Why Obama's tax plan is Socialist

[Hoosier8]

This concerns only the personal income tax.

Under Obama's plan people who do not work will not benefit by this, but people that work and do not pay taxes will. The top 5% of taxpayers pay approximately 50% of the personal tax revenue. Raise the top 5% taxes by approximately 3% and spread it among workers. If distributed evenly among remaining taxpayers and it would be an even 3% for everyone, but it will also go to workers that do not pay taxes, or about 30% of workers (what Obama calls "Making Work Pay"). My "relief" is something like a third of a percent of my taxable income. Going lower on the pay scale and the spread starts climbing until it reaches 3% between 50 to 40 thousand of taxable income and climbs from there to infinity (math, don't you love it?) if you pay no taxes. In other words, the less you make, the larger the "relief" is compared to your taxable income. Since about 65% of workers make between 20K and 30K, my gut feeling is the amount raised on the top 5% may actually not be enough to cover it. I don't think the raise in taxes will benefit the government, only re-distribute the wealth, and that my friends, is Socialism.

 

[Episcopus]

Socialism is the government ownership or control of industry or production. What industry does Obama's tax plan control? George Bush is a socialist for nationalizing the banking system and home mortgage industry through the bailout.

 

[Bigum1969]

Those working but earning poverty level income already don't pay taxes. They still get taxes deducted out of paychecks, but they get most of it back at tax time.

 

[Hoosier8]

Socialism is the government ownership or control of industry or production. What industry does Obama's tax plan control? George Bush is a socialist for nationalizing the banking system and home mortgage industry through the bailout.

Yes, but one of the tenents is as follows: From Wiki

Socialists mainly share the belief that capitalism unfairly concentrates power and wealth among a small segment of society that controls capital and creates an unequal society. All socialists advocate the creation of an egalitarian society, in which wealth and power are distributed more evenly, although there is considerable disagreement among socialists over how, and to what extent this could be achieved.

As I understand it, Bush and Congress have not nationalized the banking system or actually bailed out the mortgage industry but allowed money to be available at a very low interest rate. Chances are that the government may actually make money on the deal. It is mislabeled as a bailout but when the word was used, it was impossible to retract.

 

[Hoosier8]

Those working but earning poverty level income already don't pay taxes. They still get taxes deducted out of paychecks, but they get most of it back at tax time.

Yes, based on their taxable income.

They will get their money back plus the "Make Work Pay" money from Obama's plan. Poverty level for a family of 4 is $21,200 today. At an income of $20,000 on Obama's website, they will get $1,619 depending on a few other things. Some people see this as only fair, but it now creates a new dependent class that will never, ever go away, or as some people say, new Democrats.

“Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.”
------Winston Churchill

 

[CarmelHP]

It was a parrot of a deception from Obama himself that he wasn't a socialist because he just wanted to spread wealth around and not take ownership of businesses. He just wants to re-invent pre-Thatcher Britain and not the Soviet Union it seems. He just wants you to drink a little of the poison, not the whole bottle, makes you feel better about it doesn't it?

Socialists mainly share the belief that capitalism unfairly concentrates power and wealth among a small segment of society that controls capital and creates an unequal society. All socialists advocate the creation of an egalitarian society, in which wealth and power are distributed more evenly, although there is considerable disagreement among socialists over how, and to what extent this could be achieved. [1]

1. Newman, Michael. (2005) Socialism: A Very Short Introduction, Oxford University Press.

 

[Episcopus]

Socialists mainly share the belief that capitalism unfairly concentrates power and wealth among a small segment of society that controls capital and creates an unequal society. All socialists advocate the creation of an egalitarian society, in which wealth and power are distributed more evenly, although there is considerable disagreement among socialists over how, and to what extent this could be achieved.

The very first line of that same wiki

Socialism refers to a broad set of economic theories of social organization advocating state or collective ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods, and the creation of an egalitarian society.

Egalitarianism sounds pretty bad. This is the first line of the egalitarianism wiki says:

Egalitarianism (derived from the French word égal, meaning equal) is a political doctrine that holds that all people should be treated as equals and have the same political, economic, social, and civil rights.[1] Generally it applies to being held equal under the law and society at large. In actual practice, one may be considered an egalitarian in most areas listed above, even if not subscribing to equality in every possible area of individual difference.

His tax policies may be good, they may be bad. I have read articles viewing them both ways. If he gets elected Tuesday, we will find out which they are. He is not socialist, or at least not introducing any more socialism into the United States than already exists here.

 

[CarmelHP]

He is not socialist, or at least not introducing any more socialism into the United States than already exists here.

Absolute jesuitical ********.


The intensive welfare statism that Obama proposes, and the consequent social control that has always followed is, if not precisely, shining, pristine enough socialism for you, sufficiently congruent to what most people think when they hear the word that it would fit the bill well enough. Just because Barry says he wants socialism lite, at first, doesn't mean he's not red as a stop sign.

 

[Episcopus]

Absolute jesuitical ********.


The intensive welfare statism that Obama proposes, and the consequent social control that has always followed is, if not precisely, shining, pristine enough socialism for you, sufficiently congruent to what most people think when they hear the word that it would fit the bill well enough. Just because Barry says he wants socialism lite, at first, doesn't mean he's not red as a stop sign.

We are talking about tax plans in here. His tax plan is not socialist. McCain wants to change the tax structure too, why aren't you calling him socialist? George Bush changed the tax structure, call him socialist. Every President changes the tax structure. It is not socialism to do so.

I don't care what "most people" think when they hear 'socialism.' Socialism is the government control of industries or production.

 

[4sarge]

We are talking about tax plans in here. His tax plan is not socialist. McCain wants to change the tax structure too, why aren't you calling him socialist? George Bush changed the tax structure, call him socialist. Every President changes the tax structure. It is not socialism to do so.

I don't care what "most people" think when they hear 'socialism.' Socialism is the government control of industries or production.

Obama is a Marxist - Pure & Simple

Another Marx Brother

“You have to pinch yourself—a Marxist radical who all his life has been mentored by, sat at the feet of, worshiped with, befriended, endorsed the philosophy of, funded and been in turn funded, politically promoted and supported by a nexus comprising of black power anti-white racists, Jew-haters, revolutionary Marxists, unrepentant former terrorists and Chicago mobsters, is on the verge of becoming President of the United States. And apparently it’s considered impolite to say so.” —columnist Melanie Phillips

Should Barack Obama succeed in deceiving a majority of voters next Tuesday, our readers have suggested two methods of protest: Either displaying your flag upside down [a sign of distress] or flying it at half mast -- or both, for seven days, and doing the same on inauguration day, 20 January 2009.)

You thought American resistance was Bad for Clinton, you haven't seen anything if Obama, ACORN, and George Soros buy the American Presidency

 

[VN Vet]

Socialism is one step away from Communism. We the People will get what we have asked for, NOT ME! We the People? Who in the heck is this today? What language do they speek? The Ruskies said they would take us over from within. Lord, MY GOD, Please help us, now.

If something bad must happen let it happen in my life time so my grandchildren can live free.

 

[Hoosier8]

We are talking about tax plans in here. His tax plan is not socialist. McCain wants to change the tax structure too, why aren't you calling him socialist? George Bush changed the tax structure, call him socialist. Every President changes the tax structure. It is not socialism to do so.

I don't care what "most people" think when they hear 'socialism.' Socialism is the government control of industries or production.

Taking from the rich and giving directly to the poor is a fundamental socialist tenet. Previously, taking from the rich instead of the poor gave us the current progressive tax system where 30% don't pay taxes and 50% of personal income tax revenue comes from the top 5%. All of this to "pay for government". What is new about Obama's plan is that it is blatently sold as "fairness" and confiscating wealth from the "rich" and giving it directly to people who pay no taxes.

With over half of the Federal budget going to welfare programs (~55%), there is already a tremendous amount of help. Currently we have a budget of approximately 2.8 trillion dollars. 21% of that goes to social security, the remaining of the 55% goes to welfare programs which actually number in the hundreds. The major programs, Medicare, Medicaid, AFDC now reformed as TANF (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families) supported by Clinton, Food Stamps, Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and HUD housing programs. Social security is often treated as something different than welfare but is welfare for the retired. Financially it is no different.

The idea of Welfare Reform, again supported by Clinton, was to put the emphasis on work. As I often tell the story about one of my ex-wife's students standing up and telling everyone that he wanted to do the same job that his uncle did, which was collect welfare. A whole generation has arrived that think this is normal.

The poor according to the government make up something like 9% of the population, or approximately 37 million people, according to studies . The poor as a group generally mirror the middle class in nourishment, in other words, they are over-nourished. Of the poor according to Robert E. Rector and Kirk A. Johnson, Ph.D.:

Forty-six percent of all poor households actually own their own homes. The average home owned by persons classified as poor by the Census Bureau is a three-bedroom house with one-and-a-half baths, a garage, and a porch or patio. Seventy-six percent of poor households have air conditioning. By contrast, 30 years ago, only 36 percent of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning. Only 6 percent of poor households are overcrowded. More than two-thirds have more than two rooms per person. The average poor American has more living space than the average individual living in Paris, London, Vienna, Athens, and other cities throughout Europe. (These comparisons are to the average citizens in foreign countries, not to those classified as poor.) Nearly three-quarters of poor households own a car; 30 percent own two or more cars. Ninety-seven percent of poor households have a color television; over half own two or more color televisions. Seventy-eight percent have a VCR or DVD player; 62 percent have cable or satellite TV reception. Seventy-three percent own microwave ovens, more than half have a stereo, and a third have an automatic dishwasher.
While the poor are generally well-nourished, some poor families do experience hunger, meaning a temporary discomfort due to food shortages. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), 13 percent of poor families and 2.6 percent of poor children experience hunger at some point during the year. In most cases, their hunger is short-term. Eighty-nine percent of the poor report their families have "enough" food to eat, while only 2 percent say they "often" do not have enough to eat.

In good economic times or bad, the typical poor family with children is supported by only 800 hours of work during a year: That amounts to 16 hours of work per week. If work in each family were raised to 2,000 hours per year--the equivalent of one adult working 40 hours per week throughout the year--nearly 75 percent of poor children would be lifted out of official poverty.

The problem, as I see it, isn't that enough is not done by the government. Jobs should be a much higher priority and increasing taxes on business is not the answer. Although unemployment is currently holding steady at 6.1% it is not exactly the prima facie evidence of disaster so frequently presented in the media. There are many disagreements how unemployment is measured on both sides but historically 6% is not a bad number.

I see this as a battle to save the system that made American great, can control of the oil companies be far behind? Obama has already said he is willing to bankrupt the coal industry. You are taking only one part of the socialist platform and applying it. It is like being just a little pregnant.

 

[right winger]

THE BATTLE FOR THE WHITE HOUSE - THE BATTLE FOR SURVIVAL

Amen.

 

[Hoosier8]

The very first line of that same wiki

Egalitarianism sounds pretty bad. This is the first line of the egalitarianism wiki says:

His tax policies may be good, they may be bad. I have read articles viewing them both ways. If he gets elected Tuesday, we will find out which they are. He is not socialist, or at least not introducing any more socialism into the United States than already exists here.

Read what it says again about Egalitarianism, it says equal rights, not equal outcome. There is a difference! Is there a point for you where there is "enough" socialism?

 

[CarmelHP]

We are talking about tax plans in here. His tax plan is not socialist. McCain wants to change the tax structure too, why aren't you calling him socialist? George Bush changed the tax structure, call him socialist. Every President changes the tax structure. It is not socialism to do so.

I don't care what "most people" think when they hear 'socialism.' Socialism is the government control of industries or production.

He is not socialist, or at least not introducing any more socialism into the United States than already exists here.

You definitively declared, "he is not a socialist," not that his tax policies were not socialist, that's just more equivocation. He was a "red diaper baby," had a socialist mentor in Hawaii, befriended a committed socialist mad bomber who helped launch not only his political career but his "community organizing." His mother was a socialist who sought out other socialists to be tutor and support her. His grandfather was a socialist who took young Barry to the socialist mentor in Hawaii. The fruit reflects the tree, just 'cause little Barry is circumspect in his speech, he has still let out enough to peg him as was he was bred to be, a red as an apple race-baiter and class warfare commissar in a tailored suit.

 

[Episcopus]

You definitively declared, "he is not a socialist," not that his tax policies were not socialist, that's just more equivocation.

Have you never heard of context? This thread is about taxes. I was responding to a post calling his tax policy socialist. CONTEXT is important.

His grandfather was a socialist

Bush's grandfather (and GHW Bush's father) was an anti-semitic Nazi supporter. Does this make them Nazi supporters?

Which plans of Obama's do you view as so incredibly socialist? Don't say taxes because McCain wants to redistribute wealth through taxation too, he just wants to do it differently.

 

[Episcopus]

Read what it says again about Egalitarianism, it says equal rights, not equal outcome. There is a difference!

There is absolutely a difference, I know that. I believe in equal rights. I believe in equal opportunities. Outcome is up to each individual person, so long as opportunity and circumstance are equal. I do not disagree with you there.

 

[Episcopus]

can control of the oil companies be far behind?

Oil is such a crucial commodity in our lives that I can't see how nationalization of it is necessarily a bad thing, so long as the workers in the industry are making an appropriate wage. In practice, it might be bad, or it might be good. In theory, it isn't necessarily bad. Other utilities are already heavily regulated in a way that could be seen as socialist. Why not oil too?

 

[CarmelHP]

Oil is such a crucial commodity in our lives that I can't see how nationalization of it is necessarily a bad thing, so long as the workers in the industry are making an appropriate wage. In practice, it might be bad, or it might be good. In theory, it isn't necessarily bad. Other utilities are already heavily regulated in a way that could be seen as socialist. Why not oil too?

So, by your own definition, you're a socialist. Just so we know where you're coming from.

 

[CarmelHP]

Bush's grandfather (and GHW Bush's father) was an anti-semitic Nazi supporter. Does this make them Nazi supporters?

I don't know. Did he move to be near a Bund? Did he seek out Nazi tutors? Did H.W. have a Nazi tutor? Did H.W. find a Nazi that had planted bombs in support of his Nazi vision for America to advance his political career and serve on boards with him and wangle him a "community organizing" appointment? Did he then make pro-Nazi statements throughout his career? If the answer to a majority is "YES," then I would say that it's a great possibilty.