Is Obama's Tax Cut a Welfare Check?

[DrHolliday]

Sounds like Obama wants Joe the Plumber to basically cut a check for people that don't pay any taxes.

Is this the country we want? Do we want to penalize those that attempt to succeed while rewarding those that seem indifferent to success?



http://rendevouswithdestiny.blogspot.com/2008/10/obamas-new-welfare-state-tax-rebate.html


WASHINGTON -- Barack Obama has a disturbing habit of saying things that are not true, such as no one who makes less than $250,000 will pay higher taxes under his tax plans.

He is running saturation ads around the country saying this, but the fact is that lots of people will be paying higher taxes beneath that income level (which will raise the top marginal tax rate from 35 percent to nearly 40 percent). In fact, millions of Americans who now pay no income taxes will get "refundable" checks from the government under his plan (but more on that in a minute).

The liberal senator would raise capital-gains tax rates on the sale of stocks or other assets on the gain in their value when they're sold. That would mean higher taxes on millions of American families preparing for their retirement.

He'd raise taxes on dividends, too, that would impose higher taxes on Americans whose income depends on those hard-earned dividends.

If you run a small business that earns $250,000 or more and you pay taxes on its earnings as an individual taxpayer (though you pay yourself less than that), you will be hit by his higher income tax.

His plan proposes to get rid of a lot of corporate tax "loopholes," which would mean higher taxes that would be passed on to their customers who make a lot less than $250,000.

But the most disingenuous part of his tax plan is his claim that he will give 95 percent of all American workers a "tax cut," because he does not mention that it will mean sending checks to millions of tax filers who pay no personal income taxes.

Critics say that looks "suspiciously like welfare" or income redistribution from wealthier taxpayers to lower-income Americans. But it also raises the question, How can he call it a "tax cut" when its recipients pay no income taxes?

Under his "Making Work Pay" income tax cut for low- to middle-income people, he will give a "refundable" $500 tax credit to low- to middle-income workers or $1,000 to couples. It would begin to phase out at $75,000 for individuals and $150,000 for a couple.

But because he makes it "refundable," he will pay the equivalent amount to those who have no income-tax liability after taking the usual tax credits and deductions in the tax code. Those checks would come from taxes to be paid by higher-income Americans.

The Internal Revenue Service says nearly 46 million tax filers -- one-third of all filers -- had no tax liability in 2006, so you can hardly call this a tax cut because they pay no taxes.

"What he's really talking about doing is mailing a check and, to me, that looks more like a welfare program than the kind of real tax relief that would encourage work, savings and investments," said Phil Kerpen, policy director at Americans for Prosperity, a free-market advocacy group.

Obama claims that almost all workers (95 percent) will benefit from his "tax cuts." But Investor's Business Daily points out that Obama's "'working families' does not include all households. Throw in singles, retirees, students and the unemployed, and the share getting some tax-related benefit is a good deal less."

The Tax Policy Center, a nonpartisan tax-analysis group established by the liberal Urban Institute and the Brookings Institution, dismisses his 95 percent figure, saying that about 80 percent of households would receive a tax cut. Throw in the tens of millions of tax filers who owe no taxes, and the percentage of taxpayers getting real tax cuts falls a lot lower.

The Obama campaign's chief economist Jason Furman told me in an e-mail that "the tens of millions of families working hard and paying payroll taxes do not think that tax cuts are a form of 'welfare' or 'redistribution' -- they think it is only fair to reward work."

Roberton Williams of the Tax Policy Center said "one can argue" that workers who don't pay income taxes "are paying Social Security payroll taxes, and this is a tax cut against that."

But is this just another clever way for Obama to redistribute the nation's income, taking from high-income taxpayers who pay the lion's share of all income taxes and giving it to lower-income workers who pay none?

Williams doesn't dispute this. "You could view it that way because both (tax) proposals are in the same tax plan," he said. "There's no question that's one way to perceive the tax plan." Exactly.

So this is what's at the core of Obama's economic policies -- taking more money from one group of taxpayers and directly transferring it to those in the lower- to middle-income tax brackets who pay little or no income taxes to begin with.

Instead of cutting everyone's taxes to encourage work, investment and savings by enlarging the economic pie, Obama would redivide the pie into smaller slices and redistribute it through the tax system.

This is the Europeanization of the economy that awaits us under an Obama presidency.

[SurferGirl]

Where is he going to be getting all that money he plans on spending?
I'm tired of working hard and then having my hard earned money going to support people who won't work. If people are disabled or retired that's one thing but I'm sick and tired of working my butt off for people that are just too lazy to work.

[Jolie Rouge]

I had similar questions regarding the stimulas package ... I have a niece Terri who is bipolar, she has spent the last two years in and out of instiutions and rehab, can not hold down a job due to health issues and no GED, and pays no taxes what so ever ... and yet she recieved the same amount of a "rebate" as my five member household, with two working adults ... does that make sense ?

[renaissanceman]

This whole thing doesn't make sense!

A "tax cut" for 95% of American's??? How the hell is that possible when around 40% of American's don't pay ANY taxes?

This is a disgusting attempt to create MORE Democrat voters!!

The Government will PAY you to vote for them!!!

Sounds great, if you have no hope of ever taking care of yourself I guess!

People with pride, morals and ambition won't support this. Just because you may be poor or lower middle class NOW, it doesn't mean you have to STAY that way.

A Democrat key plank is that you CAN'T make it on your own!!!

Only intellectual giant's like Obama and his wife can become rich on their own!!

[anothersta]

Where is he going to be getting all that money he plans on spending?
I'm tired of working hard and then having my hard earned money going to support people who won't work. If people are disabled or retired that's one thing but I'm sick and tired of working my butt off for people that are just too lazy to work.


He's going to raise taxes on those making over 75,000 a year.

If you look at HIS website, the tax savings are listed as such.

couple making 75,000 with one child in college, 3700. That is figuring a 4000 tax credit if they have a child in college. If they don't have a child in college, deduct the 4000 and they have a tax INCREASE of 300 per year.

Pretty slick how they present that, eh?

http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/taxes/Factsheet_Tax_Plan_FINAL.pdf

[anothersta]

This whole thing doesn't make sense!

A "tax cut" for 95% of American's??? How the hell is that possible when around 40% of American's don't pay ANY taxes?

This is a disgusting attempt to create MORE Democrat voters!!

The Government will PAY you to vote for them!!!

Sounds great, if you have no hope of ever taking care of yourself I guess!

People with pride, morals and ambition won't support this. Just because you may be poor or lower middle class NOW, it doesn't mean you have to STAY that way.

A Democrat key plank is that you CAN'T make it on your own!!!

Only intellectual giant's like Obama and his wife can become rich on their own!!

This is a disgusting attempt to buy votes! Slogan might as well be, vote for me and check's in the mail.

Sorry BHO, every one may have a price and I probably have a price, but I'm not cheap! Gimme a couple million and maybe I'll sell my vote.

[jeanea33]

So if Obama wants to spread the wealth around, let him lead by example and start writing checks from his personal account. I am sure he can find average guys in the phone book to take his check. He made 4 million last yr, how much did he spread around? gave to charity? helped a program?

[anothersta]

And then, BHO will RAISE taxes on those making over 102K per year via the social security cap. He will raise the cap so those making over 102K will see a tax INCREASE of 6% and self employed folks (small businesses) will see an INCREASE of 15.30%. OUCH!


Tax Rate 2008 2009
Employee 7.65% 7.65%
Self-Employed 15.30% 15.30%
NOTE: The 7.65% tax rate is the combined rate for Social Security and Medicare. The Social Security portion (OASDI) is 6.20% on earnings up to the applicable taxable maximum amount (see below). The Medicare portion (HI) is 1.45% on all earnings.

Maximum Taxable Earnings: 2008 2009
Social Security (OASDI only) $102,000 $106,800
Medicare (HI only) No Limit

http://www.ssa.gov/pressoffice/colafacts.htm

And let's be sure to make this VERY clear. This isn't money you're going to get back. This is money they KEEP regardless of how many deductions, tax credits, etc that you can rack up. They KEEP 6 or 15.3 percent.

BHO's going to hammer the living snot out of those between 100K and 250K. I can't believe people are falling for the garbage that spews from his mouth and flabberghasted that the MSM isn't picking up on this!!

Joe, if you're listening.... If BHO gets into office, I recommend you GIVE up that dream of buying your own business. If I had a small business right now, I'd be looking into selling it.

[pepperpot]

BHO's going to hammer the living snot out of those between 100K and 250K.


and then some....:agree

[anothersta]

and then some....:agree

And that poor couple making 75K a year. If they don't have a mortgage, they are going to lose the mortgage credit, so that will INCREASE their tax liability by 800 per year.

If they are saving their money, getting raises and they get lucky enough to get to 100K, then wanta buy a house, they are going to get socked with an additional 6% tax, 15.3 if they are self employed.

Those poor folks are never going to be able to afford a home under BHO's plan. Thats' sad to me. I'm so glad we already have a home, almost paid for, but we are older.

I really feel for young folks who are trying to get their money together to buy one. Looks like it's going to be MUCH harder under BHO's plan.

[Jolie Rouge]

So if Obama wants to spread the wealth around, let him lead by example and start writing checks from his personal account. I am sure he can find average guys in the phone book to take his check. He made 4 million last yr, how much did he spread around? gave to charity? helped a program?


He just means other people's wealth ....


This article was posted in http://www.bigbigforums.com/news-information/599550-palins-middle-class.html and doesn't address Obama's charity but compares Palina and Biden... like I always say ..."Follow the Money"

Palin gives more to charity than Biden
By Sam Youngman
10/03/08

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin made considerably less money than rival Sen. Joe Biden, but the Palin family gave more to charity in the last two years than Biden has in the last eight combined, according to Palin's tax records released Friday afternoon.

Palin, the running mate of presidential candidate Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), and her husband Todd reported meager earnings from 2006 and 2007, at least by presidential-politics standards.

In 2006, the Palins paid $11,944 in taxes on $127,869 in income. In 2007, they paid $24,738 on $166,080.

But in 2006, they donated $4,880 to charity, and in 2007, they donated $3,325.

By contrast, Biden (D-Del.), Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama's running mate, has donated a total of $3,690 since 1998 despite his higher Senate salary, according to an analysis posted by National Review.

The timing of the release of the Palins tax records has become something of a tradition. Campaigns wait until Friday afternoon, when the news cycle slows to a grind and reporters are focused elsewhere — in this case, Congress's passage and the president's signing of the financial rescue package.

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/...008-10-03.html


Seems the Palins put their money where their heart is ... Biden keeps his in his pockets ?

[pepperpot]

I honestly can't understand why people are buying into this........what are they thinking?

[stresseater]

This whole thing doesn't make sense!

A "tax cut" for 95% of American's??? How the hell is that possible when around 40% of American's don't pay ANY taxes?

This is a disgusting attempt to create MORE Democrat voters!!

The Government will PAY you to vote for them!!!

Sounds great, if you have no hope of ever taking care of yourself I guess!

People with pride, morals and ambition won't support this. Just because you may be poor or lower middle class NOW, it doesn't mean you have to STAY that way.

A Democrat key plank is that you CAN'T make it on your own!!!

Only intellectual giant's like Obama and his wife can become rich on their own!!
Well as a family who pulls down about 18,000 a year( for a family of 4) they can pay me all they want but it is WRONG and I still won't be voting for the democrats.

[speedygirl]

So if Obama wants to spread the wealth around, let him lead by example and start writing checks from his personal account. I am sure he can find average guys in the phone book to take his check. He made 4 million last yr, how much did he spread around? gave to charity? helped a program?

Looks like he gives planty to charity. The first figure is yearly combined income , the second charitable contributions and the third, federal taxes paid.


http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-03-25-taxreturns_N.htm

Year Total income Gifts to charity Federal taxes

2000 $240,726 $2,350 $63,732

2001 $275,123 $1,470 $86,072

2002 $260,824 $1,050 $68,958

2003 $238,327 $3,400 $51,856

2004 $207,647 $2,500 $40,426

2005 $1,670,995 $77,315 $545,614

2006 $991,296 $60,307 $277,431

The Obamas gave $240,000 to charity in 2007, income 4.2 million, paid 1.4 million in federal taxes.

http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/04/obamas_2007_income_42_million.html

[anothersta]

I honestly can't understand why people are buying into this........what are they thinking?


I dont' think they are thinking, they might be so mesmerized they don't want to think. And, to be quite honest, it's hard to figure out what BHO is saying when he talks cause he talks in such circles.

I was dissecting that transcript of the debate and I have LOTS of questions for BHO, but I wouldn't DARE ask him for fear of retaliation. I will stay far far away from his rallies!

[anothersta]

Looks like he gives planty to charity. The first figure is yearly combined income , the second charitable contributions and the third, federal taxes paid.


http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-03-25-taxreturns_N.htm

Year Total income Gifts to charity Federal taxes

2000 $240,726 $2,350 $63,732

2001 $275,123 $1,470 $86,072

2002 $260,824 $1,050 $68,958

2003 $238,327 $3,400 $51,856

2004 $207,647 $2,500 $40,426

2005 $1,670,995 $77,315 $545,614

2006 $991,296 $60,307 $277,431

The Obamas gave $240,000 to charity in 2007, income 4.2 million, paid 1.4 million in federal taxes.

http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/04/obamas_2007_income_42_million.html

So, in 2007, they gave 5.7% to charity. And they are wanting us to pay 6% in additional taxes over 100K. Self employed folks will be more than double that.

And these donations don't mean squat to me. I donated 4000 to animal charities last year (and that's just what I counted, there were others I didn't get reciepts for), I don't even make 1/3 of 240K. Those numbers just tell me how stingy the Obama's are with THEIR money. Don't seem to be so stingy with mine!

[stresseater]

Looks like he gives planty to charity. The first figure is yearly combined income , the second charitable contributions and the third, federal taxes paid.


http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-03-25-taxreturns_N.htm

Year Total income Gifts to charity Federal taxes

2000 $240,726 $2,350 $63,732

2001 $275,123 $1,470 $86,072

2002 $260,824 $1,050 $68,958

2003 $238,327 $3,400 $51,856

2004 $207,647 $2,500 $40,426

2005 $1,670,995 $77,315 $545,614

2006 $991,296 $60,307 $277,431

The Obamas gave $240,000 to charity in 2007, income 4.2 million, paid 1.4 million in federal taxes.

http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/04/obamas_2007_income_42_million.html

The numbers tell me that until he was running for prez he gave a pittance and the all of the sudden he started give a bunch so it would look good. Hmmmm

[anothersta]

Looks like he gives planty to charity. The first figure is yearly combined income , the second charitable contributions and the third, federal taxes paid.


http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-03-25-taxreturns_N.htm

Year Total income Gifts to charity Federal taxes

2000 $240,726 $2,350 $63,732

2001 $275,123 $1,470 $86,072

2002 $260,824 $1,050 $68,958

2003 $238,327 $3,400 $51,856

2004 $207,647 $2,500 $40,426

2005 $1,670,995 $77,315 $545,614

2006 $991,296 $60,307 $277,431

The Obamas gave $240,000 to charity in 2007, income 4.2 million, paid 1.4 million in federal taxes.

http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/04/obamas_2007_income_42_million.html

I can't resist, let's run the numbers.

Obama's gave in 2000 .9% to charity. I put more in the salvation army bucket in front of walmart.

2001 .5% musta been a tough year for them

2002 .4% Hmm, they must think nobody's ever gonna look at this. To put this in perspective; if you've got a dollar in your pocket and united way bucket is sitting on the counter at a store. You give them a penny, then ask for change. 'cause you're giving them less than 1/2 cent out of every dollar.

2003 1.4% they gave a penny and a half that year

2004 1.2%

2005 4.2%

2006 6% I think they knew someone was gonna be looking at this one. and they were still pretty stingy. I'd also LOVE to see the list of charities they donated to.

[pepperpot]

So much for Christian tithing! :lol

[speedygirl]

So, in 2007, they gave 5.7% to charity. And they are wanting us to pay 6% in additional taxes over 100K. Self employed folks will be more than double that.

And these donations don't mean squat to me. I donated 4000 to animal charities last year (and that's just what I counted, there were others I didn't get reciepts for), I don't even make 1/3 of 240K. Those numbers just tell me how stingy the Obama's are with THEIR money. Don't seem to be so stingy with mine!


Good for you. When it comes to contributions people can do whatever they choose with their money. Though his donations my donations and whoever elses don't mean squat to you, I'm sure the charities appreciate them as your animal charities appreciate your gift.
Jeanea wanted to know how much he gave to charity and that's why I posted it.
Stingy? You can't be calling someone stingy because they don't meet your rule of thumb for generous. They have little kids and saving and putting away for college isn't a bad idea.
McCain is loaded and I don't judge his PERSONAL financial decians.

[anothersta]

I can't help but to wonder if Trinity Church was one of the non profit charities they gave to. Is there a list of charities they gave to on the web somewhere?

[anothersta]

Good for you. When it comes to contributions people can do whatever they choose with their money. Though his donations my donations and whoever elses don't mean squat to you, I'm sure the charities appreciate them as your animal charities appreciate your gift.
Jeanea wanted to know how much he gave to charity and that's why I posted it.
Stingy? You can't be calling someone stingy because they don't meet your rule of thumb for generous. They have little kids and saving and putting away for college isn't a bad idea.
McCain is loaded and I don't judge his PERSONAL financial decians.


But I CAN call them stingy when they give less than they want me to give to 'spread the wealth' in taxes.

[anothersta]

So much for Christian tithing! :lol

LOL I was thinking the exact same thing.

[speedygirl]

I can't resist, let's run the numbers.

Obama's gave in 2000 .9% to charity. I put more in the salvation army bucket in front of walmart.

2001 .5% musta been a tough year for them

2002 .4% Hmm, they must think nobody's ever gonna look at this. To put this in perspective; if you've got a dollar in your pocket and united way bucket is sitting on the counter at a store. You give them a penny, then ask for change. 'cause you're giving them less than 1/2 cent out of every dollar.

2003 1.4% they gave a penny and a half that year

2004 1.2%

2005 4.2%

2006 6% I think they knew someone was gonna be looking at this one. and they were still pretty stingy. I'd also LOVE to see the list of charities they donated to.

Once again, good for you.
Read the article and you might learn why. for example

"As new parents who were paying off their large student loans, giving $10,000 to charity was as generous as they could be at the time,"

BTW who are we to comment on peoples charitable giving? If people give for the right reason and not the glory of the praise that's all that matters.
I'd say that about a Dem. Republican, Christian, Athiest...anybody.

[anothersta]

Once again, good for you.
Read the article and you might learn why. for example

"As new parents who were paying off their large student loans, giving $10,000 to charity was as generous as they could be at the time,"

BTW who are we to comment on peoples charitable giving? If people give for the right reason and not the glory of the praise that's all that matters.
I'd say that about a Dem. Republican, Christian, Athiest...anybody.

The only reason I comment on what they give is that they don't think taxpayers are giving enough. It's a do what I say, not what I do kindof thing and that really turns me off.

If they really felt so strongly about charity, they would've given more. And there's still no proof on this student loan thing as the documents are sealed. If they released those and showed us they had loans, I would be alot more convinced. Until then, we really dont' know how the college was paid for.

[anothersta]

Once again, good for you.
Read the article and you might learn why. for example

"As new parents who were paying off their large student loans, giving $10,000 to charity was as generous as they could be at the time,"

BTW who are we to comment on peoples charitable giving? If people give for the right reason and not the glory of the praise that's all that matters.
I'd say that about a Dem. Republican, Christian, Athiest...anybody.


I didn't see a year they gave 10,000. Did I miss one?

[anothersta]

I should also add that I'm not slamming what the average joe gives to charity. It's charity, it's a thing folks do when they can and what they can.

I'd like to be judged the same way. BHO is judging me (by saying he should raise taxes and raising taxes on those making over 75K per year) which makes me wanta take a look into them.

If you give nothing, it's your perogative. Just don't judge what I do either. It's charity, it's optional.

BHO wants my charity to NOT be optional via taxes.

[pepperpot]

"As new parents who were paying off their large student loans, giving $10,000 to charity was as generous as they could be at the time,"
.

So their student loans were costing them roughly $70,000. per year?

Is that why it went from $2,500 to $77,000 within one year? :confused:


Now, I believe charity should be a gift from the heart........and anything given to a charity if a plus......BTW what were his 'charities' that he donated to? Palin dontated her baby's crib to the Salvation Army......that was disclosed.

[speedygirl]

The only reason I comment on what they give is that they don't think taxpayers are giving enough. It's a do what I say, not what I do kindof thing and that really turns me off.

If they really felt so strongly about charity, they would've given more. And there's still no proof on this student loan thing as the documents are sealed. If they released those and showed us they had loans, I would be alot more convinced. Until then, we really dont' know how the college was paid for.


The thing is I feel strongly about some charities and would LOVE to give more but I am paying out thousands in student loans, college tuitions. I've raised a family, have a mortgage etc... Does that make me stingy? It just makes me someone trying to do what's best for my family.
They have given increasingly more as the years went on.
As far as student loans go, the only person that can get that is the holder of the loan. If you wanted mine you'd get the same answer.

[speedygirl]

So their student loans were costing them roughly $70,000. per year?

Is that why it went from $2,500 to $77,000 within one year? :confused:


Now, I believe charity should be a gift from the heart........and anything given to a charity if a plus......BTW what were his 'charities' that he donated to? Palin dontated her baby's crib to the Salvation Army......that was disclosed.

I believed they wanted to pay them off in full.
Some of his charities were stated in the article. Good for Palin with the crib.

[speedygirl]

I didn't see a year they gave 10,000. Did I miss one?

Yes you did.

charitable donations for;

2005 $77,315
2006 $60,307
2007 $240,000

Hardly stingy.

[anothersta]

The thing is I feel strongly about some charities and would LOVE to give more but I am paying out thousands in student loans, college tuitions. I've raised a family, have a mortgage etc... Does that make me stingy? It just makes me someone trying to do what's best for my family.
They have given increasingly more as the years went on.
As far as student loans go, the only person that can get that is the holder of the loan. If you wanted mine you'd get the same answer.

But, I wouldn't want your info cause you're not running for president.

I dont' think you are being uncharitable if you can't afford it right now. By the same token, you aren't wanting to take my money and give it to someone else. The Obamas are and that's the difference.

I still don't see that 10K donation. Is that in with one of the later years?

[pepperpot]

I think she was more referring to these years.....

2000 $240,726 $2,350 $63,732

2001 $275,123 $1,470 $86,072

2002 $260,824 $1,050 $68,958

2003 $238,327 $3,400 $51,856

2004 $207,647 $2,500 $40,426

[pepperpot]

I still don't see that 10K donation. Is that in with one of the later years?

I think it about totals the 5 years from 2000 - 2004.....

[cSoReNSoN]

The thing is I feel strongly about some charities and would LOVE to give more but I am paying out thousands in student loans, college tuitions. I've raised a family, have a mortgage etc... Does that make me stingy? It just makes me someone trying to do what's best for my family.
They have given increasingly more as the years went on.
As far as student loans go, the only person that can get that is the holder of the loan. If you wanted mine you'd get the same answer.

Exactly. My student loan records are confidential. Only I, the loanholder, can access these financial records. Loan repayment is based upon income. Hence the higher the household/individual income, the higher the monthly repayment amount expected. As the Obamas' incomes increased, the repayment amount increased. My bachelor's degree resulted in an extremely high amount of student loan debt. It is beyond feasible that two individuals with multiple degrees (bachelor, graduate and law degrees) would have each incurred well over $100,000 in student loan debt. I would estimate each to have incurred debt more in the $150,000 range. This is based on my own experience with a bachelor's degree along with a cousin earning masters and law degrees.

[anothersta]

I found it!

"Some of their largest charitable donations disclosed — $27,500 in 2005 and 2006 — have been made to their church, Trinity United Church of Christ, which has been a focus of controversy in recent weeks over comments by its former pastor, Jeremiah Wright.

They also gave $45,000 to two literacy organizations and $31,000 to CARE, the global anti-poverty group"

The Care group is the one he promised the 1.2BILLION more from America if he's elected, correct? I think that's the one. The 10K was from adding up a bunch of the earlier years.

I'm not so sure BHO got student loans, prove it BHO!

[anothersta]

Exactly. My student loan records are confidential. Only I, the loanholder, can access these financial records. Loan repayment is based upon income. Hence the higher the household/individual income, the higher the monthly repayment amount expected. As the Obamas' incomes increased, the repayment amount increased. My bachelor's degree resulted in an extremely high amount of student loan debt. It is beyond feasible that two individuals with multiple degrees (bachelor, graduate and law degrees) would have each incurred well over $100,000 in student loan debt. I would estimate each to have incurred debt more in the $150,000 range. This is based on my own experience with a bachelor's degree along with a cousin earning masters and law degrees.

If you run for president, I think it's a fair question for the voters to want to see that info for themselves.

[pepperpot]

Follow the money.....

Hardly sounds like some dude sitting in church appeasing his wife.......he's in deep. He owes many.....

[anothersta]

Yes you did.

charitable donations for;

2005 $77,315
2006 $60,307
2007 $240,000

Hardly stingy.

It is if you go by percentages. It's less than they want to raise taxes for someone making 100K per year. Self employed would be 15.3% to 'spread the wealth'.

And that will NOT be optional for american taxpayers. The point you're trying to make is that a 77K donation is the same for someone who makes 200K and 1.4million. Just not the same at all.

Percentages tell the real story.

Sorry, that would be 1.6 Million. I missed 200K lol

[janelle]

They could give more to charity if they didn't think they had to lay out 10,000 a month for their daughters extracurricular activities. What those kids are doing is beyond me. Some high class extra activities.

If Obama wants to spread the wealth around he could start with the pay a president gets. Spread that around while you are in office. Get patriotic with it why doesn't he as well as Biden. They can be the role models for the rest of us. Snort LOL

[speedygirl]

But, I wouldn't want your info cause you're not running for president.

I dont' think you are being uncharitable if you can't afford it right now. By the same token, you aren't wanting to take my money and give it to someone else. The Obamas are and that's the difference.

I still don't see that 10K donation. Is that in with one of the later years?

I am talking about the law protecting student loan disclosure that's why I used ME as an example. No one's student loan info can be given to anyone else by the lenders nor the university.
All I did was present a list when someone wanted to know his charitable contributions. Someone was curious, I got the info.

[anothersta]

They could give more to charity if they didn't think they had to lay out 10,000 a month for their daughters extracurricular activities. What those kids are doing is beyond me. Some high class extra activities.

If Obama wants to spread the wealth around he could start with the pay a president gets. Spread that around while you are in office. Get patriotic with it why doesn't he as well as Biden. They can be the role models for the rest of us. Snort LOL

Oh, their kids won't lose their extracirricular activities with this tax plan. They can afford it. That poor couple making 75K per year will lose THEIR kids extracirricular activities and give them to someone else.

Those poor people at that 75K level, they are really getting hammered :(

[pepperpot]

I am talking about the law protecting student loan disclosure that's why I used ME as an example. No one's student loan info can be given to anyone else by the lenders nor the university.
All I did was present a list when someone wanted to know his charitable contributions. Someone was curious, I got the info.

I don't fault you for providing the info, I thank you.....

You'd think that being in the public eye and running for president, he'd be a bit more transparent......

[speedygirl]

They could give more to charity if they didn't think they had to lay out 10,000 a month for their daughters extracurricular activities. What those kids are doing is beyond me. Some high class extra activities.

If Obama wants to spread the wealth around he could start with the pay a president gets. Spread that around while you are in office. Get patriotic with it why doesn't he as well as Biden. They can be the role models for the rest of us. Snort LOL

They all could spread the wealth if they chose to do so. What people do with their own money is their own business. I don't fault the McCains nor the Obamas for being wealthy. If people have the money to do with as they choose, well good for them.

[anothersta]

I am talking about the law protecting student loan disclosure that's why I used ME as an example. No one's student loan info can be given to anyone else by the lenders nor the university.
All I did was present a list when someone wanted to know his charitable contributions. Someone was curious, I got the info.


I understand and I don't mean to be coming down on you. I ran the numbers as percentages and presented a more understandable list that relates to the average person.

I think if someone's going to run for president, we need transparency and BHO isn't giving it. Plus, via tax hikes, he's saying we're not doing enough.

[speedygirl]

I understand and I don't mean to be coming down on you. I ran the numbers as percentages and presented a more understandable list that relates to the average person.

I think if someone's going to run for president, we need transparency and BHO isn't giving it. Plus, via tax hikes, he's saying we're not doing enough.

Thanks, understood. :)

[pepperpot]

They could give more to charity if they didn't think they had to lay out 10,000 a month for their daughters extracurricular activities. What those kids are doing is beyond me. Some high class extra activities.


That's about $1,200 per child, per week, year round........what are they doing? That's $170 per day ,per child, every day of the year.....extra....curricular? What are they doing? (Granted this is not tuition, but extra...curricular...like girl scouts or ballet?)

[anothersta]

They all could spread the wealth if they chose to do so. What people do with their own money is their own business. I don't fault the McCains nor the Obamas for being wealthy. If people have the money to do with as they choose, well good for them.

I understand and I agree. But I don't agree with the Obama's trying to FORCE us all to 'spread the wealth'. Charity should always be optional. The americans have proven time and time again that we are the most charitable people in the world. Why can't BHO let it go at that?

Why does he want to raise our taxes, then force us to give to charities of HIS choice.

That's my point. You seem like a nice enough person, I apologize if my posts looked like I was attacking you. I certainly didn't mean to do that. You and I are just debating the subject.

I am attacking the Obamas. I dont' think they have a defendable position.

[anothersta]

That's about $1,200 per child, per week, year round........what are they doing? That's $170 per day ,per child, every day of the year.....extra....curricular? What are they doing? (Granted this is not tuition, but extra...curricular...like girl scouts or ballet?)


In all honesty, I wouldn't care if they weren't trying to take my grandkids' activities away from them. You've got 10K a year to spend on your kids activities? Good for you!! :) Just don't take my kids' away to give to someone else.

[pepperpot]

In all honesty, I wouldn't care if they weren't trying to take my grandkids' activities away from them. You've got 10K a year to spend on your kids activities? Good for you!! :) Just don't take my kids' away to give to someone else.

I agree, if you can afford it....go for it....

I'm just curious what their activites are! :lol

[anothersta]

I agree, if you can afford it....go for it....

I'm just curious what their activites are! :lol


Good point, my guess is they are really really really good activities. If not, they oughta be for that price!

[speedygirl]

I agree, if you can afford it....go for it....

I'm just curious what their activites are! :lol

Me too. I have looked over and over and haven't found a thing. My DD took hours of dance a month, music lessons, sports, DS the same thing with sports, art, music and we paid a a fraction (a really small fraction) of what they paid and my kids hours were fully occupied.

[Jolie Rouge]

I am curious about their priorities ... they make 1.6 MILLION a year between them; spend 10 THOUSAND a month on their childrens' extra curicular activities ( I think she said swimming, dance & gymnastics ) and yet they have not paid off their student loans ? It was all part of the same speech - a "we are one of you" where Michelle was discribing how they struggle to pay the bills "like everyone else"...

They want to take your money and mine via taxes to "share the wealth" while they spend big bucks so their kids can play while neglecting their obligations ( student loans ) and give a pittance ( as compared to their income ) to the charities they so passionately believe in ?

Who is wanting them in charge .... and why ????

[speedygirl]

I am curious about their priorities ... they make 1.6 MILLION a year between them; spend 10 THOUSAND a month on their childrens' extra curicular activities ( I think she said swimming, dance & gymnastics ) and yet they have not paid off their student loans ? It was all part of the same speech - a "we are one of you" where Michelle was discribing how they struggle to pay the bills "like everyone else"...

They want to take your money and mine via taxes to "share the wealth" while they spend big bucks so their kids can play while neglecting their obligations ( student loans ) and give a pittance ( as compared to their income ) to the charities they so passionately believe in ?

Who is wanting them in charge .... and why ????

I guess the loans are paid off now but is Mark Spitz and Nadia Comaneci their kids swim and gymnastics instructors? I know what I paid for those kinds of lessons and it didn't come near 10K!

[anothersta]

I am curious about their priorities ... they make 1.6 MILLION a year between them; spend 10 THOUSAND a month on their childrens' extra curicular activities ( I think she said swimming, dance & gymnastics ) and yet they have not paid off their student loans ? It was all part of the same speech - a "we are one of you" where Michelle was discribing how they struggle to pay the bills "like everyone else"...

They want to take your money and mine via taxes to "share the wealth" while they spend big bucks so their kids can play while neglecting their obligations ( student loans ) and give a pittance ( as compared to their income ) to the charities they so passionately believe in ?

Who is wanting them in charge .... and why ????

I don't want them in charge. And to be honest, it was right from the get go. It was the whole, 1000 for your vote thing that really insulted me. Why would they think I could be bought for so cheap?

And, I'll admit it. I'm not that enthralled with McCain.

When it comes right down to it, I think McCain's plan will grow the economy and I think BHO's plan will kill it. But, I remember the Carter years so I know how the tax and spend thing works and what it causes. I also saw how talking without preconditions worked out. I remember the Iran hostage situation, I remember. Remember waiting in line for 2 gallons of gas if you could get it?

I dont' want to live like that again.

[Jolie Rouge]

Found it ..... posted in http://www.bigbigforums.com/news-information/573103-i-kinda-feel-sorry-michelle-obama-print.html


And I made a mistake .. it is 10K a YEAR not 10K a month on playtime for the girls ...

Jolie Rouge 03-11-2008 04:08 PM

Two Americas
The one the Obamas live in and the one for the rest of us.

First it was millionaire trial lawyer John Edwards whining about two Americas.

Even Democrats rolled their eyes at his $400 haircuts and 25,000-square-foot home (10 times the national average for a new home).

Now it is Princess Michelle’s turn.

Actual quote via Jack Kelly:


“We spend between the two kids, on extracurriculars outside the classroom, we’re spending about $10,000 a year on piano and dance and sports supplements. And summer programs… Do you know what summer camp costs?” [quote]

Well, actually I don’t. None of my kids went. I spent a week once at Camp Wanakee.

[quote]“The salaries don’t keep up with the cost of paying off the debt, so you’re in your 40s, still paying off your debt at a time when you have to save for your kids,” her highness complained.

Kelly pointed out that in 2005, Mrs. O’s salary was $316,962 at the University of Chicago Hospital. She’s a lawyer, not a doctor.

Hubby’s pay as a U.S. senator topped $160 K that year.

If you are struggling to make ends meet on a half-million a year — a 1040 that puts you in the top 2% of Americans — then the problem is you, not the country.

Still this woman, who was never proud of America when her husband was elected to the state legislature or even the United States Senate, whines and whines and whines.

America is, she said, “just downright mean.”

Someone play “God Bless the USA” for her. She just doesn’t get it.

http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber.../two-americas/

Jack Kelly has more. http://jewishworldreview.com/0308/jkelly031008.php3


Why the Obamas don't advertise their standard of living

Campaigning for her husband in Zanesville before the Ohio primary, Michelle Obama described to a group of women how hard it had been for her and Barack to make ends meet:


"We spend between the two kids, on extracurriculars outside the classroom, we're spending about $10,000 a year on piano and dance and sports supplements. And summer programs...Do you know what summer camp costs?"

The burden was especially heavy because she and Barack had to repay the student loans for college and law school at Princeton and Harvard:


"The salaries don't keep up with the cost of paying off the debt, so you're in your 40s, still paying off your debt at a time when you have to save for your kids."

Actually, Michelle's salary has kept up pretty well. The University of Chicago Hospital, where she is vice president for community affairs, bumped her pay from $121,910 in 2004 to $316,962 after her husband was elected to the U.S. Senate that year. National Review's Byron York, who covered her remarks at the Zanesville Day Nursery, noted that her new salary is roughly ten times the median household income in Muskingham County.

The Obamas also have Barack's salary as a U.S. Senator ($169,300), royalties from his two best selling books, and an undisclosed amount of income from her service on six corporate boards. But this hasn't brightened Michelle's outlook:


"We have become a nation of struggling folks who are barely making it every day," Michelle had said at a black church in South Carolina in January. "Folks are just jammed up, and it's gotten worse over my lifetime... The life that I'm talking about that most people are living has gotten progressively worse since I was a little girl."

Mrs. Obama was counting her husband and herself among the folks who are just jammed up, reported Lauren Collins of the New Yorker, who was at the Pee Dee Union Baptist Church in Cheraw when Michelle spoke there.

"You're looking at a young couple that's just a few years out of debt," Mrs. Obama said. "See, because we went to these good schools, and we didn't have trust funds."

It is, apparently, America's fault that the Obamas didn't have trust funds, and unfair that they had to repay their student loans. We're a country that is "just downright mean," Mrs. Obama said.

It is true that some people in America are having trouble making ends meet. Some people in America always are having trouble making ends meet. But what Michelle Obama said is astounding. She was born in 1964. At the time, segregation was still legal. Governors in Alabama, Arkansas and Mississippi stood in schoolhouse doors to prevent blacks from attending college.

"The per capita income of African-Americans has risen sixteen-fold over the last 40 years," noted John Podhoretz of Commentary. "Black home ownership has risen tenfold. The black poverty rate has declined from 75 percent to 25 percent."

But this is, I suppose, meaningless if you think piano lessons and summer camp are among the things government should guarantee everyone. Whatever gratitude Michelle Obama has for the opportunities America has provided her are overwhelmed by her resentment that some others have more than she does.

Husbands and wives often have different political views, so we should not assume Barack shares the chip on Michelle's shoulder.

But "Spengler," the erudite cynic who writes for the Asia Times, thinks the women in his life are a clue to the inner Barack. His mother, Ann Dunham, was a communist sympathizer, he noted. A childhood mentor who Barack praised in his autobiography was Frank Marshall Davis, a prominent member of the Communist Party USA. "Radical anti-Americanism, rather than Islam, was the reigning faith in the Dunham household," Spengler said.

"Barack Obama is a clever fellow who imbibed hatred of America with his mother's milk, but worked his way up the elite ladder of education and career," Spengler said. "He has the empathetic skill set of an anthropologist who lives with his subjects, learns their language, and elicits their hopes and fears while remaining at an emotional distance. That is, he is the political equivalent of a sociopath."

Spengler's is a minority view. But if he's right, we shouldn't wonder why Barack won't wear an American flag pin in his lapel.

[anothersta]

Looks like he gives planty to charity. The first figure is yearly combined income , the second charitable contributions and the third, federal taxes paid.


http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-03-25-taxreturns_N.htm

Year Total income Gifts to charity Federal taxes

2000 $240,726 $2,350 $63,732

2001 $275,123 $1,470 $86,072

2002 $260,824 $1,050 $68,958

2003 $238,327 $3,400 $51,856

2004 $207,647 $2,500 $40,426

2005 $1,670,995 $77,315 $545,614

2006 $991,296 $60,307 $277,431

The Obamas gave $240,000 to charity in 2007, income 4.2 million, paid 1.4 million in federal taxes.

http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/04/obamas_2007_income_42_million.html

I went and looked at the Obama's tax returns because some of us were wondering what they donated to.

In '06:

26270 to the Trinity Church
50000 to the United Negro College fund
35000 to Care

For some reason, the site is down now. But, I'll try to get the rest of those numbers later tonight.

Do be aware that in '06, the numbers won't add up to what they claimed. That is because they made too much to take the full deduction and only took a percentage.

I did find it interesting that they supported a Global poverty program and not an American one. As far as the college fund, I'm glad someone's getting college funds even if you do have to be a person of color to be a recipient.

I think Charitable donations really show where a person's focus is, so I'll try and get the rest of the numbers later. With a 23 page tax return, it takes me a long time to fish through. Bear with me.

[Jolie Rouge]

10/31/2008
Obama and Biden’s Charitable Giving:
They Don’t Want to Spread Their Own Wealth Around
Patterico http://patterico.com/2008/10/31/obama-and-bidens-charitable-giving-they-dont-want-to-spread-their-own-wealth-around/


They’re happy to spread yours around, mind you. Just not their own:


Looking at Obama’s charitable giving in since 2000 based on his tax returns, we find that Obama consistently refused to follow his own advice to “spread the wealth” when he had the opportunity to do so. This is especially true in years when he made nearly $250,000 or more. . . . [F]rom 2000-2004, Obama’s charitable giving was less than 1 percent.

His contributions increased after his book deal, to a maximum of 6.1% of income in 2006.

Obama’s running mate, Joe Biden, was even stingier about spreading his wealth. When his tax records were released in September, they revealed that over the past decade he had only donated an average of $369 each year. In 2007, his charitable giving was only $995, or 0.3 percent of income in a year when his tax returns reported $319,853 in income.

By comparison, John McCain gave more than one-quarter of his income in 2006 and 2007 (28.6 and 27.3 percent respectively). And according to the New York Observer, since 1998, he has donated royalties on his books totaling more than $1.8 million.

Read it all. http://www.bizzyblog.com/2008/10/31/patrick-poole-guest-post-obama-and-biden-refused-to-spread-their-wealth/

IRONIC UPDATE: Obama today says of McCain and Palin: “I don’t know when they decided that they wanted to make a virtue out of selfishness.”

[anothersta]

Let's not forget that Cindy McCain has made many trips abroad to help children in poverty stricken countries. I'm sure she could find other things to do with all her money, but that is what she CHOOSES to do.

Someone's character DOES matter.