The Thailand expat forum for Travel, Lifestyle and Fun.

Norton

The benevolent rich and the current administration's policies seem to have either never learned or have forgotten this basic truth.

Bugs

I am still holding out hope for some meaningful open forum type of debates between the two candidates but as negotiations in regard to future debates drag on my hopes continue to be diminished.

Certainly anyone that has seen the two (Obama/McCain) give speeches and perform in debates would have to give the advantage to Obama going into future debates. Makes me wonder why the McCain team seems to want more and the Obama team seems to want to limit the number of debates?

I have always wondered why it was necessary to set the timelne and format for all of the debates before any debates can be held. Certainly no one wants to go thru the hassle of haggling over every debate time and format, but surely they could agree to at least holding one debate fairly soon while they work out the details of the rest of the schedule?

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politic...townhall_N.htm

__________________
"Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it, you'd have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, it takes religion" - Steven Weinberg

Norton

Obama has the money for adverts and campaigning. McCain has far less to spend. Debates are a good way for a candidate to get free air time so McCain is keen on the idea.

Bugs

But if Obama kills McCain in the debates what good would all the free air time be?

Speaking of money what ever happend to the Obama idea to "aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a pubilicaly financed general election".
Page 5:
http://www.commoncause.org/atf/cf/%7...NALRELEASE.PDF


Also some folks seem to forget about the "outside groups" or 527's and what they bring to the table are far as campaign ads. McCain will certainly get a rather large amount of "support" and help in the campaign from such groups. That being said this year it also seems that Obama and the blue team have finally gotten their act together as far as 527's are concerned. This might actually be the year the blue teams 527's outspend the red teams 527's.

Norton

I'm not sure he would kill McCain in a town hall forum. He may wound him a little but McCain is at his best when in face to face conversation and at his worst when doing the scripted speech thing. For Obama it's just the opposite.

chinthee

Obama is sounding like a tired old liberal.

Taxing the hell out of people making $250k? What the hell is that? That's not taxing the rich, it's taxing the productive middle class. Idiot.

McCain, Obama offer different visions on taxes - Yahoo! News

I really don't care how much shit I'll get from the school teachers on this board who make little money. Honestly, Obama is targeting the wrong group. Good, productive people who paid their way through University and now hump like hell commuting 3 hours/day and working 12 hours/day making 250/k are not rich. Tax the hell out of them and what? Give it to the inner-city blacks? Is that the plan?

Bugs

This peaked my interest a bit and I did some poking around and it appears you might be on to something here. In that some folks both inside the Obama camp and McCain camp seem to think Obama might not fair too well in "town hall" type debates. I have only seen (on the telly) Obama in a few open (non-prepared) speaking type deals and he seems to carry himself rather well in the ones that I had seen. But others (more informed than me) seem to have different opinions.

One rather short but fairly encompassing example:
The Weekly Standard

I also came across a few Obama gaffs that are a bit reminiscent of GWB and how his sticks his foot in his mouth:

Norton

After a quick look at the link, I see no professions that have a national average salary of over $200k. I'm sure there are a few making well above the national averages but taxing people with over $250k incomes seems reasonable.

http://stats.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm


Doubt it. Nothing to indicate he will. Revenues will be used to get educational systems up to snuff, fund his medical plans, shore up the economy and reduce national debt.

__________________
There is such a thing as a nation being so right that it does not need to convince others by force that it is right.

Woodrow Wilson

Bugs

I guess this might also depend a lot on if the $250k is individual income or family income. I know quite a few families in the Midwest (not in high cost of living places like NY or LA) that are making well over the $250k (including things like commissions and bonuses) and I would still consider them to be middle class.

Would be interesting to find out if the averages in the link include things like commissions and bonuses - or are just the base pay.

Norton

Likely just the base salaries because of the source "US Dept of Labor".



Pure speculation but I reckon it will be on individual income. Tax rates for those filing jointly should reflect appropriately. Guess we will have to wait and see.

raycarey

yes, i think 250 K is a 'middle class' income... but if you took a poll, i think you'd find that most americans would consider 50K to be 'middle class'.
having only three categories is far too simplistic.

and with all the deductions available, if you can't get your stated income below 250K then you mostly likely deserve an increase.

btw, here's an interesting link (that appears reputable) which says only 2-3% of households earn over $250,000.

FactCheck.org: What percentage of the U.S. population makes more than $250,000 per year?

sabang

250K in wage income is a decent ticket, but it doesn't make you rich.
Looking at the real upper end, say $1mm plus per year, I think a bit more tax on 'unearned' income- such as dividends, capital gains &/or trust distrivbutions is warranted. My understanding is that someone with a net worth of 20mm or more is likely to pay less tax as a percentage than someone paying off a mortgage and on 250K p.a. Considering that the top 5% own more than the remaining 95%, I think it's fair that they should at least pay the same rate of tax as someone on a middle class income.

Inheritance taxes are a joke- they are largely optional, if you have decent advice. I used to advise on that sort of stuff. For it to be at all effective, the gaping loopholes need to be removed- which I would not be averse too. Something like a flat percentage of net worth above, say 10mm, including what is held in Trusts and family foundations and so on. Charitable foundations in the US are as much a tax lurk as they are an actual charity, in most cases. Incidentally, the well rich would really raise a squeal if these exemptions (which joe public is largely not aware of) were removed, and a flat, blanket arrangement brought in.

__________________
Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.

raycarey

all things are relative... but i would tend to agree that this wage alone does not make you 'rich'.

that's definitely coming in the US.....but obama has stated not at a higher rate than reagan had them at.

in america it's call the estate tax but the republicans renamed it the 'death tax' (christ, who'd be for that?) and it only ends up taxing a very small percentage of inheritances....sorry no stat or link for that, but i think most here would agree.

if you die in 2009 all estates under $3.5 million are passed on tax free.

The New Estate-Tax Rules - Kiplinger.com

sabang

^ Really, in the US the 'seriously' rich get a very easy ride. Then, when I look at the way people flipping burgers at Mcdonalds have to live compared to the rest of the affluent West, I think it is quite unfair. And I am no Social Democrat either- as an ex senior professional in this industry, I just do not see the equity in the fact that I could set up my wealthy clientele to be paying less tax than their Secretary.

Jet Gorgon

Yep, I'm waiting for those townhall debates. McCain has proposed them.

BS, I say, Norton. Obama said before that he'd save billions by pulling the troops outta Iraq. Uh huh. Now, the $250k people -- well, that ain't so rich, and Business Week interviewed families making that much. They say they are comfortable, but not rich, as some are still paying off mega student loans, live in expensive areas and are also feeling the pinch of higher prices. Heck, if I paid $200,000 for my education,, I'd expect to make more than ten bucks an hour, too.
So, these folks' taxes may go up to almost 40%, while cap gains tax may go up to 25%. Sure, kill the people who have worked hard to make it and dampen the markets, where all those rich people make free money. haha
The Economist also has an article on Obama's possible admin team. I'm still mulling what these guys will do, but if the mag's first accolade for Tony Lake is that he taught Prez Clinton how to salute, I have my doubts. Lots of brains in the supposed lineup, tho.

Taxing the 'Not-So-Rich' Rich
The new Democratic establishment | Who's who in Obamaworld | Economist.com

Norton

Why do you suppose there would be no savings by pulling troops out of Iraq?

Call them rich or call them middle class, the fact is 97% of tax payers are below $250k income. Raising their taxes is hardly going to prevent them from continuing to invest in the market.


Your implication here is people "who have worked hard to make it" all their lives and earn less than $250k should be the ones "killed" with tax increases. Seems to be an elitist approach to fixing the many issues facing the US.

The US economic situation is a direct result of eight years of fiscal mismanagement. As I've said many times, no matter who wins, taxes are going to rise to correct the results of this mismanagement. Simply a matter of who bears the load!

"Overall, the Tax Policy Center said people with very high incomes would benefit the most under McCain's proposal, while low- and middle-income taxpayers would see larger tax breaks under Obama's plan and wealthy taxpayers would see their taxes increase."

Jet Gorgon

^ Um, no, Norty, that's not what I meant at all.
If Bammer saves all that money from an Iraq pullout, why raise taxes.
My implication as you point out is nothing what you just implied. People who paid for uni or who worked hard to get a well-paying job desrve to make more money. Actually, anybody with a brain who goes out and creates something and makes gobs of money deserves it, too, IMO. What, just coz I was born I should deserve handouts so I can loaf around? NO.
"where all those rich people make money" was tongue in cheek.

Norton

Of course they do. But let's keep in mind a good portion of the 97% not earning $250k per year have done the same. I was one and stupidly being an engineer, never earned $250k per year! Guess I should have been a fund manager.

Milkman

Obama gaffs? Sticks foot in mouth? I am sure he has and does.

Just like McCain, but much less often.

And remember, GWB, has stuck his foot in his mouth many, many, times, before and during both of his election campains in 2000 and 2008.

My point:

"Gaffs" for Obama are too rare, and too far and few between to be an issue for him.

For McCain, it might be.

__________________
Military men are dumb, stupid animals, to be used as pawns for foreign policy

Bugs

So why not accept McCain town hall meetings?