Obama: My Plan Will 'Spread The Wealth Around'

[Mavdog]

Originally Posted by wmbwinn

Agreed. I think the AJCA and Bush tax cuts should be permanent. Allowing them to expire or failing to renew them constitutes a tax increase on the parts of the economy that drive the economy (the top).

guess that you don't understand that the obama plan is also a tax cut....just for the vast majority of people who work day in and day out to "drive the economy".

the affect of the bush tax policy is seen in the widening gap between the economic classes. never before has so much of our country's wealth been concentrated in so few.

that is unhealthy for our country, and our economy long term.

[wmbwinn]

Originally Posted by Mavdog

guess that you don't understand that the obama plan is also a tax cut....just for the vast majority of people who work day in and day out to "drive the economy".

the affect of the bush tax policy is seen in the widening gap between the economic classes. never before has so much of our country's wealth been concentrated in so few.

that is unhealthy for our country, and our economy long term.

the tax cuts that obama and mccain propose are similar in scope and style except that obama increases taxes at the top and mccain offers tax cuts at that level also.

mccain is likely to support tax breaks for corporations (without carrots such as tax credits for creating new jobs) whereas obama is unlikely.

obama gives credits (means that he just takes tax money and distributes it as welfare through the IRS) to those who pay no taxes.

but, for the average person who does work, the two tax codes are pretty darn similar.

[Mavdog]

Originally Posted by wmbwinn

the tax cuts that obama and mccain propose are similar in scope and style except that obama increases taxes at the top and mccain offers tax cuts at that level also.

well, no, and the tax tables illustrate the difference.

mccain is likely to support tax breaks for corporations (without carrots such as tax credits for creating new jobs) whereas obama is unlikely.

pure conjecture. obama propsoes a bevy of tax credits to corporations who hire american workers, develop clean technology, and invest domestically.

obama gives credits (means that he just takes tax money and distributes it as welfare through the IRS) to those who pay no taxes.

no, you are wrong. these workers (they must work to get the credits) do pay taxes.

but, for the average person who does work, the two tax codes are pretty darn similar.

wow, to call greater than double the tax cut for most americans under the obama plan to the half the tax cut mccain proposes for the majority of american workers as "similar" is a joke.

but the joke is not funny to the majority of americans who are paying too much of the tax bill and want tax relief.

looks to me like they re likely to get it, too..

[wmbwinn]

too much time spent debating stuff that doesn't matter. I assume Obama will win. I assume that the tax code will be re-written. I assume that new social programs will be developed.

But, I know that Congress will do these things, not Obama.

So, we'll see what it really looks like later.

Many people have independently determined that Obama's tax plans don't pay for his promised programs.

So, if Congress wants to support the proposals of Obama, they have to:
1)increase the tax burden some where
2)gut the programs
3)borrow money/increase the national debt further if they wish to avoid options 1 and 2

[wmbwinn]

thanks for the link on the Uzi episode.

It was a real Uzi which is a 9 mm fully automatic gun made by Israeli Military Industries which company is banned from importation into the USA since after the 1989 imports by a bill crafted by Feinstein in California.

I was unaware that there were states where the typical Federal laws regarding level 3 NFA weapons were tossed aside.

Typically, based on the National Firearms Act (NFA), level 3 weapons can only be owned by a person holding a level 3 permit for that specific weapon which is tedious to obtain. Typically, the person owning the level 3 permit for that specific weapon (you need an additional permit for each level 3 weapon you have) is the only person who can even legally hold the gun/weapon. It is typically illegal to even let a friend with you touch it or shoot it.

So, obviously, there is a state or states where state laws have been crafted to trump the NFA.

Nonetheless, it is a good example of carelessness.

[wmbwinn]

If it makes you feel better I don't have any level 3 NFA weapons and don't see a need to obtain one.

[chumdawg]

Originally Posted by wmbwinn

If it makes you feel better I don't have any level 3 NFA weapons and don't see a need to obtain one.

Of course not. Just wondering, though, if you think that kid had every right to handle that weapon.

It killed him, of course, so I suspect that in the future there will be more safeguards. But I reckon you would be against any restraints that would have kept that young man from firing that weapon.