Wednesday, September 10, 2008

Comparing tax plans

OK, here's something I know absolutely nothing about and wouldn't begin to know how to analyze. I do know that both Obama and McCain have said, "My plan is better than the other guy's."

Here's what they say.

from Obama's acceptance speech:
Change means a tax code that doesn't reward the lobbyists who wrote it, but the American workers and small businesses who deserve it. You know, unlike John McCain, I will stop giving tax breaks to companies that ship jobs overseas, and I will start giving them to companies that create good jobs right here in America. I'll eliminate capital gains taxes for the small businesses and start-ups that will create the high-wage, high-tech jobs of tomorrow. I will cut taxes -- for 95 percent of all working families, because, in an economy like this, the last thing we should do is raise taxes on the middle class.

From McCain's acceptance speech:
"We believe -- we believe in low taxes, spending discipline, and open markets. We believe in rewarding hard work and risk-takers and letting people keep the fruits of their labor...I will keep taxes low and cut them where I can. My opponent will raise them. I will open new markets to our goods and services. My opponent will close them. I will cut government spending. He will increase it. My tax cuts will create jobs; his tax increases will eliminate them."

Now, as I said, I don't know how to analyze this, so what you think of this may depend on what you think of Business Week that has this article comparing the two plans. Here's what they say:
So where does the reality lie? According to a new analysis by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, a joint venture between the Urban Institute and the Brookings Institution, two Washington think tanks, this round goes to Obama. The TPC took a look at the various tax proposals put forth by the two candidates and estimated that Obama's plan would lead to a boost in aftertax income for all but the highest earners, while taking a smaller bite out of government tax revenues than would McCain's plans.

I encourage you to read the entire article. And I'll keep an eye out for more details.

1 comment:

qoe said...

Note, the term "open markets" is just a euphemism for "free markets". The free markets are unregulated and free-wheeling throughout the world, guided not governed by the World Bank, which is ultimately (yes, this is a very simplistic, crude generalization of a huge problem, while yet not off the mark) why Fanny and Freddie are being bailed out by the Fed right now. Keeping the markets "open" and "free" means allowing national and multinational corporate concerns to outsource/offshore their operations, hiring foreign labor at slave labor rates in countries where human rights are scant (busting international labor unions by making the jobs simply disappear). "Open"/"Free" markets are driving the competition for resources between China, U.S. and Russia... which, in turn, drives the New Arms Race that we are beginning to see. There are, finally, now writers who are beginning to use the term "New Cold War" to describe the superpower jockeying we see exemplified in the Russian march on Georgia. Before too long, I think you will begin to see "arms race" creeping into commentary, as well. There is NO plan (Dem, Rep, or bipartisan) to tax business the way business should be taxed (and we are just talking fair share, here); if there were, there would be a mass exodus and the whole house of cards would crumble into a worse mess of dust and ashes than we are currently seeing...