Go to the site to try the full calculator, but here is a limited function one:

What, of course, IT DOESN’T TELL YOU is how IT DISTORTS THE FACTS. In order for Obama’s Tax Cuts to “appear” better than McCain’s Tax plans it first takes into account the CANCELLATION OF THE BUSH CUTS and THEN REINSTITUTES THEM AS PART OF THE OBAMA PLAN (except, of course, those pesky breaks for the Rick folks, the top rate will be left back at 39%). McCain will KEEP the Bush cuts AND BUILDS UPON THEM! So when you do the calculation, you get McCains “additional” (ON TOP OF THE CURRENT BUSH TAX CUT SAVINGS) to compare to the distorted/phony Obama number. It compares Apples to prunes (and designed to give you the …. that the prunes would).

So, let me say it again straight-up without chance of misunderstanding. In the Obama calculator it shows any McCain Tax savings incorrectly because you will have the benefit of the additional amount you already currently enjoy with the Bush Cuts (Marriage penalty eliminated, personal exemptions increased, additional tax credits, etc…) You can and should add another $1,000 to the (displayed) McCain amount MINIMUM!

FIGHT THE DISTORTIONS of the ObamaBinBiden ticket, you must let your friends know of the manner in which they are attempting to deceive them in regard to the Tax Cut plans!

1. He says that the marginal tax rates on the top two brackets should never have come down. All this time, they should have remained 39.6% and 36%.

2. If he’s saying that the rate cuts were wrong, then how can he justify keeping the money? Shouldn’t he have applied his “spread the wealth” principles and given the money to someone lower down the income ladder? Heck, I’ll take it.

Let’s keep our eye on the ball. Just like Democrats send their kids to private school while opposing vouchers for poor people, this is a case of rank, rank hypocrisy.

But the idea that people should get a bonus check from other people (not charity, but obtained under threat of confinement) just because they don’t make as much money as some politician wants them to, makes my skin crawl and my blood pressure rise.

Every time new Tax cuts are implemented it should be REQUIRED that both new and old forms be filled out and sent in – the taxpayer can then CHOOSE which one to use. They will (of course) choose the one that saves them money. This is the ONLY way to get the average moronic Demagogue (er.. Democrat) to actually see (and have to admit to themselves, at least at Tax time, before purposefully choosing denial). There might be some of those “Independents” that would then actually WAKE THE __ UP!

I guess I was confused because it doesn’t sound like that specific issue is the one being opposed. Or maybe it is, but that isn’t clear from any of the statements by McCain or the ads (which I see plenty of here in Virginia). Just saying.

(In response to another poster: I would define “progressive” tax rates as being any where the percent liability increases with income.)

Thanks.

What stuff would you be willing to give up in the future for Obama?

Lets get that out of the way first.

Ever since they threw JFK’s tax policy under the bus, liberals have been in favor of increasingly confiscatory progressive tax rates to grow the size of government and its dependency programs. However, Obama’s plan not only promises the usual carrot of bigger entitlement programs, it promises actual ca$h payments to citizens – not refunds, but handouts.

However, I’d like someone to explain how the idea of progressive taxation is not conservative. It was first proposed by Adam Smith, in the Wealth of Nations (“It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.”), and has been seen as a sort of common sense approach to funding social goods (defense, lighthouses, whatever) ever since, on the grounds that the wealthiest benefit disproportionately from those social goods. I understand that lowering total tax rates and reducing government is a longstanding conservative priniciple, but is flat tax also one? Seems like Steve Forbes was the last proponent, and he didn’t get much traction with it.

Has something changed, and if so, what is the principled position against progressive taxation?

I am just beside myself. No one cares except us.