Comments on: Obama’s Plan To Tax Capital Gains

By: Think your taxes are bad now.....just wait! - Page 3 - ExpressJet Forum

Think your taxes are bad now.....just wait! - Page 3 - ExpressJet Forum — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 20:44:52 +0000

[...] Posted by echelon228 Flopping Aces » Blog Archive

By: Think your taxes are bad now.....just wait! - Page 2 - ExpressJet Forum

Think your taxes are bad now.....just wait! - Page 2 - ExpressJet Forum — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 20:35:24 +0000

[...] Flopping Aces » Blog Archive

By: The Baltimore Reporter

The Baltimore Reporter — Sat, 19 Apr 2008 20:26:34 +0000

[...] Business Daily tackled Obama’s ignorance on economics yesterday that I wrote about a few days ago. Here is the exchange in question from the debate: [flv:obamagains.flv 400 [...]

By: Flopping Aces » Blog Archive » Others Piling On Obama’s Economic Vision

Sat, 19 Apr 2008 16:43:03 +0000

[...] Business Daily tackled Obama’s ignorance on economics yesterday that I wrote about a few days ago. Here is the exchange in question from the debate: Get the latest Flash Player to [...]

By: Fit fit

Fit fit — Sat, 19 Apr 2008 03:56:21 +0000

I disagree with Obama here, but to be fair he usually puts his target at 20% not “close to 30%”. Still not a good idea. Obama has lots of Wall Street friends he goes to for advice. He was citing a Buffett reference about secretary’s tax rates during the debate. Maybe Warren put this idea in his head.

By: Curt

Curt — Sat, 19 Apr 2008 01:47:14 +0000

the Laffer curve doesn’t tell us “that with tax cuts increases revenue”. It tells us that there’s an optimal tax rate that maximizes revenue

And that optimal rate is a low rate, not close to 30% as Obama wants…..hence the post. He most definitely should of been castigated for his answer because the man obviously just wants to get at the rich. 20% of those with capital gains had an income of less then 50 grand in 2005 so his plans to get at the rich will hurt those in the middle also. Typical Socialist.

Maybe it could maybe it wont is not an answer. Its hedging.

By: Skip

Skip — Sat, 19 Apr 2008 01:26:21 +0000

the Laffer curve doesn’t tell us “that with tax cuts increases revenue”. It tells us that there’s an optimal tax rate that maximizes revenue, and rates below this decrease revenue, rates above also decrease revenue. So of course his answer was an answer. It could be shorthand for “if we’re on the lefthand slope revenues will decrease, if we’re on the righthand slope they’ll increase, but we don’t know which side we’re on, so it may or may not go up”, which would be a more pedantic way of saying the same thing, entirely inappropriate for a debate.

Now, does Obama understand this? I have no idea. From the way Gibson phrased the question I doubt that he does. I’m not pro-Obama (probama?) at all, but he definitely shouldn’t have been castigated for that answer, because it all boils down to what the purpose of a tax rate is. For every amount of revenue but the peak of the curve there are two tax rates that will achieve it (assuming a continuous curve and some other hand-waving). Fiscal conservatives want the tax rate to be set to the minimum rate necessary. Liberals want the rate set to the “most fair”.

By: Curt

Curt — Sat, 19 Apr 2008 01:02:49 +0000

Um, I hate to tell you this, but an answer that says it may or may not happen is no answer at all. The Laffer Curve tells us that with tax cuts increases revenue, but to go to zero would mean no money at all going to the government while if the tax rate is 100% the same effect would occur because no one would want to work if all money is seized. I do agree 10-15% is optimal. But Obama wants to double that…hence the post.

By: Skip

Skip — Sat, 19 Apr 2008 00:53:12 +0000

Um, I hate to tell you this, but Obama is actually one hundred percent correct when he says “Well, that might happen or it might not”. Read up on the Laffer Curve - wikipedia has a good writeup, but it’s trivially easy to prove. Set tax rates to zero. That’s a drop, and I guarantee revenues won’t go up.

Now, it’s not particularly easy to figure out where the peak of the Laffer curve is, but a value of 10-15% for capital gains wouldn’t particularly surprise me.

By: 357

357 — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 21:09:55 +0000

Barry doesn’t CARE to know how the economy works. He will TELL us how it WILL work under the glorious forward march of the proletariat …..

I know it matters which one of these pols gets elected but I have the nagging feeling that the next 4 years are going to suck as hard, politically and economically, as the Carter years.

Keep your powder dry.

By: Torrey

Torrey — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 13:22:48 +0000

This is the best line:
SENATOR OBAMA: Well, that might happen or it might not. It depends on what’s happening on Wall Street and how business is going. I think the biggest problem that we’ve got on Wall Street right now is the fact that we’ve got a housing crisis that this president has not been attentive to and that it took John McCain three tries before he got it right.

Basically, Obama is saying he knows better than history. But he’s not an elitist…NOOOOOOOO.
Are you kidding me?

He had the same reaction to the War in Iraq, I’ll gather the military minds together, the joint chiefs, and I’ll listen to them, but ultimately “the buck stops with me”.

Wow. His arrogance is staggering.

By: No Runny Eggs » Blog Archive » The Morning Scramble - 4/18/2008

No Runny Eggs » Blog Archive » The Morning Scramble - 4/18/2008 — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 13:07:41 +0000

[...] all the way down if you’re at work. - That doesn’t mean I forgot about Barack Obama; Curt skewers Obama’s “Tax the rich, beat the poor, till there are no rich no more” capital [...]

By: Gregory Dittman

Gregory Dittman — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 03:10:52 +0000

Obama has to face this fact. If Obama wins, the two more likely figures to influence the capital tax gains percentage are Clinton and McCain.

By: Mike's America

Mike's America — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 02:11:03 +0000

By: joyce

joyce — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 01:43:16 +0000

Marxism 101