AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND

The author states: "They [i.e. the teabaggers] have had enough of Obama's proposed tax hikes and tax "surcharges" to pay for all his spending programs that will drive U.S. tax rates higher even than the welfare-state economies of Europe (New Yorkers, for instance, could face a combined federal-state income tax rate of nearly 60 percent)"

That's a preposterous falsehood. First of all, Obama hasn't proposed any increase in income tax rates (which is what the author is talking about here). At most, the president has proposed allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire.

Secondly, New Yorkers wouldn't face a combined income tax rate of nearly 60 percent, even with the expiration of the Bush tax cuts. The New York state income tax rate tops out at 8.97% for those earning more than $500,000 a year.* The top federal tax rate is 35% (information found at this site). The top rate before two rounds of Bush tax cuts was 39.6%. Even allowing for the pre-Bush rates to be reinstated and adding those percentages together, a New Yorker earning over half a million dollars would still only pay a little less than 50% -- even though it would be incredibly stupid to add those together, since: (1) those are marginal tax rates, not effective rates (a mistake that conservatives always seem to make); and (2) people who itemize their deductions are allowed to deduct their state tax payments.

In short, it's an easily verifiable fact that a New Yorker, facing some fanciful Obama tax increase, will not pay a combined federal-state income tax rate of nearly 60 percent. That's simply not true. It is, indeed, a lie.

Among the more prominent elements of his tax proposal, Senator Obama would end the Bush tax cuts and allow the top two tax rates to return to 36 and 39.6 percent.

He also would allow personal exemptions and deductions to be phased out for those with income over $250,000.

The real kicker, though, is that Senator Obama would end the Social Security payroll tax cap for those over $250,000 in earnings. (The cap is currently set at $102,000.) These individuals will then face a tax rate of 15.65 percent from payroll taxes and the top income tax rate of 39.6 percent for a combined top rate of over 56 percent on each additional dollar earned.

High-income individuals will be forced to pay even more if they live in cities or states with high taxes such as New York City, California, or Maryland. These unlucky people would pay over two-thirds of each new dollar in earnings to the federal government.

Barack Obama’s new tax rate would give the United States one of the highest tax rates among developed countries. Currently only six of the top 30 industrial nations have a tax rate for all levels of government combined of over 55 percent.

Under this tax plan, the United States would join this group and have a higher top rate than such high-tax nations as Sweden and Denmark.

The top marginal rate would exceed 60 percent with the inclusion of state and local taxes, which means that only Hungary would exceed Barack Obama’s new proposed top tax rate.
http://www.barackobamataxplan.com/businesses/

July 21, 2008
Wealthy New Yorkers Face 58% Marginal Tax Rate Under Obama
I previously blogged that Obama's Proposed Tax Hikes Would Hit Blue States Hard. The New York Sun runs the numbers for New York in Tax Rates For New Yorkers Would Top 50% Under Obama, by Julie Satow:

New York tax filers reporting more than $375,000 a year in earned income may end up paying nearly 60% of their wages in taxes to the government under a Barack Obama presidency, economists who have analyzed his plan said.

The Democratic presidential candidate is proposing not only raising the federal income tax, but also adding a Social Security tax for those Americans earning more than $250,000 a year. For New Yorkers, that could mean that if the current Social Security rate is applied, the marginal tax rate, or rate on every extra dollar earned, could rise to 58%.

"This is a very eye-popping number," a resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute, Alan Viard, said. ...

Some observers said that raising taxes at a time when the economy is teetering on a recession could exacerbate the economic woes. "If the economy remains soft through next year " and it seems unlikely that it will be robust " it would be a very bad time to raise taxes of any sort, but particularly to raise them in this way," a professor who teaches federal tax law at Yale Law School, Michael Graetz, said. ...

For the full calculations of these figures, see the slideshow accompanying this article.
http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2008/07/wealthy-new-yor.html

Another lie: The maximum federal income tax is 35%, and the New York State income taxes are structured between 4% and 6.85%. As most people know, state income taxes are deductible from federal income taxes.

How does 41.85% become 58%+ "marginal rate?"

Hokus pokus math.

You should be ashamed of peddling your villifications of other people's ideas with which you disagree. . . .

Is it true that Barack Obama is a sociopath?

[snip]

Yes, I think Barack Obama is a sociopath!

In Californis, the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) has shut off water to a great many Californian food farms, leaving many farm workers and owners--plus many food shippers, processors, and sellers--in rapidly increasing poverty. They say they have done this to protect delta smelt and northern Californian salmon! So they think securing lives of those fish has a greater priority than securing human lives!

To hell with the EPA's stupid priorities!

. . .

I wonder whether the EPA is led by a bunch of sociopaths!

. . . frequent villifications, AND DISTORTIONS, instead of rational rebuttal, of other people's ideas with which they disagree, are a probable sign of envy.

ehBeth, how accurate do you think John Stossel's report on ABC's 20/20 is re Canadian healthcare?

. . . and therein lies the big problem with conservatives; they build their homes with straws, and a little wind will blow them down~!

(New Yorkers, for instance, could face a combined federal-state income tax rate of nearly 60 percent)

The real kicker, though, is that Senator Obama would end the Social Security payroll tax cap for those over $250,000 in earnings. (The cap is currently set at $102,000.) These individuals will then face a tax rate of 15.65 percent from payroll taxes and the top income tax rate of 39.6 percent for a combined top rate of over 56 percent on each additional dollar earned.

Glenn Beck: Harmful to the Conservative Movement
(Peter Wehner, Commentary Magazine, September 21, 2009)

Unlike others associated with Time magazine, David von Drehle is a skilled, careful, and perceptive writer. So I was interested in his cover story on FOX News’s Glenn Beck, who is considered to be a red-hot commodity these days.

I don’t pretend to be an expert on Beck. In the past I assumed he was a typical figure in the pundit and cable-media world. Only recently have I watched portions of his television program, as well as interviews with him, and heard parts of his radio program. And what I’ve seen should worry the conservative movement.

I say that because he seems to be more of a populist and libertarian than a conservative, more of a Perotista than a Reaganite. His interest in conspiracy theories is disquieting, as is his admiration for Ron Paul and his charges of American “imperialism.” (He is now talking about pulling troops out of Afghanistan, South Korea, Germany, and elsewhere.) Some of Beck’s statements"for example, that President Obama has a “deep-seated hatred for white people”"are quite unfair and not good for the country. His argument that there is very little difference between the two parties is silly, and his contempt for parties in general is anti-Burkean (Burke himself was a great champion of political parties). And then there is his sometimes bizarre behavior, from tearing up to screaming at his callers. Beck seems to be a roiling mix of fear, resentment, and anger"the antithesis of Ronald Reagan.

I understand that a political movement is a mansion with many rooms; the people who occupy them are involved in intellectual and policy work, in politics, and in polemics. Different people take on different roles. And certainly some of the things Beck has done on his program are fine and appropriate. But the role Glenn Beck is playing is harmful in its totality. My hunch is that he is a comet blazing across the media sky right now"and will soon flame out. Whether he does or not, he isn’t the face or disposition that should represent modern-day conservatism. At a time when we should aim for intellectual depth, for tough-minded and reasoned arguments, for good cheer and calm purpose, rather than erratic behavior, he is not the kind of figure conservatives should embrace or cheer on.

Well, you could be right, but, though I didn't research it, I haven't challenged that particular statement because several sources who have researched it have come to the conclusion that the nearly 60% is a valid number.

And, given our President and/or his spokespersons propensity to vastly underestimate the costs of what he proposes, at least according the the CBO, Cato, Heritage Foundation, et al, it is not difficult to believe they aren't exactly advertising the net effects of his proposals if he even understands them themselves.

Now we can quibble over whether social security taxes should be included in that 60%, but social security taxes are based purely on income. So can they be called an income tax? A small business owner, such as myself, certainly regards them as such as estimated social security plus income on net earnings is combined and submitted on the same form every three months.

Here is one explanation for how they get to that 'nearly 60%' number. Can you say unequivocably that they are wrong?

The real kicker, though, is that Senator Obama would end the Social Security payroll tax cap for those over $250,000 in earnings. (The cap is currently set at $102,000.) These individuals will then face a tax rate of 15.65 percent from payroll taxes and the top income tax rate of 39.6 percent for a combined top rate of over 56 percent on each additional dollar earned.

New York tax filers reporting more than $375,000 a year in earned income may end up paying nearly 60% of their wages in taxes to the government under a Barack Obama presidency, economists who have analyzed his plan said.

The Democratic presidential candidate is proposing not only raising the federal income tax, but also adding a Social Security tax for those Americans earning more than $250,000 a year. For New Yorkers, that could mean that if the current Social Security rate is applied, the marginal tax rate, or rate on every extra dollar earned, could rise to 58%.