Obama Jabs at McCain Tax Cuts

(CBS)
From CBS News' Maria Gavrilovic:
(KAUKAUNA, Wisc.) Barack Obama told a crowd of predominately white, middle class voters today that his tax plan will provide three times more relief than John McCain’s proposed cuts. He charged McCain with only helping the wealthiest families, saying that his tax cuts will only go to households earning more than $2.8 million a year.
“Now, I don’t want to embarrass anybody but how many people here make more than $2.8 million a year,” Obama asked the audience here, “If you’re there, I wanna know you because we’re still fundraising!”
Obama described McCain’s plan as neither conservative nor “fiscally prudent,” calling it a “regressive plan” plan that is twice as expensive as George Bush’s original policies. “I often say that John McCain is running to serve out George Bush’s third term, but that’s not being fair to George Bush,” Obama said to laughter and applause from the crowd.
He denied claims that he is a “tax and spend liberal,” saying that he will not raise taxes on households making under $250,000 per year. However, Obama added, “What is true is I’m gonna ask wealthy Americans to pay a little bit more because they have benefited more from the growth of this economy over the last decade. Of all the economic growth that’s taken place – about three-fourths of it have gone to the wealthiest Americans. It hasn’t gone to workers, it hasn’t gone to you and I don’t think that’s the way to build a strong economy. "
On Tuesday, McCain accused Obama of proposing the biggest tax increase since World War II. “Under Senator Obama's tax plan, Americans of every background would see their taxes rise - seniors, parents, small business owners, and just about everyone who has even a modest investment in the market,” McCain said at National Small Business Summit in Washington, D.C.
The Obama campaign sent an e-mail today, refuting McCain's comment. "Obama's proposal does not constitute a tax increase in the traditional sense, since taxes would be lower under his plan than they would under current law," the e-mail statement read, "We find McCain's statement to be false."
McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds replied to Obama’s claims today in a statement to CBS News: “Barack Obama needs to learn the facts. The very same report that Barack Obama cited to make that claim actually demonstrated that John McCain’s tax plan included relief for taxpayers across the board. John McCain has proposed expanding the child tax credit for families, keeping taxes low for the smallest investors and providing a gas tax holiday to every American – all those clearly include Americans from across the income spectrum.”
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- next
See all 206 Comments*** This is the reason I will vote for Barak Obama in November! Mccain doesn''t have a clue on the economy! Giving only the wealthiest of Americans is not going to help the economy, that will only make problems get worse. The wealthier American aren''t spending money that they save from tax breaks, they are hording it in banks, that is why Bushinomics of trickle down don''t work. The rich people aren''t letting the money trickle down, they are hording it away!
Or
You want to increase tax in order to increase spending?
Or
Can you cut tax and cut spending?
Or
Can you cut tax and increase spending?
Or
You want to increase tax on rich in order to increase spending on poor?
What is the fair answer here?
Posted by jy2008 at 05:52 PM : Jun 12, 2008
*** having rich people pay their fair share of taxes is the fair answer here. How bad is it when Bill Gates came out and said he pays less in taxes than his secretary that makes only 40,000 bucks per year. Why should people paying 40,000 bucks per year pay more in taxes than the head CEO of Microsoft? Wealthier Americans DO NOT help the economy when they hord the money away in savings accounts. If Wealther Americans got tax cuts based on the money they spend, that might be a different story, but just giving Bill Gates, Walmart Execs, and Wallstreet people tax cuts hurts the economy alot more than it helps!
Posted by jy2008 at 05:52 PM : Jun 12, 2008
If you make over 2.8 million dollars per year, you can afford to pay more in taxes than me, since I only make 8 bucks per hour as a manager at a video game store even though I have a bachelors degree. Why should people that make 2.8 million or more get tax cuts? People that make 2.8 million bucks per year, when they get tax cuts, they don''t spend more money on our economy, they spend more money on their trips to other parts of the world, So how does that help the economy? If you give tax breaks to people that make less than 250,000 bucks per year, we will spend the money to pay off debts, by tvs, movies, dvds, video games, property, things that will help the economy! That is why the Bush/Mccain policy of giving very rich people tax cuts is very wrong!
This also magnifies the job loss at here to those same countries.
Same tax rate for everyone starting at $X,000 (personal deduction). No more special rates for capital gains etc .. income is income.
And then his other stupid plan is to raise taxes on the upper middle class!!! The ones that are already in a higher tax bracket than you are, and ARE paying more!
If you think raising taxes on businesses is not going to come right out of YOUR pocket then you are sincerely naive!
Obama has NO clue about economics!
His concept is more outsourcing of American business, national security assets, military assets to foreign countries, & increased War Profiteering
McBush''s policy will explode an increasing deficit in an already weakened economy.
1, No on Equal Pay for women
2. No on Family & Medical Leave
3. No on Prevention of Unintended Teen Pregnancies
4. No on Abstinence Only Programs be medically accurate and scientifically based.
5. No on opposed Title X, the nation''s family planning program.
6. No on requiring insurance coverage of prescription birth control
7. No on comprehensive *** education
8. No on repealing the "global gag rule."
9. Yes on overturning Roe v. Wade
His concept is more outsourcing of American business, national security assets, military assets to foreign countries, & increased War Profiteering
McBush''''s policy will explode an increasing deficit in an already weakened economy.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by j-whitman at 06:52 PM : Jun 12, 2008
Nahhhhhh, McCain will get people who''ll take a more mature look at economics...and has a better understanding of how taxing actually depletes the economy instead of increases it.
McBush championed Bush''s econimic policies.
Obama''s tax policies give more to people than McBush''s, his don''t do squat for the majority of wage earners.
McBush championed Bush''''s econimic policies.
Obama''''s tax policies give more to people than McBush''''s, his don''''t do squat for the majority of wage earners.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by j-whitman at 07:18 PM : Jun 12, 2008
Nahhhhhhh, I suspect he''ll get with some good advisors that know how to fix things...
Obama, he''s just a dipwad that THINKS he knows everything after 143 days on the senate floor!
Good God, whatta twerp!
McBush championed Bush''''''''s econimic policies.
Obama''''''''s tax policies give more to people than McBush''''''''s, his don''''''''t do squat for the majority of wage earners.
------------------------
----------------------------------------
----------------
Posted by j-whitman at 07:18 PM : Jun 12, 2008
You forget, Obama''s already supporting a rebate stimulus plan, just like BUSH''s...I mean, see what a dipwad he is?
------------------------
--------------------------------------
--
----------------
Posted by j-whitman at 07:18 PM : Jun 12, 2008
Evidently you didn''t read the economists article that said, neither McCain nor Obama''s tax plans will do a *** thing for the people!
.. He said our troops don''t matter in his 100 year War Profiteering Occupation in the unecessary war of choice.
.. He said our troops don''''t matter in his 100 year War Profiteering Occupation in the unecessary war of choice.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by j-whitman at 07:30 PM : Jun 12, 2008
Who says, YOU? Somebody that''s naive and gullible to believe Obama''s lies?
McCain never said such a damned thing, and you know it...but you''ll lie for Obama just like your candidate is full of lies!
Bull spit!
An analysis of both campaigns proposals by the Washington-based, nonpartisan Tax Policy Center found that for people with incomes between $66,354 and $111,645, Obama''s proposals would cut their taxes by more than $1000, compared to around $300 under McCain''s plan. But for Americans with incomes above $603,402, Obama would raise their taxes dramatically, by more than $115,000 a year, while McCain would cut them by $45,000.
"The Obama tax plan would make the tax system significantly more progressive by providing large tax breaks to those at the bottom of the income scale and raising taxes significantly on upper-income earners," the group concludes. "The McCain tax plan would make the tax system more regressive.... It would do so by providing relatively little tax relief to those at the bottom of the income scale while providing huge tax cuts to households at the very top of the income distribution."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by j-whitman at 07:36 PM : Jun 12, 2008
And that''s exactly RIGHT! The troops aren''t coming home tomorrow! The thing we need to be worrying about right now is the SOLUTION, not setting some date to bring them home and making promises you haven''t a clue whether you can keep or NOT!
Worrying about their safety is much more important!
According to his own rhetoric, there is no reason not to declare ''Mission Accomplished'' & bring our troops home.
the republican power base even does this to the republican voting base who are mostly middle class to lower class.
most of the people who live in the red states that vote republican get taken to the cleaners by the people the put in office. Ironic, isn''''t it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by SHURCH4TRUTH at 07:39 PM : Jun 12, 2008
Yep, and Obama''s re-distribution is take people''s hard earned money and re-distribute it to people who don''t want to get off their butts and EARN it!
They are betting their lifes, homes, country & national security that the GOP won''t give us the wost possible canidate as they''ve done for 2 elections. --- Don''t figure
They are betting their lifes, homes, country & national security that the GOP won''''t give us the wost possible canidate as they''''ve done for 2 elections. --- Don''''t figure
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by j-whitman at 07:42 PM : Jun 12, 2008
The democrats have gone through two prior elections and couldn''t present a candidate that could get the confidence of the people enough to get the White House!
AND THEY''RE DOING IT AGAIN! AS A MATTER OF FACT THEY FORCED IT!
Whatta bunch of dipwads! That''s why I''ve changed to Indpendent! I don''t owe anymore votes to the democratic goofball losers!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by j-whitman at 07:44 PM : Jun 12, 2008
And you''re nothing but an Obama LIAR! You''ve supported and ignored every damned one of HIS LIES!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by j-whitman at 07:47 PM : Jun 12, 2008
I haven''t abandoned a damned thing! Hillary Clinton still has my upmost support! As well as women''s rights!
I haven''t lost a *** one of my rights in the last 8 years, even under Bush/Cheney!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by j-whitman at 07:48 PM : Jun 12, 2008
What bull spit! Obama can''t even repeat the same stance twice in one day! He''ll lie to whoever he''s talking to and tell them what he thinks they want to hear, whether it''s the truth or NOT!
Posted by RowdyWicca at 07:42 PM : Jun 12, 2008
Sure Rowdy, as if everyone and anyone who is out of work right now in this cr@ppy economy is there because they don''t want to work. The classic Republican myth of ''lazy Americans''. I think that''s an insult to the citizens of this country. The vast majority of unemployed people WANT jobs. Unfortunately, companies are biting the bullet and cutting budgets and jobs are few and far between.
To this day, Brookings is commonly, and inaccurately, dubbed "liberal" (e.g., Baltimore Sun, 8/9/98; Cincinnati Enquirer, 7/30/98; Dallas Morning News, 7/1/98; AP, 5/29/98). CBS News correspondent Bernard Goldberg even publicly chastised one of his colleagues for not tagging Brookings as "liberal" in his reporting (Wall Street Journal op-ed, 2/13/96). It''s called "centrist" almost as often, but never "conservative," though that label would be more accurate than "liberal."
In fact, much of Brookings'' top brass has come from Republican administrations. Its current president, Michael Armacost, was an undersecretary of state for the Reagan administration and ambassador to Japan under Bush. Brookings'' president from 1977 to 1995, Bruce MacLaury, spent most of his career in the Federal Reserve, with a stint in the Nixon Treasury Department.
Posted by RowdyWicca at 07:49 PM : Jun 12, 2008
You ought to look in the mirror when you say that, Rowdy. You wouldn''t accept a ''fact'' if JC himself came down from heaven and slapped you in the face with it. There''s a HUGE difference between wisdom and cynicism, lady.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by ofbyfor1 at 07:53 PM : Jun 12, 2008
Then tell some of them come down here...I''ve got three shifts I can''t even fill!
I''m about as as lazy as it gets, and I found a job...when there were none to be had!
Posted by j-whitman at 07:54 PM : Jun 12, 2008
ANYthing even vaguely to the left of the neocons is now considered by their ''base'' to be ''liberal''. The issue isn''t so much that liberals are so far to the left (granted, with some exceptions), it''s that the far right has moved so spectacularly to the uber-right.
The Exxon tax breaks he mentions, however, don''t appear to have resulted from some specific exception for the company, but are included in preexisting across-the-board corporate tax cuts. When we asked about Obama''s claim, McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds hit back with this: "In 2005, Barack Obama was the only candidate in this race to vote for Vice President Cheney''s energy bill, which provided billions of dollars of direct subsidies for big companies like Exxon Mobil. So for him to take issue with John McCain''s position of keeping taxes low makes no sense and ignores his record."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by j-whitman at 07:59 PM : Jun 12, 2008
I did...I relocated to the megaplex from a city of 2,000!
What''s your point?
I''''m about as as lazy as it gets, and I found a job...when there were none to be had!
Posted by RowdyWicca at 07:56 PM : Jun 12, 2008
You''re assuming they have the money to move. It can be extremely expensive. And for shift work that pays how much per hour?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by ofbyfor1 at 08:02 PM : Jun 12, 2008
I had the money to move myself, my car, and my clothes, 271 miles to find work!
What''s your point?
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- next
See all 206 Comments