Tuesday, October 28, 2008

Obama's tax-cut threshold shrinking?: $250,000, $200,000, now $150,000

Obama's tax-cut threshold shrinking?: $250,000, $200,000, now $150,000
WorldNetDaily ^ | October 28, 2008 | Drew Zahn

Posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:22:20 PM by MountainLoop

A new video advertisement released by the Obama campaign says the candidate's promised tax cuts are for citizens making less than $200,000 a year, not the widely reported figure of $250,000. Adding to the confusion, Obama's running mate, Joe Biden, said in an interview yesterday the cuts are for even fewer people, limited to incomes of $150,000 or less. Depending on the source of information, just who will have their taxes raised and who will have them cut under Obama's plan varies. The campaign's homepage, for example, accessed today, reads, "Obama said he wanted to give a tax break to all families making under $250,000 per year, which he said was 95 percent of American workers." Yet in the "Defining Moment" ad released on YouTube last week and viewable below, Obama says the tax cut "for 95 percent of working Americans" is only for those who make less than $200,000 per year.

(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2008; antichrist; obama; socialism; taxcuts; taxes
McCain ad: Obama/ACORN






1 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:22:26 PM by MountainLoop

To: MountainLoop

They just can’t stick to one thing.


2 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:24:00 PM by wastedyears (Quiet by nature, standing tall)

To: wastedyears

It will drop to $50k shortly after election day, if they win.


3 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:25:10 PM by bamahead (Few men desire liberty; most men wish only for a just master. -- Sallust)

To: MountainLoop

It’s the old bait and switch method...keep talking Biden.


4 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:25:27 PM by Snappy1MarineMom (Don't Blame me I voted for Keys)

To: MountainLoop

This needs to go out in a commercial and a press statement of some kind with Joe the Plumber’s words about it being 250,000 one day and then what the next


5 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:25:41 PM by volslover

To: wastedyears
The real numbers have always been $25,000, $20,000, and $15,000.
6 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:26:05 PM by GunsareOK

To: MountainLoop
7 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:26:28 PM by xcamel (Conservatives start smart, and get rich, liberals start rich, and get stupid.)

To: bamahead
It will drop to $50k shortly after election day, if they win.

And to $25K by January.

8 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:26:44 PM by MAexile (Bats left, votes right)

To: All

Liar Obama, people need to wake up from their kool-aid stupor and see who they are really supporting here, a liar and deceiver. Thanks God that us FReepers can see through the smoke and mirrors. These are the people (sheeple) that will follow the antichrist in the end times, the ones that will be deceived-—now I can see how that could really happen-—this is just a dress rehearsal of what’s to come.


9 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:28:36 PM by LegalEagle61 (If you are going to burn our flag, please make sure you are wearing it when you do!)

To: GunsareOK
All you need to know is the break point for Social Security ~ that's where folks living on pensions and savings have to pay taxes on their Social Security income.

If you are below that point they'll give you a tax cut of about $500. If you are above that point they'll leave the tax rates and conditions unchanged from that point to about double that amount.

Folks from the doubling point on up will be taxed into penury, sent to camps, and turned into cheap, untanned leather sent to China to be turned into Gucci purses.

No one in his right mind can possibly vote for Obama.

10 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:29:52 PM by muawiyah

To: MountainLoop
I believe he's also weasel-wording those numbers; that's household income, meaning two wage earners. Divide by two for single wage-earner threshold.
11 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:30:07 PM by Steely Tom (RKBA: last line of defense against vote fraud)

To: GunsareOK
That's the way Clinton did it in '93. In his campaign, he started out talking about a tax cut. Then after the election it switched to a tax increase, but only on "the rich". By the time Clinton and the 'Rat Congress got through, anyone making over about $22,000 ended up paying more in taxes. I guess that was the 'Rat definition of "the rich", 22 bills a year.

Elect 'Rats, and you get a tax increase. It's what they do. They will never change. I don't understand why the stupid sheeple can't get that through their stupid heads.

12 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:30:12 PM by chimera

To: Snappy1MarineMom

Sad thing is a lot of people have already voted. NOW the news is getting out. I hate the media.


13 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:31:14 PM by ladyvet (WOLVERINES!!!!!)

To: MountainLoop

If you take that $150,000 figure and spread that out over the four years of an awful Obama presidency, you will get taxed for making about $102/day. This is a little more than what the average person might make, but it shows how sneaky the numbers are.


14 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:31:21 PM by truthingod

To: MountainLoop
0bama has voted for tax increases no less than 94 times.

I rilly rilly rilly believe he's going to lower taxes when it's to raise money for his budget and his pet pogroms...

15 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:31:30 PM by null and void (Socialism doesn't work because of people./People don't work because of socialism...)

To: MountainLoop

Funny how we have to commit to a candidate based on what he says, but he doesn’t have to commit to what he says.


16 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:31:53 PM by ctdonath2 (I AM JOE THE PLUMBER!)

To: LegalEagle61

Obama is such a pathological liar, I want to say “Yeah, that’s the ticket” every time he opens his mouth.


17 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:33:25 PM by autumnraine (Churchill: " we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall never surrender")

To: null and void

Yep, you have the “progroms” correct. That is how these socialists deal with Israel.


18 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:33:29 PM by truthingod

To: MountainLoop

Shades of Bill Clinton 1993.


19 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:35:33 PM by The Hound Passer

To: MountainLoop

It doesn’t matter what they say during the campaign. Your taxes are going up under the Democrats unless you are on welfare.


20 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:40:21 PM by Always Right (Obama: more arrogant than Bill Clinton, more naive than Jimmy Carter, and more liberal than LBJ.)

To: MountainLoop

Obama tax cuts? That’s a fantasy!

Obama and the democrats will first let the Bush tax cuts expire, which will result in a tax increase to everybody. Obama will then take the tax increases to send welfare checks to those that don’t pay taxes to begin with.

When is the last time that the tax and spend democrats actually cut taxes? When is the last time that the tax and spend democrats actually cut spending? When is the last time that Santa Klaus actually brought anyone any presents? When is the last time that the real tooth fairy actually left anyone a dollar under the mattress or pillow?

Other than going back almost 50 years to Kennedy, taxes have never actually been cut by any democrat except perhaps on the local level.

So then, why are people actually giving any kind of credibility at all to anything that a democrat by the name of Obama says in regards to cutting taxes?

The only reason for Obama and the democrats are proposing “tax cuts” or “spending cuts” is for the votes that those promises might bring them on Nov 4th. Obama’s history and the democratic party’s history should be enough to convince people that, if it’s not in their nature, it ain’t gonna happen and therefore, expecting tax cuts or spending cuts is equivalent to believing in Santa Klaus or the tooth-fairy.

Obama and the current leadership in the senate and in the house are big believers in lying to obtain their end results. That’s the communist way.

Once elected, they’ll activate the same old excuse and lie, the one that Bill Clinton also used, that, “because of unforeseen circumstances or conditions beyond our control”, “we cannot follow up on the previously promised tax cuts or spending cuts”.

The democrats and their leadership, including the president (when democrat), have always lied about tax cuts and spending cuts. Anybody believing any of their lies are just plain stupid or easily duped or brainless.


21 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:42:14 PM by adorno

To: ladyvet

I know, they disgust me too. I own a business with my husband and we keep saying that there is no point to even have a business under Obama. Why should we work so hard for him to take it and pass it out to people who are lazy? He is also going to waste it on his big government programs.

What happened to the American Dream?


22 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:43:10 PM by Snappy1MarineMom (Don't Blame me I voted for Keys)

To: chimera

Reminds me of when Dick Gephardt said in ‘99 that people making more than $75,000 a year were rich and needed to be taxed more.


23 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:43:38 PM by flair2000

To: MountainLoop

What he isn’t telling the crowds is that $200,000 is in Mexican pesos, not US dollars.


24 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:46:19 PM by Verginius Rufus

To: truthingod
Did I misspell 'programs'? Dear me, the spell checker missed that one.

*blush* How embarrassing!

25 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:48:27 PM by null and void (Socialism doesn't work because of people./People don't work because of socialism...)

To: muawiyah
Folks from the doubling point on up will be taxed into penury, sent to camps, and turned into cheap, untanned leather sent to China to be turned into Gucci purses.

The ones with interesting tattoos will be particularly fashionable...

26 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:50:19 PM by null and void (Socialism doesn't work because of people./People don't work because of socialism...)

To: Snappy1MarineMom

I know how you feel. I ran a small bus before I had kids. Became a stay at home mom. Now my last two are almost out of H.S. and I was planning on running one again. No way now, if these people get their way. Sigh....I guess I’ll take up knitting.


27 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:50:19 PM by ladyvet (WOLVERINES!!!!!)

To: MountainLoop
Obama's tax-cut threshold shrinking?: $250,000, $200,000, now $150,000

Gee, looks just like my 401(k)!

28 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:52:42 PM by Yo-Yo

To: null and void

no problem—this is supposed to be a little light forum, right?


29 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:53:31 PM by truthingod

To: MountainLoop

NEXT STOP: $30,000.....


30 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:54:20 PM by AngelesCrestHighway

To: MountainLoop

This is just like Animal Farm. “Two legs good, four legs better” changed to “Four legs good, two legs better” by the end of the book.


31 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:55:32 PM by Pearls Before Swine (Is /sarc really necessary?)

To: Yo-Yo
Yeah. You DO know they are floating the "let's nationalize all the 401(k)s" trial balloon right now, don't you?

After all, since the private sector lost so much of the value of yours, its time to entrust it to the Government as they are only here to help you...

32 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:57:44 PM by null and void (Socialism doesn't work because of people./People don't work because of socialism...)

To: ladyvet

Pretty sad huh? I thought 0bama was the candidate of hope?
He is killing the American Dream! LoL on the knitting.


33 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:58:51 PM by Snappy1MarineMom (Don't Blame me I voted for Keys)

To: MountainLoop
"I know I know I campaigned for a middle class tax cut but Ive never worked so hard on something in my life ..." so I'm going to raise your taxes, and retroactively to boot. Sounds familiar?
34 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:59:14 PM by NonValueAdded (Colin, descending)

To: MountainLoop

Isn’t anyone in the media thinking to themselves, “Hey, that’s applying to me!?! I’m not rich!”?


35 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:59:14 PM by autumnraine (Churchill: " we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall never surrender")

To: Snappy1MarineMom
keep talking Biden.

Initially, this was my thought too. However, having Biden say this to a very small crowd is cover after election day when the true threshhold is unveiled. When people squwack, he can say, "We told you before the election it was going to be $50K/$100K/$150K (pick one). Didn't you get the memo?"

I think this is planned.

36 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 3:59:15 PM by mlocher (USA is a sovereign nation)

To: mlocher

I am getting that same feeling on this issue. I think it’s planned too. We know the truth and that’s why we are so mad. We aren’t gullible like the other side is.


37 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 4:04:14 PM by Snappy1MarineMom (Don't Blame me I voted for Keys)

To: adorno
You're mostly right. Obama will not be able to wait for the Bush tax cuts to expire, he'll have to end them immediately and enact his tax increases across the board. He can't wait until 2011 for the Bush cuts to expire, he has reparations to dole out. In case you missed his 2001 audio tape, he's not talking about spreading the wealth to poor people, he's specifically talking about reparations. As if we haven't already been paying since 1964. I guess he's in a hurry now.
38 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 4:07:19 PM by bitterohiogunclinger (Never argue with an idiot, they always wear you down and beat you with experience)

To: bamahead

In the Dem’s tax plan this year it was $42,000.


39 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 4:12:05 PM by Straight Vermonter (Posting from deep behind the Maple Curtain)

To: MAexile
And to $25K by January.

Doubt it. Obama wants just over half of the voters off the tax rolls and on the welfare rolls (though they won't be called welfare rolls). It's all about control.

40 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 4:14:09 PM by Entrepreneur (The environmental movement is filled with watermelons - green on the outside, red on the inside)

To: chimera

McCain needs to tell people that if elected, BO is gonna retroactively let the Bush tax cuts expire to January 1, 2009. That’s a tax increase for all wage earners, all income brackets. And it puts the marriage penalty back into law.

The tax cuts are set to expire in 2010. The RATS have already rejected making them permanent. They obviously do not want this expiration to occur in an election year. Hence, they will accelerate the tax increase.

Tell your friends, spread the word.


41 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 4:20:40 PM by mwl8787

To: chimera
It doesn't matter what number he use. If he get elected, he will just say, “We can't cut taxes right now. We didn't know how bad things really were until we got in and took a look. We will have to raise taxes in order to clean up the mess Bush left.”

Then everybody that was expecting tax cuts will look around and say...WTF?

I just want to say one more thing. I don't believe G-D brought us this far to leave us now. I believe there was divine intervention in the founding of this Great Nation and on Nov. 5th, Freepers will know that G-D has intervened again. Remember to, "PRAY FOR THE PEACE OF JERUSALEM" PSALM 122:6

42 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 5:08:31 PM by killerw ("I am the way, the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but through Me" (John 14:6).)

To: MountainLoop
The campaign's homepage, for example, accessed today, reads, "Obama said he wanted to give a tax break to all families making under $250,000 per year, which he said was 95 percent of American workers."

And I wanted to give my wife a new tractor and chainsaw for Christmas, too.

Obama says the tax cut "for 95 percent of working Americans" is only for those who make less than $200,000 per year.

Meaning the group earning between $200K and $250K will remain as they are, neither cut nor raised, meaning that since they didn't get raised, it is a cut for them, too?

And now, Fox News reports Biden told a Scranton, Pa., TV station yesterday that Obama's tax break "should go to middle class people – people making under $150,000 a year."

But, Biden added, "just because it SHOULD only go to that smaller group, my dunderheaed Marxist running mate wants to spread the wealth around even more than that. Besides, consistency is not our strong suit."

And I SHOULD rethink my plans for my wife's Christmas gifts.

43 posted on Tuesday, October 28, 2008 7:17:49 PM by ApplegateRanch (The Great Obamanation of Desolation, attempting to sit in the Oval Office, where he ought not..)

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794

No comments: