The Denver Post
This morning, New Mexico governor Bill Richardson, and enthusiastic supporter of Barack Obama, continued the downward ratchet of the level of income at which Barack Obama intends to confiscate income.
Obama started at #250,000, then said $200,000.
Joe Biden then dropped the bar to $150,000 three days ago.
And now, Bill Richardson is telling us that anyone making over $120,000 will be penalized by an Obama administration.
OH but wait………..Look at this too:
For Incomes Below $100,000, a Better Tax Break in Obama’s Plan
New York Times
Independent analyses of the presidential candidates’ tax proposals show that those who make less than $250,000 a year would not see their taxes raised under Senator Barack Obama’s plans. Further, Mr. Obama would generally cut taxes more than Senator John McCain would for households with incomes less than $100,000 a year.
Wild Thing’s comment…….
This feels like being at an auction…. like I have seen on TV. hahaha
First Richardson, and now the Tiimes….Do I hear $75,000?
Going, going……..
Remember Clinton started out in office saying: I tried harder than at any thing else in my life and I just could not cut taxes. We just have to raise taxes to balance the budget. I tried to cut em, I really did,
It doesn’t matter what a person’s income is, I think everyone should be taxed at the same rate, a flat rate. Maybe a low minimum at which someone avoids tax, but I’m not even sure of that. When I was a kid getting minimum wage for jobs I still paid taxes.
If everyone paid taxes and evenly, then everyone could feel a bit more like being a part of America. Instead we have a large welfare population that has little affection for our great country and vote for whoever promises them more freebies.
As a pensioner I pay taxes on my income, irregardless of it’s source or of the fact that I have to compete with Socialized systems in place, my tiny stipend disqualifies me like many others from state or federal aid. To qualify you have to forfeit all assets or go totally bankrupt and become destitute, which is the true state of many with a tiny income. Since taxes are an unavoidable fact of life I’m leaning toward the Fair Tax, it puts the burden on the consumer regardless of income. What is forgotten is that the feds grab 15% in SS, then a minimum of 15% for income, that is 30% right out the gate, it then escalates from there. Depending on the states you are then taxed again in either an income or sales tax up to 10%, as well as property, vehicle, gas, utilities …… Once the citizen has to contribute across the board out of pocket on a transactional basis what they have to the bloated system they’ll be less anxious to raise taxes. Homeowners know the effect of renters voting for pork barrel levies, it has contributed to the foreclosures we have. Tom, I agree, but let’s leave no loopholes, that’s the cause of class warfare and envy that the Socialists all exploit.
Odin, I had forgotten that, thanks for sharing about it.
Tom I agree completely. I have been for the Flat tax for a long time even the Fair tax is better then what we have.
Jack, a couple of years ago, oh let’s see, I think it was in 2002 I worked to promote the Fair tax. We would send our emails to Bush and other political figures to try and get them to go for the Fair Tax. I think it made a difference because they did start to listen and I have heard Bush one time mention the Fair tax since then so at least it got mentioned.
We would send out about 5 emails twice a week to various names.
In a TV add last night, Obama said that people making less than $200,000 will get a tax break. He lowered the mark, again. I think before it’s over, you’ll see the mark lowered to $50,000, just like Jesse Jackson said it should be.