PoliCHARTZ - Thread of U.S. Politics & the Presidential Election

[Final-Fan]

halogamer1989 said:

Final-Fan said:
You can ask me ?s.

So halogamer1989, how do you feel about the fact that McCain's tax cut is aimed mostly at the wealthy?

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/UploadedPDF/411693_CandidateTaxPlans.pdf

As far as Brookings, here is a summary from a Washington Post article who is a liberal newspaper themselves.  When they say that B.s is lib, you better believe it.

The Honeymoon

Ken Herman writes for Cox News Service with the question on everyone's mind in Washington: "Bipartisan peace in our times, or temporary ceasefire . . .

"'Both sides have been magnificent so far,' Ron Haskins, a senior fellow at the liberal Brookings Institution, said at a Friday seminar. 'Everybody's bipartisan. It's going to last at least another half hour.' "

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2006/11/13/BL2006111300496_pf.html

It is better to spread money out evenly than do a welfare Robin Hood state.  Look, Obama can't pay for this anyway--with a recession in play he will have no choice but to renig on this proposal.  Still if Obama does pay for these, he will need to cut hundreds of federal programs' budgets.  McCain will not do this.  You can get in contact w/ my superiors at my HQ for more @ 703-418-2008.  Ask for Mary Conway.

Being liberal or conservative doesn't necessarily mean liberal or conservative bias in your analysis.  I wouldn't be quoting a moveon.org tax analysis without looking extra-hard at the numbers and double checking all the sources, and I certainly hope you take what Fox News says with a grain of salt (although I doubt it).  Now, do you have any reason to be dismissive of the Brookings analysis, or did you just look at their people and say OMG LIBERAL MSM HAXOR? 

Next, "spread money out evenly"?  Did you look at the graph I posted?  What's "even" about that?  Obama has a bit of an "S" curve, high at the poor end, even in the middle half, and low at the rich end (and REALLY low at the "top 1 percent" end).  McCain's tax cut looks exactly like an exponential curve on the graph for the quintiles.  McCain's tax cut is exponentially higher on the rich -- and that's just PERCENTAGE.  the actual money savings will be even more extreme!  Saving 0.2% on $20k = $40.  Saving 3% on 300k = OVER NINE THOUSAND!

Anyway, since you've already whipped out the "welfare state" accusations I don't think you're interested in actual exchange of ideas here since we're not talking about anything remotely related to welfare.  But hey, just in case I'm wrong, would you mind telling me how exactly McCain is going to pay for a tax cut significantly BIGGER than Obama's, when Obama can't?  I don't feel like calling long distance to listen to some PR hack.  I feel much better doing this kind of thing in print where it's much easier to review exactly what's been said and take time to check sources etc.  I don't suppose that's why you don't want to do the same?