Taxes and the Middle Class in America

[Samuel De Mazarin]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/22/op...22krugman.html

This was a nice article which tried to analyze more deeply whether or not Republicans have a point when they accuse Obama's ideas on taxation of putting middle-income America at risk.

What is the middle class? And was it really a good move for Bush and his administration to move so aggressively to cut taxes for capital gains, inheritances of more than a certain size, etc.?

Which candidate, McCain or Obama, seems to have a better set of tax proposals?

Why?

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

Note that I'm not contributing much, because I don't really follow politics too much... I'm interested in learning what the educated folk here have to think about all this...

[cafe]

I'd maybe nudge the $150K up to $200K for the top end of middle class since housing is really expensive in some places and food/fuel have gone up so much in the last few years, but other than that, Obama makes more sense to me. Especially considering the alternative: someone who thinks $4.9M is middle class.

[pure_mercury]

I don't like either of them. Who is offering no war, radically less government, and no federal income tax?

EDIT: That was rhetorical, obviously.

[Jack Flak]

Originally Posted by pure_mercury

I don't like either of them. Who is offering no war, radically less government, and no federal income tax?

That would have been Ron Paul. Meh.

[pure_mercury]

Originally Posted by Jack Flak

That would have been Ron Paul. Meh.

I met Ron in Virginia in June. Nice man. Very polite. A little "absentminded professor" vibe. Very big hands.

[Samuel De Mazarin]

I would've voted for Ron Paul over Obama... but been happy with either.

[The_Liquid_Laser]

Generally, when Republicans talk about taxes they appeal to fear and not reason. One would think that an issue that is so purely financial would be talked about in a way that appeals to reason rather than emotion. Well Republican leaders know exactly what they are doing when they appeal to fear when talking about taxes. They would lose a lot of votes if they appealed to reason.

Let's look at the famously talked about Bush tax cuts. People talk about taxes in a very general way, but the government applies them in a very specific way. For example under the Bush tax cuts there are still very high marginal tax rates for both income tax and corporate tax rates. Workers directly contribute goods and services into the economy, and corporations create jobs. These groups pay high taxes under Bush.

On the other hand capital gains and dividend taxes are greatly lowered from the Bush tax cuts. Investors are the ones getting the biggest benefit. In other words a person who has so much money that they can live only on investments gets the biggest tax breaks under Bush. Workers and corporations still pay high taxes.

As the article points out any tax credits that benefit the middle class under Bush will be kept under Obama. Obama also wants to lower income taxes for the middle class. The Bush tax cuts that he wants to roll back are those on dividends and capital gains, i.e. the ones that benefit investors. McCain on the other hand wants to make the Bush tax cuts permanent.

That is why Republicans do not want people knowing the details of their tax plans. If they did a lot more people would be voting Democrat.

[pure_mercury]

Originally Posted by The_Liquid_Laser

Generally, when Republicans talk about taxes they appeal to fear and not reason. One would think that an issue that is so purely financial would be talked about in a way that appeals to reason rather than emotion. Well Republican leaders know exactly what they are doing when they appeal to fear when talking about taxes. They would lose a lot of votes if they appealed to reason.

Let's look at the famously talked about Bush tax cuts. People talk about taxes in a very general way, but the government applies them in a very specific way. For example under the Bush tax cuts there are still very high marginal tax rates for both income tax and corporate tax rates. Workers directly contribute goods and services into the economy, and corporations create jobs. These groups pay high taxes under Bush.

On the other hand capital gains and dividend taxes are greatly lowered from the Bush tax cuts. Investors are the ones getting the biggest benefit. In other words a person who has so much money that they can live only on investments gets the biggest tax breaks under Bush. Workers and corporations still pay high taxes.

As the article points out any tax credits that benefit the middle class under Bush will be kept under Obama. Obama also wants to lower income taxes for the middle class. The Bush tax cuts that he wants to roll back are those on dividends and capital gains, i.e. the ones that benefit investors. McCain on the other hand wants to make the Bush tax cuts permanent.

That is why Republicans do not want people knowing the details of their tax plans. If they did a lot more people would be voting Democrat.

To be fair, some of Obama's tax policies would end up being more expensive for a lot of people making as low as $50,000 a year. That would be a lot of Americans.

[Wolf]

You practically can't live in any city in this country if your family income is less than that...

Although Paul was not the most popular in the East, he would have been a far better choice for President than either of these turkeys.


As I've said before - our only hope is that a dark horse will come out of the shadows and completely crush both of them.

[The_Liquid_Laser]

Originally Posted by pure_mercury

To be fair, some of Obama's tax policies would end up being more expensive for a lot of people making as low as $50,000 a year. That would be a lot of Americans.

I don't believe that is due to changes in marginal tax rates. Is there some type of tax credit that he wants to remove?