Taxing the 'Not-So-Rich' Rich

**LadyT** · 06-13-2008, 06:41 AM

I swear they read our board!

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine...8081624555.htm

Such rhetoric leaves Hammer steaming. "I don't mind paying my fair share, but people act like they're just talking about Bill Gates," he says. "We would definitely feel a hit if our taxes went up." Although a year ago he would not have considered voting Republican in November, now he's not so sure: "Do you vote your heart, or do you vote your wallet?"

Just what does it mean to be wealthy these days? When it comes to raising taxes, it's far from clear exactly where the line will be drawn. While Obama has said only couples making more than $250,000 will pay more, many analysts believe that number could change. "Rates at the top end are going up, but what does that mean for those making $200,000, $225,000, or $250,000?" asks Anne Mathias, the head of Washington policy research for the Stanford Group, an investment advisory firm.

**LadyT** · 06-13-2008, 06:44 AM

.....By "wealthiest" Obama means married couples earning more than $250,000; for a single taxpayer, the equivalent income would be roughly $200,000. Today, taxpayers making that much fall into the top two federal income tax brackets, paying rates of 33% or 35%. Their rates would revert to the 36% and 39.6% top rates used in 2000. The same households would also see a bump up in the rates they pay on capital gains and dividends, both of which now stand at 15%.......

__________________________________________________ ______________

That $250k number just doesn't cut it. Its not "rich" by any stretch of the imagination and it WILL hurt the upper middle class substantially.

**Onceler** · 06-13-2008, 06:47 AM

I'm definitely concerned about the ol' wallet, but man, would I never consider voting McCain because of it.

I'm sure a lot of middlin' "rich folks" voted Bush for wallet reasons, and we're spending trillions on Iraq, which we're eventually paying for one way or another. We're also paying for his utter ineptness as a steward of the economy, and McCain hasn't exactly shown economic prowess in his rhetoric thus far.

I'm worried about taxes w/ Obama, though.

**LadyT** · 06-13-2008, 06:50 AM

Originally Posted by Onceler

I'm definitely concerned about the ol' wallet, but man, would I never consider voting McCain because of it.

I'm sure a lot of middlin' "rich folks" voted Bush for wallet reasons, and we're spending trillions on Iraq, which we're eventually paying for one way or another. We're also paying for his utter ineptness as a steward of the economy, and McCain hasn't exactly shown economic prowess in his rhetoric thus far.

I'm worried about taxes w/ Obama, though.

I think that's the only place he's legitimately vulnerable. However, if I recall correctly, McCain wanted to raise taxes before too. At least Obama's honest about it.

**LadyT** · 06-13-2008, 10:53 AM

http://www.nj.com/newsflash/index.ss...xml&storylist=

"COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — Democrat Barack Obama would apply the Social Security payroll tax to all annual incomes above $250,000, which he says would affect the wealthiest 3 percent of Americans.

The presidential candidate told senior citizens in Ohio on Friday that it is unfair for middle-class earners to pay the Social Security tax "on every dime they make, while millionaires and billionaires are only paying it on a very small percentage of their income."

The payroll tax is now applied to all income up to $102,000 a year, which covers the entire amount for most Americans. Under Obama's plan, the tax would not apply to incomes between that amount and $250,000. But all annual income above the quarter-million-dollar amount would be taxed under his plan."

**Chapdog** · 06-13-2008, 11:07 AM

of course they read our boards.

***Damocles*** · 06-13-2008, 11:09 AM

Originally Posted by Chapdog

of course they read our boards.

Just this one. Really. They tell me about it all the time.

**Chapdog** · 06-13-2008, 11:14 AM

if i was working a campaign i would most definitely get the pulse of voters off of a place like this. You could take each individual and area they live in and use them as a barometer of what issues they care about and what the breaking points are.

**uscitizen** · 06-13-2008, 11:36 AM

Jollie is a McCain staffer.

**Thorn** · 06-13-2008, 12:01 PM

Originally Posted by uscitizen

Jollie is a McCain staffer.

Well, then Obama's campaign has even less to be concerned about!

**evince** · 06-13-2008, 12:03 PM

To pretend we can fix the US and pay less taxes is just childishly insane.

**LadyT** · 06-13-2008, 12:06 PM

Originally Posted by Desh

To pretend we can fix the US and pay less taxes is just childishly insane.

The problem is that's the only solution that's ever put forth. What about serious reductions in spending.

**evince** · 06-13-2008, 12:10 PM

Fix anything about your life without spending more.

You will find that money is just a measure of human effort expelled.

You can not fix this country without money.

**cawacko** · 06-13-2008, 12:16 PM

Originally Posted by Desh

Fix anything about your life without spending more.

You will find that money is just a measure of human effort expelled.

You can not fix this country without money.

$2.6 trillion was the federal government's budget this year. How much more money do we need to spend?

**LadyT** · 06-13-2008, 12:18 PM

Originally Posted by Desh

Fix anything about your life without spending more.

You will find that money is just a measure of human effort expelled.

You can not fix this country without money.

do you even think its possible to reduce spending Desh or are you fine with the feds always suggesting tax increases to contend wiht their budget deficits?