Celebrate

[Pinky]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con...00950.html

Washington Post article showing, in a pretty chart, differences between McCain and Obama proposed tax policies. Trickle down fiscal policy vs. bottom up fiscal policy.

The problem with Obama's "tax cut" is that the bottom 45% of income earners have zero or negative tax liability. That means they essentially pay no tax on their income or already get a check from the government. You can't cut something that doesn't exist. What Obama intends to do for the people that already don't pay taxes is give them a bigger hand-out. It's not a tax cut: it's socialist welfare. He intends to make more people believe that they are entitled to the fruits of others' labor while lowering the ceiling down to 200k/year which actually isn't that much - a single skilled laborer can easily earn over 100k/year today, and in a two-worker household that has any worthwhile investments in stock, bonds or land they'll quickly run into Obama's new Wall Against Achievement.

As for the people that actually do pay taxes, by all means lighten their burden. Our tax system already punishes those who willingly accept responsibility for their lot in life too much as it is, and we don't need any more of that. What we need is to start cutting entitlement programs which are the largest tax burden in our nation - the tax dollars spent on social security, medicare, and medicaid could enable us to run the war against terrorism forever and still manage to pay off our national debt. With McCain's tax cuts he would have actually cut taxes on people that have a real tax burden: the people that earn more get a larger cut because they earn more. By letting people keep what they earn it promotes effort and work and productivity, and it only punishes sloth and lethargy which is the natural order of things. If you don't earn anything, you don't get anything.