US rivals clash on banking crisis

#1
OrangeEmpire

OrangeEmpire

The White Debonair
Joined
Nov 28, 2005
Messages
74,988
Likes
59
#1
BBC NEWS | Americas | US rivals clash on banking crisis

US presidential hopefuls Barack Obama and John McCain have clashed over their competing plans to deal with the US economic crisis.
In a TV advert, Republican nominee John McCain accused his Democratic opponent of offering "only... talk and taxes".
And in a statement on the federal bailout of insurance giant AIG, Mr Obama mocked Mr McCain's "eleventh hour conversion to the language of reform".
Polls suggest voters trust Democrats more than Republicans on the economy.
Policy shift
Commenting on the US government's $85bn (£47.2bn) loan to AIG, Mr McCain appeared to shift his position during an interview on ABC's Good Morning America.
On Tuesday, before the loan was made, the Republican hopeful had told NBC: "I do not believe that the American taxpayer should be on the hook for AIG."
o.gif
_45027542_-64.jpg

inline_dashed_line.gif


Crisis challenges McCain, Obama


But in his ABC interview, after the news of the government's intervention emerged, Mr McCain said: "I didn't want to do that, but there are literally millions of people whose retirement, whose investment, whose insurance were at risk here."
Meanwhile, Mr Obama released a two-minute advert - four times the length of most campaign commercials - in which he set out his plans to deal with the financial crisis.
He pledged to "give a $1,000 tax break to the middle class... end the 'anything goes' culture on Wall Street with real regulation... free [America] from our dependence on Mid-East oil in 10 years... crack down on lobbyists... and... bring a responsible end to this war in Iraq so we stop spending billions each month rebuilding their country when we should be rebuilding ours".
Mr McCain, in his campaign ad, vowed to "reform Wall Street and fix Washington", stressing that he had "taken on tougher guys than this before". Michael Dimock, associate director of the Pew Research Center, told BBC News that the current economic situation could be beneficial for Mr Obama by reinforcing the overwhelming public view that the US was "going in the wrong direction".
Click to expand...

Thoughts?
 
#2
#2
He pledged to "give a $1,000 tax break to the middle class... end the 'anything goes' culture on Wall Street with real regulation... free [America] from our dependence on Mid-East oil in 10 years... crack down on lobbyists... and... bring a responsible end to this war in Iraq so we stop spending billions each month rebuilding their country when we should be rebuilding ours".
Click to expand...

And lollypops for all the good little boys and girls...
 
#8
#8
I'm still trying to figure out how 95% of us will get tax cuts when 40% of us do not pay federal income taxes.
 
#10
#10
VolunteerHillbilly said:
I'm still trying to figure out how 95% of us will get tax cuts when 40% of us do not pay federal income taxes.
Click to expand...

They won't get tax cuts they will receive an unearned rebate!

To add to the confusion, if they did not work and they received free money should it not be taxed?
 
Last edited:
#12
#12
BigPapaVol said:
jwb970 has that figured out for you.
Click to expand...


If you are referring to me, not sure what "jwb" stands for or if it is just a mistake you are continually making.

But since you asked, here it is:

The Tax Foundation, a nonpartisan tax education nonprofit, has analyzed both candidates' tax plans. It says already about 44 million people have no tax burden. Obama's plan would raise taxes on the top 1 percent of wage earners, but give most everyone else a tax break. Even people who earn roughly between $93,000 and $192,000 a year would see a tax break, the foundation says.

The Tax Foundation - Hard Numbers on Obama’s Redistribution Plan
 
#13
#13
rjd970 said:
If you are referring to me, not sure what "jwb" stands for or if it is just a mistake you are continually making.

But since you asked, here it is:

The Tax Foundation, a nonpartisan tax education nonprofit, has analyzed both candidates' tax plans. It says already about 44 million people have no tax burden. Obama's plan would raise taxes on the top 1 percent of wage earners, but give most everyone else a tax break. Even people who earn roughly between $93,000 and $192,000 a year would see a tax break, the foundation says.

The Tax Foundation - Hard Numbers on Obama’s Redistribution Plan
Click to expand...

But with the Bush tax breaks...nvm
 
#15
#15
rjd970 said:
If you are referring to me, not sure what "jwb" stands for or if it is just a mistake you are continually making.

But since you asked, here it is:

The Tax Foundation, a nonpartisan tax education nonprofit, has analyzed both candidates' tax plans. It says already about 44 million people have no tax burden. Obama's plan would raise taxes on the top 1 percent of wage earners, but give most everyone else a tax break. Even people who earn roughly between $93,000 and $192,000 a year would see a tax break, the foundation says.

The Tax Foundation - Hard Numbers on Obama’s Redistribution Plan
Click to expand...

well I'll be, it must be true since they're "non partisan." We've had the conversation enough and the math doesn't work. Curtailed investment by the top 1% would also be a receipts hammer, but don't let that change your "non partisan" thinking.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#16
#16
rjd970 said:
...combined with out of control spending we get deficits and a rising national debt.....
Click to expand...
fortunately Obama's gonna cut spending and increase tax revenue with his plan.

La la land will be one solvent joint.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#17
#17
BigPapaVol said:
fortunately Obama's gonna cut spending and increase tax revenue with his plan.

La la land will be one solvent joint.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

This is as about as non-partisan as it gets:

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/UploadedPDF/411749_updated_candidates.pdf

There is a wealth of information there. The basic conclusion is both candidates will need to cut spending drastically for their tax plans to work. I agree wholeheartedly that spending is the bigger issue.

But Obama's plan, by all accounts and assumptions, provides tax breaks for the most while increasing tax revenue.
 
#18
#18
rjd970 said:
This is as about as non-partisan as it gets:

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/UploadedPDF/411749_updated_candidates.pdf

There is a wealth of information there. The basic conclusion is both candidates will need to cut spending drastically for their tax plans to work. I agree wholeheartedly that spending is the bigger issue.

But Obama's plan, by all accounts and assumptions, provides tax breaks for the most while increasing tax revenue.
Click to expand...

can't see it from my handheld, but I'll say again thatthere is no such thing as bipartisan regarding taxes, period.

Second, this assumes that you actually believe anything to do with Obama's stated tax plan. I don't for one second. He's a liberal give money away, let the governmet solve problems, tax into posperity democrat. He's getting done any of his stated policies with the plan he is espousing.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#19
#19
Second, this assumes that you actually believe anything to do with Obama's stated tax plan. I don't for one second.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I believe anything with either candidates stated tax plan. But it is all we have to go on.
 
#20
#20
rjd970 said:
I'm not sure I believe anything with either candidates stated tax plan. But it is all we have to go on.
Click to expand...
no it isn't. Obama is espousing a huge list of entitlements type expenses and talking about a tax plan whereby 95% of Americans pay even less or get more handed to them. How does any of that work?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#21
#21
Lower taxes and increase spending. Doesn't make sense. If you think the top 1% of earners are going to pay more taxes you're kidding yourselves. They will just go find more loopholes. They will pay as much as they want to pay. That is why too much money for lawyers.
 
#22
#22
hohenfelsvol said:
Lower taxes and increase spending. Doesn't make sense. If you think the top 1% of earners are going to pay more taxes you're kidding yourselves. They will just go find more loopholes. They will pay as much as they want to pay. That is why too much money for lawyers.
Click to expand...

It will also stifle new growth. If a business man knows he will be hit by higher taxes do you think he will be as likely to take a risk with his capital? His tax policy will only serve to further weaken our economy, but then again maybe that is the point!
 
#23
#23
hohenfelsvol said:
Lower taxes and increase spending. Doesn't make sense. If you think the top 1% of earners are going to pay more taxes you're kidding yourselves. They will just go find more loopholes. They will pay as much as they want to pay. That is why too much money for lawyers.
Click to expand...
you'd be very surprised. All taxing savings mechanisms are essentially tax deferments and the crows eventually come home to roost either in cap gains or earnings. All those guys have a big lick every couple of years.

The top 1% of earners in our country pay a massively outsized tax burden in this country. There is no other way to look at it. The media likes to act as if tax loopholes give all the fat cats a break, but it's dead wrong.
 
#24
#24
rjd970 said:
This is as about as non-partisan as it gets:

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/UploadedPDF/411749_updated_candidates.pdf

There is a wealth of information there. The basic conclusion is both candidates will need to cut spending drastically for their tax plans to work. I agree wholeheartedly that spending is the bigger issue.

But Obama's plan, by all accounts and assumptions, provides tax breaks for the most while increasing tax revenue.
Click to expand...

that's not true at all. if obama is elected and starts raising investment taxes an dividend taxes. watch how much good and services are going to rise. watch how much of your 401k returns will decrease. i trust him to lower our taxes as far as i can throw michael moore. you're truly clueless if you actually think hussein obama is going to cut our taxes. what a joke.
 
#25
#25
rjd970 said:
This is as about as non-partisan as it gets:

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/UploadedPDF/411749_updated_candidates.pdf

There is a wealth of information there. The basic conclusion is both candidates will need to cut spending drastically for their tax plans to work. I agree wholeheartedly that spending is the bigger issue.

But Obama's plan, by all accounts and assumptions, provides tax breaks for the most while increasing tax revenue.
Click to expand...

We've discussed this a bit before but here are 2 questions I have about this analysis:

1. How did they project economic growth resulting from each plan - it receives little mention and appears to assume that each plan will have the SAME affect on economic growth and hence the revenue model has a major assumption. Both claim their plans are key to economic growth but it seems highly unlikely these 2 distinct plans would impact growth exactly the same.

2. How are the myriad of Obama's incentives, plans and programs factored into the spending side. I know some are and likely some aren't. Basically he's proposed additional spending in Defense (Afghan increase and slow withdrawal from Iraq), Housing (incentives), Education, Infrastructure, Healthcare, Technology, Energy, etc. - virtually every sector has an Obama plan for increased government spending coupled with tax incentives. Hard to imagine that the true price tag of all these is accurately captured in the analysis.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top