Both McCain and Obama will have to raise taxes to pay for programs for which the public is clamoring, whether those programs are universal health insurance, expanding the military, trying to retire the national debt, or simply trying to balance the budget.

McCain proposes to increase your tax exemption for children by something like 5/year. That’s it, if you have children you get something, otherwise not. This will increase the deficit.

McCain proposes a 00-00 "refundable" tax credit for the purchase of health insurance while apparently proposing, as I understand it, eliminating the deduction for employer provided health insurance. This is a tax increase for business to pay for a tax benefit to the public. This is, ostensibly deficit neutral.

McCain will cut the corporate tax rate from 35% to 25%. This is proposed to keep American companies on shore and to stimulate the economy. This will not keep companies on shore because the 10% tax savings on profits is miniscule compared to the as much as 80% operating cost savings of exploitation of cheap foreign labor. And since most corporations do not pay any taxes due to loopholes it is ridiculous. All that will happen is that those that are paying taxes domestically will pay less and increase the deficit.

All of this tinkering with tax cuts will result in a net tax increase because a higher percentage of the operation of government will be placed on your credit card.

Obama’s plan, a tax cut for the middle class, should be offset by rolling back the Bush 43 tax cuts for the wealthy. Curtailing tax loopholes for companies operating offshore will have far reaching effects including reducing the deficit. As far as funding for new programs goes, there is little doubt that these, like universal healthcare or improving public education and tuition programs, will go on your nation’s credit card.

What’s in it for me? After all, I’m paying for it.

Your taxes are going to go up with either Obama or McCain. For whom you vote, if that is your issue, depends entirely on how much they will go up and/or what you will get in return

A deadline looms today, and it will not be met. Unless Congress fixes the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT), the IRS will have no choice but to print next year’s tax forms based on current law, which would force 25 million taxpayers to pay, on average, an unexpected, additional ,000 in taxes.

If the AMT is fixed after today’s deadline, the Treasury Department announced in a letter to Congress, then the delay in printing proper IRS forms will create confusion for millions of taxpayers this spring and delay tens of millions of taxpayers’ refund checks by up to two and a half months.

Democrats are the ones responsible for this — for creating the tax in the first place, for raising it, and for failing to fix it in time. Most responsible of all for the current mess, and for Congress’s failure to act, is House Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel (D., N.Y.).

The Alternative Minimum Tax was originally enacted by a Democratic Congress in 1969, in order to stop a handful of wealthy families from using deductions and loopholes to avoid tax liability altogether. But the high income threshold at which the tax is triggered was never indexed to inflation. In 1993, the Democratic Congress and President Clinton raised the AMT tax rate, but again failed to index for inflation.

As a result, inflation is carrying more and more workers across the AMT threshold each year. Congress, therefore, has had to “patch” the tax temporarily each year, raising the threshold at which it must be paid. If Congress does nothing, the government tax collections would increase through the AMT, dramatically and entirely by accident.

Republicans view the AMT’s expanding reach as a mistake. They passed a repeal of the tax in 1999, only to see it vetoed by President Clinton. In more recent years, they lacked the courage to fix it permanently because it would have invited screams of “tax cuts for the rich,” and made future deficits look much worse on paper. Yet when they controlled Congress, at least Republicans “patched” the AMT each year so that millions of taxpayers could avoid paying all that extra money.

Publicly, Democrats pretend that they, too, consider it a “mistake” for the AMT to ensnare roughly 25 million taxpayers. But their actions now speak louder than their words. They passed an AMT “patch” last Friday — H.R. 3996 — but it raises taxes on small businesses and entrepreneurs by billion, in order to recover the revenue that is “lost” by not mistakenly ensnaring millions of Americans in the AMT.

With the Democrats’ so-called “pay-as-you-go” rule in hand, and under the guise of “fiscal responsibility,” Chairman Rangel is essentially blackmailing taxpayers: “Either support us in our mission to hike taxes, or we’re going to let the AMT have all 25 million of you!”

A spokeswoman for Rangel was sticking to this “fiscal responsibility” line on Wednesday, and indicated that the tax-hike bill that Democrats passed last week along party lines took care of AMT, and that was that. But the bill they passed has absolutely no chance of passing the Senate, and even less of being signed by President Bush — something of which House Democrats have been aware all along.

Senate Democrats are not happy about what their colleagues have done here. Even Democrats in the House resented that they were being pressured by their own leadership to vote for a large tax hike. “Why should House members have to walk the plank?” asked Rep. Jim Cooper (D-Tenn), speaking to Congress Daily. “This is a 130 percent tax increase.”

Rangel does not appear to have thought this one through quite as well as he usually does. By failing to act, he may be putting his party’s pinkie finger on a new “third rail” of politics.

Everyone expects the AMT to be fixed this year for the same reason it always has been fixed in the past — failure to do it could cause a taxpayer rebellion. If, as appears likely, Congress fails to pass a real AMT fix before today’s deadline, it will probably be fixed eventually. But many taxpayers will end up with obsolete tax forms (12 different forms are affected by the AMT), creating a huge snag for the IRS. An astounding billion in tax refunds to as many as 50 million people could be delayed for up to ten weeks.

That’s great news if you’re a government bean-counter, because you’re essentially getting an interest-free loan of billion from American taxpayers. It’s very bad news, though, if you are a taxpayer trying to pay your energy bills, your child’s tuition, or your overpriced mortgage.

It might also be bad news if you are a Democratic politician who helped create the Great Tax Confusion of 2008.

http://www.fojb.com/blog/republican-economic-recovery-proposals/Default.aspx?AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1

1. Immediate Tax Relief for Working Families: House Republicans propose reducing the lowest individual tax rates from 15 percent to 10 percent and from 10 percent to 5 percent. Under the proposal, a married couple filing jointly could save up to ,200 a year in taxes.

2. Help for America’s Small Businesses: House Republicans propose to allow small businesses to take a tax deduction equal to 20 percent of their income. This will immediately free up funds for small businesses to create new jobs.

–> Small businesses (those employing 500 or fewer employees) can currently pay up to 35 percent of their income in taxes to the federal government. This is one of the highest rates among major economies of the world and Republicans want to ease the burden.

3. Assistance for the Unemployed: House Republicans propose to make unemployment benefits tax free so that those looking for work can focus on providing for their families.

4. Stabilizing Home Values: In order to encourage responsible buyers to enter the market and stabilize prices, House Republicans propose a home-buyers credit of ,500 for those buyers who make a minimum down-payment of 5 percent

5. No Tax Increases to Pay for Spending: The congressional Democrats’ spending plan includes record levels of government projects and programs that will substantially increase the current deficit, without spurring a rapid economic recovery, according to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office. House Republicans are concerned that this level of spending could result in near-term tax increases on American families and are insisting that any economic package include a provision precluding any tax increases now or in the future to pay for this new spending.

NOTICE – No Government Pet Projects
SCOTT B:

JFK got America out of a recession with Tax Cuts
Reagan got America out of recession with Tax Cuts
Bush got America out of a recession with Tax Cuts.

The New Deal extended the Depression for 10 years until WWII !

OPEN A HISTORY BOOK !

Obama:
Will cut taxes but when it expires, average US family will pay ,500 more in taxes. (CNN and MSNBC never makes it known)

The Child Tax Credit will decrease from ,000 to 0 a child

Income tax rates would rise around 3%-4.5%

AMT-Exemptions will decrease ,500 per filer

Business tax expenses- Maximum deduction amount will decrease ,000,from 0,000 to ,000

Capital Gains- Rates will rise 10%-20%

Income tax burden-will raise about 5% for many workers

Marriage penalty created

Dividends-rates to increase from 15% to 40%

50% average increased tax rates on lower income houses

He may not raise taxes on average American, but by allowing tax cuts to expire, will raise household expenses on an average family.

MCCAIN:

Wi make the Bush tax-cut permanent. And will add additional tax cuts for middle-class Americans.

Entrepreneurs are at the heart of American innovation, growth and prosperity. Entrepreneurs create the ultimate job security – a new, better opportunity if your current job goes away. Entrepreneurs should not be taxed into submission. John McCain will keep the top tax rate at 35 percent, maintain the 15 percent rates on dividends and capital gains, and phase-out the Alternative Minimum Tax. Small businesses are the heart of job growth; raising taxes on them hurts every workers.

To all those who believe that Obamwill "never" raise taxes but rather will cut taxes- Yes he will cut our taxes but when his tax cut plan has expires, we will pay for higher taxes than we pay now..

HENCE, his plan of cutting taxes is just a POLITICAL STRATEGY and not a real rescur for every American families.

MCCAIN’s tax cut policy is permanent, and perhaps the biggest tax cut in history as Alan Greenspan says.

-from an ECONOMICS student.

I heard that
When this tax shelters expire average US family will pay ,500 more in taxes:

The Child Tax Credit will decrease from ,000 to 0 a child

Income tax rates would rise around 3%-4.5%

AMT-Exemptions will decrease ,500 per filer

Business tax expenses- Maximum deduction amount will decrease ,000,from 0,000 to ,000

Capital Gains- Rates will rise 10%-20%

Income tax burden-will raise about 5% for many workers

Marriage penalty created

Dividends-rates to increase from 15% to 40%

50% average increased tax rates on lower income houses

He may not raise taxes on average American, but by allowing tax cuts to expire, will raise household expenses on an average family.

In their fight against McCain Obama supporters keep saying that McCain supports Bush’s tax cuts and these tax cuts only helped the rich and not the middle class while Obama will make tax cuts that will help the middle class (this is their "answer" when they are asked how can Obama give "tax cuts" to those in the lower class that don’t even pay taxes to begin with).

My wife and I have been making between ,000 to ,000 a year over the last 10 years (it has been going up ever year and has mostly gone up over the last 5 years yet I have been working a lot less the last several years then before). Anyhow, since Bush’s tax cuts we have been paying less taxes then ever. Last year we made about k and our tax bill was something like 7 (compared to 10 years ago k in income gave us a ,500 tax bill). The main tax cut that has helped us was Bush’s increase in the child tax deduction (from 0 per child to ,000), not to mention the increase in individual deductions per person. The child tax deduction was a reduction in the amount of taxes owed, not a deduction from taxable income, so it’s impact had more of an effect on what we ended up owing. I think the cut off for the deduction is something like ,000 (i.e. if you made more then that you did not get the deduction, only those making less then that would get the deduction). Plus the last time I looked ,000 was not in the "rich" catagory.

I know Bush’s tax cuts had additional stuff that was meant to help businesses recover after 9/11 but it also included stuff that helped those making less like my wife and I and we are far from being "rich".

So why do Obama supporters keep saying that Bush’s tax cuts only helped the rich when that is not true?

While watching the news the last couple of days when talking about "Joe the Plumber" it was asked how can you cut taxes for 95% of the people when something like 35 to 40% don’t pay any taxes to begin with I’ve heard several Obama supporters reply that Obama’s tax cuts would help the middle class as Bush’s tax cuts did nothing for them. 3 so far did this today alone. They blew off the original question by responding to it with a comment about Obama helping the middle class. What has the middle class have to do with cutting taxes to people that don’t pay any taxes to begin with?

Judging by most of the "answers" to my question I clearly see it has gone over their heads as it was not about how the "world revolves around me". Nor did I say "all" Obama supporters are saying this. The last 2 days this is what several Obama supporters are saying on TV. They clearly state "all", not most, of Bush’s tax cuts helped the rich and none helped the middle class. Why? Can you at least answer that?
Winnie – send me a message that I can reply to and I will try to answer your question the best I can.

November 21, 2009

New Consensus Sees Stimulus Package as Worthy Step

By JACKIE CALMES and MICHAEL COOPER
WASHINGTON —

…"That sort of impact is what makes federal aid to state governments rank high in economists’ reckoning of the stimulus value of various proposals. Every dollar of additional infrastructure spending means .57 in economic activity, according to Moody’s, and general aid to states carries a .41 “bang” for each federal buck.

"Even more effective are increases for food stamps (.74) and unemployment checks (.61), because recipients quickly spend their benefits on goods and services.

******"By contrast, most temporary tax cuts cost more than the stimulus they provide, according to research by Moody’s.That is true of two tax breaks in the stimulus law that Congress, pressed by industry lobbyists, recently extended and sweetened — a tax credit for homebuyers (90 cents of stimulus for each dollar of tax subsidy) and extra deductions for businesses’ net operating losses (21 cents).*******

…"

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/21/business/economy/21stimulus.html?_r=1&scp=3&sq=feldstein&st=cse

The data is from Moody’s, not the NY Times. Get a grip.

According to Moody’s Investors Services, tax cuts COST more than they’re worth:

"That sort of impact is what makes federal aid to state governments rank high in economists’ reckoning of the stimulus value of various proposals. Every dollar of additional infrastructure spending means .57 in economic activity, according to Moody’s, and general aid to states carries a .41 “bang” for each federal buck.

"Even more effective are increases for food stamps (.74) and unemployment checks (.61), because recipients quickly spend their benefits on goods and services.

"By contrast, most temporary tax cuts cost more than the stimulus they provide, according to research by Moody’s. That is true of two tax breaks in the stimulus law that Congress, pressed by industry lobbyists, recently extended and sweetened — a tax credit for homebuyers (90 cents of stimulus for each dollar of tax subsidy) and extra deductions for businesses’ net operating losses (21 cents)."

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/21/business/economy/21stimulus.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=moody’s%20feldstein&st=cse

And don’t give that "it’s the NY Times" crap. They’re quoting Moody’s.
The chief economist for Moody’s is Mark Zandi, who worked on McCain campaign. Try again.
Apparently, Olivia can’t read…

How many of you realize just how much more in taxes you will have to pay if bush’s tax cuts expire,and no not the wealthy,the working middle class.Barack Obama will make a bad economy even worse if hes elected and lets these tax cuts expire

Just take a look here:

The Child Tax Credit will decrease from ,000 to 0 a child

Income tax rates would rise around 3%-4.5%

AMT-Exemptions will decrease ,500 per filer

Business tax expenses- Maximum deduction amount will decrease ,000,from 0,000 to ,000

Capital Gains- Rates will rise 10%-20%

Income tax burden-will raise about 5% for many workers

Marriage penalty created

Dividends-rates to increase from 15% to 40%

50% average increased tax rates on lower income houses

8.1 million jobs have been created

Average of ,500 more in taxes to average middle class American

Yeah and this will help the economy how??????Stupid liberals
eltoro answer me this you stupid moron,how is a paying more taxes going to influence Americans to spend more money,its only going to make them conserve even more and even increase the rate of foreclosures.A 3rd grader can tell you that this doesn’t make sense!Stop reading Michael Moore’s blogs.