Support NeoGAF

[Frank the Great]

Good. That's exactly what I want the Republicans to think.

It's not what they really think lol.

 

[NetMapel]

Has you met our friend Jay?

lol JayDubya with his libertarian view. Most people depend on some sort of governmental social program one way or another everyday. If the government cut off those programs then you cut off more tax revenue, it's as simple as that.

 

[Byakuya769]

It can't.

Maybe if Obama heavily decreased spending while giving the middle class bigger rebates and tax credits it could work, but as a whole It is literally impossible. In fact I read somewhere that Obama's plan is 4.2 billion loss per year, while McCain is 2.something.

.... "I read somewhere"


color me convinced

 

[ryutaro's mama]

Good. That's exactly what I want the Republicans to think.

It's just weird how Obama now somehow has no ability to speak off teleprompter?

Wat?

Are they seeing the same Obama other people are?

I don't get it.

 

[ZealousD]

According to the Rep panelists on LKL, Obama only does well when reading from a teleprompter and should be very worried about debating John McCain next Friday.

The same John McCain that was fumbling over teleprompted speech during his own acceptance speech at his own Convention?

That John McCain?

Ok, guys...

Obama can have problems speaking impromptu, quite a few "ummms" and pauses because he's trying to choose his words carefully. He did very well in the later debates against Clinton though, probably because he practiced and anticipated his talking points better prior to the debates.

 

[Byakuya769]

It's just weird how Obama now somehow has no ability to speak off teleprompter?

Wat?

Are they seeing the same Obama other people are?

I don't get it.

They have to stick to the script

 

[ryutaro's mama]

Wow, amazing how civilized the panelists were on AC360.

They all got out their talking points and there was no yelling

At all.

 

[ryutaro's mama]

They have to stick to the script

Nicely played.

Bravo.

 

[The Chosen One]

Seriously I think we all need to be real. Obama isn't going to be to do a 1/10 of what he's proposing given our current economic conditions and overall debt. Obama is going to have to do some massive repairing his first term to fix the mess Bush and the Repugs made the last eight years. Hopefully by Obama's second term he'll be able to do at least a few of the programs he's proposed.

Personally I'm for Obama because he seems like a realist and pragmatist. Someone who is methodical and isn't blinded by preconceived ideology. I also feel his overall charisma will greatly improve our standing among the rest of the world and inspire people here at home.

Middle class tax cuts, improved health-care, and improved college/education grants are all great but that's not why I'm voting for him. I don't really vote based on campaign lofty promises. There's just too much that's out of their control that can drastically affect whether those programs get implemented. Instead I try to vote on perceived judgment. How do they react to world issues or when curve balls get thrown their way.

I wasn't a big fan of Obama a year ago, but he won me over during the course of the campaign. They way he handled the Rev. Wright fiasco with his Race speech was nothing short of amazing. I'm also been extremely impressed how his campaign has been very disciplined while battling both the Clinton and Republican machines. If this is any indication how he'll run his white house then it's definitely a good sign. Finally, while I admired that he was right about Iraq back in 2002, that wasn't enough for me. But over the past 15 months, he's been 6-12 months ahead of everyone else with his foreign policy views. Surgical strikes in Pakistan, increased brigades in Afghanistan, Iraq time-table, and etc. This man knows what he's talking about.

I'm sure I won't like everything in an Obama presidency, but I think the country will overall be in good hands. Especially given the other option... President Palin? You've got to be kidding me...

 

[PillowKnight]

Maybe if Obama heavily decreased spending while giving the middle class bigger rebates and tax credits it could work, but as a whole It is literally impossible. In fact I read somewhere that Obama's plan is 4.2 billion loss per year, while McCain is 2.something.
.

Where did you read this? As far as i've read those two figured are closer when swapped.

 

[speculawyer]

It's an irrelevant argument. Obama has no plans to balance the budget, but neither does McCain.

Bush has made it impossible to balance quickly. It is gonna take a few years as it did with Reagan/Bush 1 then Clinton.

 

[Cloudy]

That's always been a funny argument to me as well. Honestly, I'm willing to concede that debates haven't always been Obama's strongest forum. But when Republicans get giddy about how Obama is going to make a fool out of himself during the debates, they do realize that they're not allowed to send in a designated hitter for McCain, right?

They're idiots. Obama knew he was up against the "favorite" and didn't really go hard at Hilary even when she attacked him.

Unlike McCain, he has a firm grasp of all issues and doesn't just regurgitate talking points..

 

[speculawyer]

Maybe if Obama heavily decreased spending while giving the middle class bigger rebates and tax credits it could work, but as a whole It is literally impossible. In fact I read somewhere that Obama's plan is 4.2 billion loss per year, while McCain is 2.something.

Why do you even have an Obama Avatar? Sheesh.

Republican nominee McCain has promised to balance the budget by 2013, but most analysts consider that goal elusive unless lawmakers make radical changes in Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid funding. McCain has made no such dramatic proposals.

Obama issued a statement Tuesday on the new data, promising that he'd "bring real change by cutting taxes for middle-class families and small businesses, paying for all his proposals to reduce the deficit" and working toward fiscal responsibility. He'd let tax cuts for the wealthiest earners expire and would impose higher taxes on certain corporations.

However, the Brookings Institution-Urban Institute Tax Policy Center has found that Obama's tax-reduction plan would increase the national debt by $3.5 trillion by 2018. McCain wants to leave existing tax cuts in place rather than let them expire, which the center said would add $5 trillion to the debt.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/20080909/pl_mcclatchy/3040652

 

[mj1108]

Unlike McCain, he has a firm grasp of and talks about all issues and doesn't just regurgitate talking points..

Fix'd

 

[cashman]

Obama the antichrist???

 

[avatar299]

Ok, informative reads. Thanks guys Obama seems to know what he's doing then. In this troubled time, creating new and good jobs is key because then people get the money to live and government gets extra tax revenue. Having a healthy amount of tax revenue that can be spent on various social and essential programs is the big picture each candidates must be able to see. Whichever candidate who can deliver on that is clearly the better choice.

If that is how you think then why does the debt matter to you at all?

That's always been a funny argument to me as well. Honestly, I'm willing to concede that debates haven't always been Obama's strongest forum. But when Republicans get giddy about how Obama is going to make a fool out of himself during the debates, they do realize that they're not allowed to send in a designated hitter for McCain, right?

Have you seen the Saddleback forum?

.... "I read somewhere"


color me convinced

Oh sorry i don't bookmark every damn site i go to. God forbid you lazy bastards ever look

Tax and fiscal policy will loom large in the next president’s domestic policy agenda. Nearly all of the tax cuts enacted since 2001 expire at the end of 2010. The individual alternative minimum tax (AMT) threatens to ensnare tens of millions of Americans in a web of pointless complexity and higher taxes, but a permanent fix palatable to both political parties has proven elusive. In the past year, the federal budget deficit has ballooned, and, more worrisome, large projected increases in spending on Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid will put unprecedented demands on federal government revenue sources in the coming decades.

Fundamental reform of our tax system is one way to resolve these problems, but, at least in part because reform creates both winners and losers, the leading presidential candidates have not addressed it seriously. Nonetheless, both candidates have proposed major changes to the nation’s tax laws. Senator McCain would permanently extend the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, increase deductions for taxpayers supporting dependents, reduce the corporate income tax rate, and allow immediate deductions for investments in certain capital equipment. Senator Obama would permanently extend certain provisions of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts primarily affecting taxpayers with incomes under $250,000 but repeal the cuts in the top two marginal income tax rates ahead of their scheduled expiration in 2010; increase the maximum rate on capital gains; raise the top tax rate on qualified dividends from its current level (but keep it below pre-2001 levels); and enact new and expanded targeted tax breaks for workers, retirees, homeowners, savers, students, and new farmers. Senator McCain proposes to extend permanently and increase the AMT “patch” that has prevented most individuals and families with incomes below $200,000 from being affected by the tax and lowered the tax for others, and in our interpretation of his proposal, Senator Obama would also extend the patch. Each candidate would also increase the estate tax exemption and reduce the estate tax rate compared with current law in 2011 and beyond, although Senator McCain would cut the tax much more than Senator Obama. Finally, each candidate promises to broaden the tax base and reduce corporate loopholes. McCain lists eight breaks for oil companies as targets but, other than that, is short on details for his pledge to eliminate “corporate welfare.” Obama identifies a variety of steps, including basis reporting for capital gains, taxing carried interest as ordinary income, and enacting sanctions on international tax havens that don’t cooperate with enforcement efforts, but he would also need additional as-yet-unspecified policies to achieve his revenue target for base broadening.

Although both candidates have at times stressed fiscal responsibility, their specific non-health tax proposals would reduce tax revenues by an estimated $4.2 trillion (McCain) and $2.8 trillion (Obama) over the next 10 years. Both candidates argue that their proposals should be scored against a “current policy” baseline instead of current law. Such a baseline assumes that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts would be extended and the AMT patch made permanent. Against current policy, Senator Obama’s proposals would raise $800 billion and Senator McCain’s proposals lose $600 billion.

The two candidates’ tax plans would have sharply different distributional effects. Senator McCain’s tax cuts would primarily benefit those with very high incomes, almost all of whom would receive large tax cuts that would, on average, raise their after-tax incomes by more than twice the average for all households. Many fewer households at the bottom of the income distribution would get tax cuts and those tax cuts would be small as a share of after-tax income. In marked contrast, Senator Obama offers much larger tax breaks to low- and middle-income taxpayers and would increase taxes on high-income taxpayers. The largest tax cuts, as a share of income, would go to those at the bottom of the income distribution, while taxpayers with the highest income would see their taxes rise significantly.

The impact of the tax code on economic activity under each candidate’s policies would differ in several important ways. Under Senator McCain’s proposed policies, the top marginal rates (35 percent on individual income and 25 percent on corporate income) would be significantly lower than under Senator Obama’s plan (39.6 and 35 percent, respectively). McCain’s reduced individual and corporate rates could improve economic efficiency and increase domestic investment, but the larger future deficits would reduce and might completely negate any positive effect. In contrast, Senator Obama’s proposed new tax credits could encourage desirable behavior, particularly if the childless EITC and payroll tax rebate encourage additional labor supply among childless low-income individuals. However, he would also direct new subsidies at an already favored group—seniors —and an already favored activity—homeownership—which could probably be better directed elsewhere.

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publications/url.cfm?ID=411741

Switch around what I said earlier, Obama would cost us 2.8 and McCain 4.2 sans health care. Their health care both cost over a trillion(McCain 1.3, Obama 1.6), but McCain costs could become much smaller if his tax policy improves the economy so in the end Obama is more expensive.

 

[NetMapel]

Why do you even have an Obama Avatar? Sheesh.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/20080909/pl_mcclatchy/3040652

Jebus, there's just no way to even begin repaying that debt down, eh ? Damn this cannot continue forever.

 

[numble]

Old? Lilly Ledbetter ad for Obama:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxqjAejRF94

 

[Cloudy]

Obama can have problems speaking impromptu, quite a few "ummms" and pauses because he's trying to choose his words carefully.

He also has an obvious stammering problem..

 

[Mandark]

It can't.

Maybe if Obama heavily decreased spending while giving the middle class bigger rebates and tax credits it could work, but as a whole It is literally impossible. In fact I read somewhere that Obama's plan is 4.2 billion loss per year, while McCain is 2.something.

Where'd you read that? Cause I can say with some confidence that that's a lie.

Obama's plan is closer to a balanced budget than the current policy track (keeping the Bush tax rates and patching the AMT), while McCain's plan opens a bigger deficit.

The CBPP (I think?) had a handy chart showing this and I'll try to post it if I can get Brad DeLong's archives to load.



edit: Looks like you caught it. Those statistics are actually really misleading for both candidates.

 

[Steve Youngblood]

Have you seen the Saddleback forum?

Yes, but I don't really think that should be used as the benchmark for a typical McCain debate performance. Nor do I think that format should be used as the benchmark for a typical debate.

Again, I'm actually genuine when I concede that debates aren't Obama's strongest venue, but McCain certainly doesn't excel at them when he's shooting his average.

 

[reilo]

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publications/url.cfm?ID=411741

Switch around what I said earlier, Obama would cost us 2.8 and McCain 4.2 sans health care. Their health care both cost over a trillion(McCain 1.3, Obama 1.6), but McCain costs could become much smaller if his tax policy improves the economy so in the end Obama is more expensive.

Oh. Right. Just like the Reagan tax cuts, the Bush 1 tax cuts, and the Bush 2 tax cuts have lowered this country's debt? That's what McCain plans to continue. That's what got us into this shit hole. The only way for McCain to improve his tax policy, is if he adopts Obama's right out.

Then again, Obama said so himself that he'd rather have McCain copy his policy ideas than his slogans.

He also has an obvious stammering problem..

It's not a stammering problem... it's a "I think before I speak" problem.

 

[Stinkles]

Yes, but I don't really think that should be used as the benchmark for a typical McCain debate performance. Nor do I think that format should be used as the benchmark for a typical debate.

Again, I'm actually genuine when I concede that debates aren't Obama's strongest venue, but McCain certainly doesn't excel at them when he's shooting his average.

Not to mention that McCain's speaking ability is actually degenerating in front of our eyes. I am not being hyperbolic either, it's been scary to watch.

 

[Stoney Mason]

Have you seen the Saddleback forum?

While there are legit things to complain about in Obama's debate performance in the primaries that Saddleback thing doesn't worry me in the least. That was a religious panderfest conference rather than an actual debate even if presidential debates aren't exactly of Lincoln Douglas quality anymore.

 

[speculawyer]

Jebus, there's just no way to even begin repaying that debt down, eh ? Damn this cannot continue forever.

Nope. It can't.

 

[Steve Youngblood]

Not to mention that McCain's speaking ability is actually degenerating in front of our eyes. I am not being hyperbolic either, it's been scary to watch.

Yeah. Using an anecdotal example, I have coworkers who are utterly confident that the debates will prove Obama's incompetence. My only response has been: "Have you guys followed McCain on the campaign trail at all? How about this? You worry about your guy, and I'll worry about mine."

 

[Mandark]

Can you tell from the post title that I'm tagging this for future searches?

 

[avatar299]

Oh. Right. Just like the Reagan tax cuts, the Bush 1 tax cuts, and the Bush 2 tax cuts have lowered this country's debt? That's what McCain plans to continue. That's what got us into this shit hole. The only way for McCain to improve his tax policy, is if he adopts Obama's right out.

Then again, Obama said so himself that he'd rather have McCain copy his policy ideas than his slogans.

McCain heaclth care plan can become much cheaper becuase of how it's implemented. 2500-5000 tax credit isn't as expensive when the economy is going well and the dollar is strong. That is a fact.

Obama plan is just subsidizing, mandating and penalties. There is very little price flexibility there.

It's not a stammering problem... it's a "I think before I speak" problem.

:lol Doesn't seem to happen to other great speakers.

 

[Stinkles]

Yeah. Using an anecdotal example, I have coworkers who are utterly confident that the debates will prove Obama's incompetence. My only response has been: "Have you guys followed McCain on the campaign trail at all? How about this? You worry about your guy, and I'll worry about mine."

Where do you work? Please don't tell me you manufacture aircraft safety equipment or nuclear power systems.

 

[Steve Youngblood]

Where do you work? Please don't tell me you manufacture aircraft safety equipment or nuclear power systems.

My job is very nearly along those lines, if you consider web development along those lines.

 

[Mandark]

Obama plan is just subsidizing, mandating and penalties. There is very little price flexibility there.

Sigh.

 

[Trurl]

Why do you even have an Obama Avatar? Sheesh.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/20080909/pl_mcclatchy/3040652

This is probably a dumb question, but I've yet to take an economics class so please forgive me. Is it possible that there will come a day where the US will do something like saying that all government bonds sold before such-and-such a date are worthless as a way to get rid of the national debt? I'm aware that doing that would have disastrous consequences (though I'm not sure what they all are), but could it come to that?

 

[ryutaro's mama]

Obama the antichrist???

See, sites and thoughts like these are funny.

Here's why:

If Obama IS the Antichrist, then wouldn't he HAVE to win to furfill PROPHECY?!?!?

Wouldn't praying be futile to stop PROPHECY from being furfilled?

Wat the fuck?

 

[Mandark]

Trurl: That would almost definitely be constitutional.

Besides which it would ruin the US government's credit rating, making it very difficult to issue bonds without paying high interest on them. A future where the government even considered default is one where it's probably still carrying a deficit.

So no, it's not going to happen.

 

[avatar299]

Sigh.

Sigh what? Obama is mandating all children have health care until they are 18. He has been saying that since day 1 and has never said anything to the contrary

 

[Stoney Mason]

Obama the antichrist???

Fuck being the anti-christ.


Dude is gonna eat us!

 

[Trurl]

See, sites and thoughts like these are funny.

Here's why:

If Obama IS the Antichrist, then wouldn't he HAVE to win to furfill PROPHECY?!?!?

Wouldn't praying be futile to stop PROPHECY from being furfilled?

Wat the fuck?

If it's prophecy it's going to happen no matter what. If he does turnout to be the anti-Christ then voting against him (even though he is going to win anyway) would bode well for you in Heaven. If he's not and he loses then HOORAY! We don't have to suffer under the anti Christ.

It's a win-win. ;-)

 

[Mandark]

It's kinda disingenuous to describes his plan as "mandates" with no qualifications when the biggest running policy debate of the primaries was his plan's lack of a universal mandate. If you're just talking about for minors, fine though.

Also, you read the new Tax Policy Center chart I posted? Should I do a post explaining it?

 

[speculawyer]

This is probably a dumb question, but I've yet to take an economics class so please forgive me. Is it possible that there will come a day where the US will do something like saying that all government bonds sold before such-and-such a date are worthless as a way to get rid of the national debt? I'm aware that doing that would have disastrous consequences (though I'm not sure what they all are), but could it come to that?

I don't think we are quite that bad off . . . but things are gonna ave to change. Retirement ages will be pushed up & the FICA limit must be raised or eliminated or else medicaid/medicare/social security will bankrupt us.

 

[Stinkles]

See, sites and thoughts like these are funny.

Here's why:

If Obama IS the Antichrist, then wouldn't he HAVE to win to furfill PROPHECY?!?!?

Wouldn't praying be futile to stop PROPHECY from being furfilled?

Wat the fuck?

Why are you obssessed with fur?

 

[Zombie James]

http://blog.thehill.com/2008/09/16/mccain-secretly-plans-new-tax-on-middle-class/

wtf?

 

[thekad]

It's kinda disingenuous to describes his plan as "mandates" with no qualifications when the biggest running policy debate of the primaries was his plan's lack of a universal mandate. If you're just talking about for minors, fine though.

Also, you read the new Tax Policy Center chart I posted? Should I do a post explaining it?

Please do.

 

[Son of Godzilla]

Obama the antichrist???

This is my favorite quote, EVER: "I believe our Heavenly Father is pouring down the gift of Spiritual Discernment on His people, allowing us to clearly see the darkness Obama tries to hide, and to rightly feel the fear."

 

[The Chosen One]

I think Obama was underrated and McCain overrated in the Saddleback forum. Obama treated it as a discussion forum and McCain basically delivered his stump speech to a friendly audience. Also at that point, the media was fine with dubbing McCain the "winner" because it made the horse-race closer. Remember at that point McCain had never led in the polls.

A better guage is to look at the Republican and Democrat primary debates. Both Obama and McCain had their high and low moments. Obama at times came off as tired and passive in the debates. In McCain's low moments he blathered out nonsensical statements or he got sarcastic and mean toward his opponents. I don't think neither candidate won their primaries because of their debate performances.

But Obama showed in the Bill O'reily interview that he can tango when he's on his 'A' game. McCain is also able to give quick short sound-bite friendly answers and doesn't get rattled with tough questions. So the debates will be interesting. It could go either way.

 

[Trurl]

I don't think we are quite that bad off . . . but things are gonna ave to change. Retirement ages will be pushed up & the FICA limit must be raised or eliminated or else medicaid/medicare/social security will bankrupt us.

Thanks to you and Mandark for responding. Listening to David Walker has me pretty pessimistic about what America might be like in 2040 or later. :lol . . . :-(

 

[avatar299]

It's kinda disingenuous to describes his plan as "mandates" with no qualifications when the biggest running policy debate of the primaries was his plan's lack of a universal mandate. If you're just talking about for minors, fine though.

Also, you read the new Tax Policy Center chart I posted? Should I do a post explaining it?

How about you read the URL of my link? I've seen the chart. it's pretty.

I didn't say his entire healthcare plan was one big mandate, i said it was composed of 3 main things. One is a mandate. Are you misreading on purpose just to argue about something, becuase if you are you can do it with someone else.I'm not in the mood to argue with someone over something as stupid as the definition of a mandate.

 

[Y2Kev]

the us government declaring all bonds past a certain date worthless would probably destroy any investor confidence in the short term liquid/money market from here on out.

i'd never ever ever buy a bond or t-bill if you could all of a sudden up and throw it away

 

[Cloudy]

Obama the antichrist???

I ended up reading some other threads on that crazy site. Scary stuff and it saddens me cos there are probably millions in this country who think Obama is "dangerous". Good grief...

 

[speculawyer]

Fuck being the anti-christ.


Dude is gonna eat us!

Stick with the basics . . . he's a Muslim.

They've got the rock solid proof. You see Obama was born a Muslim and went to a Madrassa. But he claims that he is a Christian and not a Muslim. But if he was a Christian, that would make him an Apostate and Muslims would be calling for his death. But since they are not calling for his death, he must still be a Muslim. QED.

Are people really that paranoid? Apparently so.

 

[The Lamonster]

Is the new Bill Maher online yet?