Impact of Obama tax plan

thoughts?

I hope he doesn't win.

Seriously though, I may be naive, but I would bet he doesn't get everything in his plan, hopefully not even close. Its so offensive to the upper and upper middle classes, my guess is compromises will be made.

Of course you're right, it wouldn't be good for the RE market in NYC (or the economy in general but thats a discussion for another board).

Democrat President + Democrat Congress = higher taxes with no effort needed getting it to pass. Scary thoughts my friends.

The futures market gives him a 64% chance of winning so he is the clear favorite, like it or not. While there will definitely be some compromises, the current economic environment may give this tax plan (or someting like it) a fighting chance.

I didn't even get into the secondary effects like wealthy people retiring & moving out of NYC (why work when Federal+States+City taxes would consume close to 60% of your income).

This obviously won't impact the market in 2008 but could be very relevent in 2009+.

ccdevi: Bush didn't compromise when he controlled both houses of Congress. Why would you guess Obama will bend much if he gets elected? The main difference between the two is that Obama's plan is at least fiscally defensible. I don't personally like the idea of such jolting changes, but a deficit-hawk case can be made for bitter medicine after eight years of profligate lunacy.

Obama isn't a deficit hawk. Whatever new taxes he implements will go right to higher spending and bigger government.

West 81: Bush wasn't trying to take huge amounts of money away from people. Tax increases are much harder to swallow than tax decreases. I just think they'll even be some democrats who believe this is simply too harsh. But again maybe I'm naive or maybe its wishful thinking, as I am absolutely disgusted by his tax plan.

Sacre bleu! Higher taxes on upper-income people will leave us with the sort of economic devastation that Norway, Switzerland and Belgium have to contend with.

It's not going to be too hard for taxes to be raised... all that requires is allowing the Bush tax cuts to simply expire. Obama will only really have to push through the tax inceases on Cap Gains & Div as actually "raising taxes"... sadly, in this sound-bite society, allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire will be an easy sell b/c most people won't even realize what is happening to them. Sad really.

I'm sure we could go on for days about the tax plan. But for the sake of argument let's assume it becomes a reality. If you were to ask me what asset class would be hardest hit, NYC real estate would be at the top of the list: 1) most households in the top income bracket, 2) already-high state/city taxes, 3) large foreign population (who presumably will choose to live somewhere else, on the margin), 4) high cost of living which means that incomes are already-stretched in many cases even for those in the top bracket.

For all the talk on this board of whether or not NYC real estate is a good long-term investment I find it shocking that this has not come up. This would seem to be basic due diligence and a potential deal-breaker for anyone who thinks Obama will win and have enough influence to dramatically raise taxes (seems at least 50/50 to me). I'm guessing there will be a lot more focus on the issue as we get deeper into election season. Selling in the next year may start making more-and-more sense as time goes on.

Obama might get a veto proof congress...then we will all need to hope his rich contributors talk to him.

rich contributors...take a good long look at George Soros

George Soros...that's beyond rich

The thing that really pisses me off about Obama's tax "plan" is putting the Social Security tax on wages, not income. It penalizes people who earn greater than $250k in wages from their W2. But not people who gain income from other sources. Why? Because Obama's advisors are super rich who no longer have wage income. And it's not 6.2% it's 12.4%. The assumption that employers pay the other 6.2% is misguided. Most people who make over $250k know that businesses allocate a percentage of their revenues to wages. It's not like they're going to allocate more to take into account a new tax. The wage earner will pay the entire 12.4%.

I'm all for raising taxes to pay for Bush's misguided, incompetent fiscal policies. But I won't vote for Obama and his plan, it's crafted by super rich advisors who still aren't paying their fair share. And if Obama is too naive to understand that, what other policies will his advisors force through?

To all you idiots - ANYTHING that Obama does is an improvement on what Bush and the Republicans have done to this country. Do you think that raising taxes on the extremely wealthy will be worse than the effects of Bush economics like - wiping out the entire credit market, devastating every Wall Street Bank, running up the largest deficits in history, bankrupting more people in recorded history since the depression, highest rates of personal bankruptcy, highest rates of home foreclosure, military used up and on verge of falling apart, etc etc etc

Do you REALLY think that Obama could do worse than Bush? I think that you would have to try purposely to fuck up our country to even come close the the current REpublican disaster.

Here's an article from cnn.com with estimated tax changes. According to this article at least, people with incomes in the 250-600k range won't see much of a change in their tax bill. However income above 600k will see a big increase.

http://money.cnn.com/2008/06/11/news/economy/candidates_taxproposals_tpc/

BREAKING DOWN THE NUMBERS
Here's how the average tax bill could change in 2009 if either John McCain's or Barack Obama's tax proposals were fully in place.
MCCAIN OBAMA
Income Avg. tax bill Avg. tax bill
Over $2.9M -$269,364 +$701,885
$603K and up -$45,361 +$115,974
$227K-$603K -$7,871 +$12
$161K-$227K -$4,380 -$2,789
$112K-$161K -$2,614 -$2,204
$66K-$112K -$1,009 -$1,290
$38K-$66K -$319 -$1,042
$19K-$38K -$113 -$892
Under $19K -$19 -$567
Source:The Tax Policy Cente

petrfitz, nice rant. completely idiotic and more importantly non-responsive to anything discussed in this thread. but nice rant.

ccdevi - please explain how the current tax plan and administration is better for our economy than what Obama proposes.

You are a partisan moron who doesnt think past what you are told even though it is directly not in your interests.

petrfitz:

shut your piehole you ignorant clown...there is no one on this board who is a fan of Bush. Everyone knows he has been a disaster. But if you think Obama's tax policies are going to help this economy grow you need to get off the crack.

Please tell us oh brilliant one why countries like China, India, Brazil and other eastern european countries will soon run rings around us economically....low taxes, low regulation, in short a lower cost to run a business. The US used to be a great nation that produced things after WW2...now we produce nothing except for bubbles and it will only get worse with a high tax burden.

its sad that I would have to explain this to a supposed multimillionaire...oh excuse me you will probably just ask your chauffuer to take you, super model wife and prius to another country

"please explain how the current tax plan and administration is better for our economy than what Obama proposes"

who said it was? please quote any person in this thread who said it was.

Thats why I said your original post was non-responsive.

That said most of what you've said is nonsense. Bush caused the credit meltdown? He crushed the banks? Be real. Bush may be an idiot but he didnt make people take out mortgages they couldn't afford, or make the idiot lender make the loan.

And as for your partisan comment, please tell me what I've been told and what is not in my interests. The last 8 years have seen my company have record years every year, this year looks to be down but still very successful. So why, despite the fact that I already see about half my money go to income, sales, and other various taxes, should I want Obama to take another $x of my money.

Somebody's got to pay for Bush's war in Irag.

cherrywood : WE All ARE PAYING FOR THE WAR...HAVE YOU SEEN THE PRICE OF OIL LATELY. and don't tell me some bs about how you don't drive. the high cost of oil is touching us all. Wait till the MTA cuts services further and then raises the subway fare

boo-hoo: i'm making $250,000+, in the top 1% percentile of income in the country, and i'm complaining about increased taxes.

http://blogs.wsj.com/wealth/2007/02/01/the-rich-o-meter/
http://www.visualizingeconomics.com/2006/11/05/2005-us-income-distribution/

btw, globally, that puts us well above the top 0.1% of people in the world. that means that 99.9% of the entire world is worse off. and boo-hoo we have to pay more taxes. i swear, you people live in a bubble or something and have no idea what life might be like off of this very special island. we should pay more taxes because we OWE MORE to our government for our income/wealth. let me ask you this: do you think that your hard work and smarts would have made you just as rich if you weren't implicitly supported by the infrastructure, property rights, legal system, political stability, higher education, etc. of the united states? asked differently, could you have pulled off your success in ANY other country? could you have gotten to where you are if you had lived and grown up in, say, england? germany? malaysia? ..... if you were to be completely honest with yourself, almost everyone would answer: "NO, couldn't have done it anywhere else but here in the US".... we couldn't have gotten to where we are financially without the US. .... which means we should pay taxes. a lot of them. because we owe it to our government/country.

we as the top earners in the world really need to get a grip on reality. i'm not talking about sophomoric, idealistic, late college dorm-room talk about saving the world. i'm just talking about opening our friggin eyes to how good we got it. if that means i have to pay 10% more in taxes, i'll grin and bear it.

real original dumber. I do pay taxes, a lot of them.

And this kind of ranting is why I am for a real flat tax. The race baiting of decades gone by by politicians has been replaced very skillfully by class warfare. The funny thing is, most people (even the ones making over 250k) view themselves as 'middle class' or 'upper middle class'... because of the values & ideals those words convey: hardworking, responsible, etc... they don't see themselves as rich. So this funny little game Obama et al play is to say we're going to give the middle class a tax cut & only raise it on the rich. When you break down his numbers, a lot of people making 70k a year & more are going to find out he considers them "rich".

If we had a simple flat tax, if a politician says I'm going to raise taxes, then it's goinng to be on everyone. If it's a cut, it's on everyone. A nice, simple, transparent system so everyone knows where they stand and they stand in it together (rich, poor, & in the middle). Heck, I'd probably be willing to pay a slightly higher tax rate if we had this and the simplified tax code that went along with it... of course this will never fly in DC, but a guy can dream.

Obama would be a disaster for this country. As poorly as Bush has done, Congress (which has been Democrat the last few years) is even worse. It has blocked various proposals to fix social security, oil production, etc. The fact is that the U.S. is weathering some very big economic hits very well partly because of the tax cuts. As rough as things have been the last few years, it is nowhere as bad as it had been during Jimmy Carter's presidency. Elect Obama and watch us repeat the Jimmy Carter years. It will be a nightmare.

I agree with everyone here. Bush has been horrible in so many ways, congress (republicans and now democrats) are also terrible. We just need to wait it out...it's strange but the Country always survives.

GothamG8or- I have been having this discussion with several people and you are 100% correct. I hate when these politicians who claim they are going to help the middle class. Would someone please define "middle class". $70,000 in NYC is a joke for a single person, never mind a family. Try telling a family of four making $90,000/yr that live in NYC or the tri-state area that they are considered rich and will have to pay more taxes. It's a joke and it's absolutely wealth distribution. How much more money can some people give to satisfy others. How many more social programs can this country support before we become socialist society, because quite frankly I think that we are already there.

Just wait until this winter when we will be paying to heat other people's homes. We already do it through public housing now we a going to have to use our tax dollars to help those who decided to buy a house that in a million years could never afford and are living better then my wife and I because they refuse to pay their bills or can't because they never could in the first place. There are people who never made 1 payment on their overpriced homes and will live in them for years at no cost to themselves, however it will be you and I (tax payers) that will have to pay plenty more in tax increases because they can't add or subtract. Enough already. And for the record I don't think either one of these candidates are worth wasting my time voting for and I vote every time. Neither one of these represents myself or my family. 300 million people in this country and this is what we have to choice from. God help us.

sorry- for the rant.

dumberthanyou is the only one on this board that lives in reality and has intelligence.

ccdevi - you said that you wished Obama would lose, therefore you meant that you wished McCain to win. Therefore you are saying that a Third Bush term - McCain has voted with Bush 95% of the time - would be better than Obama's tax plan.

We know what you are - a partisan Republican who doesnt think about what is actually good for the country - you just spit out what you are told to spit out.

I think that we should all be paying more taxes to support our WARS, common posterity, and the good of our country.

dco - i feel so bad for you. You pay taxes to live in the greatest country in the world. Your taxes go to making that country better, safer, more secure and to make oil companies and defense contractors extremely wealthy.

I cant stand people like you who complain that your tax dollars go to support other lazy people. You wouldnt have a job, you wouldnt have wealth if you didnt live in this country. Suck it up and stop complaining. If anything you should be paying more taxes to support these WARS we have going on. So much for sacrificing for the country.

I would feel better about paying taxes if those tax dollars were spent reasonably responsibly rather than the overwhelming pandering pork as it stands now (both Repubs & Demos). That and the smugness of those who think they know how to spend everyone else's hard earned money for them when all it really does is make the smuggies just feel better about themselves. Sad really.

My feeling for the government is that it should be responsible for keeping us safe, providing a base of infrastructure, enforcing laws that promote a level playing field of opportunity, and finally to help those that cannot help themselves (note, not the same as those who are unwilling to help themselves). These things I am more than willing to pay for.

Sorry for my rant!

I wont apologize for my rants. The problem is not with the politicians. It is with the people that let the politicians get away with this crap. People like ccdevi who dont think for themselves, they see a headline or talking point and spit it out with out thinking about the implications.

The past 8 years of republican rule is what you get when the people dont question their leaders. Look where it got us - 2 Wars which we are losing, devastated economy, the citizens wiped out, a few connected people got extremely wealthy.

dco - talks of a redistribution of wealth. And it did happen under Bush just not in the way dco explains. The wealth of the poor, the middle class and the upper middle class just got taken away from them and given to a select few uber wealthy. Bush was a reverse Robin Hood.

petrfitz

How do your daily koz talking pints make you any better informed than those of dco or ccdevi? Seems like you are making lots of assumptions about a poster(s) w/ relatively little real info.

you mean that you cant tell that ccdevi is spitting out RNC talking points verbatim?

I dont read the daily koz, i think for myself.

GothamG8or....LOL!

perfitz, thankfully your rants clearly show how off-the-wall you are. In the current session, McCain ranked 65th out of 100 senators in voting with his party. Obama ranked in the top 10 and is considered one of the 2 or 3 most liberal members of the Senate. McCain never liked Bush and broke with him on many high profile matters, such as the handling of military operations in Iraq and the appointment of judges. Obama's policies are one step away from socialism and would be extremely harmful to this country.

perfitz...you might want to notice that many of the things you are saying are the Dems talking points (i.e. McCain = Bush 3rd term, we are losing in Iraq etc). Even the NYTimes is coming to the realization that things in Iraq are a hell of a lot better today than a year ago (In June of 2007 there were 1200 insurgent attacks a week, in June 2008 there were 200 a week).

LICComment - are you saying that McCain did not vote in line with Bush 95% of the time over the past 3 years? 90% of the time for the prior years?

What is McCain's tax policy? TO CONTINUE BUSH'S DISASTEROUS TAX CUTS AND ECONOMIC POLICY.

What effect on the economy on RE would McCains "healthcare plan" have? Hmmm lets see - he wants to remove 50% of the tax incentives that employers have (isnt that a tax increase?) and give some of that to individuals. Therefore employers will not have enough tax incentives to ensure Health insurance for their employees, and individuals will not have enough tax incentives to buy their own insurance.

Under this plan millions more will go without health insurance, driving up hospital and medication costs, causing more bankruptcies, and more mortgage foreclosures.

LICComment - have you ever voted Democrat? Would ever even consider a democratic candidate?

Slizzack - so 1 month of data means that Iraq is going well now? What if the monthly data for next month goes up versus a year ago does that mean that Iraq is a disaster?

Is Iraq a cake walk yet? Is Iraq no longer effecting our ability to fight wars in Afghanistan? What about the effect of the IRaq war on our economy?

Bye the way, I am a civilian Board member of the Armed Services - actually appointed by Bush.

Anyone who says we are losing in Iraq is just shilling the Democrat line. It is shameful how some Democrats want us to fail in Iraq just so they can win an election.

I did not say or suggest any of the things you mention about Iraq. All I was saying was that you said we are losing, and I tried to suggest otherwise. Everything else, you drew your own conclusions.
And as for a cakewalk, Iraq is a war zone, I cannot think of any war zone on earth in the history of time that was described as a cakewalk.

LICComment - anyone saying that we are winning in Iraq is just shilling the RNC line and can't even tell us what winning means. What does a "Victory" look like in Iraq?

When will we get out?

Is the money being spent in Iraq good for our country?

Are we still in Iraq just to make it look better for the Administration that shouldnt have went there in the first place?

Hey are we taking care of our wounded soldiers like we should? Or did the Bush tax breaks take a way the money that should be going to their care?

Its shameful to support a war that you dont know why it was started, why we are fighting it, or what a vidtory looks like.

So if you want to win in Iraq you are an RNC shill, and if you want to lose you are a DNC shill. Really sounds like we're thinking for ourselves here...come on now...

Hmm - no answer to what winning is? or what a victory is?

All you said is that I want to lose. What does lose look like?

No one here is defending Bush or his decisions leading up to Iraq, but to suggest it is "shameful" to want to win (i.e. beat the people who are killing our troops) is beyond nuts to me.

What would victory look like? I assume it would mean a functioning democratically elected Iraqi government, little to no U.S. casualties, the defeat of extremism and al-qaeda in the country, a normal life for Iraqis...

a loss would be a hasty withdrawal, ignoring what the commanders on the ground might have to say about it, emboldening the enemy to continue the fight elsewhere...etc.

Sizzlack - where did i ever say that "it is "shameful" to want to win?"

I think that it is shameful to keep sending soldiers to die when we dont know why they ar dying, what we are fighting for, or how to win the war.

You still haven't answered what "winning" is. Makes it clear that you dont know what you support.

Why was the war started? Where were you in 2003? Faulty intelligence + Rumsfeld = Iraq of 2006. Then we got Patraeus + Surge and we are where we are today.

Siizlack - are those your definitions of what winning or losing in IRaq are? Dont you think that there should be clearly defined goals that all soldiers know?

I noticed that you used the words "assume" "might have to say"

Hmm - yeah clearly defined goals on "winning"

OK now I am sold. I support "winning". I think that "winning" is worth our soldiers dying even though I dont know what we are "winning."

alright well I tried, if you only want to hear what you want to hear than thats totally cool. Rock on!

winning and war should not even be in the same sentence....war is horrible but our soldiers are doing their best and Iraq should not be part of the election debate.

"you mean that you cant tell that ccdevi is spitting out RNC talking points verbatim?"

You've said this or referred to me as a partisan or partisan Republican about 5 times now. You don't know anything about me. Please cite the RNC talking point I spit out. The only thing I've said in this whole thread is that I don't want to pay more taxes. Wow how controversial, the RNC must be witch doctors to get that into my head. Its laughable, you're obviously the most partisan person in this thread, cept that's ok because you're on the right side of course. I love people like you, berating people for not thinking for themselves, simply because they don't think like you. And for the record I am not a Bush guy and am not at all thrilled about McCain. So that's something else you were wrong about.

petrfitz, you may want America to be a country with high taxes, huge government controlling everything, handouts, welfare; a country that doesn't reward individual responsibility or provide opportunity, that appeases foreign dictators and does nothing when we are attacked or put into danger. I want an America based on freedom, individual responsibility and opportunity, small but strong government, and strong against its enemies. Time will tell whether the new Iraq will benefit us, but you can't deny the progress made since Petraeus was put in charge. McCain was a big critic of Rumsfeld and four years ago called for the strategies that were put in place last year that have turned things around in Iraq. I don't have time to educate you on the progress made in Iraq, from both a security and political standpoint, but read Ken Pollack and Michael O'Hanlon. They were very critical of our Iraq operations who have commented in the NY Times about how the surge has significantly improved the situation. Read Jason Gluck's writings on Iraq's political progress. An independent, democratic Iraq could benefit the entire world if it could happen. Stop being such a biased small-minded shill and try to look at the big picture.

LICC, very well said.

Something to think about....peg taxes to both zipcode (cost of living) AND income. Comments?

I think that we should pay enough taxes to support the wars we want to win, and the soldiers who fight it. How can we support a war we want to "win" but at the same time not want to sacrifice a few extra tax dollars to win that war?

Winning with no sacrifice! Support the war but dont know what winning means!

Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, Iran! War is Peace! Dont question W!

petrfitz, you don't read the comments carefully. Winning would be a stable, independent, self-secure, democratic Iraq friendly to America and in which Americans are not in harm's way. What is so hard for you to understand?
The government already taxes enough to fulfill the functions that it should fulfill, including the war. The problem is too much government spending on programs that are either too big or in which the government should not be involved. The pork and earmarks should be drastically cut, and social security and medicare need major changes. These changes should be based on free markets and limited government in order to best serve Americans, not socialist policies.

"Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, Iran! War is Peace! Dont question W!"

That is truly one of the stupidest things I have read in this thread. You clearly aren't interested in people's legitimate positions, you just want to paint everyone who disagrees with you as some sort of evil neocon. Like you don't read the Daily Kos!

LICCOmments says "Winning would be a stable, independent, self-secure, democratic Iraq friendly to America and in which Americans are not in harm's way. What is so hard for you to understand"

Is this statement your opinion of winning in Iraq? Or is this the publically stated goals of the war that every solider and US citizen know that we are fighting for.

Also how do you measure "Stable" and "self-secure"? Do you mean Cuba like - stable and self secure or United States "stable and self-secure>" Also does "independent" mean no US Troops in Iraq? If so how does Iraq becomes "Independent" when we have troops fighting there and while we are building huge military bases there?

no one's answered my question of whether you would be where you're at now if you were to have lived/worked in a different country.

Sizzlack - the Bomb Iran was an exact quote from John McCain.

That brings up another point. Since John McCain publically stated that we should Bomb Iran, if he wins the Presidency doesn that then mean that Iran could apply the Republican logic of Pre-Emptive War and attack the US before we attack them?

Wouldnt then Iran have the right and justification to attack the US a country that openly stated we intend to Bomb them?

"i want a war where no one dies" .......... what alternate universe are you people from? war's a bitch. people die. even invincible americans die. it's called war. it's a foggy bitch.

no one seems to remember the shifting reasons for going to war. weapons of mass destruction! no, he gassed his own people! no, they need democracy! ........ because we're in some position to export democracy. like democracy could ever be force-fed to a people.

people that start sentences with: "well, regardless of all the bad reasons we got into this war..." and then go on to talk about it now, give me a break.

First of all McCain was making a joke when he said that. And if you want to tell me he wasn't, then I will tell you that Barack Obama believes there are 57 states in this country...why? Because that's an exact quote. And as for your hypothetical question, any country can attack any other country. That is war. If Iran wanted to attack us, well that is Iran's prerogative, but you can be sure it wont end up pretty for Iran.

dumberthanyou - If I lived in a different country chances are that I would not be a multi millionaire like I am now.

But I would have free healthcare, and 6 weeks vacation per year. I wouldnt worry about my son being drafted to fight a war we didnt know why we were fighting.

My neighbors wouldnt be obese ignorants who want to bomb the rest of the world so they can afford to drive their oversized SUV's to Denny's for some steak fried chicken steak.

Um...we have a volunteer army Perfitz. It isnt 1968 and your son need not worry he will be drafted.

And who the hell is suggesting we "bomb the rest of the world". You're a member of Code Pink aren't you!

Sizzlack - thanks for telling me that. I sit on the Selective Service Board. You dont think that our military is stretched thin? You think that we could easily attack Iran and support wars in Iraq and Afghanistan without a draft?

I am glad there are Americans like you. Where would our country be without people like you putting those yellow ribbon and God Bless W stickers on their SUVs like real Americans!

There you go making ridiculous assumptions again. I have no yellow ribbons, do not believe in God and if I did would not expect him to "bless W", nor do I drive an SUV. You are truly a moron and this is where my part will end.

anyone else want to chime in on the original post? the part about "i love my country" and "america the beautiful" and "oh but i don't want to pay taxes". i'd love to hear opinions from those making $250K or more, about how the specific job they have right now could have made them just as rich in a different country. how their skill set is transferable to any part of the world.

Like I said before, I'm glad petrfitz' comments very clearly show how off-the-wall loopy he really is.

Dumberthanyou...I believe the answer to your question can be summed up in the term "The American Dream". There is a reason people from all over the world immigrate here, because they can make more of themselves here than anywhere else. Do you know of the Zimbabwean Dream? Or the Mongolian Dream? If I were born in the Congo you can be sure as sh*t I wouldn't live the life I live. But what you're asking can be applied to absolutely any scenario in the world. What if the Nazis had won WW2, how would your life be different? What if the Roman Empire never collapsed...how would you be living right now?

And I do not make more than 250K/year, nor would my skill set be transferable to another part of the world. Which is why I live and am very happy right here.

??? as much as i like riding on unicorns, i wasn't really talking about alternate universes where hitler won. i was talking about our current reality.

dumber, what's your point? People making over @250k do pay a lot in taxes. If you think that increasing taxes further would be bad economic policy for this country, that doesn't mean you are unpatriotic or ungrateful.

Yea I know, which is why the first part of my response was an attempt to answer your question. My great grandfather came here because of the opportunity and tolerance, something he did not see in pre WW1 Germany. Had he chose to move somewhere other than America, his and subsequently my father's and my life would be vastly different (more than likely for the worse).

petrfitz, if you lived in another country:
free health care is NOT FREE: you pay a private doctor if you really want medical help
your son will be drafted even without a war
your neighbors would be ignorant chauvinistic burgers
ALL YOU GENERALIZATIONS are primitive and offensive. As all generalizations usually are, coming from screaming, ill-informed, self-righteous, pompous, narrowminded little bourgois.
If you're "thinking for yourself", you better start adopting others' thinking. ASAP.

"boo-hoo: i'm making $250,000+, in the top 1% percentile of income in the country, and i'm complaining about increased taxes."

I guess there would be no reason to take cost of living into consideration on this topic....nor the fact that there is already a regressive tax system in place "the more you make the increased amount you pay in net and gross"...not to mention the AMT that "evens" the playing field (so yuo go from paying high taxes to even higher ones)

Increased taxes are fine, but shouldn't everyone have to make a sacrifice instead of soaking the so called rich at $250,000 who are already paying most of the taxes as is?

"'d love to hear opinions from those making $250K or more, about how the specific job they have right now could have made them just as rich in a different country. how their skill set is transferable to any part of the world."

dumber, do you really think this point you keep making is clever or novel in any respect? yes, we've benefited from living here. we get it. and thus we pay taxes. nobody is arguing that we shouldn't pay taxes. its about amount.

I make well over $250K. Some years double that, others quadruple that. Not bad for a "loopy, ill infomred, narrowminded" person huh?

Its typical that all these partisan Republicans are worried about higher taxes on those making above $250K per year but they themselves dont even make that much. Another case of voting against your own interests.

Hey you should support the Republican plan to benefit the extremely wealthy. It actually hurts you now but someday you will be filthy rich and you will benefit from the tax cuts to the uber rich.

I am happy to pay more taxes to support the soldiers, the US Economy, and our common posterity. I realize that I wouldnt have made my money in another country.

Stakan - I have lived in Canada, UK, and New Zealand. All free health. All better than you get in the US. None of those countries besides UK have to worry about wars and a draft. None of them are inhabited by "chauvinistic burgers"

Have you traveled? Lived in other countries or do you just believe what Rush Limbaugh tells you?

Also no answer to what "winning" in Iraq means.

Sizzlack - you talk about the "American Dream"

What is the American Dream? It is widely talked about that the American Dream is home ownership. Too bad the deregulation policies and disasterous economic policies of the Republicans have wiped out home ownership and in turn "the American Dream"

How will McCains tax plan of giving corporations and the uber rich more tax breaks help the middle, upper middle class of America?

I hope you realize that you are by far the most partisan person speaking on this thread. Where, in any of my posts, have I suggested I support McCain on anything? The two times I mention him were in regards to Democratic talking points and his "bomb Iran" gaffe. As for my referring to the American Dream, it was more in the historical context, it still applies today but not to the same extent I feel it did say 50-75 years ago. And if you really make as much money as you love suggesting you do, you would know very well what the American Dream is.

and the "bomb Iran" gaffe was exactly that, a gaffe, just like Obama's 57 states remark. (You see...they both make mistakes, it is not all one sided as you like to suggest)

petrfitz - to label everything you don't like (or get) as Republicans is just silly. What would you do in "other countries" where there are multitudes of parties?
But your all-encompassisng simplifications and shrieking border on fascism.
If you do make a lot of money (about which you're suspiciously loud), it does not change anything.

McCain tax plan facts
- Repeal of AMT has a direct benefit in helping the middle, upper middle class
- Corporate tax breaks (to put us in an earshot of other countries tax rates) will reduce their cost structures and allow them to create more middle, upper middle class related jobs
- Not sure what the "more" tax breaks are for the uber rich, but if you say so i guess it must be right

Hmmm a gaffe that was spoken in front of military and ex military leaders on a stage televised to the world.

I think that a gaffe about 57 states is a lot better than a "gaffe" about attacking another country with nuclear weapons. Dont you agree?

Saddam never even joked or gaffed about attacking the US unprovoked. Dont you think that we should have a leader that when makes mistakes they are such that could set off a World War?

If you are referring to when McCain said "Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, Iran" it was so obviously a joke that if you did not get it it shows how dumb you are. You know the song Barbara Ann or whatever its called...the 50s surf song...it was a joke. You make it sound as if McCain was imitating Ahmadinejad, standing in front of a crowd of military, foaming at the mouth screaming "We will bomb Iran! Bomb them to the stoneage! Bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran!". That is simply not what happened. But believe whatever your warped little mind wants you to believe I could really care less. Saddam might not have joked about attacking the US unprovoked, but he did invade Kuwait in an attempt to usurp it. I hardly think McCains "bomb Iran" lame joke would set off WW3, I think Ahmadinejad screaming that Israel is a parasite that is soon to vanish from existence is a tad bit more scary and concerning. But what do I know Im just a fat, SUV driving, Bush loving, bible thumping, gun toting hillbilly...right?

petrfitz, how do you know how much people make? You have no clue. If you think Obama will only increase taxes on the top 1%, you are a hack. He will raise payroll taxes and capital gains taxes, which will hit the majority of the population and businesses.
Also, you are showing that you are not genuine. If you really knew people who lived in a socialized medicine country, you would know that it's not all it's cracked up to be.
We do not have a draft in this country, so your comment is nonsense.
You don't think people in the UK have had to worry about wars? You should open a history book and read.
If you do have all the money you say you do, it must have come from inheritence or luck.

garelj - Bush did give corporate tax breaks and middle class jobs were not created. If you havent noticed those tax breaks (McCain is speaking the same as Bush) got us into the worst employment and economic environment since the Great Depression.

The AMT does effect the middle class. Maybe the middle class of NY metro but certainly not the middle class of the country.

What is different in McCains tax plan from Bush's?

Sizzlack:

"Speaking at Murrells Inlet VFW Hall in South Carolina, McCain was asked when he thought the US Military might "send an air mail message to Tehran."

"McCain began his answer by changing the words to a popular Beach Boys song," the Georgetown Times reports.

"'Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran,' he sang to the tune of Barbara Ann," the paper notes."

The AP article continues, "Asked if his joke was insensitive, McCain said: 'Insensitive to what? The Iranians?'"

Hmm speaking in public infront of military leaders and the press is a joke? Do you think that the Iranians, Egyptians, Syrians, all other Arabs got the joke? Do you think that the joke looked funny on Al Jazeera?

Do you think that is acceptable for a President of the United States or of any other country to "joke" about invading another country?

I'm not saying it was a funny joke...but it was a joke. http://youtube.com/watch?v=o-zoPgv_nYg

petrfitz, everyone is a partisan republican, again what about you, by far the most partisan person on the board.

Was it acceptable for a Presidential Candidate to joke about bombing another country? Is it acceptable to you for a leader of a foreign country to joke about bombing the US?

Watch the clip on youtube. Then go and find yourself of Ahmadinejad at a rally in Tehran screaming Death to America! over and over while the crowd chants with him. Then you tell me which one is worse.

find yourself one of Ahmadinejad...shoulda said

And no it shouldn't be acceptable...but you know what...John McCain is not the President, and if what he said bothers you, you have a right to not vote for him.

Ok I agree with you Sizzlack - Ahmadinejad's comments are slightly worse than McCain's. Neither of them are qualified to be world leaders.

You actually think Obama is more qualified than McCain? A war hero with significant accomplishments in producing legislation during a long tenure in the Senate compared to a "community organizer" who . . . gave a good speech at a convention and . . . and . . . uh . . . can't think of anything right now . . .

petrfitz is an empty suit, just as his beloved community organizer from Chicago. And I'm not for McCain, either. It's just this clanky noisy bullshit that makes me suspicious. petrfitz, I do not believe you make a lot of money. Here.

McCain - a veteran politician who has voted 95% of the time with the current failed administration who was a central figure in the 80's savings & loan scandels. He left his sick wife to cheat on her with a woman 18 years younger who happened to be a beer heiress. He married his way into the politically connected world of Arizona society by abandoning his crippled wife.

Earlier in his life - McCain finished the bottom of his class at West Point and was offered a plum flying job because of his family connections (sounds similar to W!) He went on to crash 5 planes and was described as McNasty by his fellow airman. He was shot down and bravely endured 5 years of captivity.

Hmmm - now Obama had no hand up in life from a priveledged family. Made it into Harvard and graduated near the top of his class. Became a professor of law, ran for and won local and regional offices without having to divorce his wife and marry into society. Made an impact on the local level then successfully ran for US Senate. He has written books, given speeches, passed legislation in the Senate.

Oh yeah - Obama has done something that no other republican has ever been able to do. He beat a Clinton. Not only did he bet Hillary, he also beat Bill who was campaigning for her. So this inspiring man with no help from priveledge beat the best politicians in our country.

He out organized them, and he out inspired them.

How did McCain get his nomination? He ran against a bunch of candidates no one liked. He rose to the top of the shit pile nearly bankrupted. Hi sonly hope is that he clings onto the Bush morons.

Clinton beat herself. Even for a politician, she was too vile and plain bad person. Compared to her, Obama is an angel, just like almost anyone is. Compared to a good person, Obama is a politician (an objectionable term).