Info on Dean's tax plan - O'reilly Lies again this afternoon....!!

[cthrumatrix]

I heard O'rielly on the way home with some reporter basically saying Dean's tax plan was a hug hit on the middle class.I suspect they will distort and decieve as ususal.

Where can I find a good review so I can share with other people.

thank you in advance

==================================================================

On edit: I found a few links which reviewed and allowed you so show the difference.

It's tough to compare with shrub's sunset tax laws ... the links below to simplify a bit.

The bottom line is don't be afraid to review and share...truth is truth.

[SahaleArm]

1. It's an argument that's going on right here.

It's tough to argue repealing all tax cuts versus some of the tax cuts; Dean is sticking to the plan. Though I'm surprise he hasn't proposed something more progressive than just repealing the tax cuts. Democrats have a great chance to substantially lower the middle-lower class tax burden while still providing social services, balancing the budget, and spurring economic growth.

[sandnsea]

12. That's the Clinton way

He would never support raising working people's taxes if there was any way around it. We can get money going in the right direction to create jobs without doing it, so we just shouldn't.

[adamrsilva]

13. The only way to acutally fix the mess is to repeal all the tax cuts

It can't be done any otherway. Dean knows this and he has the balls to say it.

[bearfartinthewoods]

15. if he restores the marriage penalty the way it was before bush eliminated

it, our taxes will go up. i think last year it was 8,300 deduction for the two of us but without the marriage penalty it will be 9,500 this year. so our taxes will increase by about 8% i think.

if he puts it back before ALL the bush tax cuts, (the marriage penalty was reduced last year) it means another 5% increase so dean's plan might increase our tax by 13%.

warning...taxes are not my forte.

[mouse7]

16. Leave the "marriage penalty" neo-con vocab out of here

I don't want to see "marriage penalty", "death tax", "clear skies", "healthy forests", "compassionate conservative" neo-con vocabulary-word spin-language refered to in anything but the negative light they should be in.

[w4rma]

2. Dean's plan = Clinton's plan

Because when you get rid of Shrub's tax cuts primarily for the extremely wealthy, Clinton's plan is what you end up with.

Then with the money saved, those resources will go back to the middle and lower classes in the form of an $87 billion health care program.

It is my understanding that that is the current plan.

[cthrumatrix]

3. I saw a comment which said "tax rates back to the prosperous Clinton era"

however...all this rhetoric about tax increases...he sheeple don't understand.

So I'm looking for some answers and have been looking at his and other sites.

[wunnerfulrobin]

4. the rich paying more now??

I read some time ago in an article from Milton Friedman (sp?) that after the tax cuts go into effect the top 1% will actually be paying a higher share of the total income tax burden than they do now. It was explained using last yr (02) figures, but its been some time so excuse me for forgetting the whole thing. I'd still like to know how that would be.

[papau]

11. If total tax is 900FIT plus 600 Payroll, and FIT is decreased to 600, then

the rich that paid 80% of the 900, or 720, and now pay 100% of the 600, have received a 120 cut in tax paid! (the real numbers are that 85% of the tax cut went to the 20% paying 80% - much worse than my illustration)

Meanwhile the deficit - in my illustration - has gone up by the 300 and it will be there for your kids to pay as Bush provided "birth tax increase" - the increase in the national debt.

[wunnerfulrobin]

14. thats not entirely correct.........

..........because the payroll tax is not income tax. I know money coming out is money coming out, but they are different. Theres medicare tax too, etc. Social security is separate from income tax. so then they ARE paying a bigger share of the income tax?

[mouse7]

17. Rubbish.

Almost anything Milton Friedman says is rubbish.

[cthrumatrix]

5. Here's a link from Friday's WSJ Op Ed. piece on his tax plan....

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110004500

snip

When it comes to taxes, Mr. Dean thinks really big. In raw numbers, the Dean tax proposal would raise taxes on 109 million Americans by roughly $1.5 trillion over the next 10 years. This comes out to a Dean tax of about $15,440 for every family of four in the U.S. over the next decade. The Dean tax rule of thumb is that if you are in the middle class, he would roughly double your federal income tax payments.
Dean's Greedy Hand
Current Dean tax
Capital gains tax 15% 20%
Dividend tax 15% 39.6%
Income tax rate (highest) 35% 39.6%
Income tax rate (middle) 25% 28%
Income tax rate (lowest) 10% 15%
Per child credit 10% 15%
Marriage penalty Eliminated Reinstated
Death tax in 2010 0 55%
Source: Club for Growth

Let's look at real-life examples of what the Dean tax might mean for you. Under current law, a married couple with one child and a $40,000-a-year income pays income taxes of $1,503. Under the Dean tax, that family would pay $2,935--or just about double. For a family with two kids and an income of $80,000 a year, the extra Dean tax costs $1,780 a year. What Mr. Dean has never had to answer to in the Democratic primary, perhaps because the other candidates are too embarrassed to ask, is how a presidential contender whose campaign is dedicated to relieving the economic squeeze on working class families, believes that socking these folks with a $1,400- to $1,800-a-year tax hike will make their financial situation less stressful.

Mr. Dean responds to these charges by countering that his plan will help restore prosperity and produce higher incomes and more jobs. But how exactly? His tax plan would be the equivalent of hitting small businessmen, who create about 70% of the jobs, over the head with a two-by-four. The highest tax rate under the Dean plan rises from 35% to 39.6%. Add on top of this perhaps the most insidious feature of the Dean tax. For the first time ever, he would eliminate the cap on payroll taxes. Henceforth, all income of more than $87,000 a year would pay a 15% payroll tax. This means the Dean tax plan raises the small-business tax rate from 38% to 55%. If you are a self-employed worker with an income of $125,000 a year, which in high-cost-of-living states like California and New York is hardly rich, Howard Dean wants to raise your taxes more than $8,000. That will create jobs?

snip

statistics can be used by all involved....for thier own agenda. My gut says that the "high incomes" will get a large tax increase. Tough to compare with shrubs when the current tax projections send our budget off the cliff..something has to give.

[cthrumatrix]

6. here's a site that calc. the tax plan change (calc your own tax)

http://www.clubforgrowth.org/taxsavings2004.php

if you make 35,000 (single, no child., no big div, no itemiz.) = $357 more (10% more)

if you make 100,000 (same as above ) = $2200 more (10% more)

if you are married and 200,000 (some div) = $6855 more /15% more


this doubling is a scare tactic

[papau]

8. OPINION JOURNAL is WSJ bull sh*t , as is club for growth

there is not one number in the above that is correct - or even close.

when you press the point they come back with the if and buts that are needed to make their numbers correct. the most obvious is that the income shown is adjusted tax income - not the income you actually make.

[cthrumatrix]

10. I agree....but we need to understand and be able to diffuse the BS...

if you look and compare...the main difference is the child credit (which goes away in shrub plan) and the marriage penalty.

The hidden cost's from shrub plan are the increase in real estate tax and other local taxes (govt held back some funding).

[mouse7]

18. Get that Club4growth rubbish outta here, too.

More Neo-con crap.

[papau]

9. Replace the 2010 calc with a 2011 calc - and all the lies are exposed

All the tax cuts are sunset in 2010 - so unless passed as a separate law - not in a budget bill - Deans plan is in effect Bush's plan for 2011 - only a bit earlier.

I kind of like that!

:-)

:toast:

[papau]

7. Dean reflects reality of aid to state cuts to fund tax cut - so

reversing the tax cut means reversing those aid to states cuts which means those state tax increases go away.

Net - net you are better off with Dean

However the GOP always wants to look at whatever fact sells their theft of your dollars - and which will keep you from seeing the total picture.

So obviously if 60% of us got 300 - that 300 would represent a middle - class increase in our federal income tax.

I am more worried about the money I have after ALL tax and necessities.

However, most of the US will be hard to educate on this, so I hope Dean buys into keeping the 10% bracket, the child credit increase, and the marriage penalty pretend fix - as a transition to Clarks more progressive rate basis.

Folks have a hard time doing more than one number at a time!

:-)