Quote:
Originally Posted by aceventura3
In the editorial section of IBD today. I would like to see a fact based defense from the Obama side from some of the facts pointed out in this editorial. I am betting it won't happen, I expect only generalities and accusations of bias and unfair treatment.
And, yes I already know what many of you think about IBD. But they reference fact based information that can be independently checked and verified by looking at the tax code and Obama's plan (the parts of his plan that can be nailed down). So, let's stop the pretense and agree that under Obama and a Democratic Congress taxes are going up for almost all of us including the middle class. And, I think we should expect federal government spending to increase at a rate higher than tax dollars collected, unfortunately the next President is not going to have the benefit of a dot com boom and excessive real estate price increases to bolster taxes collected the way that Bill Clinton experienced. So, perhaps it is time to get over the "times were so good under Clinton" talk because Clinton policies had almost nothing to do with the boom in technology in the 90's or the real estate boom.
Today in Investor's Business Daily stock analysis and business news
|
That is odd the article says Obama will phase out the child and dependent care credit yet Obama's website says he will expand it:
Barack Obama | Change We Can Believe In | Family
Quote:
Expand the Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit: The Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit provides too little relief to families that struggle to afford child care expenses. Barack Obama will reform the Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit by making it refundable and allowing low-income families to receive up to a 50 percent credit for their child care expenses.
|
So which is it? Also if this article is factually correct why is it in an editorial?
-----Added 25/8/2008 at 03 : 08 : 30-----
Also looking at marginal tax rate is a bit misleading. The bottom line is do the families pay more or less overall? This article makes no mention of that.