No wonder Joe the Plumber Is worried About Taxes

Very interesting. Thanks for posting this article. Ironically, it highlights how Obama's tax and healthcare proposals will truly benefit the "Joe Plumbers" of the nation. Joe Plumber, as a hard working man who has difficulty paying his taxes and medical bills, is representative of the average, struggling American. It looks like the McCain Campaign has fired our slovenly, but beloved "Joe Six-Pack." Although Joe Six-Pack is now unemployed, we can at least find comfort in the fact that his job of holding up the McCain campaign hasn't been shipped overseas.

I listened to Joe and made a quick determination that he had no clue . You dont pay tax on what you invest, in fact, you get tax breaks from expensing.
I think he was a shill that was put in to prove that Americans are sacks of hammers.

More like screwdrivers.

He also doesn't have a plumbers license. He claims he doesn't need one because he works under the license of his employer. However, the county has no record of either of them having a plumbing license.

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5gJsPHiQlgYvAsrHz9mvHJlezQJLwD93RONUO0

Perhaps neither hammer nor screwdriver...

A sack of loose nuts?

Unrelated to the point he made when talking to Obama, and the idea McCain used him for in the debate, which was that redistribution of wealth is unfair and un-American. People who make money fairly, by being clever, whether this one person is an example or not, deserve to keep most of what they make. The rich have no obligation to pay a much, much higher percentage of their income in taxes than the middle class. In America, we don't pull anyone who succeeds down to our level out of jealousy, by taxing him to death.

Gee, squinney, didn't pick up on the "screwdriver" pun, heh?

Screw loose, and drives the smitten conservatives of like mind.

Good. I'm sick and tired of hearing about Joe Six-Pack. As if anyone without a college degree and a six figure income drags his fat ass in the door after work, plops down in front the all sports channel and pops the top on a can of Blue Ribbon.

I fit that profile except that I usually like to smack the little lady around and then kick the dog first...

Scrap Joe the Plumber? "Joe the Fraud" is the de facto mascot for McCain's campaign. Who could have guessed that?

It's frightening to think Joe the plumber is a representative of America, but there are enough evidence to show it is.

Well, then, add Merle Haggard to the profile.

WHen someone tries to "make a point" its incumbent upon them to develop a premise thats at least based upon solid facts and evidence. Apparently since Joe the Plumber is neither representative of the tax "redistribution premise" nor , apparently is he even a ;licensed plumber.


If we had eggs, we could have bacon and eggs, if we had bacon.

The premise is not that this individual is such a person. The premise is that soaking the rich by taking a very disproportionate percentage of their income is inherently unfair, and that is a subjective judgement, but consistent with the traditional American idea that anyone who is willing to work hard and use his brains can and deserves to become wealthy. Do we now want to pull anyone who does better than we do without cheating down to our level out of jealousy? Even if this particular man wasn't a good example, the philosophical question remains.

I always figured I was Joe Six-Pack because of my rock-hard abs.

ABC News Journalist just asked, "Why are we vetting Joe the Plumber? He's already done more interviews than Sarah Palin."

No this man was a good example of how the tax code favors the rich by endless loopholes and creduits for business investment. Thats why I feel that the average mid class workers WAGE has been purposely conflated (by the GOP natch) with the business investments of small businesses. The tax laws are favorable to risk taking and it catches up with you AFTER you make it. I think that is entirely fair.

NOW as to increasing tax rates on those who can afford it is not too hard to explain. You forget that the very tax code IS THE BIGGEST CHEATING MECHANISM MADE. Once again we have a tax system that is highly favorable to those who make a lot of money. It is especially nice on "Trust fund babies" who have never WORKED A DAY IN THEIR LIVES.

IMHO We are in a second "Gilded Age" with a premise built upon DE-industrialization and exploitation of a shrinking middle class. THe exploitation has nothing to with the fault or shortcomings of the wrokers. MAny workers and middle managers have , together, made the US worker among the most competent and innovative, and best producers of the world. When a company and its board decides to outsource these jobs and entire production merely in order to max profits that (indirectly) servive the "trust funders" and exploit the workers who generated the initial profits , how can you take the side of the industrialists who are really mass exploiters of their own workers(And then the GOP has the balls to wear the mantel of deep concern for the workers, by saying that "the fundamentals of the economy, ie, the workers, are sound").

Maintaining a "competitive edge" for a business has often been the excuse for mass layoffs and shrinkage in the middle class. The problem at Detroit has been blamed upon labor, when, in reality, its the incompetent design theories employed by overpaid and incompetent management.

The first " gilded age" was based upon exploitation of the poor ( made up of A huge portion of the population and a necessary component of a dawning industrial age). This gilded age is based upon an exploitation of a middle class.
SO, trying to take the side of a "person who has worked hard and built himself up " and to state that they shouldnt be excessively taxed, IS TOTAL BULLSHIT. Id seuggest you learn a bit more about the tax code and how protective it is for the wealthy (and nearly wealthy).

Ive always wondered one simple case, and Id be happy to hear your explanation. The FICA contributions of a worker, for computing social security bene fits, terminates at 99000$. The vast majority of regular (national) income is (volumetrically) much greater than 99K. Why not tax everyone to the complete level of their salaries or incomes??
This would result in instant solvency for the social security program . Isnt the selective forgiveness of taxing higher incomes an example of how the wealthy are already coddled by the tax code?.

Im in a comfortable tax bracket and would not mind if I were to have to pay my "fair share", If you seek out what Bill GAtes has to say, he too (hes in a higher tax bracket than I) says that hed be willing to pay a fairer share.


I think that the mantel of "no new taxes" is worn by certain middle class conservatives, who dont fully understand the confisctory cutoff of the tax code and how it suits perfectly the higher income brackets.
I spend good dollars to have my personal and business taxes prepared, and Ive never had to (legally) pay significant taxes ever since I began earning a good living. Usually we get refunds because of allowable deductions , credits, shcedules, etc.

I take avantage of the tax code and any accountant can tell you that its complex redistributive allowances are a dirty little secret (apparently), That many people (those loaded with slogans like yours), dont "get "

Frankly, my solution would be to tax everyone at the same rate, with virtually no loopholes, except for the very poor who would be totally exempt. I do not believe that taking a much, much higher percentage from the successful is fair, and that seems to be Obama's platform.

you seem to believe that the tax code is "fair" for the wealthier earners. That is not true. IT IS LOADED IN THEIR FAVOR.
The tax code, after a certain level of participation, becomes more of a "wealth management code".

Levelling the playing field is what many of the DEMS (including Obamas advisors) have always proposed. The GOP has always played to their bases naivete and ignorance of the very tax codes they wish to protect.

Flat taxes, wherein the oil baron pays the same rate as a widow with four children, and Spending Freezes (an idea I thought was dead, but was resurrected by McCain in this last debate) are the kind of simple-solutions ideas favored by people who haven't thought things through.

Joe(who are the very poor? Those making less than $250,000? $20,000? $52,134.18?)Nation