matters is Obama's answer. It is important that politicians define their beliefs and policies. Obama finally makes sense to me, and I have finally heard it from his own mouth,, Thanks Joe the Plumber.
      • robopuppy, on 10/16/2008, -1/+12No, MANY people would not be taxed more. Very few would. Look at the percentages again. 95% is a whole lot. 5% is very little. Therefore, MANY people would benefit from Obama's tax plan, whereas very few would have to pay more. Goddamn, it must be ***** horrible to be rich!
      • raytibbitts, on 10/16/2008, -11/+3Oh, and politicians need to stop ***** with other people's wealth.
        My boss needs her wealth so she can continue signing my paychecks, and making me happy by spreading her wealth to me.
        THAT'S how you spread wealth *****.
      • sleazycheese, on 10/16/2008, -10/+1@robopuppy

        You don't like that someone else has more money than you? Increase your education. Try being self-reliant instead of voting for politicians who promise to transfer other people's earnings to you. Nobody is OBLIGATED to support you, other than yourself.

        Also, with respect to 95%/5%, please read up on majority rule vs. minority right.
      • uncleosbert, on 10/17/2008, -0/+1@raytibbits and sleazycheese

        no, i love it that other people have more money than i do, because that means the government has a very convenient source of revenue to fund schools so i can increase my education.

        a progressive income tax doesn't prevent the minority from enjoying the fruits of their labors. how on earth do you spend $1,000,000 a year? how do you spend $250,000?

        the fact is, it is just weird for people to vote based on a fantasy, and that is what both of you are doing. no, this guy on the tv will not be paying more in taxes, even though he lied about that when he spoke to obama on tv. that means obama answered based on a lie, but the tax plan is there for anyone to find.

        why does it upset you so?

        you know who would pay more in taxes? bill o'reilly. michael moore. sean penn...

        probably not sleazycheese or raytibbits. and if you give a crap about the country, you might notice we're deep in debt from having cut taxes while we waged a war at the same time. what you guys are suggesting is that we should run the country into the ground because your ideology demands it.

        you know how much you're fighting for, for fake joe?

        "Bloomberg reports that “one other problem in making Wurzelbacher a symbol of the overtaxed” is that — even if he did earn an adjusted gross income of $280,000 — “he would pay just $773 more in taxes under Obama’s plan than McCain’s.” That amount would hardly deal a crippling blow to his potential small business."

        real joe probably borrows from his father in law when he's in deep doodoo.
        http://www.eisenstadtgroup.com/2008/10/15/joe-the- ...

        good job, guys. you've rediscovered feudalism.
    • bigstinky, on 10/16/2008, -10/+42I for one believe he was a plant.

      And no, (for you comedians out there) I'm not saying he was green and full of foliage.

      I will bet there will be more on this "move" to follow. Such as his relationship to another better known Wurzelbacher in Ohio.
      • thcobbs, on 10/16/2008, -36/+13How does that change the fact that it was a legitimate question that showed Obama really believes in a socialistic society?

        Whether or not he was a plant... what's wrong with him asking a valid question that Obama chose to answer? Its not like he asked the standard "So, when did you stop beating your wife" type entrapment question.
      • stubear, on 10/16/2008, -5/+39@thcobbs,

        Please explain how eliminating tax BREAKS for the rich (those making $250,000 or more per year) somehow makes Obama a socialist?
      • DreKor, on 10/16/2008, -3/+12I don't know if the guy was a plant or not. I wouldn't be surprised either way. I don't mind that he asked a question on the street. I do mind that, when interviewed on national TV, he spouted GOP FUD and talking points in a charmingly folksy way.
      • bigstinky, on 10/16/2008, -5/+22How can you not see what Obama says he is trying to do? HE WANTS TO LOWER TAXES FOR 95% OF AMERICA. If you don't make $200,000 a year, YOU WILL PAY LESS TAXES. Between 200 and 250 there will be no rise in taxes.

        I will bet my arse you don't make 250k. You only stand to gain.

        Your socialism argument is weak. But not as weak as the fascism buschco has been working on. Vote McCain to continue the conversion.

        You like to call Dems "sheep," but it is you on the right who are truly the sheep. Buying into the talking points but not FACT. I don't feel sorry for you fools.
      • toetagger, on 10/16/2008, -1/+7http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Joe_the_Plumber_ ...
      • thcobbs, on 10/16/2008, -19/+4@stubear
        This phrase is what depicts Obama as a socialist: "spread the wealth around".


        Now, everyone who supports obama is going into massive damage control. They have immediately dog piled on this man(plant or otherwise) when he finally got Obama to say something stupid. It doesn't diminish the whole socialistic idea of taking MORE money from the rich "because they can afford it" and giving it to the poor.

        @bigstinky

        Considering the top 1% of Wage earners in America pay 50% of the tax, how is it fair to ask them to pay for even more? This is class warfare plain and simple. "You got yours, now give me some... you owe it to me."
      • SpectralSounds, on 10/16/2008, -3/+15It's interesting that McCains advisors said they were trying to call "Joe the plumber" during the debate, but his number was busy. How did they get this guys number?

        Oh yeah, because McCain was (is?) associates with his relatives (The Keatings). "Joe" is a registered republican and this was all known. He was never an undecided voter, and this whole thing is a sham.

        Joe Sixpack aka Joe Plumber is a republican shill liar. Big surprise.
      • thcobbs, on 10/16/2008, -15/+2@SpectralSounds

        OK.

        How does that change what Obama said? Or are you just an Obama damage control shill who would rather demean someone than face what your chosen candidate said?
      • madrid, on 10/16/2008, -1/+15@thcobbs

        You said: "This phrase is what depicts Obama as a socialist: 'spread the wealth around'."

        Interestingly enough, this idea of spreading the wealth around isn't too distant from the old republican talking-point about tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy, also known as "trickle-down economics"

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trickle-down_economic ...

        It's just posed in a way that sounds less "socialist," otherwise it's the same "idea."
        In principle, the trickle-down economic theory is much worse because it makes the assumption that the wealthy are somehow more responsible with the money, and will pass it on as they see fit, while hiding the fact that in most cases, they simply keep it for themselves, or cycle it between other wealthy individuals. In my estimation, that's simply greed.

        Obama's proposed tax structure basically enforces the sense of responsibility that high-income makers should bear in our society: pay your part. As it stands, the corporations and the wealthy enjoy all kinds of tax cuts, loopholes and other methods for avoiding taxes, which if you ask anyone who knows a thing or two about the principles of taxation, is about as anti-American as it gets. If you don't believe me, try refusing to pay your income tax for a year, and see what the feds have to say about it.
      • oblique63, on 10/16/2008, -1/+4@ thcobbs:

        it doesn't change what obama said at all, so who cares? you guys who like have an irrational phobia against 'socialism' are the ones putting a 'negative' spin on it... does the concept of 'The Greater Good' resonate at all with you guys? I mean seriously, for being a 'christian nation,' that's awfully selfish...

        also, there wouldn't be any 'damage control' needed if Joe asked his question under realistic pretenses, because now Joe somehow seems to have pretty much everybody believing that they could easily qualify to have tax increases, and that is simply not the case...

        try this at home kids:
        -Tell some middle class worker Obama's plan (somewhat vaguely, to mimic the thickness of these McCain sympathizers), and then get his reaction. Prediction: concern about being taxed more.
        -Now, tell them if they think they'll be able to get to earn a stable 250k/yr income within the next 4 years, and get their reaction. Prediction: LOL
      • robopuppy, on 10/16/2008, -2/+9@thcobb

        I'm not sure why you think that the money "taken" from the rich will go to the poor anyway. This isn't Robin Hood where he steals some gold and jewels from the rich baron and rides to Nottingham Forest and gives the money directly to the poor people living in the trees. The fact of the matter is that we all pay taxes, and percentage-wise paying those taxes hurts poor people a whole lot more than it hurts rich people, yet you'll still be able to afford your Mercedes, while that poor person might not be able to buy their cup o' ramen for lunch the next day because of that percentage.
        In fact, I'd be willing to bet that only a small amount will go to welfare programs, probably even less than before, considering the huge amount of problems we've accumulated under the fiscal conservatives practice of GLOBAL socialism.
        I can understand your worry about paying for other peoples healthcare, but only a selfish ***** would not want that for every American. I thought we were on the same team. Why do you hate Americans and want them to die?
      • bigstinky, on 10/16/2008, -1/+5Thank you toetagger.

        Exactly what I was waiting for.

        @thcobbs...

        I believe those that make ridiculous amounts of money, (in the vein of ExxonMobil) and especially those that send our jobs overseas to save a buck, should be slammed tax wise so as to rethink their wont to utilize cheap foreign labor. As well as crafting garbage product. People that make 250 k a year can afford to pay more in taxes. After all they're the ones who benefited while the rest of the country went into the tank.

        They love to use the argument that if they were taxed more they couldn't afford to pay workers. What workers? the ones in China and India? I do not feel for them. I feel for the guy or lady who busted their ass for years, only to come home one day and realize the job is gone, I can't pay my bills, how am I going to feed my family? The middle class is gone. It's the uber rich vs the rest of us and I for one say screw the rich. Let em' eat ***** like the rest of the country.

        If you make over 250k a year, then good for you, if you don't then you should get on board and support the man who's at least trying to come up with ways to save and rebuild the middle class. As well as put more money in your pocket.
    • Nitesmoke, on 10/16/2008, -24/+33Digg is funny. Instead of examining Obama's statement of "spread the wealth around" let's attack the guy that asked the question. I'm curious to see how Diggers feel about what Obama said, ***** Joe.
      • MammasMilk, on 10/16/2008, -10/+20I guess that would have nothing to do with Joe being a liar and the fact the Barak was correct when he said Joe would get a tax break so he could save money to buy that business.

        of course, if "Joe" the Not-a-Plumber ever does manage to save up to buy that busines with the help of Obama's tax plan, I sincerely doubt he'll do anything but run it into the ground considering he as well as you cannot seem to grasp something that has been very simply explained.
      • nicheplayer, on 10/16/2008, -7/+18I think Obama did a great job of explaining "spread the wealth" in the debate last night. Go watch it again. What's to examine?
      • stubear, on 10/16/2008, -7/+15I think he answered the question fairly, honestly and consistent to his platform from day one, unlike the Maverick twins who keep making up ***** to make it sound like they even have a platform.
      • oblique63, on 10/16/2008, -7/+9the problem was that 'Joe's question was potentially asked under false pretenses (i.e. Joe making over 250k/yr)...

        I don't love obama, but I have no problem with his answer because it is a plan that would be for the greater good... sacrifices have to be made in order to improve our economy, and frankly, if I were making over 250k/yr, I cant say that I would care very much to have to give back to the community, because I would know that I would be better off than a vast majority of the population... and as for the 'small business owner' scenario, the main thing there was medical insurance costs, and in his answer, obama clearly stated that that would be practically subsidized for small businesses, and that only large businesses like Exxon would have to pay the infamous 'fee'. so, overall, even though I feel that the term 'spread the wealth around' is an exaggeration, how else is the country supposed to fund itself? you need taxes, and who better to tax than the few lucky ones on top of the economic ladder who wouldn't be affected as much as the rest of us middle-class people? sure, tax cuts all around would be great, but realistically, this country cannot afford it, and the middle class would need a rather hefty tax break to really jumpstart the economy again, and I just don't see a better way to go about doing that, than with what obama's proposing, honestly...
      • maz2331, on 10/16/2008, -15/+6Because Digg is a hotbed of socialists and communists, maybe?
      • raytibbitts, on 10/16/2008, -9/+2As much as I hate admitting to making a stupid assumption, but I don't think this is the same plumber that Obama told to be happy and spread his wealth around.
      • BossKey, on 10/16/2008, -3/+8"Spread the wealth around" means what you want it to mean. If you want it to mean socialism, you're going to think socialism. If you want it to mean improving the economy for all, then that's what you'll think.

        On the flip side, being against "spread the wealth around" could be interpreted as "keep wealth highly concentrated at the top while the rest of us beg for some to trickle down to our exhausted, hard-working lives."
      • raytibbitts, on 10/16/2008, -4/+4Holy *****, this IS the same guy.

        (after 30 minutes of googling to be sure.)

        An YES, the only thing that matters is Obama's answer. It is important that politicians define their beliefs and policies. Obama finally makes sense to me, and I have finally heard it from his own mouth,, Thanks Joe the Plumber.
      • raytibbitts, on 10/16/2008, -6/+4Oh, and politicians need to stop ***** with other people's wealth.
        My boss needs her wealth so she can continue signing my paychecks, and making me happy by spreading her wealth to me.
        THAT'S how you spread wealth *****.
      • uncleosbert, on 10/17/2008, -0/+1i think only retards like raytibbitts think that feudalism is a good idea. the redistribution of wealth so many people equate with socialism is something our country has been playing with since the 1800s. i don't say this to suggest that we've ever done it perfectly, but i do notice that our country did not participate much in world affairs until the twentieth century when fdr took his cue from the economic shock from the depression to build social services. this is what made our country great.

        and maybe you really think that is philosophically wrong, but i notice how much we've all benefited from strong central planning. how could you have internet millionaires without the internet? the idea that millions are made in a vacuum without the infrastructure built by other people's taxes is divorced from reality.
    • Ant0ni00, on 10/16/2008, -11/+5I wonder how much he was paid to take this beating from the media. It just looks so set up to me.

      He comes out right before the debate to stir a pot of ***** soup, because these debates have extraordinarily large viewer attention. After the debates, things pretty much wash over people. That's probably why McCain regurgitated the same talking points and erroneous misquotes he said in the last debate. He knows that during the debate is the most important time to do things like that because most people won't care afterwards.

      I doubt if Joe Plumbitch even cared if Obama's plan helped him or not, because he's had his mind made up for a long time. The media is ripping him a new one, but the debate is over and McCain has already tried to use this guy to appeal to the "average American" vote.

      Personally, I think his question was staged and he probably was paid to do it. The backlash he's getting right now doesn't matter. In a few months he'll be owner of Joe Corp with the money he received to execute this half ass pseudo-smear plan.
      • thcobbs, on 10/16/2008, -4/+3How the hell is a smear plan with it was a straight-forward question? Or are you saying that Obama said something he really doesn't believe?
      • dkistner, on 10/16/2008, -1/+5I thought he was a plant the first time I saw him. After the debate and him coming out to the press this morning, it's clear to me that this is more Rovian-style manipulation of the electorate. My intelligence is insulted. And trying to kill two birds with one stone, too: Say it ain't so, Joe.... Despicable.
      • Nitesmoke, on 10/16/2008, -4/+3The guy asked a simple question. Whether he was planted or not isn't the real issue (despite what the left would have you believe). The issue was Obama's answer to the question. "Spread the wealth around" just doesn't jive with a lot of people.
        Let me pose a hypothetical:
        A woman, planted by the Obama camp, asks John McCain about Iraq. "My son is in Iraq, when will you bring him home?" McCain responds, "When I feel like it" or something that is just stupid and offensive as "spread the wealth around." The next day, it turns out the lady doesn't even have children. Would Digg be hammering the woman for being a liar, or does Digg hammer McCain for the answer? All most people ask for is fairness. Who cares who asked the question, the answer is the controversy.
    • bleh19799791, on 10/16/2008, -5/+31Someone forgot to vet the stage prop.
    • nycjap, on 10/16/2008, -5/+12From "Average Joe" to "Average Schmoe". No license required!
    • FcukAllYall, on 10/16/2008, -2/+1http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/You_Can_Vote_How ...
    • toetagger, on 10/16/2008, -4/+24http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Joe_the_Plumber_ ...

      Samual "Joe" ***** is related to Charles Keating. The GOP is dead.
      • treehugger87, on 10/16/2008, -0/+3Good catch, toetagger! That's hysterical. John McCain made someboday famous - we all know his name! What a maverick ;)
    • ErickStevenson, on 10/16/2008, -0/+3http://money.cnn.com/2008/10/15/smallbusiness/smal ...
      http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/16/joe- ...

      The Truth!
    • anixmander, on 10/16/2008, -9/+3I am puzzled by the attacks on this guy. What did he say that was so wrong? He asked Obama a question about taxes, Obama gave him what was apparently an answer he didn't like. But nowhere in there did he say that Obamas tax plan would hurt him, he said that he didn't see that it would help him any.

      Not the same thing.

      What the hell is wrong with all you liberals and conservatives? Are ANY of you capable of doing anything besides attacking each other? Is that all any of you know how to do? What a ***** waste of time and

      Maybe this country wouldnt be going into the ***** if all you narrow-minded zealots would spend less time calling each other names, and more time doing something constructive.

      Probably too much to ask though. Of either group.
      • xptoast, on 10/17/2008, -0/+1I honestly don't care for either side right now. It is like trying to pick which leg to cut off. I honestly like both of my legs. I however dislike the insane amounts of name calling and arguments over the candidates. It is like arguing about football or anything else. It will get you nowhere. In my life I have noticed that people will not change their mind because of what someone else says. This is especially true when the person trying to sway the other is being angry, yelling or any other insane tactic. The only way I have ever changed myself or seen others change is by means of traumatizing experiences in life such as relationship failures, family deaths or changes, money problems, health problems, etc. (If anyone feels this comment is to try to sway you I apologize to you and wish to let you know that is not the intention but merely a reply to this person who is upset.)
      • anixmander, on 10/17/2008, -0/+0Going by all the diggs down, I struck a nerve.

        Thats just too damned funny.

        Well said xptoast.
      • uncleosbert, on 10/17/2008, -0/+1if you're puzzled, here is some background (i mean the video, not the article... just joe's own words):

        http://crooksandliars.com/david-neiwert/joe-plumbe ...

        joe seems to be asserting that the american dream is paying no taxes. he says obama scares him with this socialist plan which is not the american dream. please correct me if you think i'm not accurate with this representation.

        the thing is, we've had a progressive income tax since fdr was in office. what joe says doesn't make any sense unless you believe the united states has been a socialist country for the better part of a century.

        is that what you think? i'm not trying to start a fight, but i literally cannot understand why that idea has any traction.

        personally, i am an american and in my dreams i accept that other people aren't as lucky as i am (though some are much luckier). just a few years ago we took out a student loan so my husband could go back to school.

        we're paying it back and i'm ecstatic to be in a higher tax bracket because it means we're not poor like we were.

        that's the american dream: being able to live your life because you were free to pick up the tools others invented. if joe values the ability to go to a hardware store and buy a wrench invented centuries before his birth and imported from china, then it's just ludicrous for him to assert that he earned his money all by himself. he doesn't make his own tools. he didn't invent the pipes he fixes. we all make our living on the backs of others.

        on top of that, he isn't as wealthy as he claims to be. to me, this implies that hard work is really not all that determines your income. sometimes it's luck. check out the stories in this article about the ripple effect of joe the plumber:
        http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?A ...

        and on the off chance our taxes go up under obama, i can tell you honestly, i wouldn't mind if joe got some. i really mean that.

        @xptoast

        if you don't pay attention to the candidates and only look to their supporters, that's to be expected. we're not on tv most of the time, and some of us are really awful.

        but i won't give up on the idea that civil discussion can change minds. i think the founding fathers believed that, since they gave us all the right to assemble and speak our minds.

        and i think they knew what the risks were, when washington warned us about giving our allegiance to political parties instead of ideas:

        "I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the State, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally.

        This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.

        The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty."
        http://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/washing.as ...

        we were warned. what draws me most to obama, is his celebration of our union, rather than our separateness. it is always what made us strong.
    • Vlixes, on 10/16/2008, -3/+5JOE THE PLUMBER IS A GOP SHILL!!! check this out:

      http://forum.thedailyshow.com/tds/board/message?bo ...
    • diggggggerrr, on 10/16/2008, -0/+2He see's himself having to stick with the same car for 10 years and yet he thinks Obama that would be a president for a max of 8 years as being the worse choice. I think the guy would be better off financially with Obama that is unless McSame might just "help him out" with a little cash for supporting his presidency.
    • HonestAbe, on 10/16/2008, -2/+6Isn't he related to Keating?
    • cwcentral, on 10/17/2008, -4/+1I love this bickering!

      One thing I agree with is this Joe guy is a hack, by not setting his conversation/facts straight.

      But I think the [left] MSM has blown this way out of proportion as well as BOTH candidates did during the debate:

      The media thinks he owe taxes in the millions of dollars. No, it's around $1200, from 2007, which is not a lot to most folks on here (month's rent) and still within the 1 year tax period. Warren Buffet likely owes 10x more. Heck people owe that much on their [overdue] electricity bill or cable bill. This is MSM propaganda.

      Before the MSM attacks, even this digg, this guy has always been identified as Joe W, *who works for a plumbing company*. Hell, I can be a desk clerk working at a plumbing company. Doesn't make me a plumber! It was the MSM (and then the 2 candidates) who labeled him as 'Joe the Plumber'. Hence, ASSumptions were fabbed. More MSM proaganda.

      Man, this campaign season shows a complete lack of competence and accountability on all levels, on both sides.
      • AverageJane2, on 10/17/2008, -0/+1nag nag nag
      • uncleosbert, on 10/17/2008, -0/+1which mainstream media outlet claims he owes millions of dollars?

        if you are willing to make up lies to prop up your own opinions, it really doesn't matter what they say though, does it?

        "Wurzelbacher owes the state of Ohio $1,182.98 in personal income tax, according to Lucas County Court of Common Pleas records.

        In January 2007, Ohio's Department of Taxation filed a claim on his property until he pays the debt, according to the records. The lien remains active.

        At the debate, McCain cited Wurzelbacher as an example of someone who wants to buy a plumbing business but would be hurt by Obama's tax plans.

        Wurzelbacher, a self-described conservative, had spoken to Obama at a rally Sunday near his home and asked him whether his tax plan would keep him from buying the business that currently employs him, which earns more than $250,000 a year.

        "Your new tax plan is going to tax me more, isn't it?" Wurzelbacher asked.

        Obama said that under his proposal taxes on any revenue from $250,000 on down would stay the same, but that amounts above that level would be subject to a 39 percent tax, instead of the current 36 percent rate."
        http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/hotstories/606 ...
        http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&si ...
    • proliance, on 10/17/2008, -7/+3WTF?

      Joe the Plummer clearly states he is getting ready to buy a company that makes 250 to 280 thousand dollars a year. He never said he makes that kind of money now.

      Journalism in America is dead and this article is a good example.
      • anubis2night, on 10/17/2008, -1/+4Here's an idea take a quick look at business math in particular what it would take to invest in a plumbing business that would generate 250,000 a year in profits then take a look at what this guy makes. Plain and simple math there he can't do it and unless he gets his journeyman license and increases his wealth over the next 10 years in and makes some high yield investments to overcome inflation he won't be buying into a business anytime soon. In fact he then goes on to say that he wont be able to afford to buy a business and that he's still concerned with this tax plan, now why would he be when it will effect him now positively rather than in some make believe situation that he might find himself in?
      • uncleosbert, on 10/17/2008, -0/+1proliance, are you just lazy or actively stupid?

        "Not Taxable Income

        It's far more likely that the $280,000 Wurzelbacher told Obama he'd earn would be in the form of gross receipts and not taxable income, said Steven Bankler, a certified public accountant in San Antonio, who counts plumbers and other trade professionals as his clients.

        According to an analysis by Dun & Bradstreet on Wurzelbacher's employer, A. W. Newell Corp., the plumbing and heating contractor has annual sales of $510,000.

        If Wurzelbacher bought the company, by the time he took proper business deductions, Bankler said, he'd be left with between $150,000 and $200,000 in taxable income and wouldn't be affected by Obama's proposed increase in the top rates.

        Wurzelbacher might eventually have to pay more employment taxes under Obama's plan to impose a rate of between 2 percent and 4 percent on wages over $250,000, Bankler said, but Obama has said that change wouldn't take effect for a decade."
        http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&si ...
    • tyho, on 10/17/2008, -9/+3Some idiot liberal bloggers are saying there is a big scandal because Joe the Plumber doesn’t make $250,000 and would (GASP) actually get a tax cut under Obama’s plan! I could not make the case against their liberal socialist plan any better than they themselves are. Hey, rocket scientists, here is what Joe said: “I’m getting ready to buy a company that makes about 250, 270 - 80 thousand dollars a year, your new tax plan is going to tax me more isn’t it? I’m getting taxed more and more for fulfilling the American dream.” Got that? He didn’t say he makes that now. You should have gotten the clue when he said “I am getting ready to buy a company.” Evidently the Obama talking points went out saying Joe doesn’t make $250,000 and the idiot lib bloggers ate it up and didn’t bother watching the actual comment Joe the Plumber made, but rather reported this fact as some big Republican lie.
      • anubis2night, on 10/17/2008, -0/+3Listen up buddy and try to get this straight, he doesn't make enough to pay last years taxes so how is he gonna afford a plumbing company that clears 250, 000 a year? Oh and he's not even a licensed contractor so how would this work for him? So try looking at the fact first there. Then maybe you should try doing the research on they guy your defending. Oh but wait McCain mentioned this guy and he made a few statements about himself ah shucks that must be the truth, there's no reason to dig deeper into the story move along folks nothing to see here...
    • bowlagoat, on 10/17/2008, -2/+0This guy said what he said and probably never expected it to be a big deal. Lay off him and start criticizing the candidates. Criticize McCain for bringing him up. Criticize Obama for continuing it. Criticize the media for making it a bigger deal than it was. Obama countered it well and no harm was done to his campaign, in fact it gave us at least three frontpage articles about deer being in headlights. Just sayin.
    • jzuska, on 10/17/2008, -0/+2Until a democrat supports the fair tax i'm not voting for them.
      Until a republican stops the religion BS i'm not voting for them.

      Ron Paul.
      • uncleosbert, on 10/17/2008, -0/+1the fair tax is not particularly fair.
    • luvkit, on 10/17/2008, -0/+1He didn't make a big deal out of himself, the news people did. He just asked Obama a question. You have a problem with his message getting out, talk to CNN, NBC, and all those guys. They're the ones that made a big deal out it.
    • DonnaSueLouise1, on 10/18/2008, -0/+1Joe the plumber got a lot of attention on debate night. And, I hope American's get the point. Joe is the man with the American Dream, which has driven this country, to own their own business and own their own home. He is not a wealthy CEO but a hardworking man trying to get his business off the ground. My brother is a small businessman with a plumbing business which he started about 20 years ago. He works hard, stands behind his work and employs about 10 employees at this point. This is what America is all about. And, I hope voters realize that Obama will hurt the small business man, not help him. If Joe the Plumber is forced to provide health care for his employee's he would probably have to lay off some employees. And, Obama's plan would raise his taxes. Many American's have not had the opportunity to travel. I was in France this past summer. I would not want to get sick in Europe. I love France. But, socialized medicine is sub-standard. More government control of our Health Care, or our Banking System moves us closer to Big Brother and George Orwells story "1984". We need less government control, not more. Good Luck to you Joe.
      • Nietz1950, on 10/19/2008, -0/+0Um, you do realize "Plumber Joe" pays more taxes under McCain's plan, right?
    • kolobcreek, on 10/19/2008, -0/+1I know a plumber that makes more than that from his plumbing business. He and his mid-west crew of misfits are so good at what they do they don't have to advertise.

      Besides with all this money we're giving away to the war and banks inflation will soon make $250K seem like nothing haha.
    • Mitchl, on 10/20/2008, -0/+1This poor SOB- how dare he ask Obama a question! And nobody pay any attention to what the answer was- lets explore all of Joe's cavities.

      If we have all learned one thing here- If Obama comes walking down your street, blocking your traffic and having reporters stomp through your front yard- don't dare ask a question. Just get down on your knees and suck him dry.
  • ScienceDoc, on 10/16/2008, -20/+36Whoopsie!
    • winnestow, on 10/16/2008, -11/+730 obama lawyers swooping in to dig dirt on an ordinary guy
      • Gutterpunk, on 10/16/2008, -0/+4Yes. The press releases about Joe came from Obama's lawyers, not from the press at all.
    • zooplibob, on 10/16/2008, -1/+7This is completely retarded. I have a masters degree in computer engineering and work for a high-tech company, but I'm not a licensed engineer. In fact unless you are doing work for the government, almost nobody is. That doesn't mean I'm lying when I say my job is an engineer.
    • tyho, on 10/17/2008, -0/+7In Other News...---...

      Joe Biden, skilled orator and lifelong U.S. Senator, says “J-O-B-S” is a “three-letter word.”

      Can you imagine if Sarah Palin had said this?
      • Mitchl, on 10/20/2008, -0/+1You aren't saying there is a slant somewhere, are you? Not on DIGG! Not in the media!
        Dan Quayle mispelling tomato was a national story on all the networks and the talk of the late night shows for weeks. Biden, screws this up, as well as numerous other things, and I also don't ever remember seeing the Obama 57 state quote anywhere but youtube.
    • mannyfreshh, on 10/17/2008, -0/+2Wait! Joe the plumber is a real guy?! i thought he was just some random generalized name they picked up... like John Doe o.O

      Next thing you know... im gonna find out Joe Sixpack is real too!

      *slaps forehead*
    • jmorato, on 10/17/2008, -1/+1Let me get this straight. He owes taxes, but under Obama's proposed plan he wouldn't have owed that much to begin with?

      And McCain's plan would stick him w/ the same bill for the next 4 years?
    • kolobcreek, on 10/19/2008, -0/+1Intellectual Honesty Check.
      1. Do you have to be a Plumber to do plumbing work?
      2. Can you work as an apprentice?
      3. Can one not aspire to become a licensed plumber and own a plumbing business?
      4. Do you have to be a plumber to own a plumbing business?
      5. How many plumbing / heating / AC companies make over $250K? Think about that next time you get your bill.

      Maybe you should ask Joe instead of trying to ruin his life.
  • swrostmore, on 10/16/2008, -42/+25also not registered to vote
    • Insightful, on 10/16/2008, -9/+122Actually, we now know that Samuel Joe Wurzelbacher is a registered Republican. He is not licensed as a plumber. Court record from a divorced showed that he made $40K annually. So Joe would qualify for a bigger tax cut under Obama.

      Court records also show he owes taxes.

      He also is very unlikely to purchase a business that makes $250K profit (conveniently at Obama's threshold for higher taxes) since he would need $1 million using the common 4:1 rule + money to purchase the assets. Joe clearly does not have that much money and banks is in no condition to lend right now (nor will they after finding out about his tax liens).

      Oh, he also hates Social Security and loves the war in Iraq.

      Joe is starting to sound like Karl Rove to me.
      • swrostmore, on 10/16/2008, -3/+26oops, looks like he's registered to vote under a different name (Joe is his middle name). my bad. On the other hand he is related by marriage to the Keating family (yes, that Keating family)
      • MajinAku, on 10/16/2008, -2/+4Sounds like Joe's a dumbass loser.
      • dshPls, on 10/16/2008, -5/+5Joe appears to have lied and it doesn't make a bit of difference, his point is still a question many Americans have. You can question all day if he was really going to buy a business, but there's thousands of people like his "story" that Obama's presidency actually would effect. Shame on him if he lied, but it still brought up important points. Don't punish successful people, and especially people trying to become successful!
      • mvader, on 10/16/2008, -12/+5If he makes $40k annually, then, under Obama's plan, there is no incentive for him to work harder as he will really only make 60 cents for every extra dollar he earns since he will have to give up those tax returns (that Obama calls tax cuts, but really aren't).
        /sigh
        What is the US coming to when the government gives out incentives to work less?
      • BufordT, on 10/16/2008, -0/+3"Joe clearly does not have that much money and banks is in no condition to lend right now (nor will they after finding out about his tax liens)."

        Actually many local and smaller regional banks are not (yet at least) being hurt by the down market. Our local bank is actually increasing their advertising to try to get people in the door for loans. They said so many people are now just assuming they won't be able to get a loan, they don't even bother trying. Just the opposite is true. I also believe that if the business is currently successful and the current owner agrees not to start a rival business right next door, the bank would be more than willing to lend the money. They see the current success of the company, and know he has been an integral part of that success and will continue to be in the future. Just because he doesn't have the start-up capital (we assume) to purchase the business doesn't automatically mean he has no options.

        But what do I know, maybe we should all just trash the poor guy even though he didn't ask for any of this. Are we to say just because he is a registered Republican he can't consider voting for Obama and doesn't deserve the right to ask a possible President a tough question. If you ask me, both McCain and Obama need more tough questions from down to earth people like Joe.
      • offrdbandit, on 10/16/2008, -4/+2Don't you just hate him because he was able to get Obama to admit to being a socialist?

        Isn't that what all this is REALLY about?

        "I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody" - Smells like a bad day to be a Democrat.
    • jeffbw, on 10/16/2008, -4/+16Not true, he's a registered Republican, with all the talking points memorized.
      • thcobbs, on 10/16/2008, -7/+2Ok, so how does that change what obama said?
    • swrostmore, on 10/16/2008, -1/+7my mistake, bury me
  • cubedw00t, on 10/16/2008, -12/+237This one slipped through the plumber's crack.
  • ichbinladen, on 10/16/2008, -43/+360Who gives a ***** about this guy? I hate him already and I don't even know him.
    • Apophis574, on 10/16/2008, -38/+19I hate you and I don't even know you either.
      • webXL, on 10/16/2008, -7/+6I know this guy. I can tell by the red star in his icon he spends most of his day at Starbucks lashing out against corporations and American ideals. When he gets home, he tells his parents that he's gonna get a job any day now and that he knows a lot of other 25-yr-olds living at home.

        I don't hate him as much as those who enable him (i.e. the baby boomer parents who wanted to be his friend rather than raise him and the Democratic party who say its OK to underachieve since they can always take from the overachievers)
      • jordn, on 10/17/2008, -0/+1@WebXL

        or perhaps that red star is the symbol for RATM...
    • roxgod666, on 10/16/2008, -5/+18Great now people will say "Joe the Plumber" as a new meme
      • theOster, on 10/16/2008, -0/+7after seeing Wurzelbacher, i know why he's "Joe the Plumber"
    • Number23, on 10/16/2008, -21/+6So you're a democrat then.
      • inhaler, on 10/16/2008, -2/+10Democrats like blue collar people. I think you have it backwards.
      • Number23, on 10/16/2008, -6/+3No, you dems have a real thing for people they've never met.
      • markmdillon, on 10/16/2008, -5/+2Heeeheeeheee! Well done Number 23! Well done! : )
    • pintomp3, on 10/16/2008, -4/+14funny how mccain doesn't even like using obama's name but can't keep joe out of his mouth. he's still using him in his stump speeches today.
      • FlyingSpaghetti, on 10/16/2008, -2/+11If McCain can't keep Joe out of his mouth then he has bigger problems.
      • rondeth, on 10/16/2008, -1/+3@Flying: Yeah, THAT would go over well with his base, huh?
      • SAR2009, on 10/18/2008, -0/+1That would be because Joe *deals* with ***** and the ∅bamessiah -------- IS ******* . . . a particularly odious sort of it, at that.
    • arjie, on 10/16/2008, -0/+9It doesn't matter who he is or what he is, or if he lied about being a plumber. If his question was something that could be asked legit by someone (and I thought it was), then it's a question that should be answered. However, the truth seems to be that he would actually be better off under Obama than he is now.

      What I don't get is that some people will continue to parrot that Obama is bad for the average man* because Joe the plumber says he's going to have a bad time _knowing that it is not true_. That's what I find amazing about the US Presidential Campaign (as an outsider). In other countries, politicians lie about stuff that's a this-way-or-that thing which hasn't been clearly debunked, but in the US, despite a whole bunch of intelligent people going over facts and pointing clearly that some things are false there will be people who still repeat it.

      That is a horrible way to win someone's vote, and it shows incredible disrespect for your fellow citizen. You guys are the most powerful nation in the world, guys. For the sake of humanity, choose well, and for good reasons, whoever you choose.

      * It isn't just McCain's campaign either. I have seen, on this very site, people repeating that McCain crashed his jet on the aircraft carrier and watched from behind CCTV as others worked to put out the fire. As far as I understand that was earlier proven to _not_ be a crash, but an accidental firing of a rocket from another jet.
      • ssn697, on 10/16/2008, -1/+3Except it wasn't a very legitimate question. McCains position is that these small businesses won't be able to "create jobs", due to the tax difference.

        Take a look at the difference, and tell me who is going to be hired. Minimum wage workers? At 16k a year (add another 10k for health care), even if this guy WASN'T lying (which he was), the tax difference doesn't even cover a minimum wage worker.
    • zmigliozzi, on 10/16/2008, -1/+7Here's your sign.
    • SpinningHead, on 10/16/2008, -2/+15This is classic thinking by middle class conservatives. "I will vote for the rich guys because one day I will be one of them". So, they elect guys who make it harder and harder to get ahead in the middle class. Brilliant.
      • phqu88, on 10/17/2008, -2/+1Your a ***** idiot! Seriously all you obama tards need to get with the ***** program. Finally an article pretty much bashing obama comes up and yall still freak out because hes the messiah or Alpha Omega. Read about his tax policy...you will pretty much have a threshold at 250,000. You can't make any more and if you do it gets taxed and goes to some idiot who doesn't have a job sitting on his front porch waiting for the money to come in. What happend to the american dream where you can come here with a 20 dollar bill in your pocket but introduce a profiting idea and make millions? It's my right as an American to become filthy rich if i can and the government shouldn't have control over that...Obama is not a democrat hes a socialist...if Karl Marx would be alive and running im sure your punkasses wouldnt be falling over him because he couldn't put a spin on words as good as this tool. Responses are welcome...digging me down only shows me how much of a ***** tool you are for obama...
      • SpinningHead, on 10/19/2008, -0/+1"you will pretty much have a threshold at 250,000"
        Yes, Im sure the Hiltons, Bushs, and McCains will be in the poor house as soon as Obama gets elected.
        I love getting lectured by economics by conservatives who brought us the economic policies of the past 8yrs that led to the shrinking of the middle class. Even Alan Greenspan (libertarian) said the shrinking middle class is the greatest threat to our democracy.
    • JoeThePlummer, on 10/16/2008, -9/+4***** You.
      • mikeoncampus, on 10/17/2008, -0/+4no sir ***** you. your not even real!
    • TJATL, on 10/16/2008, -8/+1You "hate" him? 155 Diggs? Tolerance?
    • tomjeff09, on 10/17/2008, -6/+2You don't know him yet hate him. Yep, this country is *****.
      • izolutionz, on 10/17/2008, -2/+2This is the typical guy who's not successful but hates big government because it's trying to help him? It doesn't make any sense. Seems like some people wish they were truly successful but will find any excuse for not being it.

        "I am not going to be able to own that business, because it makes too much and I'm going to have to pay a few extra hundred bucks in taxes so I won't be able to hire enough illegal immigrants, the same people I curse every day, to do the work for me." Pathetic.
    • booboolean, on 10/17/2008, -1/+4But doesn't your heart BLEED for him? The poor, poor thing! All he wanted to do was buy the company he works for! Isn't that a basic human right?

      I mean, sure, there are people who don't even have jobs, much less jobs that pay enough that they could even consider saving enough to BUY the company they work for, and there are millions without health insurance, but I think it really says something about McCain's priorities that he chose to focus on poor Joe the Plumber as an example of the problems America is facing. I mean, aren't we ALL concerned about how much tax we'll have to pay when we buy out the company we're working for? I worry about it every day!

      And before anyone jumps down my throat about "punishing success", I'm happy for Joe, I'm quite sure he's worked hard and now he can live comfortably. That's great! I don't want to take that lifestyle away from him. I just don't really think he has the right to bitch about anything.
    • banido, on 10/17/2008, -2/+1You don't give a ***** about this guy...yet you hate him...even though you don't know him?

      *HEAD EXPLODES*
  • jd33, on 10/16/2008, -21/+112What a tool.
    • leerayIG88, on 10/16/2008, -2/+7Guess what? It's TOOL TIME!!!
    • dcollins, on 10/16/2008, -3/+13He didn't do anything, other than ask Obama a question. He is just unlucky because McCain decided to make him his bitch for his own purposes, and now the media has jumped on the wagon.
      • Mujokan, on 10/17/2008, -0/+3The only area where I lack sympathy is that he lied about his own circumstances to give weight to the talk-radio stuff he wanted to spout. It's probably common sense to tell the truth if you voluntarily go on camera with a presidential nominee.

        But the whole issue is a sideshow. It is just gossip. I do feel sorry for him.
    • Cuchanu, on 10/16/2008, -1/+5He is a tool, taking the whole "robbing from the rich to give to the poor" thing way too literally. How have rich people managed to convince poor people that raising rich people's taxes is stealing?

      BTW if I was him I'd change the name of my plumbing store to "Joe's Plumbers" or something.
      • randomface, on 10/16/2008, -6/+0Rich people convincing? I don't see why having a larger entity than yourself take money from someone with more than you to "share" it with other people can be legitimatized in anyone's mind. Seriously. I wish i could "share" the possessions of a lot of other people, however I realize that mindset is incredibly childish and covetous. So I am going to college to try and get my own things on my own merits.
      • Flipdawg27, on 10/16/2008, -6/+1In any other context, taking money from someone and giving it to someone else (aka spreading the wealth around) is stealing. When the government does it, it's commonly referred to as "legal plunder" and is for some reason encouraged. It's one thing to raise taxes on the "rich." It's an entirely different situation altogether when the plan is to provide "cuts" to those who already pay no taxes (aka welfare). That's stealing.
      • Cuchanu, on 10/16/2008, -1/+6What you guys don't understand is that by your definition all taxes are stealing. Tax cuts/raises are not stealing/giving to the poor.

        Obama want's to eliminate Bush's tax breaks and put them at the level they were at under Reagan, Bush 1, and Clinton. It's that simple. Was Reagan stealing from the rich? No. So how is Obama Robin Hood if Regean was the rich man's superhero?

        McCain himself said he could not support Bush's tax cuts. Which, by the way I suppose you could say that by lowering taxes for the rich Bush 2 was stealing from the middle class because guess who has to make up the difference? Us. The only reason you haven't seen your taxes go up is because the deficit did, so I guess the correct answer would be your kids and grandkids will have to pay for the tax cuts.

        When they raise the sales tax by 0.1% to pay for highway renovations, is that stealing from taxpayers to pay the construction workers? McCain wants to give Exxon a $4,000,000,000 tax credit. Is that stealing? No. It's stupid, but it's not stealing from taxpayers.

        Raising taxes is not stealing, unless taxes themselves are stealing.

        And if we really want to talk about stealing I think the best place to start would be the bailout. Taxing Americans to bail out corporate America IS stealing.
      • Mujokan, on 10/17/2008, -1/+2If you don't like taxes, maybe you should do a Wesley Snipe and refuse to pay them.

        Just make sure you never use anything paid for by government spending, or accept anyone who's been helped by government spending as a customer, or whose parents were helped by government spending... etc...

        Set up your business in the middle of a forest (not in a national park) where there aren't any roads or streetlights or anything paid for by taxes, and sell your products to the forest animals.
      • Flipdawg27, on 10/17/2008, -0/+1Cuchanu - I didn't say anything about plans to raise/lower taxes. I am referring to the fact that under Obama's plan, people who don't pay any income taxes will receive checks ("refunds") paid for by citizens who do pay income taxes. This is not synonymous with using tax money to fund civic projects. This is taking money from one group and flat-out giving it to another. Call it wealth redistribution, welfare, "credits," "cuts," whatever you like - at the end of the day it's stealing.
      • Cuchanu, on 10/17/2008, -0/+1@Flipdawg27

        Obama is not proposing anything that doesn't already exist. People who don't pay taxes already get rebates. There is already welfare, food stamps, government housing, WIC, medicaid, social security for disability, schools that people who don't pay taxes can attend, free school lunch, free bus passes for poor or disabled people, libraries, unemployment, education grants, etc. Those would all fall into your definition of stealing.

        Not to mention corporate welfare.

        @Mujokan
        Great point. People seem to forget how they (especially corporations) benefit from taxes.

        If we eliminated those programs we'd be just like Brazil, where people who have money live in constant fear of those who don't. And people who don't have money sometimes go to drastic measures to feed their children. As Americans we believe in equal opportunity, but, unfortunately things aren't equal. There are places in our country where the most people hope for is to live to be 18. There are people who attend schools with a 75% dropout rate and teachers who don't give a *****. There are people who are suffering and to let them continue to suffer is un-American. And to complain that you have to pay a little more of your quarter million salary so that other people have a chance at the same things you take for granted is GREED.

        It's just the way the system works and has worked for 80 years. Obama is not any more of a Socialist/thief than Bush, Clinton, Reagan, etc.

        In my opinion, part of what makes America great is caring for one another. During elections it's sometimes hard to see that, but it's still there.
    • NyteStarNyne, on 10/16/2008, -1/+5After watching some "interviews" with him, he comes across as kind of a douchebag. Even so, I think the media's exploitation of him today shows how hungry they are for a story.
    • winnestow, on 10/16/2008, -5/+3actually he represents the majority of americans who don't want obama's socialism
    • meirav, on 10/17/2008, -1/+1Monkey wrench?
    • sampanc, on 10/17/2008, -1/+1Someone tell him to quit talking politics and fix the clog my roommate made in the toilet after eating at a Mexican buffet!
  • THETEH, on 10/16/2008, -12/+61what's becoming of American heroes? First we find out that our politicians are all self-serving morons, and now THIS! I suppose next we'll learn that Joe Sixpack prefers to only drink chocolate milk!!!
    • DHracer, on 10/16/2008, -6/+5Who said this guy was a hero?
      • blackbeardtron, on 10/16/2008, -1/+6DING DING DING... SARCASM ALERT!!!
    • billbugger, on 10/16/2008, -3/+1no hero, only an average american.
      • SpeedSteamBoat, on 10/16/2008, -4/+1You mean "only and average republican."
    • nickert0n, on 10/16/2008, -1/+8I ***** hate the term "Joe Sixpack" its tottaly derogatory to the average citizen.

      ***** Palin....


      MMMMMMMMMMMMMMAAAAAAAAAAAAverick
      • tschau, on 10/16/2008, -0/+1Seriously. I was drinking from a six-pack of beer when she said that during the debate, and I almost had to stop and go buy a 40.

        On a side-note, I'd support any candidate who spoke about "average joe forty-in-a-paper-bag american"
      • web2pointYo, on 10/16/2008, -0/+2Homer S. upgraded the reference to "Joe Twelve Pack".
    • DeucesWild, on 10/16/2008, -0/+4Whats wrong with chcolate milk?
      • Volatile36, on 10/16/2008, -1/+5CHOCOLATE MILK IS FOR SOCIALISTS AND COMMUNIST TERRISTS!!!!!! IF YOU LOVE YOUR COUNTRY YOU'LL HAVE A BEER WITH SARAH PALIN WHILE SHE'S IN THE OVAL OFFICE DANCING ON MCCAIN'S CORPSE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



        /sarcasm (since you people can't ever seem to figure that out)
    • harveywalbanger, on 10/17/2008, -0/+1The "Joe Six-pack" the McCain/Palin campaign talks about is a ***** drunk who beats his kids and probably doesn't even have the intelligence to figure out that another Republican term is the worst thing for middle America.

      I get a kick out of these dumb-ass rednecks saying Obama will raise their taxes for healthcare. I hope Joe doesn't have any pre-existing conditions! HA ha
  • treehugger87, on 10/16/2008, -18/+55Mmmmm, I love the smell of *fail* in the morning.
    • maz2331, on 10/16/2008, -7/+2Yep. Obamas poll numbers dropped a point overnight.
      • vinod1978, on 10/16/2008, -0/+5You do realize that there is a +/- 3 point margin of error for any poll. Unless it's more then 4 points, it's not relevant.
    • sampanc, on 10/17/2008, -0/+2That's just the clog in the toilet that the plumber hasn't fixed yet... someone tell him to stop talking politics!
    • mozert, on 10/17/2008, -0/+2Joe FAIL
    • Somedude2137, on 10/17/2008, -2/+1please shoot yourself in the ***** head
      • treehugger87, on 10/17/2008, -0/+1Somedude, I can't imagine what set you off. I know it's a tired meme, but most people would just hit the thumbs down button and move on (actually, most people have hit the thumbs UP button and moved on, but that's beside the point).

        Please, dude, "Go placidly amid the noise and haste, and remember what peace there may be in silence."
  • homercles337, on 10/16/2008, -9/+60Another story about how he is not "undecided" afterall:
    http://digg.com/2008_us_elections/Joe_The_Plumber_ ...
  • kooredaan, on 10/16/2008, -4/+126Well he is not licensed according to what he told the AP and he claims he doesn't need to be to work on residential homes. Okay....

    But on "Good Morning America" when asked what jobs he had planned, he said yesterday he worked on a broken water main at a gas station (unless it is some weird family don't think that is residential) and than listed one or 2 jobs that sounded like work for other companies (again not residential).

    I'm confused and I think Joe might be a bit confused as well.
    • MammasMilk, on 10/16/2008, -3/+15Maybe he could see plumbing from his house
    • publiclurker, on 10/16/2008, -3/+1I thought he said he did not believe he needed to be licensed if he worked for someone else.
      I wouldn't hire him, however. I've needed plumbers three times in the last 4 years and they were all licensed.
    • slimjimworm, on 10/16/2008, -1/+8You do not have to be licensed if you work for a licensed plumber. Think of it as an Apprentice.
    • atact88, on 10/16/2008, -6/+3Does this mean every student for Obama is a fraud because they lack student licenses? How about
    • gpw11, on 10/16/2008, -1/+9You're looking into this too much. First of all, it doesn't matter at all. Secondly, depending on local zoning restrictions and such you may or may not need (on paper) to be licensed in order to work on small projects such as a gas station water main. When trades people generally talk about working commercial construction they refer to towering high rises and other large projects where liability is high and as such restrictions are both stiffer and more heavily enforced. It would not be unusual for a gas station or small business owner to call in an unlicensed plumber for a repair job which did not require a permit being issued. You would, however, demand a licensed plumber when installing a boiler in a new high rise. Also, as previously stated, you only need a licensed plumber to sign off on the work - who actually does it is not strictly enforced in most cases.

      In the end though, what the ***** does it matter? Fake stupid question or real stupid question, it's all the same. No wonder the system is such a mess - they've been distracting the voter for years with ***** like this and people just eat it up.
  • somedudemanguy, on 10/16/2008, -45/+16He doesn't need to be licensed for the work he does. Should he be paying hundreds of dollars for a license he doesn't need?
    • DatVillain83, on 10/16/2008, -2/+21Apparently you haven't seen NBC Dateline's Report on Unscrupulous home contractors!
    • Catchpen, on 10/16/2008, -2/+7If he does work in the city and cities have certain HVAC codes that have to be followed. Yes he needs a license but not a master license. A Jouneyman or Apprentice License at the least or his company will be fined if caught.
  • birdly, on 10/16/2008, -15/+109Joe the Plumber = Joe the Shill.
    • jdibiase, on 10/16/2008, -14/+7Let's assume for a minute that he is a shill ... does that change anything? Small businesses that make >$250,000 will pay more tax under Obama (assuming they're unincorporated or are sub-chapter S corporations), and Obama still wants to "spread the wealth around."
      • HybridVigor, on 10/16/2008, -3/+18"Obama still wants to 'spread the wealth around.'"

        As opposed to concentrating it in the hands of the wealthy elite, widening the class gap to historic levels like the Republicans have been doing.
      • SpeedSteamBoat, on 10/16/2008, -0/+12Does it change anything? Of course it does. John McCain practically made "Joe The Plumber" the corner stone of his whole argument in the third debate. He claimed Joe the Plumber was going to have to pay more taxes under Obama. Joe the Plumber was an undecided voter. Joe the Plumber was planning on buying the business he worked for. Joe the Plumber was an actual plumber!

        Now it turns out the NONE of those things are true. Everyone already knew that business who make over $250,000 would have to pay more taxes under Obama's plan, but it turns out that has NOTHING to do with Joe the Plumber.

        Btw, very few small businesses make over $250,000. Anyone who believes otherwise doesn't understand the facts, how small businesses work, or how tax code works regarding businesses. Tip: Only profits are taxed so you would have to be making $250,000 of PROFIT to have you taxes increase under Obama's plan.
      • jdibiase, on 10/16/2008, -1/+3small business owners aren't taxed on profit, but on adjusted gross income, which is a different concept. For instance, if you buy equipment this year, you may need to amortize the cost of that equipment over a period of years. If you calculate profit, your profit would be lowered by the entire cost of the equipment, but your AGI is actually higher than your profit because you're only allowed to deduct a portion of the cost of the equipment this year.

        I'd like to see not only the numbers on how many small businesses have AGI of > $250K, but how many people small businesses that earn less employ and how many that earn more employ. My suspicion is that those business with AGI >$250K, even though smaller in number, employ far more people than those that have
      • BossKey, on 10/16/2008, -0/+4Listen, everybody wants to spread the wealth around, the only question is how. The way we have been doing it under current leadership has simply put us deeper in debt. That is negative net worth. That is not wealth.

        And besides, I'm not worried about Obama turning us into a socialist country because capitalism is quite ingrained here, and there is an entire Congress to stop him from going too far.

        Unless you are looking for him to continue the Bush trend of increasing Presidential power and reducing the checks-and-balances system of the judiciary and Congress versus the President.

        If our government could be allowed to work as designed by the founders, Obama should be able to do a lot more good than harm, and a lot better than we have been.
      • wishninja, on 10/16/2008, -0/+2But joe is voting for higher taxes for himself. Of course today he said he didn't believe in a progressive tax at all so to keep the same revenue everyone's taxes should have to increase.
    • ASfinkterSezWut, on 10/17/2008, -0/+1Bingo!

      You win the no-prize!

      This was a set-up from day one.
  • theskillwithin, on 10/16/2008, -46/+43His point was that he was going to buy a company and now because of the higher tax cant afford to pay the taxes on that company. This hurts the economy.
    • Jeffler, on 10/16/2008, -15/+40Except that he wouldn't be paying higher taxes, he'd be paying lower taxes.
      • uppitydiggers, on 10/16/2008, -3/+21I don't give a ***** if it's McCain or Obama talking about their tax plans, tax cuts are nothing more than a carrot on a stick to get you to vote. The chances that either will actually cut taxes are about the same of you penning the next Hollywood blockbuster over the weekend.

        In case you haven't noticed, the government has just spent the last few months spending a ridiculous amount of money that was unforeseeable when both candidates trotted out their tax proposals earlier this year. The wars aren't ending any time soon, and it looks like they're moving to sink even more money into the economy in the near future.

        So how exactly is it economically sound policy to further reduce your available pool of revenue? Also, if you haven't noticed, corporate profits are falling through the floor and expected to continue that way. So all of a sudden those corporate tax increases Obama is promising, are only going to bring in a fraction of what he had estimated originally.

        The subject of tax cuts is nothing more than an election platform fairytale.
      • ender7074, on 10/16/2008, -7/+5Wrong.
      • natastna2, on 10/17/2008, -1/+2Nice argument Ender, very succinct.
      • st00f72, on 10/17/2008, -3/+4Wrong!
        RTA
        If he buys the business which he hopes to do, he expects to then earn over 250,000. More taxes according to Obamas plan
    • Nietz1950, on 10/16/2008, -7/+44...Which doesn't make any sense.

      Why would anyone refuse to buy a company because it makes too much money? There's no such thing as a tax greater than 100% of your profit - any increase you get is going mostly to you.

      Given Joe's unrealistic expectations and odd priorities (even if he could earn a profit of $300K, that might only increase his taxes by $2K), it might be better if he was stopped from running his own company for now.

      $300K is profit... in your pocket at the end of the day, profit. You deduct expenses, so the more he invests, the less his taxable income will be.
      • joshwehatetech, on 10/16/2008, -7/+9Ok...lets look at something.

        At 250k it is suppose to go up 3% if I read right (if not someone will correct me I am sure).

        Lets say for some reason we are looking at about 1.5 million. That is 37.5k of extra taxes. Choices are

        1. Cut someone who is making that
        2. Pass it to the customer

        Who is winning here? Even if this is corporate taxes, they will get passed back to the workers or the consumer. We simply don't eat losses here.
      • ender7074, on 10/16/2008, -13/+5Gee, I can think of a real good reason. I take a loan to buy a company. Taxes are increased by a good amount under the Obama Screw America plan. I now have to raise prices to cover the new taxes to insure I'm still running a profitable business and lose business or go out of business from overtaxation but still have to pay back the loan. Not real hard to figure out there... Oh and if your profit is 300k now it wont be anything near that if Dear Leader gets his way. And, just so you know, 250k gross is not much to make in any kind of business.
      • Nietz1950, on 10/16/2008, -4/+5Any income over 250K is subject to the tax increase. Since any "small business"-owner is likely to receive the bulk of their income before the $250K, very little of their income would be subject to such an increase. It would only be noticeable to those who earn most of their income above that mark.

        True, the employer may look at their income and say "Hey, I'm making $1 million dollars and I don't want to pay 3% more!". They could cut employees or raise prices to keep his income high.

        But then someone who could cut employees or raise prices for a small increase in their profit would probably already be doing that.
      • Peko, on 10/16/2008, -0/+10Just curious about your accounting numbers.

        Wouldn't payroll be an expense? Therefore cutting somebody (for the 37.5k) would presumably not make sense?
      • scubaman5000, on 10/16/2008, -0/+9I love Obama's answer to this guy in the original video. In my opinion he demonstrated a clear understanding of how economics work in the real world (none of this trickle down *****). By giving larger tax breaks to a majority of Americans they'll have more money to support his business. The business may be getting a 3% tax increase but the business will likely get more than a 3% increase in the amount of business they're able to do due to relief of the tax burden on his customers.

        Businesses won't need to cut labor because the amount of business they do will increase when 95% of their customer base has more money to spend. They won't need to increase prices either for the same reason, larger volume of business means more money coming in without having to raise prices to cover the increased tax expense. Small businesses will have an easier time remaining profitable and it makes sense to me that if their customers have more money to spend then profits should go up.

        The way I see it everyone wins under Obama's tax plan, even the larger small businesses.
      • publiclurker, on 10/16/2008, -1/+5False dichotomy Josh. you forgot:

        3. raise prices on the customer because you want a larger house.

        4. Take the money and use it to outsource your workers in order to give yourself a larger bonus.

        5. Tell you "secretary" her new boob job will have to wait.

        6. Go without the deluxe leather package on the next company hummer.

        I could go on, but the truth of the matter is that your "employer" will not do anything but help themselves.
      • Nietz1950, on 10/16/2008, -1/+5Ender, you're making the same mistake "Joe the Plumber" is. You are not taxed on gross. If you take a loan, then you subtract your interest payments, since that is your personal cost.

        You spend $5000 on new equipment, then that is an expense you deduct. The loan charges 5%, so you deduct that as well.

        You aren't going out of business from taxes... taxes are only placed on the income you receive AFTER you've deducted your expenses. And it only matters then on income you are keeping over $250K.
      • uppitydiggers, on 10/16/2008, -2/+3@Nietz1950

        Are you saying that if my profit is $250,001 for the year, then I'm paying the 3% increase only on that $1?

        I ask because that is completely different than everything I've read in every publication that has discussed the candidates' tax plans. I haven't seen one mention of a multi-layered tax.


        @publiclurker

        I'm doubting you've held any half-way decent job.
      • joshwehatetech, on 10/16/2008, -1/+1Look, I am not going to dispute that someone making 300-500k is going to go shoot themselves over the increase. The issue really lies with these corporations that will get hit by this. "Trickle down" economics really does not work in both directions here. If the Corporations save money they will pass it on to the investor. If they incure more cost it will be passed to the consumer or they will cut back on staff to balance things out. In the end you really do not get anywhere and a good deal of this money will be wasted by the government in some fashion that is taken from the Corporations.
      • slimjimworm, on 10/16/2008, -5/+2No...if you earn $250,000.00 then your new tax "bracket" is 39%. So by earning 1 penny more than $249,999.99 you will have to pay an additional $7,500.01 because you are no longer in the 36% tax bracket.

        Taxes are not stair stepped...i.e. the first $x is at y%, the next $x is at y%, etc. Add up your total adjusted gross income (AGI) and your % is calculated on that.

        And he was asking a question about if he wants to better himself and can purchase the business will he have to pay more taxes. The answer is yes. I am not saying that profiting $100k more now that you own the business is not worth giving up say 10%...but who knows.
      • joshwehatetech, on 10/16/2008, -0/+5Last time I checked taxes are stair stepped (income at least). That is how the 10% change under bush cut most people's taxes since a certain part was taxed at that level.
      • Nietz1950, on 10/16/2008, -1/+7Yes, income taxes are "stair-stepped", slim-jim. You are only taxed at the new rate on income above $250K. Obama has said many times, the tax applies only to the income you earn above $250K.

        No country has a tax plan in which you pay a new higher rate if you go $1 over a given limit. that would be strange and make no sense... people would intentionally set their incomes below the next limit, up to the penny.

        The charts are available on the IRS' website - they've simply done the calculations for you, but it is stair-stepped... you'll notice when you do your taxes it is always "if you earn over $30K, you owe $5K + 15% Income - $30K"
      • rocketman42, on 10/16/2008, -0/+4Wow, it's like all the republicans have never done their taxes before. Of course taxes are "stair-stepped".

        At uppitydiggers, you haven't seen a mention of a multi-layered tax because that is how the tax system has been since it was created over a century ago. If you don't even understand the basics of how the tax system works, how are you possibly deciding which plan is better for you?
      • nimbleprune, on 10/17/2008, -1/+1they tax how much money you bring in not the total profits...many small companies bring in that amount...not many actually proffit that much. Total profits are the money you bring in - expenses (including taxes).
      • Nietz1950, on 10/17/2008, -0/+2Not quite, nimbleprune.

        Small businesses are taxed on income AFTER expenses. Taxable income is bottom-line, after you have taken out all of your expenses.

        It is treated the same as income you receive from a job. They only tax the part left over that is put in your pocket at the end of the day... as it should be.

        The only real difference for small businesses is they have to pay the employer's portion of unemployment and social security insurance, since they are their own employer. This is of course deductible as well.
    • treehugger87, on 10/16/2008, -5/+19Except that Obama's tax plan would not increase his taxes in any way, and would most certainly help him by giving him tax relief and by giving him help in providing his employees health insurance. This helps the economy.

      Honestly I feel bad for the guy. He's listened to too many right-wing talking points. No amount of convincing is going to get him to believe anything less than "Obama is going to raise my taxes." He asked a fair question, and was pretty ballsy in pushing his point. I respect that. There is a real "gotcha" media (not the one Palin & McCain complain about) and this guy is about to get hit hard with it. Watch the covers of the National Enquirer and People magazine this week and you'll see.
      • MammasMilk, on 10/16/2008, -2/+6I don't feel bad for this guy at all. He's a liar. If he wanted to ask the question fine, ask the ***** question, but don't make up ***** about your self.
      • alandilw, on 10/16/2008, -8/+3Obama says that 95% of Americans will have a tax cut. But guess what... 1/3 of Americans do not even pay any taxes.

        So essentially Obama will be sending a welfare check to people.

        It's simply astounding how he has got people to believe this. I mean use a little logic libtards. How can Obama pay for all of his govt. programs if he is cutting taxes for 95% of Americans.
      • onestrawplz, on 10/16/2008, -3/+3alandilw, i'd like to see where you got your figure that a third of the population doesn't pay taxes (unfeasible, you must be counting people outside of the labor force such as senior citizens, children, and those serving in the military). and i must point out that the tax cut applies to WORKING americans, as obama has stated multiple times. working people get taxed. and if you don't pay taxes, you don't get a tax cut. YOU'RE the one lacking in common sense and logic.
      • uppitydiggers, on 10/16/2008, -4/+3What part of "tax increases on businesses making over $250,000 a year" do you not understand, treehugger?

      • PennFarmer, on 10/16/2008, -1/+3@onestraw - In defense of common sense, and without entering the greater debate, I would like to say that I effectively don't pay taxes. I make a decent amount, but my wife doesn't work and we file joint, so we are under the taxable pay level. That means that I get at least all of my money back at the end of the year (more actually because I have children).

        So yes, technically I have taxes taken out during the year, but I get more than that amount back come tax time, so I would have to say that I don't really pay taxes. Yet because I have money taken out I qualify for and receive the tax refunds. I would consider myself one of the 1/3 who does not pay taxes.

        If my work did not take taxes out (if I was self-employed for example) and I made the same amount as i do now, I would not have to pay the government anything come April. Ergo I do not really pay taxes.
      • joshwehatetech, on 10/16/2008, -1/+4As PennFarmer mentioned it happens quite a bit. There are a lot of credits and tax breaks for having children and there are certain thresholds where you don't pay or the government pays you. As much as people moan and complain, the government is setup to help families with children under 18 and even more so in blue states with a lot more social programs in place.
      • slimjimworm, on 10/16/2008, -0/+2In 2004 the estimated number of "earners" that didn't pay a penny was 32%. (http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/542.htm ...

        And here is a recent WSJ talking about the "illusion" http://wsj.com/article/SB122385651698727257.html
      • rondeth, on 10/16/2008, -1/+6Instead of incessantly arguing about talking points and surface information, perhaps everyone should read breakdowns of actual plans?

        One is here:
        http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publications/url.cf ...

        Abstract:
        Both John McCain and Barack Obama have proposed tax plans that would substantially increase the national debt over the next ten years, according to a newly updated analysis by the non-partisan Tax Policy Center. Compared to current law, TPC estimates the Obama plan would cut taxes by $2.9 trillion from 2009-2018. McCain would reduce taxes by nearly $4.2 trillion. Obama would give larger tax cuts to low- and moderate-income households and pay some of the cost by raising taxes on high-income taxpayers. In contrast, McCain would cut taxes across the board and give the biggest cuts to the highest-income households.

        The graphs inside the huge PDF will serve as pictures for those not inclined to read, I guess.
      • seanof, on 10/17/2008, -1/+1Everyone who works pays payroll taxes. All those claims of some large number of Americans pay no taxes dose not take this into account.
      • treehugger87, on 10/17/2008, -1/+1@uppitydigger. Increasing taxes on small businesses that earn more than $250,000 a year *in profits* effects 1.9% of small businesses. If you've started a dog-grooming business in your town and you can earn more than $250,000 in profit every year, more power to you - now pay your share and give the other 98.1% of small businesses a break.

        http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/10/16/tax-a ...
      • publiclurker, on 10/17/2008, -1/+1Actually Uppity, I've worked a large number of different jobs, some sucky and some great. All of the examples I gave (except is was a Lexus and not a hummer) came from employers my wife and I have had.
    • JoeVet, on 10/16/2008, -7/+24He's going to buy a million dollar company while only making 40K a year with a lien in his house? Yup this guy is just like his GOP hero, Palin. Both are idiots who can't think for themselves.
    • homercles337, on 10/16/2008, -6/+14Well, would he rather pay less taxes on a company with no customers--assuming he doesnt cater to just the top 5% of wealth owners--or one thats taxed slightly higher but has tons of customers because people can afford to pay him?

      You idiots like to talk about "redistribution of wealth" but the top 5% of wealth owners have gotten filthy rich on the backs of the remaining 95%. Nothing "trickles down." If i made $250,000 a year wouldnt balk at paying another $2k. You people are just god damn selfish and dont understand the concept of a society and what i means to contribute to one.
      • logandurand, on 10/17/2008, -0/+1Let me preface this by saying that I don't care about contributions to your "society". You and I seem to have vastly different ideas about what society should be - don't force yours on me.

        With that out of the way, I would ask you why people getting rich doing business is such a bad thing. It is of no concern to me how much money my neighbor makes - so long as he does not reach for a gun (which is, oddly enough, exactly what you propose be done to rectify this perceived injustice). You talk of selfishness - what could possibly be more selfish than claiming a right to take from someone in the name of your own ideal "society"?
      • publiclurker, on 10/17/2008, -1/+1Well, quite frankly, if you are not up to living in a decent society, please leave and stop sponging off the rest of us.

        Somalia, for instance, has the appropriate level of control for someone like you. Unfortunately, we both know that you would rather leach off everyone around you while simultaneously biting the very hands that feed your self important existence than walk the walk.
      • logandurand, on 10/17/2008, -0/+1What I meant to imply was that a better world can only be achieved by choice, not through force. What that means in this context is that if you want a more equitable distribution of wealth, don't let the government give preferential treatment to any particular groups - treat everyone the same.
    • SpeedSteamBoat, on 10/16/2008, -4/+16Why is this getting dugg up?

      Joe the Plumber couldn't afford to buy the business he works for anyways. He apparently can't even afford to pay a couple thousand dollars in backed taxes. Knowing that, you honestly believe Joe can afford to buy a business that makes $250,000 a year? That's absurd. I highly doubt the company he works for even turns that kind of profit. How much does a plumber cost? The company he works for would have to be HUGE to make that kind of money, and there is no way in hell Joe the Uncertified Apprentice Plumber Who Only Does Residential Work is buying a company like that now or anytime soon regardless of who is elected the next president.
      • Gutterpunk, on 10/16/2008, -3/+1But somewhere in America, someone who really want to buy a similar company might exists.

        That it's Joe or Bob buying it, they want to know the answer.

        That said, the Republican want Joe for senator now, and they claim that he single handily won the presidency for McCain. It's a goo