McCain the Redistributionist Socialist:

[Gimpy]

‘There’s Nothing Wrong with [Rich People] Paying Somewhat More’ Taxes....John McCain.... in 20000.......Now he's "Filp- Flopped? What a man of "conviction"!----If it was OK then..............it's OK NOW!

C'mon John..........stop telling LIES about Obama when YOU yourself took the SAME position he takes NOW!



http://www.pensitoreview.com/2008/10...ist-socialist/



Gimp

[MORTARDUDE]

Our government's ongoing "socialist redistribution of income"

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

FDR - 1933

EITC 1975 - 2008 Supported by both parties, expanded by Reagan.

"Progressive Income Tax " - 1913 ( Teddy Roosevelt )

F.I.C.A and Medicare contributions that are in excess of what is paid to retirees, is "redistributed" by Congress anyway it wants to, not put in a mythical trust fund.

[Gimpy]

Originally Posted by MORTARDUDE

Our government's ongoing "socialist redistribution of income"

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

FDR - 1933

EITC 1975 - 2008 Supported by both parties, expanded by Reagan.

"Progressive Income Tax " - 1913

F.I.C.A and Medicare contributions that are in excess of what is paid to retirees, is "redistributed" by Congress anyway it wants to, not put in a mythical trust fund.

"EITC 1975 - 2008 Supported by both parties".....end quote....And signed into LAW by Gerald R. Ford.......a REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT!

Gimp

[Gimpy]

Originally Posted by Gimpy

‘There’s Nothing Wrong with [Rich People] Paying Somewhat More’ Taxes....John McCain.... in 20000.......Now he's "Filp- Flopped? What a man of "conviction"!----If it was OK then..............it's OK NOW!

C'mon John..........stop telling LIES about Obama when YOU yourself took the SAME position he takes NOW!



http://www.pensitoreview.com/2008/10...ist-socialist/


]

Not a single comment from the "CONservatives"????? Wonder WHY??????


Gimp

[darrels joy]

Redistribution You Can Believe In
American workers should beware the siren song of “the Redistributor.”

By Rich Lowry

The growing cast of characters at McCain rallies includes Joe the Plumber, Tito the Builder and now “Barack the Redistributor.” John McCain is keying off Barack Obama’s comment to Joe the Plumber about “spreading the wealth around,” and his 2001 rumination in a Chicago Public Radio interview about the Supreme Court “redistributing the wealth.” Cautious even then, Obama didn’t commit himself on whether the Court should force “redistributive change,” but his use of the R-word was enough to make it his moniker at McCain events.

Obama is an exotic bird — a self-described tax-cutter for “95 percent of working Americans,” with a predilection toward socialistic language and concepts. The key to the riddle is the nature of his tax program.

Obama proposes a dog’s breakfast of tax credits, including a $500 refundable work credit that applies even to people who owe no income taxes. The Internal Revenue Service would cut them a $500 check every year. This essentially is a government payment dressed up as a tax cut. It will be partly funded by new taxes on the top 5 percent. So Obama is redistributing wealth, but in an eminently salable way. Call it “redistributive change we can believe in.”

Obama’s plan wouldn’t, like cuts in marginal tax rates, increase the incentive to work, invest or save. In fact, the opposite. As tax credits phase out, they increase marginal tax rates. But for Obama, his plan is a matter of justice rather than economics.

When in a Democratic primary debate Charlie Gibson of ABC News pointed out to Obama that increasing the capital-gains rate in the past has initially reduced revenue, Obama replied that he wanted the increase “for purposes of fairness.”

But how unfair is the American tax system? It’s already steeply progressive. IRS data show that the top 1 percent of filers paid 40 percent of federal income taxes in 2006. The top 5 percent paid 60 percent. The top half paid 97 percent.

According to the congressional Joint Economic Committee, these are the highest tax shares paid by these income groups since 1986. The bottom half of filers, in contrast, pays 3 percent. Millions of these people have an income-tax liability less than zero, because they receive already-existing refundable tax credits.

Obama couches his work credit as relief from the payroll tax funding Social Security. Even here, the system is already redistributive. American Enterprise Institute economist Andrew Biggs points out that low earners get a roughly 4 percent rate of return on their Social Security taxes, while high earners get a 1.5 percent rate. Obama would heighten the disparity, “pushing it closer toward a welfare-program approach.”

None of this means average workers aren’t under stress or that tax credits in themselves are nefarious. Rising health-care costs have eroded wages, and McCain has a well-considered policy — including a tax credit — to help workers cope with these costs. An intelligently crafted increase in the per-child tax credit, meanwhile, would counteract the perverse redistribution of our entitlement system — from households with children to childless adults.

But Obama’s tax program pursues a foolhardy goal — redistribution for its own sake — in an unworkable manner. As Alan Reynolds of the Cato Institute has written, between his tax credits and other proposals, Obama is seeking to balance some $4.3 trillion of new spending over the next 10 years on the top 5 percent of earners.

Experience shows that raising taxes on these earners doesn’t produce as much revenue as expected, thanks to what economists call “the elasticity of income” — i.e., people find ways around the Tax Man. Regardless, there’s simply not enough money to be had from “the rich.” This is why socialistic European countries have tax systems arguably less progressive than ours. To fund their extensive welfare states, they must resort not only to onerous income-tax rates, but to high payroll and sales taxes paid by everyone.

American workers should beware the siren song of “the Redistributor.”

© 2008 by King Features Syndicate
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q...mFjODE5N2I3ZTM=

[Gimpy]

They should "beware" of serial "copy & paste" fanatics like you who continually post radical right-wing nonsense all the time.

Case in point.


The Obama and McCain Tax Proposals have recently undergone a thorough "analysis" and you and McCain are WRONG!

Hell even the ultra conservative Heritage Foundation admits Obama's tax plan is BETTER than McCains!

According to a new analysis by the Tax Policy Center, a joint project of the Urban Institute and the Brookings Institution, Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain are both proposing tax plans that would result in cuts for most American families. Obama's plan gives the biggest cuts to those who make the least, while McCain would give the largest cuts to the very wealthy.

Why am I not surprised! Typical Rethuglican behavior from John McCains' tax plan...............reward the WEALTHY-----Crap on the middle class & poor!

Also, directly from the Tax Policy Center:..........Quote,:

"McCain's version purports to show the impact of each candidate's tax cuts on ordinary people—families making between $35,000 and $55,000 in wage income. You won't be surprised to know that each example shows families far better off under McCain than Obama.

But let's look closely at one example: A two-parent, one-earner family with two kids, making $42,000 and taking the standard deduction. The calculator ( McCains version) shows this family getting a tax cut of more than $5,000 under McCain if it gets $8,000 in employer-sponsored health insurance and a tax cut of almost $6,000 if it does not. In either example, according to the McCain calculator, this family would get only $737 under Obama.

So, is Joe the Plumber right after all? Would working stiffs do better under McCain than Obama? Well, no so fast.

It turns out the typical family McCain chose to profile isn't so typical at all. We ran these characteristics through the Big Computer here at TPC and discovered that, in fact, of families making between $40,000 and $50,000, only one out of every 564 look like the happy household McCain carefully chose. That's about 7,000 tax filers. The Cleavers, it happens, live only on cable reruns.

Change just a couple of variables and the story is vastly different. Let's make them a two-earner family, and give them the average amount of mortgage interest, as well as education and child care expenses for families in their income class. What happens? Low-and-behold, they'd get no tax cut at all from McCain and more than $6,000 from Obama.

Keep in mind, too, that these TPC estimates exclude the promised health care subsidies of each campaign. So does the Obama calculator. McCain's includes the benefit of his refundable health credits, but ignores the Obama health subsidies.

This doesn't suggest that McCain's numbers are wrong. Well, no....but. It does however show however he carefully chose his examples to show his tax plan in the best light.


The lesson here is be afraid, be very afraid, of all of these crude calculators. (And folks like John McCain & Darrels Joy!----Gimp)...TPC tries to avoid these problems by showing what percentage of people in each income group win or lose under any given plan"..............End quote!



So there you have it folks, looks like Darrels Joy AND the McCain campaign along with many other right-wing radicals are attempting to MIS-lead you into believing their BALD FACED LIES & DISTORTIONS of the F-A-C-T-S!


Just thought you'd you want to know.


Gimp

[darrels joy]

Hell even the ultra conservative Heritage Foundation admits Obama's tax plan is BETTER than McCains!

Cut & Paste from original site. If you were to go to the web addresses that I have pasted at patriotfiles, you will find the texts of treaties and bills not just pieces cherry picked for an agenda.

Information for people to make a decision from.

Joy

Heritage Asks TV Stations to Stop Airing Obama’s Misleading Ad

Two days after asking Barack Obama to pull a false and misleading ad citing The Heritage Foundation, the campaign has not yet responded to the request. Heritage’s attorney, Alan P. Dye, today contacted TV stations directly to stop airing the ad. Dye’s letter was sent to TV stations across the country where the Obama ad is running.

The ad" target="_blank">The ad

implies The Heritage Foundation supports Obama’s tax plan even though neither Heritage nor analyst Rea Hederman said what is quoted in the ad. The text of the letter to TV stations is below.

Dear General Manager:
We are informed that your station has been running advertisements placed by Obama for President that contain false statement concerning my client, The Heritage Foundation. The ads and the reason for their falsity are described in my attached letter to the Obama campaign. The campaign has apparently ignored my letter and continues to run the false ad.

As a responsible media outlet, we assume that you take seriously your obligation to ensure that advertisements appearing on your station do not mislead the public with false information. Accordingly, we respectfully request that your station discontinue the publication of these ads.

Further information about The Heritage Foundation’s position on the Obama and McCain tax plans can be obtained at heritage.org. After reading them, we are sure you will agree that it is misleading in the extreme for the Obama campaign to suggest that The Heritage Foundation believes that Senator Obama’s tax plan would be better for middle class Americans than the plan proposed by Senator McCain.

Very truly yours,

Alan P. Dye
http://blog.heritage.org/2008/10/30/...misleading-ad/
_________________________________
Obama's False and Misleading Ad

A misleading ad from Barack Obama distorts Heritage's view of the candidate's tax plan. Help us correct the record.

Barack Obama's campaign is running a TV ad called "

Try This" target="_blank">Try This

." The 30-second spot cites The Heritage Foundation and suggests we support his tax plan. Because the Obama campaign is playing fast and loose with the facts, Heritage has asked him to pull the ad. He has ignored our request.






Here's what you need to know about the false ad:

• The New York Sun ran an article in August incorrectly paraphrasing the view of Heritage policy analyst Rea Hederman on Obama's tax plan.
• Obama's ad uses a language from the New York Sun reporter who interviewed and summarized Hederman's views erroneously.
• Even though Hederman never said what Obama attributes to Heritage in the ad, Obama continues to air the commercial.

Heritage has made it's views on Obama's tax plan well known:

• Shortly after Obama secured the Democrat nomination, Hederman wrote that Obama's plan would impose European levels of taxation on America.
• When an Obama surrogate wrote in the Wall Street Journal that Heritage favored Obama's tax plan, Hederman immediately sent a letter to the editor correcting the record.
• Earlier this month, Heritage's Center for Data Analysis released a thorough analysis of both candidates' tax plans, concluding, "Senator McCain's plan is substantially better at spurring economic growth than Senator Obama's."

Obama's refusal to correct the record or pull the ad does a disservice to voters who want factual and accurate information. As a result, Heritage's attorney wrote to TV stations airing the ad, requesting they pull it immediately. We encourage you to let us know if you've seen the ad air in your local market.

Correcting the Record



http://blog.heritage.org/obama/

[Gimpy]

Won't you EVER learn?


Now that Heritage policy analyst Rea Hederman has got his ASS in a crack with his bosses at the Heritage Foundation, he's attempting to renege on his original comments to the New York Sun reporter.


Why haven't we seen a RETRACTION by the New York Sun if what the Staff Reporter of the Sun, RUSSELL BERMAN was in any way incorrect????


After working in the newspaper industry for most of my adult life I can ASSURE you that anytime....ANYTIME......a reporter writes incorrect or false information in a major daily newspaper. A formal "RETRACTION" is forthcoming as soon as the actual "error" (if there WAS one!) is brought to the attention of the newspapers management team. It NEVER happened.


The Heritage policy analyst Rea Hederman is now simply attempting to get his "CONservative" allies at the Heritage Foundation and other "Conservatives" off his ASS now. Plain & Simple.


Here is EXACTLY what he said as published in the Sun...............


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


Heritage Hails 'Great Step in The Right Direction'
By RUSSELL BERMAN, Staff Reporter of the Sun | August 15, 2008



WASHINGTON — Senator Obama, with his lead against Senator McCain narrowing in some polls, is trying to portray himself as the real tax-cutter in the presidential race.


And even some conservatives are praising him for it.


A senior policy analyst at the conservative Heritage Foundation, Rea Hederman Jr., praised Mr. Obama for proposing a 20% tax rate on dividends and capital gains, lower than a 28% rate he had initially floated, though still more than the current 15% rate. "That's a great step in the right direction," Mr. Hederman said. "It's a big change from what we thought the Obama tax plan would be at the beginning of the summer."


Mr. Hederman said the middle class would likely pay less under Mr. Obama's plan than Mr. McCain's but that the Democrat was excessively reliant on complicated tax breaks that would make the tax code more confusing.


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


Here's some MORE "info" for you to "chew on" while attempting to find another radical right wing "blog" to copy & paste from...........Enjoy.


Oct 2nd 2008 | WASHINGTON, DC
From The Economist print edition

In our special report on the election we analyse the two candidates’ economic plans. Here, we ask professional economists to give us their views


The detailed responses are bad news for Mr McCain (the full data are available here).

http://www.economist.com/ecsurvey/


Eighty per cent of respondents and no fewer than 71% of those who do not cleave to either main party say Mr Obama has a better grasp of economics. Even among Republicans Mr Obama has the edge: 46% versus 23% say Mr Obama has the better grasp of the subject. “I take McCain’s word on this one,” comments James Harrigan at the University of Virginia, a reference to Mr McCain’s infamous confession that he does not know as much about economics as he should. In fairness, Mr McCain’s lower grade may in part reflect greater candour about his weaknesses. Mr Obama’s more tightly managed image leaves fewer opportunities for such unvarnished introspection.


You want MORE evidence McCains plan is full of manure, go here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/26/bu...in&oref=slogin



Tuesday, September 16, 2008


66% of Economists are Economists for Obama

This is according to a new survey of 523 economists who are U.S. citizens and members of the American Economic Association


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


Gimp

[Gimpy]

What, no rebuttal from Joy????


Wattzamatta Joy, couldn't you find any "evidence" of a "retraction" from the New York Sun regarding The Heritage Foundations Rea Hedermans' comments about Obamas' Tax plan????

It's beacuse there WASN'T ANY "retractions"!

The New York Sun is standing by their published reprts!

Nice try, but NO CIGAR!

Gimp