Obama tax plan:

[Phlegm]

From CNN.com

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Sen. Barack Obama on Tuesday proposed overhauling the tax code to lower taxes for the poor and middle class, increase them for the rich and make it so most Americans can file their taxes in five minutes.

The tax relief plan he envisions for the middle class alone would mean $80 billion or more in tax cuts, he said.

Obama, an Illinois Democrat who is a front-runner for his party's 2008 presidential nomination, said during a speech at the Tax Policy Center that the present tax code reflects the wrong priorities because it rewards wealth instead of work.

"Instead of having all of us pay our fair share, we've got over $1 trillion worth of loopholes in the corporate tax code," he said. "This isn't the invisible hand of the market at work. It's the successful work of special interests."

The result, according to Obama? "Gaps in wealth in this country grow wider, while the costs to working people are greater."

The plan means billions in breaks by: nixing income taxes for the 7 million senior citizens making less than $50,000 a year, establishing a universal credit for the 10 million homeowners who make less than $50,000 annually and do not itemize their deductions, and providing 150 million Americans with tax cuts of up to $1,000.

"I'd reward work by providing an income tax cut of up to $500 per person -- or $1,000 for each working family -- to offset the payroll tax that they're already paying," he said.

"Because this credit would be greater than their income tax bill, my proposal would effectively eliminate all income taxes for 10 million working Americans."

Obama also said he'd simplify the tax code so that any employed American with a bank account can do their taxes in minutes if they take the standard deduction. It makes sense, he said, because the Internal Revenue Service already collects wage and bank account information.

"There's no reason the IRS can't send Americans pre-filled tax forms to verify," he said. "This means no more worry. No more wasted time. No more extra expenses for a tax preparer."

Obama proposes funding the tax cuts by closing corporate loopholes, cracking down on international tax havens and increasing the dividend-and-capital-gains tax for the wealthy, he said.

He called his proposal a "fair" alternative to the present tax code and said it was necessary because hard times on Main Street translate to hard times on Wall Street.

"When the changes in our economy are leaving too many people behind, the competitiveness of our country risks falling behind," he said. "When that dream of opportunity is denied to too many Americans, then ultimately that pain has a way of trickling up."

[Tikker]

cutting taxes is nice election ploy, but how does he plan to fix your 5+ trillion dollar debt?

[The Kizzy]

Stopping the overspending by the government would be the first step, followed up by cutting some salaries of congress, etc....

[Martrae]

Instead of making money saving cuts they'd rather just tax more.

[brinstar]

cutting taxes is nice election ploy, but how does he plan to fix your 5+ trillion dollar debt?

actually last week it passed the 9 trillion mark

which is over $30,000 per living american

[The Kizzy]

Here is another way to save some spending


"Like a lot of folks in this country...I have a job. I work, they pay me.
I pay my taxes and the government distributes my taxes as it sees fit.
In order to get that paycheck, I am required to pass a random urine test, with which I have no problem.
What I do have a problem with is the distribution of my taxes to people who don't have to pass a urine test.
Shouldn't one have to pass a urine test to get a welfare check because I have to pass one to earn it for them?
Please understand, I have no problem with helping people get back on their feet.
I do on the other hand have a problem with helping someone sitting on their butt and using drugs.
Could you imagine how much money the state would save if people had to pass a urine test to get a public assistance check? "

[Jay]

The government needs to stop buying rims for people.

[brinstar]

i'd agree with that

but i also think that depriving drug users of welfare wouldn't necessarily stop them from being drug users-- it would just make them homeless drug users or starving drug users or drug dealers or drug users that commit other crimes to get more drugs

what pisses me off is that there's a guy in my program who draws SSI because he's fat. he's not stuck in a wheelchair, he's not diagnosed with debilitating mental illness, he's just FAT. and John Q. Taxpayer gives him $600 a month because he's so fat he can't work. first of all, he's only about 400 lbs, i've seen fatter guys than that working decent jobs. and second of all, he smokes a pack of cigarettes per day. makes me wanna stab the fucker.

[Harrison]

i'd agree with that

but i also think that depriving drug users of welfare wouldn't necessarily stop them from being drug users-- it would just make them homeless drug users or starving drug users or drug dealers or drug users that commit other crimes to get more drugs

Homeless drug abuser, starving drug abuser, whatever...

Better than a welfare collecting addict...

[The Kizzy]

i'd agree with that

but i also think that depriving drug users of welfare wouldn't necessarily stop them from being drug users-- it would just make them homeless drug users or starving drug users or drug dealers or drug users that commit other crimes to get more drugs

what pisses me off is that there's a guy in my program who draws SSI because he's fat. he's not stuck in a wheelchair, he's not diagnosed with debilitating mental illness, he's just FAT. and John Q. Taxpayer gives him $600 a month because he's so fat he can't work. first of all, he's only about 400 lbs, i've seen fatter guys than that working decent jobs. and second of all, he smokes a pack of cigarettes per day. makes me wanna stab the fucker.

Exactly. And if the drug users end up homeless or starving, it is of their own doing!! Take responsiblity for your own actions. Tell the fat guy that you are gonna cut him off unless he looses weight. That is ridiculous.

[Gaazy]

While we're on the subject of fucked up bullshit government programs and stuff, ill say this: FUCK YOU WORKERS COMP! Bunch of crooked ass bastards...

[Lueyen]

i'd agree with that

but i also think that depriving drug users of welfare wouldn't necessarily stop them from being drug users-- it would just make them homeless drug users or starving drug users or drug dealers or drug users that commit other crimes to get more drugs

Then the taxpayers eventually end up giving them a room (albeit with a pretty airy door) and three squares a day... I'd like to say in a drug free environment, but we all know that isn't true.

Kizzy the one thing you are kinda missing is that there are ways to get around drug tests if you have the time to implement them, so unless the process is random it probably wouldn't do much good... and of course those tests cost money. In the end if it got people who couldn't afford to be doing drugs off them then it might pay for it's self, but I could also see the savings due to not paying those who fail the tests included in statistical figures touting the virtues of such an arrangement. Remember you aren't talking about the average responsible person who works to earn a living, we are talking about affecting people who for whatever reason "need" welfare assistance AND choose to continue to use drugs. I think given the obviously poor decision making that put someone in that spot, we can predict a pattern of choosing a criminal route rather then getting their shit in order.

Perhaps do random tests, and when someone fails predicate checks on the attendance to a drug rehab program?

[Arlos]

I think drug tests as conditions of employment are an unconstitutional invasion of personal privacy for anything but critical cases. (Airline pilot, etc.) Whether or not someone snorts coke at home has no bearing whatsoever on whether or not they're a capable worker at their job. Now, if they snort coke at work, that's an entirely separate issue, but then, getting drunk at work's a no-no too.

Anyway, assuming the numbers work out as far as government income is concerned, I rather like his plan.

-Arlos

[Tikker]

how does every thread you're involved turn into a rant about your right to get stoned arlos?

[Harrison]

I think drug tests as conditions of employment are an unconstitutional invasion of personal privacy for anything but critical cases. (Airline pilot, etc.) Whether or not someone snorts coke at home has no bearing whatsoever on whether or not they're a capable worker at their job. Now, if they snort coke at work, that's an entirely separate issue, but then, getting drunk at work's a no-no too.

Anyway, assuming the numbers work out as far as government income is concerned, I rather like his plan.

-Arlos

I hate to sound like a liberal, but I agree completely.

[The Kizzy]

I don't agree Arlos. Take the "stereotypical" drug user for example. Someone who is always getting baked. Do you really want them workin gon anything of yours? They have lost brain cells. Kinda like being hungover still means you are drunk. You can't function properly, and you could seriously injure someone.

Here is another way to save government spending. Quit giving welfare to illegal aliens and their families. At least make them apply for a green card.

[Gypsiyee]

well, if they applied for a green card they'd be denied; you have to have sufficient income to prove that you aren't going to be a burden on the government to get one, or you have to have someone who does have the income level to vouch and sign a contract, basically, saying that for the rest of their lives while you're a permanent resident they're willing to be responsible for you so that you don't become a burden to the government.

I don't follow illegal immigration much, but I'm not sure how, without social security numbers, they're legally collecting anything, if they are.

[Eziekial]

I can't believe he has the gall to reference Adam Smith's "Invisible Hand" in his proposal. I bet he figured no one has the intelligence to call him out on it since this is simple pandering to the government educated masses.

[Evermore]

I think drug tests as conditions of employment are an unconstitutional invasion of personal privacy for anything but critical cases. (Airline pilot, etc.) Whether or not someone snorts coke at home has no bearing whatsoever on whether or not they're a capable worker at their job. Now, if they snort coke at work, that's an entirely separate issue, but then, getting drunk at work's a no-no too.

Anyway, assuming the numbers work out as far as government income is concerned, I rather like his plan.

-Arlos

and if said pilot snorts said coke 5 min before he gets behind they yoke of your flight....

[Arlos]

Note, I said I didn't have a problem for it in cases of public safety, like airline pilots, etc. While they're illegal, I can see testing law enforcement officers, etc. as well. But who does it effect if, say, a librarian likes to go to raves and do E on Friday nights, and doesn't work again til monday? What about jobs where drugs that enhance creativity will HELP? I know a TON of software developers that smoke weed to help them write code better. And no, Kizzy, I couldn't care less if some checker at Home Depot or Lowes or wherever smokes pot when he's at home. Effects me not one iota. If I hired someone to do an installation, and they showed up at my house baked, that would be unprofessional as hell, sure. But if they finish their work, go home, and have a joint instead of a beer, I couldn't care less. Face it, Alcohol kills far more brain cells than pot, and it's legal. There's no law against showing up to work hung over, yet the same employer would punish someone who smoked pot 2 weeks befoer that at a party on saturday night? Talk about double standards...

-Arlos

[Zanchief]

Here is another way to save some spending


"Like a lot of folks in this country...I have a job. I work, they pay me.
I pay my taxes and the government distributes my taxes as it sees fit.
In order to get that paycheck, I am required to pass a random urine test, with which I have no problem.
What I do have a problem with is the distribution of my taxes to people who don't have to pass a urine test.
Shouldn't one have to pass a urine test to get a welfare check because I have to pass one to earn it for them?
Please understand, I have no problem with helping people get back on their feet.
I do on the other hand have a problem with helping someone sitting on their butt and using drugs.
Could you imagine how much money the state would save if people had to pass a urine test to get a public assistance check? "

The cost of instituting this retarded plan would probably be more than what you'd be saving.

Stop whining about Welfare. It's not the problem. If you're really concerned about where all that welfare money is going, try and reform the process to get these guys off of social assistance, because if they're drug using users then the government is doing their job.

[Lyion]

The amount spent on Welfare is tiny. We have good programs in place and good safety measures. WIC and Welfare do not need to be touched. Medicaire and Medicaid are another story, as well as the free health money to the rich geezers.

The real money wasted is on pork projects, bridges to nowhere, and other silliness that is our federal government

[Zanchief]

The amount spent on Welfare is tiny.

So why do people obsess over it?

HINT: It's racially motivated.

[Lyion]

Most people don't care much about it, and I don't think it's too racially motivated. A lot of the problems with Welfare and support were with its stupid setup of have more babies, get more money. We've done away with that, as well as equalized and made sure the system is fair and helps those who need it, but encourages those who should work, to work.

Sadly, we spend more on drug entitlements to wealthy senior citizens then we do on welfare and WIC. It'd never come across because the AARP is the most powerful bloc in America, and unlike other age groups, senior citizens covet their wealth and vote en masse.

[Zanchief]

Most people don't care much about it

Not true at all.