Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
 
No. of Recommendations: 4

http://www.realclearmarkets.com/articles/2008/02/obama_stirs...

The Obama spend-o-meter is now up around $800 billion. And tax hikes on the rich won't pay for it. It's the middle class that will ultimately shoulder this fiscal burden in terms of higher taxes and lower growth. This isn't free enterprise. It's old-fashioned-liberal tax, and spend, and regulate. It's plain ol' big government. The only people who will benefit are the central planners in Washington.


As opposed to the Republican borrow, spend, and pass the bill on down to future generations mode of operation.

How much has this totally stupid Iraq war cost so far and what's it projected to cost? http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23551693/

We've already paid nearly $5,000 dollars per Iraqi just for 2007 alone.
http://zfacts.com/p/447.html

The Wall Street Journal's Steve Moore has done the math on Obama's tax plan. He says it will add up to a 39.6% personal income tax, a 52.2% combined income and payroll tax, a 28% capital-gains tax, a 39.6% dividends tax and a 55% estate tax.

Interesting. We're supposed to trust hearsay evidence. Kudlow apparently believes it (not surprising), but nowhere in the article is there any mention of how these figures were computed.

The question then becoms at what income level would the 39.6% rate kick in? That's never stated. We had a 39.6% maximum marginal rate as late as 2000. I have the 1999 tax return to prove it, not to mention the 2001 (albeit at 39.1). Non-qualified stock options will do that to you. In 2001, I was laid off. Got paid nearly a year's salary to go away. Also had to sell vested options to avoid losing them. Had to take the income hit all in one year. Oh well.

As I recall, we were also running a budget surplus back when Bill was in office.

Capital gains at 28%? Is that across the board, or is he just trying to disturb fecal matter by scaring us into thinking it will be at that level regardless of your income tax bracket? And a dividends tax of 39.6% would probably only be at that level for people in that bracket, since it reverts dividends to the old method of taxing them at regular income tax rates. If you're in the 15% bracket, your dividends would probably still be taxed at the 15% rate. 'Course, Kudlow (and fleg) don't want to say that, because it would take a lot of the wind out of the scary figures they want to foist upon us.


BTW, if you take the current payroll tax (SS and Medicare) from both the employee and employer (currently 15.3%) and the supposed 39.6% tax rate and you get 54.9%. However, SS taxes (12.4% from employer and employee combined) are capped at $102,000 in 2008 so I suspect that that 52.2% rate is the "scare tactic" rate (most people aren't in the highest income tax bracket). Even then, the effective rate wouldn't be that high because income taxes are progressive. http://www.kissacct.com/ktax.htm

After paying my 2001 taxes where I was in the 39.1% marginal bracket, I tried to calculate the effective rate of my taxes (including State income, property, sales taxes, and anything else I could think of). Even after adding in my employer's portion of SS into the equation, I couldn't get the figure up to 40% of total gross income.

AM is wrong about one thing. It's not bull poopie. It is, in the immortal words of one Col. Sherman T. Potter, "HORSEHOCKEY!"

Cjurchy
Print the post  

Announcements

When Life Gives You Lemons
We all have had hardships and made poor decisions. The important thing is how we respond and grow. Read the story of a Fool who started from nothing, and looks to gain everything.
Contact Us
Contact Customer Service and other Fool departments here.
Work for Fools?
Winner of the Washingtonian great places to work, and Glassdoor #1 Company to Work For 2015! Have access to all of TMF's online and email products for FREE, and be paid for your contributions to TMF! Click the link and start your Fool career.
Advertisement