In light of the recent economic struggle that has been plaguing America, it is not hard to imagine that we may be heading towards a second Great Depression. Unemployment rates are at a reported four year high and to make matters worse, the United States government has had to step in and bail out several billion dollar companies such as Bear Sterns and AIG. With the 2008 Presidential election just months away, one thing that is on every body's mind is: what are they going to do about it? With they being Presidential nominees John McCain and Barack Obama.
Both McCain and Obama have addressed the current economic crisis in myriad ways that focus on different ways to balance the budget and keep the country afloat. One of the issues they address in their discussions is taxes.
John McCain's main stance is against raising taxes and, in his most recent T.V. ad, McCain attacks Obama saying that Obama wants us to pay "painful taxes" on income, electricity and heating oil. Seems a bit extreme, right? Actually, it is. In regards to income, Obama says that he would only increase the tax for those households who make over $250,000 annually. As for taxing electricity and heating oil, Obama has not proposed anything of the sort. So why the false ads?
It could be that McCain is relying on the usual political stereotype where, based on history, Republicans are usually in favor of tax cuts whereas Democrats are usually in favor of tax increases. But, here's what it boils down to. Who's tax plan is better for the future of America? Do we go with McCain's do nothing plan where in order for it to work federal spending would be reduced by %25? Or do we go with Obama's plan which, despite its merits, is so complex that Fox News has dubbed that it will "make a complex system worse"?
The choice is yours. Just remember that out of the two certain things in life, taxes is one of them.
5 comments:
It is very interesting post and you couldn't find better timing than now.
It makes perfect sense to know what is going on around our environment and understand the impacts it will have in our day to day life. More important than just to understand, we must be in a position to protect ourselves from the negative impact it will have upon us.
Surely key to going about this is to have financial education and being able control our own financial destiny and not just hand it over to a mutual fund company which seldom succeed.
However it is not all gloom and doom. If we act smart and make our way through in correct manner we could convert this misfortune to fortune.
To give you guys a bit of encouragement, friend of mine made $5000 in just two days from the AIG crises. I am sure we all have the capability to do just that.
P.s Rachael i like the Scrambling to Clean Up After A Category 4 Financial Storm article.
Aybek
I think Obama's economic makes sense because McCain plan is more of the President Bush plan during his presidency like more tax cuts, and tax breaks for oil companies, and keep spending more money on Iraq!! I think at the end of the day with the economy reaching its lowest points since the World War II, Americans want a change in leadership and want to move away from the GOP entirely. Therefore, expect Barack Obama to be elected this year because of his emphasis on the economy. John McCain campaign strategy of fear, terrorism, and lies on Obama raising taxes on everyone including the middle class will not work this time around.
Unemployment and the issue of raising taxes are both weighty topics, in my opinion. I am glad you have linked to the various articles about these issues. I am still undecided at this point which tax policy seems better, but I was unaware of the debate before reading this post and plan to follow it more now.
I read about McCain's stance on taxes in the link that you included-- what is so dreadful about asking the rich to pull their weight in taxes? You're absolutely right, Rachael, when you say that of the two things certain in life, taxes are one of them; so why do the Republicans persist in the myth that taxes can be abolished?
I don't understand McCain's rational in thinking that when the country is 9 trillion dollars in debt (http://www.ontheissues.org/Background_Budget_+_Economy.htm) he should give tax cuts to the rich. Tax cuts are detrimental to the economy, not beneficial, as John E. Schwarz points out in his article "Tax, spend, and create more jobs" (http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20080901/news_mz1e1schwarz.html). You can't expect a government that is steadily losing money and bringing nothing in to compensate to boost the economy.
Obama's plan to raise taxes is not radical or, as McCain claims, detrimental at a time when people can ill afford a tax raise. The wealthier households can certainly afford to pay for the greater share of energy and material products that they consume. I know that we are not-- yet-- talking about raising taxes on electricity and heating, but in principle the rich consume more, so they should pay more.
According to Obama's statement on tax cuts supported by the bush administration (http://projects.washingtonpost.com/2008-presidential-candidates/issues/candidates/barack-obama/) he only intends only to cut taxes for the middle and lower classes. If at the very least he cuts taxes for the middle and lower classes and maintains the tax rate on the wealthy, wouldn't that have a positive effect on the economy by redistributing resources fairly?
Well, with the bailout becoming a failout, I think we can be sure that both candidates' economic plans will not be the same, especially since they both voted to pass the $700 billion bailout.
In response to Rachael's question about McCain's false ads: There is no consequence for telling an outright lie in a negative campaign ad. All these ads function for are to put doubt into the mind of the opposing voters. McCain himself has proven to be a risk-taker, and while that may hurt him in the end, he has a lot of savvy media guys working in his camp, feeding him these strategies and instructing him on what to do.
In regards to taxes, both candidates are saying their opponent will raise taxes, while both candidates themselves say they won't. Somebody's obviously lying, and it isn't the candidates... It's their "approved messages" on TV.
Post a Comment