Who do you support for president?

[96cali]

Originally Posted by 1996 328ti

And you're not a site supporter?

Oh that is sooooooooooo republican.














j/k!

[Maverix]

Originally Posted by cooljess76

It has occurred to me that McCain is the one bitching about Obama's plans to raise taxes for the rich, not the supporters, so I'll give you guys that. I bet the percentage of Americans who have actually bought into McCain's argument about taxes is pretty small. Two of the big reasons I think people support McCain are his position on abortion and his position on the war. People will always take opposing sides on those two issues. While both of those issues are really significant, we have to understand that women will still terminate pregnancies whether it's legal or not. And people are finally starting to realize that we can't afford to keep losing lives and dumping borrowed money into this war. It's not a win/lose situation over there fellas. This war is nothing like the way it was when McCain was in the Navy. Perhaps being the bigger man and withdrawing our troops will be noticed as the honorable thing to do instead of the defeat that McCain claims. But seriously though, does anyone here honestly believe that dinosaurs walked the earth 4000 years ago?

Actually McCain has fooled many people about the taxes. And that's why he's gonna get 50%, if not more, of the votes. He has thrown it in disproportion. I just wish that he would go out in the public and correct himself, along with Sarah. But chances of that happening is pretty slim, considering that he wants to keep all the votes that he can get.

=\

[bbbmw]

If Obama is elected and lets the "Bush tax cuts for the rich" expire, this is what changes we will all see in our tax bill:
Taxes under Clinton 1999 Taxes under Bush 2008

Single making 30K – tax $3,157 Single making 30K – tax $2,756
Single making 50K – tax $7,262 Single making 50K – tax $6,606
Single making 75K – tax $14,262 Single making 75K – tax $12,856
Married making 60K – tax $6,585 Married making 60K – tax $5,512
Married making 75K – tax $9,426 Married making 75K – tax $7,762
Married making 125K – tax $23,426 Married making 125K – tax $19,462

So if you are single and making $30k/year, Bush put $2,005 in your pocket over the past 5 years. If you are married and make $60k/yr, Bush put $5,365 in your pocket over the last 5 years. These tax cuts will expire in 2010, and we will revert to the column on the left.

McCain has consistently said he will make the cuts permanent. Obama has said he will let them expire. Obama's tax plan has continued to change since he has been in the race. Figure out what the impact is to you, and ask yourself if it is better to keep what we have, or give it back and hope that Obama does something better?

My answer is "no", and that's a key reason I'm voting for McCain.

NOTE: This chart and the tax tables do not cover the 40% of the population that does not pay any income taxes at all. It is assumed that they will receive the wealth that will be spread around.

-------------------------

CORRECTION: The Tax Foundation issued revised numbers, which I have corrected above. The numbers do not take in child tax credits, or the affects of the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT).

http://www.taxfoundation.org/blog/show/22958.html

"If Congress and the President do not act to make permanent the Bush tax cut, known formally as the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 (EGTRRA), a family of four earning the median income can expect its federal income tax bill to increase by $2,681 between 2010 and 2011, a 48.8 percent increase. This will amount to 3.3 percent of the family’s adjusted gross income in that year and roughly equals what the average family of four spends on out-of-pocket health care costs each year."

http://www.taxfoundation.org/research/show/134.html

[b.u.ti-ful]

I just pulled out my 1999 1040 book and tax for single making $30,000 was $5060.

The 2007 1040 book says single making $30,000 tax is $4113.

Are you getting different numbers due to child tax credits?

[cooljess76]

Are you seriously comparing Bush's financial plan to Clinton's? IIRC, Clinton turned the economy around which is exactly what Obama will do. It makes perfect sense that you need to raise money to pay off debts. The deficit won't get caught up by lowering taxes. Look what's happened over the past 8 years. We've had a spend crazy administration and haven't had the funds to back it up. Look at HW Bush's plan, "READ MY LIPS" ring a bell? How'd that work out? Oh that's right he had to raise taxes anyway. Imagine how difficult it would've been for Clinton to clean that mess up if HW didn't raise taxes. Now look at what the next president is facing, it's 10 times worse than when Bush's daddy screwed things up. And the only thing that they could find to trash Clinton was him getting a BJ

[cooljess76]

Originally Posted by b.u.ti-ful

I just pulled out my 1999 1040 book and tax for single making $30,000 was $5060.

The 2007 1040 book says single making $30,000 tax is $4113.

Are you getting different numbers due to child tax credits?

nice

Again, that's the typical republican tactic, spreading lies to make themselves look good and dodging questions by talking in circles until the people just give in

[bbbmw]

Originally Posted by b.u.ti-ful

I just pulled out my 1999 1040 book and tax for single making $30,000 was $5060.

The 2007 1040 book says single making $30,000 tax is $4113.

Are you getting different numbers due to child tax credits?

Good catch - the numbers are from the tax tables, but there are additional considerations that are fair. I was digging further as well, and found revisions. I corrected my original post above. I would encourage you to read the last link I posted, for more analysis on the impact of the expiration of the cuts - it's pretty major. That article was published in 2002, but the calculations have not changed.

[bbbmw]

Originally Posted by cooljess76

Are you seriously comparing Bush's financial plan to Clinton's? IIRC, Clinton turned the economy around which is exactly what Obama will do. It makes perfect sense that you need to raise money to pay off debts. The deficit won't get caught up by lowering taxes. Look what's happened over the past 8 years. We've had a spend crazy administration and haven't had the funds to back it up. Look at HW Bush's plan, "READ MY LIPS" ring a bell? How'd that work out? Oh that's right he had to raise taxes anyway. Imagine how difficult it would've been for Clinton to clean that mess up if HW didn't raise taxes. Now look at what the next president is facing, it's 10 times worse than when Bush's daddy screwed things up. And the only thing that they could find to trash Clinton was him getting a BJ

I'm comparing Clinton's tax plan with Bush's, not the financial plan. I agree - Bush Jr. didn't veto anything the Republican or Democratic Congress sent his way. It is debatable whether Clinton turned the economy around (I won't get into it, but it is widely debated - not just my opinion). He certainly reduced the budget by decimating the military, which you could also argue led to... later issues.

I do know, however, that Clinton increased the payroll withholding tax on commission and bonus income from 31% to 36%. That took A LOT of money out of my pocket per paycheck, which I didn't appreciate. And all of us who earn bonuses or commission income continue to pay it.

And the BJ wasn't the issue - it was perjuring himself, and wagging his finger in the face of America while lying.

[cooljess76]

So you're saying that it's all debatable, that's cool. One thing that isn't debatable is that the economy was in far better condition than it is now. As for Clinton perjuring himself, well we'll see what the Bush administration does when they're brought up on charges. Comparing a BJ to war crime is hardly fair, but America has definitely been fed it's share of lies from the Bush's and I'm sure it'll all be uncovered once he's out of office.

[b.u.ti-ful]

I'm okay with the revised column on the left.

I'll pay it and I hope we can get back to a balanced budget.

This is our US budget from whitehouse.gov

We had a couple good years between 1998 and 2001

[b.u.ti-ful]

Sorry, that was kind of small.

[b.u.ti-ful]

As far a "decimating the military," I'm afraid it must be pretty decimated at the present moment in as much as it is spread thin in the wrong country as far as getting Bin-Laden is concerned.

Joe the plumber can just sit on his hands for a minute because my buddy Tom the electrician is going over to Afghanistan for the third time and he isn't even regular Army - he's a reservist in his mid 40's. Poor Joe might get taxed, but Tom might get killed.

[mohaughn]

I do know, however, that Clinton increased the payroll withholding tax on commission and bonus income from 31% to 36%. That took A LOT of money out of my pocket per paycheck, which I didn't appreciate. And all of us who earn bonuses or commission income continue to pay it.

This is a little misleading. You are correct that the withholding rate went up, but that doesn't mean that your overall tax rate went up.

So at the end of the year if you made less than $164,550 you would get 8% of that tax withholding back. Meaning that you are really only getting charged 28% for it, not 36%. Withholding doesn't mean anything to me, I only care about my taxable rate at the end of the year.

Your overall tax bracket is based on end of year income earned, so even if you did have to pay the 36% bonus/commission payout, you get it back at the end of the year. You would have to be earning over $350k per year to not get that extra 8% of taxes paid on that bonus back...

I get one or two pretty large bonuses per year so I deal with this, and it isn't that bad. If you know you are going to get hit with this you should raise your withholdings by two or three this way you pay less tax with your regular paychecks, and it all balances out. That is what I do. I pay for less taxes in my regular paychecks knowing that the bonus withholding makes up for the shortfall in my regular paychecks. It all works out the same.

[bbbmw]

And if you have a 401k:

Powerful House Democrats are eyeing proposals to overhaul the nation's $3 trillion 401(k) system, including the elimination of most of the $80 billion in annual tax breaks that 401(k) investors receive.

http://www.investmentnews.com/apps/p.../REG/310139971

[1996 328ti]

Originally Posted by bbbmw

And if you have a 401k:

My 401K is going to be worthless anyway. I lost most of it after the dot.com burst.
And to think the Bush's plan was to let people invest instead of Social Security. Either way, we are fcked!