Calculate Your Obama Tax Increase With This Handy Calculator

[darrels joy]

Calculate Your Obama Tax Increase With This Handy Calculator

» by Bill Dupray in: Barack Obama, Economy, Taxes
This is a cool little site where you can prove Obama is a liar on taxes. You can put in your tax filing status; single, married filing jointly, etc., and then put in your taxable income. You can do it for any year, so give it a shot for 2008 and then try it for 2000, which is what you will owe once Obama repeals Bush’s tax cuts. Give it a try.

Link is here. Look for the small box with “calculate” button.
As an example, if you are married filing jointly and make $100,000 this year (a hell of a lot less than Obama’s rich-guy threshold of $250,000), you will pay $17,688 in taxes. After Obama increases your taxes to the 2000 rate, you will owe $22,300, a patriotic increase of $4,612, which is a 26% tax hike.
If you are single, earning $35,000 this year, you will owe $4,448. Obama’s tax increase jacks it up to $5,250, for a tax increase of $802, which is an 18% increase in your taxes. You rich bastard.
That’s your wealth Obama plans to spread around.
H/T Jim Geraghty at The Campaign Spot.
http://patriotroom.com/?p=3158

[darrels joy]

This is about reversing Bush's tax cuts. It is not Obama's only over $250,000 per family. That is in addition to reversing the tax cut.

Obama talked today about how McCain was opposed to Bush's tax cuts because they gave too much to the "rich" people. Obama's people are out saying they made changes that make his new "tax credits" seem more reasonable by adding a work requirement. Another new government program with more government employees or using the "private sector" (ACORN, etc.) to assist people in getting the most money from us.

Use the site above to calculate your gains or losses from the cut reversal.

Joy

[darrels joy]

Obama and the Tax Tipping Point



Obama and the Tax Tipping Point: How Long Before Taxpayers Are Pushed Too Far?, by Adam Lerrick:

What happens when the voter in the exact middle of the earnings spectrum receives more in benefits from Washington than he pays in taxes? Economists Allan Meltzer and Scott Richard posed this question 27 years ago. We may soon enough know the answer.





Barack Obama is offering voters strong incentives to support higher taxes and bigger government. This could be the magic income-redistribution formula Democrats have long sought.





Sen. Obama is promising $500 and $1,000 gift-wrapped packets of money in the form of refundable tax credits. These will shift the tax demographics to the tipping point where half of all voters will receive a cash windfall from Washington and an overwhelming majority will gain from tax hikes and more government spending.





In 2006, the latest year for which we have Census data, 220 million Americans were eligible to vote and 89 million -- 40% -- paid no income taxes. ... [T]his will jump to 49% when Mr. Obama's cash credits remove 18 million more voters from the tax rolls. What's more, there are an additional 24 million taxpayers (11% of the electorate) who will pay a minimal amount of income taxes -- less than 5% of their income and less than $1,000 annually.





In all, three out of every five voters will pay little or nothing in income taxes under Mr. Obama's plans and gain when taxes rise on the 40% that already pays 95% of income tax revenues.





The plunder that the Democrats plan to extract from the "very rich" -- the 5% that earn more than $250,000 and who already pay 60% of the federal income tax bill -- will never stretch to cover the expansive programs Mr. Obama promises.


What next? A core group of Obama enthusiasts -- those educated professionals who applaud the "fairness" of their candidate's tax plans -- will soon see their $100,000-$150,000 incomes targeted. As entitlements expand and a self-interested majority votes, the higher tax brackets will kick in at lower levels down the ladder, all the way to households with a $75,000 income.

I am reminded of the poem by Martin Niemöller:

[T]hey came first for [those making $250,000], And I didn’t speak up because I [didn't make $250,000];

And then they came for [those making $150,000], And I didn’t speak up because I [didn't make $150,000];

And then they came for [those making $100,000], And I didn’t speak up because I [didn't make $100,000];

And then . . . they came for me [because I made $75,000] . . And by that time there was no one left to speak up.

http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_b...and-the-t.html

[darrels joy]

Heritage Slams Obama Over Tax Claims

Tuesday, October 28, 2008 7:51 PM Article Font Size

The Heritage Foundation on Wednesday asked Barack Obama to immediately pull two ads that misrepresent the views of Heritage’s Rea Hederman. The campaign has released a 30-second TV ad with false information and repeats it on the campaign website. The following letter was sent by Heritage lawyer Alan P. Dye to the Obama campaign: Dear Senator Obama: Two recent campaign advertisements seriously misrepresent the views of my client, The Heritage Foundation. They suggest, quite falsely, that The Heritage Foundation and one of its analysts support your tax plan. The print ad on your Web site, as well as your ad entitled “Try This,” reference a quote from policy analyst Rea Hederman. In fact, Mr. Hederman never said what is quoted there. Rather, the words you quote are from a New York Sun reporter who interviewed Mr. Hederman and summarized his views erroneously. That the reporter’s summary is erroneous is evident from the actual quotes from Mr. Hederman presented in the article, which make it quite clear that Mr. Hederman believes your tax plan would be bad not only for the country, but for the middle class. By omitting the direct quotes from Heritage that are contained in the article and attributing to Heritage a conflicting statement not made by its analyst, the advertisement appears to be an intentional attempt to mislead. Surely there can be no doubt within your campaign as to how Heritage truly views your tax plan. When one of your economic advisors, Jeffrey Liebman, made this same misrepresentation in a September 4, 2008 letter to The Wall Street Journal, Mr. Hederman promptly sent a corrective and very public letter. It appeared in the September 16 issue of The Wall Street Journal under the title: “A Bad Plan That Is Less Bad Is Still Not A Very Good Plan.” In it, Mr. Hederman strenuously decried Mr. Liebman’s blatant misrepresentation and set the record straight. The Heritage Foundation believes that your advertisements’ use of its name is not only not a fair use of its intellectual property, but is an intentional attempt to mislead and misinform voters. As a responsible candidate, you should insist that your campaign cease to run these false advertisements immediately. Very truly yours, Alan P. Dye http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/h...28/145119.html

[darrels joy]

Obama's New Attack on Those Who Don't Want Higher Taxes: ‘Selfishness’

October 31, 2008 10:58 AM
On the stump this week, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., has pushed back against Sen. John McCain's description of his tax policies.

"The reason that we want to do this, change our tax code, is not because I have anything against the rich," Obama said in Sarasota, Fla., yesterday. "I love rich people! I want all of you to be rich. Go for it. That’s the American dream, that’s the American way, that’s terrific.

"The point is, though, that -- and it’s not just charity, it’s not just that I want to help the middle class and working people who are trying to get in the middle class -- it’s that when we actually make sure that everybody’s got a shot – when young people can all go to college, when everybody’s got decent health care, when everybody’s got a little more money at the end of the month – then guess what? Everybody starts spending that money, they decide maybe I can afford a new car, maybe I can afford a computer for my child. They can buy the products and services that businesses are selling and everybody is better off. All boats rise. That’s what happened in the 1990s, that’s what we need to restore. And that’s what I’m gonna do as president of the United States of America.

"John McCain and Sarah Palin they call this socialistic," Obama continued.

"You know I don’t know when, when they decided they wanted to make a virtue out of selfishness."

It's unclear if this was a nod to the Ayn Rand book

"The Virtue of..." target="_blank">"The Virtue of...
"The Virtue of...">"The Virtue of... cover" /> "The Virtue of...

with all that http://www.aynrand.org/site/PageServer?pagename=index.

It would seem to be, given the themes of Rand's work, what happens when independent achievers are demonized.

Which would fit with this description of those who want to keep their hard-earned tax dollars as "selfish."

Atlas may not be shrugging, but Obama is.

-- jpt
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpu...-new-atta.html

[darrels joy]

Obama: Will Raise the Price of Electricity and Other Energy

Posted in Biden, Energy, Obama, Politics at 7:40 am by Thanos

This is how the liberal philosopher kings in Washington would tax and tailor your behavior. I’ve pointed out in many past articles how people in third world countries starve when energy prices are high, (Here’s just one) and the killing effect of energy stasis. Yes conservation is a worthy goal, but it will never solve the problem of rising energy demand. In a few short years there will be 9 billion souls on this planet, and to get by at that point energy must not only be cheap, but highly abundant. Here you see in 2007 how Barack Obama is planning a middle class tax hike that’s hidden:

YouTube - BIG BROTHER Obama's wants Government...

Here’s a hint Barack: the world-wide recession we face now isn’t just because of housing, but also because of years of sustained high energy prices.

http://noblesseoblige.org/wordpress/...-other-energy/

[darrels joy]

Now it seems Obama wants to tax any household making more than $50,000-70,000. “Rich” just keeps getting redefined downward as more about Obama’s stance on the matter is revealed

Posted by hillbuzz

In some countries, they have reporters who write stories about things like this — and reveal political candidates for who they really are so people voting for them can know what they are really getting themselves into.

Those countries sound great.

Magical.

Can we live there?



http://hillbuzz.wordpress.com/2008/1...r-is-revealed/