29
   

FINAL COUNTDOWN FOR USA ELECTION 2008

 
 
H2O MAN
 
  1  
Reply Sat 6 Sep, 2008 02:41 pm
@FreeDuck,
FreeDuck wrote:

H2O MAN wrote:

Cycloptichorn wrote:
McSame


Only the ignorant use that term...


That is right. Enlightened people use more educated terms, like liberaltard.


Exactly!
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sat 6 Sep, 2008 02:43 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Some are, some I think you'll be hard pressed to find evidence for. Are you saying that McCain is proposing nothing that hasn't been tried by GWB?

And also, please explain why McCain's list sucks.
And while you're at it, please give us some pointers on how Obama's list is better.
Foxfyre
 
  4  
Reply Sat 6 Sep, 2008 02:51 pm
@Foxfyre,
As a refresher here are the two summarized lists again:

McCAIN'S BASIC ECONOMIC PLAN
compared to
OBAMA'S BASIC ECONOMIC PLAN


McCain proposes to slash federal corporate tax rate to 25% along with expensing for capital investment (allowing capital costs to be deducted in the year they are incurred.)

McCain proposes to make current tax rates permanent: Top individual income-tax rate 35%; capital gains and dividends rates 15% and eliminate repetitive death tax. In addition he proposes to double the personal exemption for children and other dependents from $3,500 to $7,000.

McCain proposes to abolish the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT), which was originally adopted as a mechanism to ensure that a small number of the richest Americans pay at least some tax. Because it was never indexed for inflation, today it imposes sharp, surprise tax increases on the middle class in the highest-tax states.

McCain also pledges to ban taxes on the Internet and on cell phones, consistent with his longstanding record.

McCain proposes cutting numerous tariffs.

McCain favors the Columbian Free Trade Agreement

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Barack Obama proposes to increase the top two individual tax rates.

Obama would increase the capital gains and dividends tax rate by 33%.

Obama has proposed Social Security payroll tax increases of 16% to 32% for families making over $250,000 a year

Obama’s proposed health plan would also impose a new payroll tax on employers.

Obama would reinstitute the "death tax" (estate tax) with a top rate of 45%.

Obama has also proposed several increases in corporate taxes, including a "windfall profits" tax on oil.

Obama proposes no cuts in any tariffs and several higher tariffs.

H2O MAN
 
  2  
Reply Sat 6 Sep, 2008 02:56 pm
@Foxfyre,
Foxfyre wrote:


Barack Obama proposes to increase the top two individual tax rates.

Obama would increase the capital gains and dividends tax rate by 33%.

Obama has proposed Social Security payroll tax increases of 16% to 32% for families making over $250,000 a year

Obama’s proposed health plan would also impose a new payroll tax on employers.

Obama would reinstitute the "death tax" (estate tax) with a top rate of 45%.

Obama has also proposed several increases in corporate taxes, including a "windfall profits" tax on oil.

Obama proposes no cuts in any tariffs and several higher tariffs.




None of those changes are good for the country.
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sat 6 Sep, 2008 02:57 pm
@H2O MAN,
Our side should not be allowed to get away with that any more than the Obama disciples should be allowed to get away with it H2O.

WHY are they not good for the country? And how is what McCain proposing good or not good for the country?

I'm not asking for an in depth economics lesson here as few, if any of us, are qualified to give one. But surely we have something more substantive to base our arguments on than we're okay and you're not.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  2  
Reply Sat 6 Sep, 2008 03:31 pm
Speaking for myself, if Obama's magnanimous tax cut for senior citizens does not include capital gains, he will be imposing a huge hardship on those seniors who depend on their retirement investments to live. We'll have to see if that flies, huh?
Asherman
 
  2  
Reply Sat 6 Sep, 2008 03:56 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Actually, my quibbles about Congress isn't limited to those dominated by the Democrats. The Congress is (and mostly always has been) self-serving, partisan and unable to rise to national challenges. McCain has spent a good part of his life serving in the Congress where he has a well-deserved reputation for fighting corruption, waste and self-interest regardless of which Party, or politician is involved. Obama has been absent and supportive of the Democratic Party line for the short time he has been in Congress.

A McCain-Palin administration can be expected to resist efforts to enlarge the Federal government, and the bureaucracy. The Administration will make efforts to eliminate Congressional pork and earmarks. He will veto Bills that are wasteful of the tax payer's money, and I expect sincere efforts to reduce the number of bureaucrats on the Federal payroll. The proposals the administration sends to Congress will focus on items of substance; Energy Independence, tax reform, Social Security and MediCare reforms, etc. The McCain administration will draw a line in foreign relations that will reassure our friends and serve unmistakable notice on our enemies.

I doubt that either McCain, or Obama will be able to effectuate much meaningful change, because our system is designed to prevent that. Our system evolves and changes, but very slowly. McCain and Palin have demonstrated their willingness to risk personal defeat by challenging entrenched interests. Obama has not. He risked nothing personal in organizing the poor folks in Chicago, and he has risked nothing since coming to Congress. He's spoken and written about "change" that apparently will create a modern Utopia paid for by redistributing the wealth from those who earned it to those who have not. Promises, promises.
Asherman
 
  5  
Reply Sat 6 Sep, 2008 04:02 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Why would anyone value your opinions? Because some of your family members are Buddhist doesn't make you more knowledgeable than I am after being a Buddhist for 45 years and doing graduate work on Oriental Philosophy and Religion. What has my knowledge and understanding of Buddhism to do with political opinions posted to this forum?

Your opinions regarding Republicans and Conservatives are just as biased as my opinions of Democrats and Left-wingers. The difference, it seems to me, is that I take the time to explain my points of view, while you consistently mount hateful attacks on anyone who doesn't agree with you.
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sat 6 Sep, 2008 04:17 pm
@Asherman,
Quote:
I doubt that either McCain, or Obama will be able to effectuate much meaningful change, because our system is designed to prevent that. Our system evolves and changes, but very slowly. McCain and Palin have demonstrated their willingness to risk personal defeat by challenging entrenched interests. Obama has not.


This is what we're dealing with in a succinct nutshell. President Clinton accomplished practically zilch his first two years in Congress when he had a Democratically controlled Congress. Why? They liked the status quo and they weren't gonna mess with it. It was only the so-called Gingrich led GOP revolution of a bunch of brand new reform minded freshmen Republicans who gained control of Congress in 1994 that took us in to what almost constituted a 'new deal' in the reforms, change of how welfare was done, economic prosperity and fiscal responsibility resulting in an almost balanced budget.

McCain and Palin are likely to be saddled with an entrenched Democratic majority in both houses of Congress who have accomplished practically nothing in the last two years and aren't going to want to help the new GOP leadership accomplish any more of their goals than they absolutely have to.

But I believe John McCain when he says he doesn't care who gets the credit, and he has absolutely nothing to lose politically and nobody that he will be beholden to. I think he will absolutely be the maverick that he promises to be. And I see nothing in Sarah Palin that suggests that she marches to any drum but her own and I think McCain will use that to great advantage.

I agree with that Forbes writer. I think if the people want real change, McCain/Palin is absolutely their best bet to get it.

0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  3  
Reply Sat 6 Sep, 2008 04:17 pm
@Foxfyre,
Once again, you left off the biggest part of Obama's plan: that he plans on cutting income taxes for 90-95% of taxpayers. You might not agree that this will save money in the end, but if you were honest, you would include it in the plan listing!

Quote:

Obama’s proposed health plan would also impose a new payroll tax on employers.


So does McCain's plan; but you don't list that.

Quote:
Obama would reinstitute the "death tax" (estate tax) with a top rate of 45%.


So would McCain's plan; but you don't list that.

C'mon, Fox. I don't mind if you like McCain's plans, there's nothing wrong with that. But don't pretend it is meaningfully different then Bush's economic plans, for it isn't.

Cycloptichorn
FreeDuck
 
  2  
Reply Sat 6 Sep, 2008 04:28 pm
@Foxfyre,
Ok, maybe the one I posted earlier was too long to read. Here is a side by side comparison. I urge you to consider the fact that TPC actually cites its sources when deciding whether or not to give it credence.

The Forbes piece you posted is not a comprehensive analysis but rather an opinion piece, as evidence by how much information they left out. One example, the estate tax. He dings Obama for bringing it back when McCain would also bring it back (though with a higher exemption and lower rate). He credits McCain with wanting to abolish the AMT when he is really just proposing to extend the 2007 patch, as does Obama.


Foxfyre
 
  2  
Reply Sat 6 Sep, 2008 04:28 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
I posted an article from Forbes magazine and have been discussing the points made in that article. Those aren't the ONLY points that can be made of course, but so far you have done nothing but state opinion that you haven't backed up with anything. You may be right. But without having some evidence that the information I am posting is wrong, you can surely understand that I will consider your information to more likely be flawed than that which I am posting.

McCain is on the record as favoring retaining the current progressively decreasing tax levels on estate taxes so that they do NOT revert to their pre-2001 levels in 2011 as they will do if the Bush tax cuts are not made permanent.

And on health care:
Quote:
“John McCain believes that insurance reforms should increase the variety and affordability of insurance coverage available to American families by fostering competition and innovation.

Reform the tax code to eliminate the bias toward employer-sponsored health insurance, and provide all individuals with a $2,500 tax credit ($5,000 for families) to increase incentives for insurance coverage…

Families should be able to purchase health insurance nationwide, across state lines, to maximize their choices, and heighten competition for their business that will eliminate excess overhead, administrative, and excessive compensation costs from the system.

Allow individuals to get insurance through any organization or association that they choose: employers, individual purchases, churches, professional association, and so forth…” 2


Perhaps you can show where he intends to increase taxes on employers?
Ramafuchs
 
  0  
Reply Sat 6 Sep, 2008 04:30 pm
@Asherman,
sorry sir
though it is addressed to CI
may i repudiate your logical views?

Your opinions regarding Republicans and Conservatives are just as biased as my opinions of Democrats and Left-wingers.

Not biased but based on facts.

Not even your opins are biased?
( I live in Germany and not an American)
The thing is this.
American had lost the global respect not because bush nor because of you or CI.
Rational critical views are not saleable in in USA.
I am with innocent Americans but not with intellectual manipulators.
Thanks
Rama
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  0  
Reply Sat 6 Sep, 2008 04:32 pm
@Asherman,
Quote:
Actually, my quibbles about Congress isn't limited to those dominated by the Democrats. The Congress is (and mostly always has been) self-serving, partisan and unable to rise to national challenges. McCain has spent a good part of his life serving in the Congress where he has a well-deserved reputation for fighting corruption, waste and self-interest regardless of which Party, or politician is involved.


You've always been good at this, Ash, repeating old canards, but you do do it with a measure of assurance; good fiction writer, eh? So much of American politics, ideas on country are simply the result of a pretty effective propaganda program which you've bought into.

Your gravitas is looking pretty shoddy.

Quote:
McCain's 'Maverick' Myth Is the Media's Creation

By David Brock and Paul Waldman, Anchor Books. Posted March 31, 2008.

The bizarre tale of how the media turned a crooked Republican into the mirage of a principled politician.

In 1992, McCain was one of three Republican senators to vote for Democratic campaign finance reform legislation (all the Senate Democrats except two voted in favor). The bill called for the provision of taxpayer funds and other incentives to urge candidates to abide by voluntary spending limits; it was vetoed by then-president George H. W. Bush, a veto that the Senate failed to override. In 1993, McCain again cast himself in the role of party rebel in the campaign finance debate. In deliberations over an identical measure to the one Bush had vetoed in 1992, McCain proposed amendments that caught the attention of the media. McCain offered one amendment that barred candidates from using campaign money for personal expenses such as vacations, mortgage payments, and clothing purchases, among others. Another amendment pushed for the campaign reforms, if enacted, to go into effect in 1994 instead of 1996, as originally proposed. Little noted was that McCain's amendment was identical to one that his Arizona colleague, Senator Dennis DeConcini (D), was set to introduce to the Senate, before McCain beat him to the punch by a day-a move that won McCain credit for the amendment.

The early returns to these maneuvers were encouraging. In 1993, the Washington Post noted that McCain was one of five "maverick" Republicans for his work on campaign finance reform legislation. Another Post reference two months later offered a continuation of the theme, describing McCain as a "conservative with maverick instincts."But if the media had taken a closer look, talk of McCain as a maverick may have been a little premature. As news stories at the time made clear, the 1992 campaign finance bill was preordained to be vetoed by Bush, making it easier for McCain and his fellow Republican rebels to back it. That motive became starker in 1993 when the Clinton administration, pushing a nearly identical bill, was told by McCain and his fellow "renegades" that they would support a Republican filibuster of the legislation.

Predictably, Clinton expressed his dismay at the "rebels" who changed their tune when faced with a bill that might actually become law. "The thing that particularly troubles me about this one is that several Republicans voted for a bill not unlike this last year which contained public financing," Clinton said. The Associated Press reported that Republican moderates admitted to voting for the original bill only because they knew it would be vetoed.

Eventually, McCain and his band of mavericks broke with their GOP colleagues on the filibuster, but only after the bill was gutted to remove most of the public financing features of the measure. The compromise legislation "left almost no one happy" and was derided by advocacy groups like Public Citizen and US PIRG as watered down. The bill eventually died a quiet death in the House. McCain's maverick gestures, though revealed to be less than substantial under scrutiny, nonetheless left their imprint on the media.


Quote:
Asherman postures:
Obama has been absent and supportive of the Democratic Party line for the short time he has been in Congress.


Ask that top flight researcher, H2oMan, how this actually plays out.

Quote:
Asherman wrote:
A McCain-Palin administration can be expected to resist efforts to enlarge the Federal government, and the bureaucracy. The Administration will make efforts to eliminate Congressional pork and earmarks. He will veto Bills that are wasteful of the tax payer's money, and I expect sincere efforts to reduce the number of bureaucrats on the Federal payroll. The proposals the administration sends to Congress will focus on items of substance; Energy Independence, tax reform, Social Security and MediCare reforms, etc.


Pure partisan motivated drivel.

Quote:
Asherman wrote:

The McCain administration will draw a line in foreign relations that will reassure our friends and serve unmistakable notice on our enemies.


What friends? They're not all that reassured, I assure you. A quick review of the facts, something that you hold in great disdain, finds that McCain has been wrong about virtually everything wrt foreign policy. He knows nothing about life and people outside his narrow little borders.

0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  2  
Reply Sat 6 Sep, 2008 04:36 pm
@Foxfyre,
I agree that we should eliminate the bias toward employer sponsored health care, but it seems like the easiest way to do that is to just make all health insurance tax deductible, right? If my health insurance is no longer taken out pre-tax, but I get a $5000 tax credit, my paycheck gets smaller, I might get bumped up into a higher tax bracket -- increasing my effective tax rate, and I wont get any relief until April. I am not too crazy about that idea.
Foxfyre
 
  2  
Reply Sat 6 Sep, 2008 04:38 pm
@FreeDuck,
FreeDuck wrote:

Ok, maybe the one I posted earlier was too long to read. Here is a side by side comparison. I urge you to consider the fact that TPC actually cites its sources when deciding whether or not to give it credence.

The Forbes piece you posted is not a comprehensive analysis but rather an opinion piece, as evidence by how much information they left out. One example, the estate tax. He dings Obama for bringing it back when McCain would also bring it back (though with a higher exemption and lower rate). He credits McCain with wanting to abolish the AMT when he is really just proposing to extend the 2007 patch, as does Obama.


Okay, I'll check it out when I get some time. You may have arrived at something. I did note this at the bottom of the analysis though:

"TPC has not verified claims made" along with citing the only sources used as Obama's website, McCain's website, and the NY Times. I think for now I'll stick with Forbes' take on it but I will look forther.
FreeDuck
 
  2  
Reply Sat 6 Sep, 2008 04:40 pm
@Foxfyre,
Foxfyre wrote:

"TPC has not verified claims made" along with citing the only sources used as Obama's website, McCain's website, and the NY Times. I think for now I'll stick with Forbes' take on it but I will look forther.

The candidates websites would be where they would publish their proposals.

What sources is the Forbes article using?
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Sat 6 Sep, 2008 04:42 pm
@FreeDuck,
FreeDuck wrote:

I agree that we should eliminate the bias toward employer sponsored health care, but it seems like the easiest way to do that is to just make all health insurance tax deductible, right? If my health insurance is no longer taken out pre-tax, but I get a $5000 tax credit, my paycheck gets smaller, I might get bumped up into a higher tax bracket -- increasing my effective tax rate, and I wont get any relief until April. I am not too crazy about that idea.


My health care is fully tax deductible because I can pay it through my own business. I also enjoy excellent coverage at a very affordable cost and don't want either Obama or McCain messing with that. A tax credit would probably put more money in my pocket though and medical savings accounts make HUGE sense. The primary difference between Obama and McCain is that Obama wants to micromanage it with more taxes and I can see nothing.....I do mean NOTHING.....good that can come from that. McCain wants to make it possible and affordable (by lower taxes) for people to be able to get the healthcare they want when and where they want it but leave it up to them how that will happen. McCain is advocating the same kinds of portability and flexibility that I have been hollering to get for years.
0 Replies
 
JTT
 
  0  
Reply Sat 6 Sep, 2008 04:46 pm
@Asherman,
Quote:
Because some of your family members are Buddhist doesn't make you more knowledgeable than I am after being a Buddhist for 45 years and doing graduate work on Oriental Philosophy and Religion.


I don't know much at all about Buddhism but being a war monger doesn't seem to square with being a Buddhist.

Not having the common decency to voice some small measure of concern about the tens of thousands of dead Iraqis, about their ravaged country, their destroyed homes and infrastructure just doesn't seem to square with being a Buddhist.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  2  
Reply Sat 6 Sep, 2008 04:48 pm
@FreeDuck,
FreeDuck wrote:

Foxfyre wrote:

"TPC has not verified claims made" along with citing the only sources used as Obama's website, McCain's website, and the NY Times. I think for now I'll stick with Forbes' take on it but I will look forther.

The candidates websites would be where they would publish their proposals.

What sources is the Forbes article using?


Forbes IS a source. Where this particular writer got the data, I don't know, but I do know the value they put on the reputation of the organization and the journalistic integrity of the publication and the value they put on their journalistic and editorial integrity, and therefore I trust them. I have also listened to Steve Forbes on several occasions talking about this stuff. I think the information found in Forbes can also be backed up through other groups who study tax policy and the consequences when various kinds of policy are implemented.

What sources does Obama use? The NY Times? That the sources TPC apparently was using. Smile
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Are all Republicans Idiots? - Question by BigEgo
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2014 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 08/29/2014 at 03:58:48