What's amusing to me is that while they're quick to point out "95% will see a tax cut under Obama", they seem... reluctant? ... to point out that "100% will see a tax cut under McCain".
I especially love the "Obama will only increase taxes for the top 1% of incomes; and this isn't really an increase: he's simply going to let the Bush tax cuts expire"... umm, that's an increase. Did I pay less last year than I am the next? Yes? Then that's an increase, and you can try to "lipstick on a pig" that up all you want, but it's an increase.
And, again, myself and LOTS of people I know -- including I suspect dear old Tom -- would do better under the McCain tax plan than under Obama's. (And, seriously, Tom, if you WOULDN'T do better under McCain's plan, then you need to renegotiate your compensation package at Big G. *grin*)
I would not receive a tax cut under the O'Bama plan. I do not want one. I want the taxes I'm paying to be re-prioritizes to be used for fixing the FUCKING BROKEN bridges and roads around me, and funding the schools near me. Both are priorities of O'Bama.
And, again, myself and LOTS of people I know -- including I suspect dear old Tom -- would do better under the McCain tax plan than under Obama's.
I think it is a bit short-sighted to assume someone's live would be "better" based solely on how their tax bill comes out. If I get a smaller tax bill under McCain, but under Obama the schools are better, the health insurance system is better, I still have the right to make choices for my own body, and our country doesn't go to unnecessary wars, then under which situation is my life "better"?
As noted in a previous thread, I'm voting for Obama in all likelihood (unless I decide to vote my conscience and vote Barr, knowing full well that if Obama can't carry NY without my vote, he wasn't going to win anyhow), so you don't have to convince me that McCain's platform - overall - isn't something I'm interested in.
I was using "do better" in the sense of which tax-cut program would put more money in Tom's wallet. There are lots of us out here who believe that Americans can spend their money better themselves without adding a whole layer of bureaucracy to waste it for them before any good stuff gets done.
My point, though, was simply that I love how they specifically mention things like "Oh, 95% of people will see a tax cut under Obama", on a site that's praising Obama's Tax Cut program, and ignore that the "other guy" has a more comprehensive tax-cut program that includes *everyone*. :-)
I actually prefer looking at their tax plans more granularly. And McCain's by far favors those with higher incomes. Yes, he gives tax cuts to everyone. But in the lower brackets, the "tax cut" is in the single digits, whereas from Obama it's a more sizable chunk of money, going to those who could use it the most. I happen to be one of those bleeding heart liberals that agrees with progressive taxation, and the idea that those with higher incomes - who proportionally use public resources more - should pay more.
And I am definitely NOT one of those who looks at is "Americans can spend their money better themselves". On some things that simply isn't true. Leave all of my money in my hands, and I would have NO IDEA how to get the potholes on my street fixed. But pool some of my money with that of all of my neighbors and those potholes have a much better chance of getting filled. I just don't buy the idea that government is, per se, a bad thing. I just think badly run government is a bad thing. And the last 8 years have made it clear to me how the government is run by the party that used to run on a platform of reducing bureaucracy and costs. Government has become horribly bloated and even more horribly run. But that doesn't mean that government is a bad idea.
I just think there are certain things that are in the public's best interests - good schools, good roads and bridges, good public transportation, etc. - that can be far better accomplished by pooling some resources and accomplishing them together. Done right, public funds that come from taxes should be a matter of the sum being greater than the parts.
Aren't bridges and roads usually funded at the state level? I thought a lot of school funding was local, as well. What is the local/State/Federal mix for funding, and how does it work?
-P
p.s. as a parent, I am finding public school education incredibly annoying. The educators can't do what they think best for individual kids - it is all very "least common denominator" and over-regulated no matter how "good" the school. We are fortunate to be in a very small school, which has helped - I dread Q going to middle school.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
Tax Cut
Date: 2008-09-07 02:44 pm (UTC)What's amusing to me is that while they're quick to point out "95% will see a tax cut under Obama", they seem... reluctant? ... to point out that "100% will see a tax cut under McCain".
I especially love the "Obama will only increase taxes for the top 1% of incomes; and this isn't really an increase: he's simply going to let the Bush tax cuts expire"... umm, that's an increase. Did I pay less last year than I am the next? Yes? Then that's an increase, and you can try to "lipstick on a pig" that up all you want, but it's an increase.
And, again, myself and LOTS of people I know -- including I suspect dear old Tom -- would do better under the McCain tax plan than under Obama's. (And, seriously, Tom, if you WOULDN'T do better under McCain's plan, then you need to renegotiate your compensation package at Big G. *grin*)
Re: Tax Cut
Date: 2008-09-07 02:53 pm (UTC)Re: Tax Cut
Date: 2008-09-07 04:38 pm (UTC)I think it is a bit short-sighted to assume someone's live would be "better" based solely on how their tax bill comes out. If I get a smaller tax bill under McCain, but under Obama the schools are better, the health insurance system is better, I still have the right to make choices for my own body, and our country doesn't go to unnecessary wars, then under which situation is my life "better"?
I know which one I'm voting for.
Re: Tax Cut
Date: 2008-09-07 04:49 pm (UTC)I was using "do better" in the sense of which tax-cut program would put more money in Tom's wallet. There are lots of us out here who believe that Americans can spend their money better themselves without adding a whole layer of bureaucracy to waste it for them before any good stuff gets done.
My point, though, was simply that I love how they specifically mention things like "Oh, 95% of people will see a tax cut under Obama", on a site that's praising Obama's Tax Cut program, and ignore that the "other guy" has a more comprehensive tax-cut program that includes *everyone*. :-)
Re: Tax Cut
Date: 2008-09-07 04:57 pm (UTC)And I am definitely NOT one of those who looks at is "Americans can spend their money better themselves". On some things that simply isn't true. Leave all of my money in my hands, and I would have NO IDEA how to get the potholes on my street fixed. But pool some of my money with that of all of my neighbors and those potholes have a much better chance of getting filled. I just don't buy the idea that government is, per se, a bad thing. I just think badly run government is a bad thing. And the last 8 years have made it clear to me how the government is run by the party that used to run on a platform of reducing bureaucracy and costs. Government has become horribly bloated and even more horribly run. But that doesn't mean that government is a bad idea.
I just think there are certain things that are in the public's best interests - good schools, good roads and bridges, good public transportation, etc. - that can be far better accomplished by pooling some resources and accomplishing them together. Done right, public funds that come from taxes should be a matter of the sum being greater than the parts.
Re: Tax Cut
Date: 2008-09-08 02:03 am (UTC)-P
p.s. as a parent, I am finding public school education incredibly annoying. The educators can't do what they think best for individual kids - it is all very "least common denominator" and over-regulated no matter how "good" the school. We are fortunate to be in a very small school, which has helped - I dread Q going to middle school.
no subject
Date: 2008-09-13 01:12 am (UTC)