PDA

View Full Version : "Spread the Wealth"



Rick-Mi
10-17-2008, 09:28 AM
.

Looks like it took a plumber to bring out the REAL agenda.


.

Rick-Mi
10-17-2008, 09:46 AM
Apparently "spreading the wealth" is more easily understood by the "clingers" than socialism.


.

TomF
10-17-2008, 09:51 AM
http://www.woodenboat.com/forum/showthread.php?t=86960

The already rather long discussion about "Spread the Wealth" prolly has something to do with the lack of traction you're seeing too.

Rick-Mi
10-17-2008, 09:53 AM
Looks like your troll isn't working any better than the 'joe the plumber' attempt to be a ringer at the Obama rally.... both seemed to have failed or backfired.:p


My little jab may fall flat here Norman, but don't be so sure Plumber Joe is going away on the political front. He might shape up to be the Willie Horton of 2008.


.

TimH
10-17-2008, 09:56 AM
I spent about 1/2 of my first 25 years in Michigan. I love the people there.

The longer I live in the real world though I find I cannot understand them one bit.

TimH
10-17-2008, 09:57 AM
McCain - the Midas touch in reverse.

Everything he touches turns to ****. :)

Rick-Mi
10-17-2008, 10:01 AM
Boy, you really DO live in an alternate reality, don't you?

You do know that the guy was totally 'busted', don't you? No plumbers' license, no actual agreement to buy the business, a tax delinquent, and a hard core right winger who isn't telling the truth about who he supprts? His lame attempt to buttonhole Obama on the rope line has made him the laughing stock of the entire country!!! :p

It's you who doesn't understand the issue once again Norman. Like the image surrounding the empty suit of Barack, Plumber Joe is a REPRESENTATION of working people in America who do not like the idea of big government "spreading the wealth around." It doesn't matter that democrat operatives dug up dirt on the guy. Joe relates to a lot of Reagan democratrs and is getting more traction with swing state voters than some people think.....

Rick-Mi
10-17-2008, 10:03 AM
I spent about 1/2 of my first 25 years in Michigan. I love the people there.

The longer I live in the real world though I find I cannot understand them one bit.

You left Michigan at the right time. Liberal politicians have turned this state into an economic disaster.


.

Keith Wilson
10-17-2008, 10:07 AM
And Obama answered him honestly - If you have over $250K taxable income, I want to raise your taxes. "Joe the Plumber" doesn't make anywhere near that, and his question was vague about taxable vs. gross income for a business. This has been clear for months to anyone paying even a little attention. Obama has not been at all shy about it; I posted this chart from the Washington Post quite while ago. Care to take a shot at explaining why those making over $2,870,000 per year should get an average tax cut of $270,000 each?

http://media3.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2008/06/12/GR2008061200193.gif

Tylerdurden
10-17-2008, 10:09 AM
Hate to blow it for you Rick as you have some good ideas. The plumbers a fraud.

Joe the Plumber? Nope. Joe the Tax Dodger. Joe the Relative of Charles Keating. Hilarious.




http://theobfuscationreport.blogspot...ax-dodger.html (http://theobfuscationreport.blogspot.com/2008/10/joe-plumber-nope-joe-tax-dodger.html) __________________

Tylerdurden
10-17-2008, 10:11 AM
Hate to blow it for you Rick as you have some good ideas. The plumbers a fraud.

Joe the Plumber? Nope. Joe the Tax Dodger. Joe the Relative of Charles Keating. Hilarious.




http://theobfuscationreport.blogspot...ax-dodger.html (http://theobfuscationreport.blogspot.com/2008/10/joe-plumber-nope-joe-tax-dodger.html) __________________

I forgot to add Obama is the same as McCain in the whole scheme of things. The Libs haven't figured it out yet, thats all.;)

Rick-Mi
10-17-2008, 10:11 AM
OK, Rick... have it your way. McCain thought he'd get 'traction' with the Ayers smear... a quick look at the polls pretty much tosses THAT bright idea out.

But, go ahead, keep hoping and praying for the famous 'silent majority' to rise up in 3 weeks and sweep McCain into the White House. Self deception may not work, but I imagine it at least feels good.


Hey, it's been you guys dancing on John McCain's political grave spouting poll numbers with the greatest of glee. Those of us who support McCain/Palin have pretty much been relegated to reminding you it's not time for Michele to pick out the drapes just yet.

I agree McCain mishandled the Ayers issue along with all the other highly suspect associations of Barack Obama. His campaign has been run quite poorly IMO.

However, anyone who has ever had their favorite horse fade in the stretch knows that sickening feeling of the finish line so close, but so far away.....

.

Rick-Mi
10-17-2008, 10:13 AM
Hate to blow it for you Rick as you have some good ideas. The plumbers a fraud.




That is not news to me Mark. Once again, it's the IMAGE of Plumber Joe and what he represents that has legs.


.

Andrew Craig-Bennett
10-17-2008, 10:16 AM
That is not news to me Mark. Once again, it's the IMAGE of Plumber Joe and what he represents that has legs. .

So... you are not concerned that the IMAGE turns out to be a false one?

That is a very interesting position to take.

Seems like "the end justifies the means", for you.

Is that right?

TomF
10-17-2008, 10:19 AM
Yeah, it is the image, and what it represents, that's got legs.

But the enduring image isn't of an honest small business guy, who's afraid he'd be whacked by an unjust tax increase ... and is asking a fair question in hope of a fair answer.

You wish!

No, the enduring image is of a guy who's already made up his mind, who misrepresents his business, income, and his honesty ... who hoped to catch the guy he's voting against in a "gotcha" in front of a camera. A disingenuous party hack.

I'd bet that Joe the Plumber wishes now he'd kept his mouth shut, and just voted the way he'd already intended ...

Gonzalo
10-17-2008, 10:24 AM
That is not news to me Mark. Once again, it's the IMAGE of Plumber Joe and what he represents that has legs.
Joe the Plumber? Nope. Joe the Tax Dodger.... In the eyes of some on the right, a tax dodger is a hero.

Keith Wilson
10-17-2008, 10:30 AM
The trouble with "images" is that they can be ambushed by reality, or even by other images. The "image" of Sarah Palin as courageous Ms. Everywoman speaking truth to corrupt and venal politicians was ambushed by her own incompetence, and replaced by the "image" of a small-town mayor and beauty pageant winner hopelessly out of her depth. The image of honest hard-working Joe the Plumber, the American everyman, was ambushed by the reality of Joe the Partisan, making up his personal circumstances in an attempt to trip up Obama - and he didn't even succeed in that. Obama answered him honestly and clearly, although obviously not everyone agrees with the answer.

Tylerdurden
10-17-2008, 10:33 AM
The trouble with "images" is that they can be ambushed by reality, or even by other images. The "image" of Sarah Palin as courageous Ms. Everywoman speaking truth to corrupt and venal politicians was ambushed by her own incompetence, and replaced by the "image" of a small-town mayor and beauty pageant winner hopelessly out of her depth. The image of honest hard-working Joe the Plumber, the American everyman, was ambushed by the reality of Joe the Partisan, making up his personal circumstances in an attempt to trip up Obama - and he didn't even succeed in that. Obama answered him honestly and clearly, although obviously not everyone agrees with the answer.

Yeah you got it. Now can you teach me to steal time and money from my employer too.

Chris Coose
10-17-2008, 10:46 AM
Plumber Joe is a REPRESENTATION of working people in America

I wouldn't have Plumber Joe within 10 miles of my plumbing work or my check book.

He is a representation of fat func*ing low life lieing bastards

Tylerdurden
10-17-2008, 10:48 AM
I wouldn't have Plumber Joe within 10 miles of my plumbing work or my check book.

He is a representation of fat func*ing low life lieing bastards

I would do your plumbing but I hate residential and you hate constitutionalists :rolleyes:

Rick-Mi
10-17-2008, 11:40 AM
So... you are not concerned that the IMAGE turns out to be a false one?

That is a very interesting position to take.

Seems like "the end justifies the means", for you.

Is that right?


Sorry Andrew, you are entirely off base with this line of questioning which has no relevence to the issue at hand. The "imgae" I mentioned has to do with the portrayal of the typical working guy with a dream to create some wealth. Whether or not he has a plumbers license or a small tax lien on his house doesn't make any difference. The problem arises from Barack Obama's ANSWER TO THE QUESTION, not the person asking it.

Unlike aything McCain or the soft ball media asks him, this question revealed something most Americans find appauling which is government "spreading the wealth around." I realize many of you leftists in the bilge don't have a problem with that, but we are talking about the American electorate here. They didn't like what they heard and that is why the Obama camp dug up the dirt and even Barack himself got personally involved in a smear job on Joe Blow Citizen to quell the fire....

.

Rick-Mi
10-17-2008, 11:48 AM
In the eyes of some on the right, a tax dodger is a hero.


The fact there is a lien on his house reveals that Joe the Plumber is not a tax dodger, but instead is having a difficult time paying due to economic circumstances. On the other hand, there is a high level democrat named Charlie Rangle from New York who cannot make that claim who has indeed been a tax dodger.


.

TimH
10-17-2008, 11:52 AM
so how much does Joe the plumber make?
We could simply look at the chart above and determine if he will be better off with McCains tax plan or Obamas.

PatCox
10-17-2008, 11:57 AM
Oh, McCain has already given up on winning the election, now he is pre-emptively declaring the election of Obama fraudulent with this Acorn lie, which was all part of Rove's plan back when he ordered the US attorneys fired for failing to come up with any evidence Acorn ever did anything wrong.

Rick-Mi
10-17-2008, 11:58 AM
The image of honest hard-working Joe the Plumber, the American everyman, was ambushed by the reality of Joe the Partisan, making up his personal circumstances in an attempt to trip up Obama - and he didn't even succeed in that. Obama answered him honestly and clearly, although obviously not everyone agrees with the answer.


Yes, Obama did answer the question honestly and that is what is giving him so much trouble! Unlike you, mainstream America is not in favor of big brother government "spreading the wealth around."

The "partisan" asking the question isn't the problem, it was the ANSWER given by the candidate for president! For instance, if a NOW crowd woman put on a Palin Tee shirt and asked McCain what he thinks should happen to doctors who perform abortions if he were to be come president, and John answered they should get life in prison, it wouldn't be the person who asked the question who caused the political problem. :rolleyes:

.

Rick-Mi
10-17-2008, 12:03 PM
Oh, McCain has already given up on winning the election, now he is pre-emptively declaring the election of Obama fraudulent with this Acorn lie, which was all part of Rove's plan back when he ordered the US attorneys fired for failing to come up with any evidence Acorn ever did anything wrong.

McCain has given up on winning the election? Could have fooled me.

Also Pat, are you naive enough to think Acorn hasn't been involved in any wrong doing?


.

TimH
10-17-2008, 12:06 PM
McCain needs to just go back to Az. and kick it with all the old people.
Some people just dont know when to give up.

He wont quit until he really makes an ass of himself.

Rick-Mi
10-17-2008, 12:21 PM
McCain needs to just go back to Az. and kick it with all the old people.
Some people just dont know when to give up.

He wont quit until he really makes an ass of himself.


You're right Tim, McCain doesn't stand a chance. Time to hang it up and concede right now with some dignity. But, just for the sake of tradition, let's carry on to November 4th and count the votes before we send Barack to the white house.


.

Cuyahoga Chuck
10-17-2008, 12:26 PM
My little jab may fall flat here Norman, but don't be so sure Plumber Joe is going away on the political front. He might shape up to be the Willie Horton of 2008.


.

You can try burning joss sticks to the memory of "The Gipper"
but neither that nor your flights of Neocon fancy will make Plumber Joe worth 90 electoral votes.
Obama is a first class candidate and there ain't enough one-issue voters in existence to beat him.
Keep your eyeballs on the Senate. Sixty Democratic seats is a possibility now that North Carolinians have discovered that Libby Dole and her hubby spend 99.99% of their time in that Gomorrah known as D.C.

TomF
10-17-2008, 12:31 PM
He's caught, Tim. McCain poll advisors will be saying the same thing as the talking heads on CNN this morning. To get enough electoral college votes, McCain's now got to win every undecided state, and at least one major state now leaning towards Obama.

But quitting isn't a real option, whatever the polls say. It isn't for any candidate, once they've actually been endorsed by their party's nominating convention.

I'm sure John McCain wishes heartily that today was about November 7 or 8, because it will be hell getting from here to there, acting confident and knowing the opposite.

Cuyahoga Chuck
10-17-2008, 06:46 PM
McCain has given up on winning the election? Could have fooled me.

Also Pat, are you naive enough to think Acorn hasn't been involved in any wrong doing?


.

Republicans in Ohio sued the Attorney General to cull the new registrations but the Supreme Court of the United States said she didn't have to do it.
It seems you gotta' have evidence beyond "Neocon flights of fancy". I suspect that if there were more justices devoted to "original intent" you would see the same result.


"Honi soit qui mal i pense". Or words to that effect.

Pugwash
10-17-2008, 07:35 PM
I'm just amazed that nobody from either Party has noticed we're talking about plumbers as an example of hard working Joes.

Say "plumber" to the majority of people and they'll roll their eyes, cross themselves and pray they don't need one. 'Cos they know they're about to be F%&ked.

Mechanics, used car salesmen and tax men swim in the same pool of the human psyche.

mdh
10-17-2008, 11:10 PM
I'm just amazed that nobody from either Party has noticed we're talking about plumbers as an example of hard working Joes.

Say "plumber" to the majority of people and they'll roll their eyes, cross themselves and pray they don't need one. 'Cos they know they're about to be F%&ked.

Mechanics, used car salesmen and tax men swim in the same pool of the human psyche.

So you really don't like "Spreading the Wealth". Even if a guy works for it.

Pugwash
10-17-2008, 11:21 PM
I think the slogan "spread the wealth" is pants linguistically as well as politically.

If you are a plumber, you probably think highly of plumbers.

Guess what, nobody else does.

mdh
10-17-2008, 11:44 PM
I think the slogan "spread the wealth" is pants linguistically as well as politically.

If you are a plumber, you probably think highly of plumbers.

Guess what, nobody else does.

I've done some plumbing, most of it high pressure hydraulic, job title was mechanic. It's a skill, and if you need someone else to do it, you should be just as willing to pay for it as you would for a doctor or lawyer. I think highly of people who work for their money, not depending on the government to share the wealth. But I'm not a socialist, or fool enough to think Reid, Pelosi, and Obama are going to give me a tax cut.

David G
10-17-2008, 11:45 PM
Yes, Obama did answer the question honestly and that is what is giving him so much trouble! Unlike you, mainstream America is not in favor of big brother government "spreading the wealth around."

The "partisan" asking the question isn't the problem, it was the ANSWER given by the candidate for president! For instance, if a NOW crowd woman put on a Palin Tee shirt and asked McCain what he thinks should happen to doctors who perform abortions if he were to be come president, and John answered they should get life in prison, it wouldn't be the person who asked the question who caused the political problem. :rolleyes:

.

Rick,

I've been reading through this thread, and trying to make sense of what you've been saying. I was unsuccessful till this post. I think I see now what you're getting at. While I agree with those who point out that the net result of The Plumber As Everyman did not work out well for Joe, or for the McCain campaign (at least to me, he came off as sneaky at best and as a partisan, sleazeball, hack at worst), you seem to be conceding that, and saying that it doesn't matter. What matters is that Obama gave a fair and balanced accounting of his tax proposal. Is that right? Further, having done so, he revealed or spotlighted a policy that was disagreeable to many?

If I've understood you, I wonder what evidence you are seeing that there was a negative reaction to the Obama tax plan among mainstream voters. Are there polls that I'm not seeing, or are you getting your read from somewhere else?


"I have come to the conclusion that politics is too serious a matter to be left to the politicians" -- Charles De Gaulle

Pugwash
10-18-2008, 12:13 AM
It's a skill, and if you need someone else to do it, you should be just as willing to pay for it as you would for a doctor or lawyer.

Once apon a time, in a land far far away.......

Plumbing was a skill, you had to know about copper and lead and soldering and arcane STUFF. (that's why it's called plumbing).

Now, it's plastic, shwoop and fit. I could call myself a plumber and charge $60 an hour, who would know the difference. Until it went wrong....

My point is that both of these politicians, choose to use a profession that is probably one of the most despised, as an example of the "average".

The "average" mechanic?

Most people dread those "professions", because they know they're going to get f#cked.

Do I have respect for someone that asked me if I had the tool they needed, and then told me they were going to charge me for them to go get it ?

Erm, NO.

:rolleyes:

mdh
10-18-2008, 12:56 AM
Then fix it yourself, but when you screw it up and call me back, I'm gonna charge double.

pcford
10-18-2008, 01:28 AM
That is not news to me Mark. Once again, it's the IMAGE of Plumber Joe and what he represents that has legs.


.

What? Tax cheat? Foot soldier for McCain? Unlicensed tradesman? Another right wing fool?

mdh
10-18-2008, 02:09 AM
So much for the party of "the workin' man".

Pugwash
10-18-2008, 07:44 AM
Then fix it yourself, but when you screw it up and call me back, I'm gonna charge double.

Sure sound like a plumber.

I rest my case, your honour.

:)

George Roberts
10-18-2008, 01:52 PM
"What matters is that Obama gave a fair and balanced accounting of his tax proposal. Is that right? Further, having done so, he revealed or spotlighted a policy that was disagreeable to many?"

Mr. Obama used the word revenue in the context of revenue in excess of $250K will be subject to increased taxes

According to my wife, an income tax expert, the word revenue is meaningless. There are at least 3 different terms Mr. Obama could have used depending on his intent. As a US Senator he should know which of the correct words to use. As a US Senator he should not have made up a word that has no meaning relative to his proposal.

I suspect Mr. Obama meant taxable income, but that is only a guess.

David G
10-18-2008, 03:09 PM
"What matters is that Obama gave a fair and balanced accounting of his tax proposal. Is that right? Further, having done so, he revealed or spotlighted a policy that was disagreeable to many?"

Mr. Obama used the word revenue in the context of revenue in excess of $250K will be subject to increased taxes

According to my wife, an income tax expert, the word revenue is meaningless. There are at least 3 different terms Mr. Obama could have used depending on his intent. As a US Senator he should know which of the correct words to use. As a US Senator he should not have made up a word that has no meaning relative to his proposal.

I suspect Mr. Obama meant taxable income, but that is only a guess.

Mr. Roberts,

As a small businessman, I agree that his term was imprecise. Also that he was likely meaning Taxable Income.

Mostly though I was wanting to know two things:

Did I grasp the thrust of what Rick was saying?

Are there signs of a negative response to Obama's tax proposal? I haven't seen it, and thought there might be something I've missed - which is quite possible.


"Revolution is not a one time event" -- Audre Lord

ChrisF
10-18-2008, 03:13 PM
Let our government's bureau of taxation be known henceforth as the Internal Meaningless Service. All in favor?

Memphis Mike
10-18-2008, 03:16 PM
"Are there signs of a negative response to Obama's tax proposal? I haven't seen it, but that's quite possible - and thought there might be something I've missed."

There will always be greedy tight wads in the world. All the man is asking for is 3% to help shore up the middle and lower income brackets. It's not going to hurt small business at all.

But then if some of you would come across with annual cost of living pay increases it wouldn't be needed........but there haven't been any of those in the last eight years. Not for me, anyhow.

Dave Davis
10-18-2008, 03:40 PM
This may be posted elsewhere but I doubt Rick-Mi et al have read the whole transcript of the conversation. Perhaps if they put the soundbite into context?

From: http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/10/spread-the-weal.html

"Outside Toledo, Ohio, on Sunday, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., was approached by plumber Joe Wurzelbacher, a big, bald man with a goatee who asked Obama if he believes in the American dream.

"I'm getting ready to buy a company that makes 250 to 280 thousand dollars a year," Wurzelbacher said. "Your new tax plan is going to tax me more, isn't it?"

Obama said, "First off, you would get a 50% tax credit so you'd get a tax cut for your healthcare costs….. if your revenue is above 250 – then from 250 down, your taxes are going to stay the same. It is true that from 250 up – from 250 – 300 or so, so for that additional amount, you’d go from 36 to 39%, which is what it was under Bill Clinton. And the reason why we’re doing that is because 95% of small businesses make less than 250. So what I want to do is give them a tax cut. I want to give all these folks who are bus drivers, teachers, auto workers who make less, I want to give them a tax cut. And so what we’re doing is, we are saying that folks who make more than 250 that that marginal amount above 250 – they’re gonna be taxed at a 39 instead of a 36% rate.”

Responded Wurzelbacher, "the reason I ask you about the American dream, I mean I've worked hard. I'm a plumber. I work 10-12 hours a day and I'm buying this company and I'm going to continue working that way. I'm getting taxed more and more while fulfilling the American dream."

"Well," said Obama, "here's a way of thinking about it. How long have been a plumber?"

Wurzelbacher said 15 years.

Obama says, “Over the last 15 years, when you weren’t making 250, you would have been given a tax cut from me, so you’d actually have more money, which means you would have saved more, which means you would have gotten to the point where you could build your small business quicker than under the current tax code. So there are two ways of looking at it – I mean one way of looking at it is, now that you’ve become more successful through hard work – you don’t want to be taxed as much.”

“Exactly," Wurzelbacher said.

Obama continued, “But another way of looking at it is 95% of folks who are making less than 250, they may be working hard too, but they’re being taxed at a higher rate than they would be under mine. So what I’m doing is, put yourself back 10 years ago when you were only making whatever, 60 or 70. Under my tax plan you would be keeping more of your paycheck, you’d be paying lower taxes, which means you would have saved…Now look, nobody likes high taxes."

"No," said Wurzelbacher.

"Of course not," said Obama. "But what’s happened is that we end up – we’ve cut taxes a lot for folks like me who make a lot more than 250. We haven’t given a break to folks who make less, and as a consequence, the average wage and income for ordinary folks, the vast majority of Americans, has actually gone down over the last eight years. So all I want to do is – I’ve got a tax cut. The only thing that changes, is I’m gonna cut taxes a little bit more for the folks who are most in need and for the 5% of the folks who are doing very well - even though they’ve been working hard and I appreciate that – I just want to make sure they’re paying a little bit more in order to pay for those other tax cuts. Now, I respect the disagreement. I just want you to be clear – it’s not that I want to punish your success – I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you – that they’ve got a chance at success too.”

Wurzelbacher said it seemed as though Obama might support a flat tax.

Obama says, “you know, I would be open to it except here’s the problem with a flat tax is that if you actually put a flat tax together, in order for it to work and replace all the revenue that we’ve got, you’d probably end up having to make it like about a 40% sales tax. I mean that’s the value added, making it up. Now some people say 23 or 25, but in truth when you add up all the revenue that would need to be raised, you’d have to slap on a whole bunch of sales taxes on. And I do believe for folks like me who have worked hard, but frankly also been lucky, I don’t mind paying just a little bit more than the waitress that I just met over there who’s things are slow and she can barely make the rent."

Obama said, "My attitude is that if the economy’s good for folks from the bottom up, it’s gonna be good for everybody. If you’ve got a plumbing business, you’re gonna be better off if you’re gonna be better off if you’ve got a whole bunch of customers who can afford to hire you, and right now everybody’s so pinched that business is bad for everybody and I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody."

That's the key moment McCain is jumping out…"when you spread the wealth around it's good for everybody."

"But listen," Obama said, shaking Wurzelbacher's hand, "I respect what you do and I respect your question, and even if I don’t get your vote, I’m still gonna be working hard on your behalf, because small businesses are what creates jobs in this country and I want to encourage it.”

"Guys I gotta get out of here and go prepare for the debate," Obama said, "but that was pretty good practice right there."

Memphis Mike
10-18-2008, 03:45 PM
Old Joe only made 40,000 last year and I'm sick of hearing about him.

George Roberts
10-18-2008, 06:13 PM
"Are there signs of a negative response to Obama's tax proposal?"

I believe that one negative is that Mr. Obama is using his proposal to buy votes. 95% of the people will benefit at the expanse of 5% of the people. (negative)

On the other hand I believe that tax rates should be raised on the rich - they have a large debt to repay. (positive)

But the rates need to be raised much more than Mr. Obama is willing to raise them. (negative)

Tax proposals are just that - they do not reflect the tax changes that come from them. (negative)

Considering Mr Obama's health plan his tax proposal is going to need to change much more than anyone could imagine. (negative)

Pugwash
10-18-2008, 07:00 PM
http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=188619&title=joe-the-plumbers-house

:)

Keith Wilson
10-20-2008, 10:11 AM
Well, I hadn't seen the whole thing, but IMHO Obama gave an excellent answer to Joes's question, explaind pretty clearly in limited time why more progressive taxation is a good idea. It bears repeating.
"Outside Toledo, Ohio, on Sunday, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., was approached by plumber Joe Wurzelbacher, a big, bald man with a goatee who asked Obama if he believes in the American dream.

"I'm getting ready to buy a company that makes 250 to 280 thousand dollars a year," Wurzelbacher said. "Your new tax plan is going to tax me more, isn't it?"

Obama said, "First off, you would get a 50% tax credit so you'd get a tax cut for your healthcare costs….. if your revenue is above 250 – then from 250 down, your taxes are going to stay the same. It is true that from 250 up – from 250 – 300 or so, so for that additional amount, you’d go from 36 to 39%, which is what it was under Bill Clinton. And the reason why we’re doing that is because 95% of small businesses make less than 250. So what I want to do is give them a tax cut. I want to give all these folks who are bus drivers, teachers, auto workers who make less, I want to give them a tax cut. And so what we’re doing is, we are saying that folks who make more than 250 that that marginal amount above 250 – they’re gonna be taxed at a 39 instead of a 36% rate.”

Responded Wurzelbacher, "the reason I ask you about the American dream, I mean I've worked hard. I'm a plumber. I work 10-12 hours a day and I'm buying this company and I'm going to continue working that way. I'm getting taxed more and more while fulfilling the American dream."

"Well," said Obama, "here's a way of thinking about it. How long have been a plumber?"

Wurzelbacher said 15 years.

Obama says, “Over the last 15 years, when you weren’t making 250, you would have been given a tax cut from me, so you’d actually have more money, which means you would have saved more, which means you would have gotten to the point where you could build your small business quicker than under the current tax code. So there are two ways of looking at it – I mean one way of looking at it is, now that you’ve become more successful through hard work – you don’t want to be taxed as much.”

“Exactly," Wurzelbacher said.

Obama continued, “But another way of looking at it is 95% of folks who are making less than 250, they may be working hard too, but they’re being taxed at a higher rate than they would be under mine. So what I’m doing is, put yourself back 10 years ago when you were only making whatever, 60 or 70. Under my tax plan you would be keeping more of your paycheck, you’d be paying lower taxes, which means you would have saved…Now look, nobody likes high taxes."

"No," said Wurzelbacher.

"Of course not," said Obama. "But what’s happened is that we end up – we’ve cut taxes a lot for folks like me who make a lot more than 250. We haven’t given a break to folks who make less, and as a consequence, the average wage and income for ordinary folks, the vast majority of Americans, has actually gone down over the last eight years. So all I want to do is – I’ve got a tax cut. The only thing that changes, is I’m gonna cut taxes a little bit more for the folks who are most in need and for the 5% of the folks who are doing very well - even though they’ve been working hard and I appreciate that – I just want to make sure they’re paying a little bit more in order to pay for those other tax cuts. Now, I respect the disagreement. I just want you to be clear – it’s not that I want to punish your success – I just want to make sure that everybody who is behind you – that they’ve got a chance at success too.”

Wurzelbacher said it seemed as though Obama might support a flat tax.

Obama says, “you know, I would be open to it except here’s the problem with a flat tax is that if you actually put a flat tax together, in order for it to work and replace all the revenue that we’ve got, you’d probably end up having to make it like about a 40% sales tax. I mean that’s the value added, making it up. Now some people say 23 or 25, but in truth when you add up all the revenue that would need to be raised, you’d have to slap on a whole bunch of sales taxes on. And I do believe for folks like me who have worked hard, but frankly also been lucky, I don’t mind paying just a little bit more than the waitress that I just met over there who’s things are slow and she can barely make the rent."

Obama said, "My attitude is that if the economy’s good for folks from the bottom up, it’s gonna be good for everybody. If you’ve got a plumbing business, you’re gonna be better off if you’re gonna be better off if you’ve got a whole bunch of customers who can afford to hire you, and right now everybody’s so pinched that business is bad for everybody and I think when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody."

That's the key moment McCain is jumping out…"when you spread the wealth around it's good for everybody."

"But listen," Obama said, shaking Wurzelbacher's hand, "I respect what you do and I respect your question, and even if I don’t get your vote, I’m still gonna be working hard on your behalf, because small businesses are what creates jobs in this country and I want to encourage it.”

"Guys I gotta get out of here and go prepare for the debate," Obama said, "but that was pretty good practice right there." http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpu...-the-weal.html (http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/10/spread-the-weal.html)

Andrew Craig-Bennett
10-20-2008, 10:54 AM
Senator Obama was citing Francis Bacon, writing some 250 years before Marx and 170 years before the USA:

"Money is like muck; no good unless it is spread".

Keith Wilson
10-20-2008, 11:12 AM
Francis Bacon? And all this time I thought it was Horace Vandergelder in Hello Dolly . . . . :D

John of Phoenix
10-20-2008, 11:19 AM
Obama said, "My attitude is that if the economy’s good for folks from the bottom up, it’s gonna be good for everybody.
And the reds just can't figure that out. "Spread the wealth" becomes a socialist slogan to them.

Remarkable.

George Roberts
10-20-2008, 12:56 PM
Obama said, "My attitude is that if the economy’s good for folks from the bottom up, it’s gonna be good for everybody."

Mr. Obama offers up a false premise and suggests that he can make it happen.

norm bernstein is certainly not near the bottom. His family has more assets and income than the most yet he is complaining about his family's health care. He lacks sufficient to consider his economic position "good."

It is unlikely that Mr. Obama intends to even raise the economic position of the poor to norm's level. They will continue to complain.

Yes, it is impossible to make everyone's economic position good - yet that is what Mr. Obama wishes us to mis-believe that he is promising.

ccmanuals
10-20-2008, 03:04 PM
Interesting article in the NY Times by Paul Krugman(you know, the Nobel Prize winner in economics this rear) regarding our plumbers.




The Real Plumbers of Ohio By PAUL KRUGMAN (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/opinion/editorialsandoped/oped/columnists/paulkrugman/index.html?inline=nyt-per)
Published: October 20, 2008
Forty years ago, Richard Nixon made a remarkable marketing discovery. By exploiting America’s divisions — divisions over Vietnam, divisions over cultural change and, above all, racial divisions — he was able to reinvent the Republican brand. The party of plutocrats was repackaged as the party of the “silent majority,” the regular guys — white guys, it went without saying — who didn’t like the social changes taking place.
It was a winning formula. And the great thing was that the new packaging didn’t require any change in the product’s actual contents — in fact, the G.O.P. was able to keep winning elections even as its actual policies became more pro-plutocrat, and less favorable to working Americans, than ever.
John McCain’s strategy, in this final stretch, is based on the belief that the old formula still has life in it.
Thus we have Sarah Palin expressing her joy at visiting the “pro-America” parts of the country — yep, we’re all traitors here in central New Jersey. Meanwhile we’ve got Mr. McCain making Samuel J. Wurzelbacher, a k a Joe the Plumber — who had confronted Barack Obama on the campaign trail, alleging that the Democratic candidate would raise his taxes — the centerpiece of his attack on Mr. Obama’s economic proposals.
And when it turned out that the right’s new icon had a few issues, like not being licensed and comparing Mr. Obama to Sammy Davis Jr., conservatives played victim: see how much those snooty elitists hate the common man?
But what’s really happening to the plumbers of Ohio, and to working Americans in general?
First of all, they aren’t making a lot of money. You may recall that in one of the early Democratic debates Charles Gibson of ABC suggested that $200,000 a year was a middle-class income. Tell that to Ohio plumbers: according to the May 2007 occupational earnings report from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the average annual income of “plumbers, pipefitters and steamfitters” in Ohio was $47,930.
Second, their real incomes have stagnated or fallen, even in supposedly good years. The Bush administration assured us that the economy was booming in 2007 — but the average Ohio plumber’s income in that 2007 report was only 15.5 percent higher than in the 2000 report, not enough to keep up with the 17.7 percent rise in consumer prices in the Midwest. As Ohio plumbers went, so went the nation: median household income, adjusted for inflation, was lower in 2007 than it had been in 2000.
Third, Ohio plumbers have been having growing trouble getting health insurance, especially if, like many craftsmen, they work for small firms. According to the Kaiser Family Foundation, in 2007 only 45 percent of companies with fewer than 10 employees offered health benefits, down from 57 percent in 2000.
And bear in mind that all these data pertain to 2007 — which was as good as it got in recent years. Now that the “Bush boom,” such as it was, is over, we can see that it achieved a dismal distinction: for the first time on record, an economic expansion failed to raise most Americans’ incomes above their previous peak.
Since then, of course, things have gone rapidly downhill, as millions of working Americans have lost their jobs and their homes. And all indicators suggest that things will get much worse in the months and years ahead.
So what does all this say about the candidates? Who’s really standing up for Ohio’s plumbers?
Mr. McCain claims that Mr. Obama’s policies would lead to economic disaster. But President Bush’s policies have already led to disaster — and whatever he may say, Mr. McCain proposes continuing Mr. Bush’s policies in all essential respects, and he shares Mr. Bush’s anti-government, anti-regulation philosophy.
What about the claim, based on Joe the Plumber’s complaint, that ordinary working Americans would face higher taxes under Mr. Obama? Well, Mr. Obama proposes raising rates on only the top two income tax brackets — and the second-highest bracket for a head of household starts at an income, after deductions, of $182,400 a year.
Maybe there are plumbers out there who earn that much, or who would end up suffering from Mr. Obama’s proposed modest increases in taxes on dividends and capital gains — America is a big country, and there’s probably a high-income plumber with a huge stock market portfolio out there somewhere. But the typical plumber would pay lower, not higher, taxes under an Obama administration, and would have a much better chance of getting health insurance.
I don’t want to suggest that everyone would be better off under the Obama tax plan. Joe the plumber would almost certainly be better off, but Richie the hedge fund manager would take a serious hit.
But that’s the point. Whatever today’s G.O.P. is, it isn’t the party of working Americans.

Flying Orca
10-20-2008, 03:17 PM
Very interesting indeed, cc - thank you.

George Roberts
10-20-2008, 03:57 PM
"I'm most certainly NOT complaining about my family's personal health care. right now, it's pretty good.

I'm expressing my concern for those who are NOT as lucky as me... and my concern for what might happen if McCain's brain-dead health care policy were ever enacted."

In the past I believe you expressed concern about the costs of your wife's health care and expressed that you should not have to sell your house to pay for that care. (I suppose that the house sale would follow the liquidation of other assets.) And you suggested that some sort of health insurance run by the government would solve your problem.

I am glad that you have resolved your health care concerns for the moment.

As for those who are less well off than you: my point was we cannot bring all the poor up to even nearly as well off as you. But that is what Mr. Obama would like people to believe he can/will do.

John of Phoenix
10-20-2008, 04:11 PM
my point was we cannot bring all the poor up to even nearly as well off as you. But that is what Mr. Obama would like people to believe he can/will do.
By changing tax brackets? Got a link?

George Roberts
10-20-2008, 07:40 PM
I quoted the comment that Mr.Obama made (the source is given above somewhere)

Obama said, "My attitude is that if the economy’s good for folks from the bottom up, it’s gonna be good for everybody."

As I said even making the poor economic equals of norm will not make the economy "good" for them. (Note that Mr. Obama thought that $250K was included in teh bottom.)

(My wife asked about our investment position last month. Before I could answer she said we could live off of our Social Security benefits - under $15K/year. Takes very little to make us "good" in an economic sense.)

mdh
10-20-2008, 08:38 PM
The story by Krugman is a crock. His figures for the average plumber work out to $23 hr. 40 hours a week. If that's all a guy is working then that's what he gets. If he wants more then he can get out and work for it, as some obviously do. That's the problem with socialism, unions, etc., they try to make the outcome equal when anybody knows that the input rarely is.

Keith Wilson
10-21-2008, 07:44 AM
His figures were from the Department of Labor statistics, and are as accurate as it is possible to get. Obviously, some make more, some less.

Mdh, it's generally more effective to defend one's position by arguing against the actual ideas of those opposing you, rather than against utopian socialism, or communism, or some other idea that no one here supports. Everyone here advocates some variation on capitalism. You might as well argue against monarchism.

Grizz_
10-21-2008, 08:49 AM
You might as well argue against monarchism.

OK, I'm against monarchism.

So, there's a common saying that you can't tax the country into prosperity, is this true? Is there a good example of a national economy that taxed itself into universal prosperity, or 'wealth from the bottom up'? Don't recollect anything along those lines. Fewer than fifty percent of the population pay the taxes that everyone is talking about. Is that an economic problem?

Keith Wilson
10-21-2008, 09:52 AM
Fewer than fifty percent of the population pay the taxes that everyone is talking about. Is that an economic problem?This is incorrect. While federal income tax is progressive, Social Security/Medicare taxes are regressive, as are most state and local taxes in the aggregate. (A comprehensive reference, but a big download: http://www.itepnet.org/wp2000/text.pdf) Everybody pays taxes. When all taxes are taken into account, the US tax system is not very progressive and in some cases is even regressive.
Is there a good example of a national economy that taxed itself into universal prosperityThis confuses two different issues: the level of taxation (i.e. what we want the government to do) and the distribution of taxation (who pays how much).

Grizz_
10-21-2008, 10:26 AM
Quote:
Is there a good example of a national economy that taxed itself into universal prosperity
This confuses two different issues: the level of taxation (i.e. what we want the government to do) and the distribution of taxation (who pays how much).

well, confuse me then with two answers..,

Milo Christensen
10-21-2008, 10:26 AM
Obama - socking it to small business. (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122455021772252457.html) I will forever maintain that the best way to spread the wealth is to have businesses that create jobs.

Cuyahoga Chuck
10-21-2008, 10:57 AM
Obama - socking it to small business. (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122455021772252457.html) I will forever maintain that the best way to spread the wealth is to have businesses that create jobs.

Maintain whatever you like. The holes on that arguement are there for all to see.
You are betting that a business will use tax reductions to increase employment, modernise assets, expand, etc. rather than fattening an offshore bank account or giving the boss a bonus, stock options and a golden parachute. Doesn't look much like sound tax policy.
Eight years of tax give-aways has left us with the sorry situation we have. If you can explain what went wrong Henry Paulson would be pleased to hear it.

Milo Christensen
10-21-2008, 11:12 AM
. . . Eight years of tax give-aways has left us with the sorry situation we have. If you can explain what went wrong Henry Paulson would be pleased to hear it.

Actually, the growth of jobs related to the growth of small business has been the only bright spot on the jobs front during the Bush administration. Difficult to say where we'd be without those millions of jobs. Henry Paulson has spoken often of the need to get the liquidity flowing again to small businesses.

2,000 hours a year for the average 9 to 5er is a $10 an hour job. Raising taxes from $146,000 to $166,000 on a small business making $500,000 is one job.

That same $20,000 confiscated and redistributed to the so-called poor equals peanuts spent at WalMart equals more jobs to China.

Your choice, choose wisely.

John of Phoenix
10-21-2008, 11:12 AM
Or Buffett suggested a few yeras ago, the business owners pay themselves a dividend (15% tax rate) instead of a salary. QED.

Grizz_
10-24-2008, 09:54 PM
Might seem like holes to Chuck, but I've been a self employed small businessman for most of my adult life.

Tax policy and regulatory environments absolutely do affect business decisions like employees, or not. I hired contractors because of tax policies, they were in turn self employed and dealt with their own taxes.

I now only work businesses that require no employees. I'll never hire anyone again, even though I could grow business if I did.

I know many others with the same point of view. It's amazing how smooth things run when you don't have employees to baby sit. Oh, and no unions to endulge either. Come to think of it, it's downright wonderful.

So remind me again, who got the bailout, and who got the bag?

George Roberts
10-25-2008, 09:01 AM
"2,000 hours a year for the average 9 to 5er is a $10 an hour job. Raising taxes from $146,000 to $166,000 on a small business making $500,000 is one job."

Your math is wrong ---

Adding a $20K job produces a $20K tax deduction for the employer. Either an employee gets the money or the IRS gets the money - employer's choice.

mdh
10-25-2008, 09:21 AM
An employee making 20K costs the employer a lot more than 20K. The way to bring the bottom up is to create a situation where there is more competition for employees than for a job.

Dan McCosh
10-25-2008, 09:33 AM
OK, I'm against monarchism.

So, there's a common saying that you can't tax the country into prosperity, is this true? Is there a good example of a national economy that taxed itself into universal prosperity, or 'wealth from the bottom up'? Don't recollect anything along those lines. Fewer than fifty percent of the population pay the taxes that everyone is talking about. Is that an economic problem?


I'm thinking of the success of countries that cut taxes, concentrate wealth, cut public spending, discourage unions, reduce spending on infrastructure like roads, and privatize pubic works like highways. Say Mexico.

paladin
10-25-2008, 11:55 AM
A few years ago I had several employees.....Salary was 15 bucks an hour.....because of taxes and gov't requirements my actual cost was closer to 30 bucks an hour. I owned the building that we were in....I owned all the lab/test equipment etc....... the depreciation was a bitch....my take home, after everything finished, was about 200K per annum......
Two things happened to make me change my mind.....
Hired a secretary/telephone person to handle the BS...part of her job was to process the paperwork for c.o.d.'s coming and going...one weekend a client needed the project delivered by Monday, so on Thursday I gave the gal a half day off to drop the package to fedex over night......Monday noon and pkg did not arrive....I also noted that close to 2K bucks was missing out of petty cash...Tuesday she shows up, pkg in trunk of her car etc...she went to Atlantic city with friends using my money.....
Item number two...fellow was looking for a higher paying job, took lab notes on new project to a competitor who rushed a patent thru......on my design...
we eventually reached a settlement...
Then I had the accident....etc......
By operating with subcontractors, by e-mail, and subbing all my work, my take home jumped about 50-60 percent, and much of it could still be written off...

Dan McCosh
10-25-2008, 01:32 PM
Not too many people in business hire and fire based on taxes. They usually have work to do, and hire people to do the work. They charge more for the work than they pay their employes, and make a profit. Then they pay taxes on the profits.

They don't often hire people just because they make more profits, despite what McCain is saying.

Cuyahoga Chuck
10-25-2008, 04:47 PM
Might seem like holes to Chuck, but I've been a self employed small businessman for most of my adult life.

Tax policy and regulatory environments absolutely do affect business decisions like employees, or not. I hired contractors because of tax policies, they were in turn self employed and dealt with their own taxes.

I now only work businesses that require no employees. I'll never hire anyone again, even though I could grow business if I did.

I know many others with the same point of view. It's amazing how smooth things run when you don't have employees to baby sit. Oh, and no unions to endulge either. Come to think of it, it's downright wonderful.

So remind me again, who got the bailout, and who got the bag?

You know your situation better than I or anyone else.
The problem now is how is your wonderful business situation related to the fact our national economy seems to be headed down the toilet? If you are not worried about that maybe you can clue us in on how to survive this downturn without emptying our retirement accounts.
No Drug running or cultivation of illegal crops, please!

mdh
10-25-2008, 07:38 PM
You know your situation better than I or anyone else.
The problem now is how is your wonderful business situation related to the fact our national economy seems to be headed down the toilet? If you are not worried about that maybe you can clue us in on how to survive this downturn without emptying our retirement accounts.
No Drug running or cultivation of illegal crops, please!

Do one thing, and do it better than anybody else.

Dan McCosh
10-26-2008, 08:40 AM
Do one thing, and do it better than anybody else.


That's one job. Now about the other 150,000,000.

George Roberts
10-26-2008, 09:50 AM
"They don't often hire people just because they make more profits, despite what McCain is saying."

I believe that the theory is that businesses that are growing (make more profits) tend to invest in growth or into expanding into other areas. For that they take a risk and hire employees.

LeeG
10-26-2008, 10:12 AM
Sorry Andrew, you are entirely off base with this line of questioning which has no relevence to the issue at hand. The "imgae" I mentioned has to do with the portrayal of the typical working guy with a dream to create some wealth. Whether or not he has a plumbers license or a small tax lien on his house doesn't make any difference. .


Rick-me, reality does matter, wether it's determining threats to the US or the necessity for a post invasion plan.

If a politician uses an image that isn't grounded in reality then it's an image without integrity.

Dan McCosh
10-26-2008, 10:33 AM
"They don't often hire people just because they make more profits, despite what McCain is saying."

I believe that the theory is that businesses that are growing (make more profits) tend to invest in growth or into expanding into other areas. For that they take a risk and hire employees.


Business growth takes place with or without taxable profits. Reinvestment is a tax shelter--as you pointed out in an earlier post.

ccmanuals
10-26-2008, 10:36 AM
Hmmm... if Obama wins the election, your contention about 'mainstream America' will have been proven utterly wrong... won't it?

I would suggest that the polls prove that idea wrong right now! The ability to understand and even underestimate the intelligence of the electorate is one of the major reasons the McCain campaign is in the shape it's in today. They thought they could get away with the Rove lies and smear tactics that worked so well in the past. Middle Amercia just isn't buying those tactics any more.

George Roberts
10-26-2008, 10:43 AM
"Business growth takes place with or without taxable profits. Reinvestment is a tax shelter--as you pointed out in an earlier post."

You are correct. But I was explaining Mr. McCain's statements. His statements (as represented here) appear to be based on a reasonable economic theory.

Dan McCosh
10-26-2008, 10:53 AM
"Business growth takes place with or without taxable profits. Reinvestment is a tax shelter--as you pointed out in an earlier post."

You are correct. But I was explaining Mr. McCain's statements. His statements (as represented here) appear to be based on a reasonable economic theory.


McCain regularly misrepresents the impact of an increase in the upper marginal personal income brackets as having a negative impact on job creation. He also carries the argument on to where such a tax change is "socialism". There is at best a vary tenuous relationship between personal income taxes and overall economic growth. There is a much stronger economic argument over the impact of a huge and growing national debt, or what it would take to reduce that debt. I would prefer both candidates include the impact of the debt in their tax policies. It is debt, after all, that is at the heart of the current economic crisis.