Now, Obama and McCain have opposing views on this subject. But, both stand true to the Republican and Democrat name. So since both views can be proven wrong and right, it becomes unclear which is better. So since there is no obviously dominant tax reform, us, here at the International Discussion boards, should shed some light on which you think is better, and or, What you think the tax reforms should be like.
McCain thinks that by extending the 2001, 2003 bush tax cuts he can relieve the people of the tax burden. And while this helps to an extent, it does give the richer upper classes a bigger tax cut, and this stays true to the Republican name. This is called the "Trickle Down" effect. Basically if you give Big business a larger sized cut, you see prices go down on consumer goods, jobs open up, and then the Economy grows. There are a few problems with this, The Major one is; these rich business owners didn't get were they are by shear dumb luck. They know all of the Loop holes, so what ends up happening is, sometimes with certain businesses the prices don't go down much, or not at all because the Big Business owners find a way to pocket that money. And therefore, it backfires, creating a larger wealth gap.
Obama believes that if we give a significant tax relief on the lower classes, then you increase the tax on the upper classes then you relieve the burden of the people. This brings a phase where the lower and middle classes have more money, and are able to spend more on consumer goods they need. This in term allows them to have more money to spend on unnecessary things like toys, new cars, music, decorations, and other things that make living in a Developed nation interesting to the average person. There is a few problems with this as well. The main one being, the Big business owners don't want to lose any money, and most will not wait for the lower and middle classes to get there debts situated so that they can buy more. So they simply increase prices and find other ways to keep there 5 or 6 houses, and still run around in there Stretch hummer.
So, when changing tax policies to make things easier for the people who are needing it, in a Capitalistic society gets confusing on how just to accomplish that. Because the government cannot control what Big Business does. Only provide rules and regulations, and give them enough Red tape that it makes things just difficult for them. Now, the reason why America doesn't do this is because America, on the political spectrum, is very conservative. Not that it is a bad thing, I mean just look at where this country has become in the world. Even though many a country hates America, it is still a very powerful nation.
So, setting aside big business lets talk on the lower levels. This is because, there are times when Big Business does there job right to make as much money as they can off of the consumer without giving them a Big price tag. And with gas prices as high as they are, those same businesses are probably doing what they can to lower there prices, even though it probably isn't out of humility. But the common people would rather not like to spend a lot on anyone thing anymore because the economy has caused everything that is required for living to skyrocket in prices. So it isn't the Big businesses as of now, actually, some businesses are on there needs to the common person. So times are getting rough for everyone.
Therefore, under McCain's tax policy, everyone receives a tax cut, even thought the richer you are, the bigger percent of the cut you get. So how will the consumer react to this? Well considering that the tax cut really isn't for that much money on the common people, there won't be much of an increase in spending. But considering the Unemployment rate is at it's highest, following our great economy and almost no unemployment during during the Clinton Administration, maybe giving businesses more money might actually give the people more jobs. So this is where you have your long term and short term effects. In the short-term, Big Business will get the benefit of the relief. Now if the businesses are smart enough, they won't pocket it, but instead give more jobs so you can sell more at lower prices. For the lower and higher classes this means, that if it works out in the long run, you will get those jobs you've been searching the Newspapers for all the time. And for the middle class, assuming most have jobs, this means returning to a higher standard of living sooner, that is if you spend more money on those little decorations and such, that at least make you feel as if your rich. And since America is characterized by it's middle class, which is the hard working American, that goes to school, maybe even college and works at sophisticated jobs and tasks (And yes, even working at a super market as a Manager or other higher ranking employee, is still considered a more sophisticated position, this is because what is deemed as unsophisticated is usually manual labor, but Sales associates aren't really holding that sophisticated of a position.) anyways as I was saying, and always try's to break there middle class barrier and become rich one day yet never succeeding. The more they spend the better our economy gets. Now the social issue facing the McCain tax policy is this, being that what the middle classes economic situation is in general, is usually what the economy reflects. Now, McCain's Idea for tax reform actually helps what is referred to as the "Upper-middle class" which is the group of Americans that have not Quite made it to the point where they can afford 5 houses, and 10 cars, but are rich enough to buy most Luxury consumer goods. This is bad because then the Middle-Middle class, and the Lower-Middle class, usually ends up suffering in the log rune because, the businesses realize it's the upper middle class they need to appeal to, so then the prices then adjust accordingly. Which leaves the other two subcategories of the middle class to usually by foreign made goods, which doesn't really help our economy much at all.
Now under Obama, he will have a tax policy set up that gives a lot of tax relief for those that actually need it, like the Lower classes and Middle classes. This is good in the sense that, when once again Big Business plays the game the way the government wants them too, it ends up befitting them too. Just not right away. This is why, when ever the Common American people have more money they tend to spend it more on American made goods, this is because they are usually higher quality than some sweat shop in India or China. This will help those Big Businesses get the money to help make more jobs for the unemployed. And when we don't Import something to sell it, it will inevitably, aid our economy. Now, relating this to today's issues would be relating to the Mortgage crisis. If the common American Public had more money in a short term effect, the mortgage crisis might end. Although that is probably too much to ask for, because even with the tax relief Obama has in plan, which give average Americans a lot more of a tax cut starting off as compared to McCain's Plan. It may not be enough for some Americans who are already very deep in the Hole. But nevertheless It will inevitably help it. And there are still some social problems as well with this. One issue is, and this is what all communist conspirators think about democrats solutions. It seems a bit socialist to fix a wealth gap, because under communism everyone makes the same amount of money. And being that the American government is on the opposite side of the political spectrum, even going close to the middle of the two standings Socialism and Conservatism, scares some people. No matter how much it helps the Country as a Whole. And go a head and laugh the rest of the world. Since you have all three political parties in most of your governments, you know what is the benefits of Socialism here and there, especially health care. Considering that switching to a socialist Health Care has saved almost Billions in dollars for the Country, and Thousands for it's people. But anyways, another, but more Important social issues for this is plan of action is, after a crisis, a lot of people usually take the money they make and start putting it in banks and saving it, not spending it. Thus making the well being of most Businesses and the slow promise of income a democratic tax issues offers usually becomes just that, slow.
So with the entire worlds economy hanging off balance because America's economy is declining, what would you suppose we do? Do You support giving Businesses the tax relief, giving them the money, and hoping they can get things going again since they have already mad there fortune, why not rely on their experience? Do you support Obama in giving the already deteriorating standings the Lower and middle class are having the relief, because if anyone can fix America, It is the Flesh, the blood, and heart of America, the People. Or, do you have a different Idea entirely on what should And also since we are comparing Political parties I found this quote Interesting.
"The Democrats are the party that says government will make you smarter, taller, richer, and remove the crabgrass on your lawn. The Republicans are the party that says government doesn't work and then get elected and prove it."
Also, I am probably wrong with some, maybe even a lot of these pieces. Considering I have never taken a Micro or Macro economics class, I only know what I have learned through the teaching and discussions held in American History, and American government courses. Also I have watched many a debate, done a lot of research, and talked with my own peers about this and now I have found this site not to long ago. But I am very interested in Politics. So if I made a mistake, or if something just flat out seems wrong, quote it, post it, and I'll fix it. Who knows, maybe we can make some sort of influence.
Alright, so I had a class discussion in my Government class today. This was a pretty interesting discussion, especially since I was supposed to support Obama completely, if not just to represent him. So, it was almost typical and I had expected what would happen if I were to lay out Obama's tax policy. The issue was exactly as I had said before, If you increase taxes on the upper class they will find a way to get it back. But after I gave them there fulfillment of what was wrong in McCain's they quickly jumped to this conclusion: McCain has more experience, thus his insight on tax is better.
Now, back on topic, I have been frequently told by these Republicans that McCain's experience glorifies his tax issue, and that Obama's lack of it is shown in his. Now I am aware of McCain's Experience, and Obama's lack there of. But I decided to analyze the past experiences our country has had, in a time when our economy was great. So, I traveled back in time (On the internet of course!), to the 90's. From here I looked at our president.
Actually I looked on this site:
On the Issues.org and found this quote:
|Across-the-board tax cuts are irresponsible. (Jan 1996)|
|Longest Economic Expansion in US History. (Dec 2000)|
I have always looked at it this way...follow the money...all of it!
McCain's extention of Bush's tax cuts plays on the idea that everyone gets some benefit - this is pretty much the Socialist Taxation Policy. People that didnt pay much dont get too much back. People that paid a lot dont get too much back. Where we fall into the pit of mud in talking about this is comparing the amount that the "rich" get back vs what the "lower class" get back. If you take a look at the tax percentage cuts, you can see that everyone gets a bit back, some 1 percent more than others.
Sounds good, but what really happened...
Should you view the government as a business, their gross sales just dropped. They sold less government to people and as a result, should be decreased in size should that trend continue. This means there shouldnt be a whole lot of new government programs for support or welfare issues of the tax payers dime, because the taxpayer just paid less. This is what conservatives would like to see. Additionally, you get to keep more of your money. By percentage basis, the increase is about the same no matter if you are poor or rich (purely based on the decrease and not including loopholes that allow the rich to get to the AMT - Alternative Minimum Tax). People have proven time and time again, if they have money, they will spend it. So the GDP increases. The more money you make and the more people in the workforce year after year mean that the GDP should increase anyway...and it usually does.
Look at the Obama policy and where does the money go?
I look at this as more like the Robin Hood Approach to Taxation. Relieve taxes from the lower/middle class families and raises them on the upper class (who are all then called rich). Now the interesting part is that there really arent a whole lot of exact numbers as to the lower level, while the McCain stuff (since it is a extenuation of the existing, is pretty much in print) is available for analysis.
|I would love to know who exactly middle class is, because you would be amazed at what low level rich is considered within this party, but I digress...|
International Level: International Guru / Political Participation: 863 86.3%
I am one who is for a flat tax for the people or personal income taxes. The federal government takes 10% flat. No tax loop holes that you can hide behind. If you make $30,000 you pay $3,000 to the government. IF you make $3B then you pay $300M to the government. This makes it fair to all people. Let the states take an addition 5% out so they can run. I believe this will give the tax payers who make less than $200,000 a year a substantial raise. At the same time the riches people who have paid $0 in taxes because of tax shelters will start to pay their fair share. Thus the government actually brings in more money.
I agree that inheritance tax should be dropped. We should not be paying for what is rightfully ours to begin with.
I do agree why should the government be allowed to double tax monies in the case of an inheritance?
yes I would gladly pay 20 percent flat rate! I would get back 12% of my wages or more. I am not rich but not sure if 60k is middle of the road or not but I think so.
Let these big corporates pay their share at the same rate.
What a bout capital gains it get taxed at 45% why so we are discourage from taking it out! Not a bad idea in some ways but now at least we have vehicles so that that interest is gained tax free till removed. I thin this will bite the government in the end also as the baby boomers start liquidating in the next few years.
International Level: Senior Politician / Political Participation: 188 18.8%
I believe some are liquidating now to get what they can while their stocks are still worth something.
But I am not sure that a 45% tax on capital gains would be something worthwhile. I would lower it to 35%.
It is the current practice here. I think it is too high I think reduce it and remove the tax shelters.
International Level: Senior Politician / Political Participation: 188 18.8%
From what I know, $65,00 from $118,000 is considered to be the upper-middle class. But that depends on kids.
|this is pretty much the Socialist Taxation Policy. People that didnt pay much dont get too much back.|
|Socialism - any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods|
|Conservatism - disposition in politics to preserve what is established b: a political philosophy based on tradition and social stability, stressing established institutions, and preferring gradual development to abrupt change ; specifically : such a philosophy calling for lower taxes, limited government regulation of business and investing, a strong national defense, and individual financial responsibility for personal needs (as retirement income or health-care coverage)|