Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
Why Obama’s tax cut plan is a crock
Posted by: McQ on Friday, September 19, 2008

His claim is he's going to cut taxes for 95% of American families. Yet he is proposing more than $343 billion in annual spending according to the National Taxpayers Union.

Where is the money for this new spending going to come from?

Obviously the top 5% aren't going to be able to foot the bill for that amount of spending. It's not even close. IBD lays it out:
As outlined in a Congressional Budget Office analysis last December, about 45% of total income in all households comes from those making an average of about $85,000 or less. That's about 90 million households, yet they pay only about 31% of all federal taxes.

The 23 million households making up the richest 20% already pay about 69% of total taxes; the nearly 12 million households constituting the top 10% of income earners already pay about 55% of all federal taxes.
So, he lets the Bush tax cuts lapse and he'll allow the top two tax brackets return to 36% and 39.6% (which, btw, includes more than the top 5%). He then promises to cut the taxes of the rest of the country.

In a down economy.

With $343 billion in new spending each year.

The money is going to have to come from somewhere unless he's going to smilingly stack another trillion plus in debt on to the 5 trillion "official" debt we have now.

So, he raises corporate income taxes, right? How many times do we have to remind you that corporations are tax collectors not tax payers? Who would pay those corporate taxes? 100% of the American people. It would also make corporations less competitive.

In a down economy. Where job creation is going to be a key to recovery (and he'd most likely call "unpatriotic" those corporations who finally threw up their hands at the tax rate and moved to friendlier business climes).

In reality he has two choices. Cut spending drastically in order to keep his 95% tax cut pledge, or pull a Clinton:
But it was less than a month after his inauguration in 1993 that President Clinton, intent on so much new government "investment," gave a televised Oval Office address to the nation announcing that instead of a middle-class tax cut there would be a middle-class tax hike, "because the deficit has increased so much beyond my earlier estimates."
Given the figures Obama has tossed around willy nilly on the campaign trail, there is no indication he plans on spending cuts at all. That means he has to find a source of revenue for his spending programs other than the rich and most likely other than corporations.

Republicans should be combining his spending plans, his promised tax cuts and the condition of the economy and asking "how can he do all of this by taxing only the top 5%?"

It should become obvious to even the economically illiterate that it simply isn't possible. Then they should remind everyone of Bill Clinton's shell-game concerning the middle-class tax cuts that became middle-class tax increases.

Fool me once ...
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
In reality he has two choices.
Well, 3 choices. He can always fall back on deficit spending, like the Republicans.

You also forget that it will be really easy to cut spending: Have one of the Dems pet former Generals declare that the terrorism has been defeated in the GWoT and the slash the military back to Clintons targets (shich Clinton never actually reached).
 
Written By: Terry
URL: http://
Republicans should be combining his spending plans, his promised tax cuts and the condition of the economy and asking "how can he do all of this by taxing only the top 5%?"
Agreed. It’s not possible. Make that point over and over.
Then they should remind everyone of Bill Clinton’s shell-game concerning the middle-class tax cuts that became middle-class tax increases.
I’d stop short here. Don’t connect him to Clinton. Don’t attack Clinton’s economic policy. It’s a bad time to do that, even if it is to say that he lied about raising taxes. Let Obama’s economic plans stand alone and point out how inept they are on their own.
 
Written By: Is
URL: http://
where did these TRILLION DOLLARS OF BAILOUT come from?-
From Republican small government wet dream?
Crock is your post...
 
Written By: sashal
URL: http://
I think you’ll find, sashal, that none of us are happy about the bailout, either. (Although I think you exaggerate, a bit, by calling it a trillion dollars.) The more libertarian of us think that the companies should have been allowed to fail, and that’s that; as the S&L bailout gave companies license to do poorly, so will this bailout do the same, to our detriment years later. Others feel that the bailout was the best of a bad lot of choices. But I don’t know of anyone who thinks it’s a good thing.

And actually, I find your whole "small government" snark darkly amusing, since Bush is explicitly not a small-government Republican, and the reason that voters abandoned the Republican Congress in 2006 was largely because they are not small-government types either.

 
Written By: Jeff Medcalf
URL: http://www.caerdroia.org/blog
sashal,

How is the post a crock? What specific point in the post is refuted by saying "The Republicans don’t like small government as much as they say they do?"
 
Written By: Terry
URL: http://
Where is the money for this new spending going to come from?
I know, I know! He explained the whole plan in his nomination acceptance speech:
Now, many of these plans will cost money, which is why I’ve laid out how I’ll pay for every dime, by closing corporate loopholes and tax havens that don’t help America grow. But I will also go through the federal budget, line by line, eliminating programs that no longer work and making the ones we do need work better and cost less because we cannot meet 21st century challenges with a 20th century bureaucracy.
Line by line, to pay for every dime. It’s easy when you’re The One!
 
Written By: Linda Morgan
URL: http://
"Where is the money for this new spending going to come from?"

I don’t really care where he gets it from as long as he doesn’t take it from my end of the pool.



"eliminating programs that no longer work and making the ones we do need work better and cost less because..."

BlahBlahBlah Waste, Fraud, and Abuse blahblahblah Fraud, Waste, and Abuse blahblahblah Abuse, Waste, and Fraud blah.....

I think that literally every politician since at least the 60’s has claimed they were going to save money by cutting Waste, Fraud, and Abuse in government. I am surprised there is any left. I am sure there isn’t enough left to cover all big O’s planned spending increases.
 
Written By: timactual
URL: http://
As a libertarian scanning the comments in the pro-freedom blogs,, I’m glad to see so many apparent Democrats denouncing the bailout. I sort of figured they would. Because you know there’s no one more concerned about fiscal responsibility and the American taxpayer than a liberal Democrat! Glad to see they’re also outraged at deficit spending, too. I’m old enough to remember when Democrats were high on Keynes and touted deficit spending as the high road to prosperity See you at the next meeting of the National Taxpayers Union, Terry!



"I remember when ’liberal’ meant being generous with your own money."
—Will Rogers
 
Written By: Bilwick
URL: http://
Hey McQ, Obama may be able to balance the budget and increase annual domestic spending, in a similar way Clinton did.

Watch this video.
keep in mind, its not just a down economy we have to worry about these days.
 
Written By: Jimmy the Dhimmi
URL: http://
Here’s an even more radical idea, Jimmi: the new president balance the budget, decrease domestic spending, and give the money saved on back to the people it was originally taken from. Then if they wanted to use some of that money to donate to charity, they could do so. Or not. I call my radical plan "liberty." Democrats and RINOs might want to look into it.
 
Written By: Bilwick
URL: http://
I’m not an Obama supporter. The point is Obama will balance the budget by slashing military spending, just like clinton did with the "Peace Dividend." The problem is, as evidenced by 9/11, maybe cutting military spending is not quite what we need right now.
 
Written By: Jimmy the Dhimmi
URL: http://
Clinton never really balanced the budget. And, he only got close because of the good economy, he was actully saying he couldn’t balance the budget up until he claimed to balance it. He just lucked out with tax revenue.
 
Written By: Don
URL: http://
I have a question -

Since 40% ( or more) of the people in this country don’t pay a red cent of taxes to FedGov, Inc- Howthefrak is Bambi planning to cut their taxes?
 
Written By: The Gonzman
URL: http://
And how is McCain going to pay for *his* massive increases in spending, while simultaneously cutting taxes on *everyone*, in a time of same exploding budget deficits?

Every nonpartisan economist out there has nocked Obama’s tax plan as being closer to fiscally neutral than McCain’s.
 
Written By: glasnost
URL: http://
Every nonpartisan economist out there has nocked Obama’s tax plan as being closer to fiscally neutral than McCain’s.
Links? Citations? Nocked? Or was that a misprint and you meant to write Mocked?
 
Written By: SShiell
URL: http://
2xUsZs ramdhnfpeoes, [url=http://rhqwbyjffdsn.com/]rhqwbyjffdsn[/url], [link=http://jcfsozfshkhu.com/]jcfsozfshkhu[/link], http://bijfhcehnjbg.com/
 
Written By: xvcxpkq
URL: http://snafsethiyqf.com/

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider