Calculate Your Obama Tax Cut!
Did you watch Republican vice-presidential nominee Sarah Palin’s speech last night? Of course you did; it was a must-see. And regardless of your politics, you can’t deny that she delivered it superbly, with polish and poise. In short, at least as a stylistic matter, it was the Best Speech Ever.
But how was the Palin speech as a matter of substance? The AP fact-checked it and identified some issues:
PALIN: “The Democratic nominee for president supports plans to raise income taxes, raise payroll taxes, raise investment income taxes, raise the death tax, raise business taxes, and increase the tax burden on the American people by hundreds of billions of dollars.”THE FACTS: The Tax Policy Center, a think tank run jointly by the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute, concluded that Obama’s plan would increase after-tax income for middle-income taxpayers by about 5 percent by 2012, or nearly $2,200 annually. McCain’s plan, which cuts taxes across all income levels, would raise after tax-income for middle-income taxpayers by 3 percent, the center concluded.
Who cares about Kansas — what about Biglaw associates (and partners)? How would they be affected by Obama’s tax plan? With their six- and seven-figure salaries, some are doing a lot better than “middle income.”
Check out some surprising numbers, after the jump.
A series of guest posts on ATL by Ted Frank — here, here, and here — suggested that Obama’s tax plan wouldn’t be kind to denizens of law firms. But under the latest version of his plan — new and improved, arguably for political expediency — most ATL readers will receive a tax cut.
Shortly before the Labor Day holiday (so some of you probably missed it), an online tool allowing you to calculate your Obama tax cut made its debut. Check it out here (via TaxProf Blog). You can enter your approximate adjusted gross income and see what Obama can do for you.
A few data points relevant to firm lawyers:
What about law firm partners? If you enter $500,000+ into the calculator, you get this message: “You will probably not get an Obama Tax Cut.”
And you might even get an Obama tax hike. Check out this table, based on research by the Tax Policy Center:

So many partners at Am Law 100 firms, who fall into that $603,403 to $2.87 million band, will see their taxes go up by about ten percent in an Obama administration. Top partners at Am Law 100 firms, who earn more than $2.87 million, will see their taxes go up even more.
But who’s going to feel bad for millionaires — and millionaire lawyers, to boot — whose taxes go up so we can have a better health care system?
Calculate Your Obama Tax Cut [TaxProf Blog]
Obama and McCain Tax Proposals [Washington Post]




Comments
Comments hidden for your protection. Show them anyway!
booty juice. got it
On the road...and First? OK, second?
mccain to TTT
Whoa! Obama must be God on Earth because He now has everyone convinced that He is the true agent of tax relief. I have seen the Light and it is Obama.
Same ol' Dem, same ol' socialism.
What's the definition of a Marxist?
Someone who loves humanity in groups of one million or more.
You fail to account for Obama's increase in payroll taxes, captial gains taxes, corporate taxes, ect... which will impact blue collar workers, the middle class and any other person who has a job or who is/will be unemployed but actually wants a job.
It is only rational to support this tax plan if you are lazy/don't want to work/don't have a job and don't want one, or alternatively if you are super-rich (>$100MM net worth).
Corporate/payroll taxes will adversley affect workers' salaries, reduce employment/wages, not to mention a blow to small businesses.
All of this to bankroll a bigger goverment with more social programs and more spending on those who choose not to work hard.
HTH.
4, you making bank north of $600K? Doubt it.
Lat- Props for fairness and honest reporting. You would never see this on Fox News.
Really??? You're making 18k a year and McCain's tax cut is going to line your pockets to the tune of $19? That should certainly pay for your bootstrap.
Best Speech Ever??? I though she sounded like a robot. Rudy kicked ass, though.
Could we lose the liberal bias here?
What about the fact-checker who looked into Obama's promise that a 'diner-waitress would be able to take a day off of work without fear of losing her job', under the Obama economy?
Please, Obama promises anything and everything to get elected, you can't seriously consider any of his proposals.
8 - It's hard to cut taxes on people paying no taxes. You're looking for income redistribution. Go hire Robin Hood.
Also, Lat's table fails to note that this is FAMILY income. So if you're single or if your spouse also works, cut the numbers roughly in half. Which means no Biglaw associates get a tax cut under Obama's plan, but do get a tax hike when adding in the effects of the Payroll tax hike.
And that's assuming he's telling the truth.
Did I accidentally stumble on Daily Kos? If this site is going to turn into just another liberal rag I am out.
Your charts are complete b.s. Obama clearly has said that he will raise taxes on anyone who makes above $250,000.
Hey idiot:
It was not the "best speech ever." You've been drinking the Fox News Kool Aid, you jackass. It was a condescending, nasty screech from a lightweight of a human being. That speech did not hold a candle to Barack's speech.
May God bring Palin shame.
5 - You're an idiot.
Elie, how come you didnt take this opportunity to bash Palin? Oh wait, this article was written by Lat. Makes sense...it's actually well-written and unbiased
Elie, how come you didnt take this opportunity to bash Palin? Oh wait, this article was written by Lat. Makes sense...it's actually well-written and somewhat-neutral
Rudy looks like a soft boiled egg. I kept waiting for his dentures to fly out each time he said (tried to say?) the word "Senate." His speech was abysmal and he doesn't even fit in with the WT crowd at the RNC.
Well, since 95% of America makes under $250,000, we're supposed to feel sorry for that 5% that's going to have their taxes raised? Wah, wah, wah, my heart bleeds for you, really. And you really think that just because we make under $250,000 we don't work hard? How delusional can you be? My spouse and I work hard, but we want to see our family too. So yeah, we're not crying rivers for the rich folks who'll get a tax raise, so the 95% of the rest of us won't and can get some affordable healthcare.
Oh, all you conservatives shut up about the bias of the chart for singles, etc. It's biased the same way on both sides. The chart is from the Washington Post link, Lat didn't make it.
God, shut up and quit whining. You sound like Palin with that annoying voice talking about her retarded kid all night and her preganant Britney Spears wanna be daughter.
If Obama wins I am moving to Canada. It will be just as socialist, but at least it will be mostly white people.
19 - Don't let Obama's shifty speak fool you. When he says $250,000, he means families making $250,000. That means $125,000 per spouse, and that is the level where he will hike taxes on single individuals.
If you make over $125,000, Barack Obama will raise your taxes. And that's just what he's promising BEFORE he is elected. Just wait until after.
What I find most offensive about Obama's tax plan is that he plans to raise taxes on families that make over 250K, but on individuals making over 200K. That's a pretty big marriage penalty for couples with two professional jobs (and the obscene student loans that come with the degrees). Guess Obama thinks I should have been a stay-at-home mom instead of taking a BigLaw job.
And I will have easier access to my weed.
10, you might be the first person who's ever accused Lat of having a "liberal bias." i'm sure the rest of us just missed it. nice work, Sherlock.
23, as if us single people don't deal with higher taxes than those married. Get an f-in clue. All marriage is is a tax break.
5:
What's ect.? Did you mean etc.?
20-I think you mean JAMIE LYNN Spears.
Rudy saved NYC on 9/11
Watch your mouth, MF
Nice. After those ridiculous Ted Frank guest posts, it's good to see ATL set the record straight.
Well done 28. Sorry for confusing my celebrity preteen whores with my celebrity adult whores.
And by "white people" I am including Asians and Jews, who are alright by me.
- 21
19: Nice class warfare there. People more successful than you should give up their hard-earned money to compensate you and your wife for your lack of talent.
19 = Wah, wah, wah!! I lost in the genetic lottery, so I demand that the government steal money from my intellectual superiors and give it to me. It won't make me any smarter, but at least I'll be able to afford better healthcare (e.g. a physchologist to help me deal with my inferiority complex.)
20, typical democrat - fighting for the people... Good job making fun of a baby who did nothing wrong in this world but was born that way. If you have no intelligent arguments to make about the actual CANDIDATE, don't stoop down that low to make fun of her kids.
--someone with a down syndrome family member
Wow 21, way to be the most racist person on this post. And intelligent too I might add. A black man in office will certainly make the minority birth rate go up more so than a "abstinence only education" mom who has a pregnant teenage daughter because she wouldn't teach her about condoms. . . .
Wait a minute? . . .
Wow 21, way to be the most racist person on this post. And intelligent too I might add. A black man in office will certainly make the minority birth rate go up more so than a "abstinence only education" mom who has a pregnant teenage daughter because she wouldn't teach her about condoms. . . .
Wait a minute? . . .
Wow 21, way to be the most racist person on this post. And intelligent too I might add. A black man in office will certainly make the minority birth rate go up more so than a "abstinence only education" mom who has a pregnant teenage daughter because she wouldn't teach her about condoms. . . .
Wait a minute? . . .
Wow 21, way to be the most racist person on this post. And intelligent too I might add. A black man in office will certainly make the minority birth rate go up more so than a "abstinence only education" mom who has a pregnant teenage daughter because she wouldn't teach her about condoms. . . .
Wait a minute? . . .
37/38 - If only someone would have taught your mom about condoms.
26: You are wrong. Two married lawyers pay far more in taxes than two single lawyers combined. There is a huge marriage penalty for double income couples. The penalty only turns into a "tax break" if one spouse doesn't work, because the other spouse can then take advantage of the non-working spouse's standard deductions and exemptions.
The tax code shits on two-income professional families. And Obama likes it that way because he intends to amplify this effect.
if all you losers vote based on your straight economic self-interest--and everyone else in this country follows your admirable lead--it'd be an absolute landslide for obama. remember your kant, morons
37/38 - If only someone would have taught your mom about condoms.
19: Your will be out money too. What do you think happens when your employer has to pay double the social security and medicare taxes? Are they just going to take that hit? No, they will pass some of that along to you and to their clients, because it sure as h*ll is not coming from their bottom line profit. So good luck getting a decent raise during the Obama term.
Oh, and do you plan to sell stock in the next 4 years? If so, and if you will make money on that stock, the taxes will likely go up by 70 to 80% on captial gains.
Want affordable healthcare? Unless you are very poor, you will not see any change from Obama.
Hope this helps.
37/38 - If only someone would have taught your mom about condoms.
34,
I'm not making fun of the kid. I'm making fun of a lady with a 4 month old special needs kid who is trying to be a vp. As if she'll have the time for both.
And she's the one who keeps mentioning him, as if he's a shield. "Can't attack me, my kid is special needs." No one would've known the kid was special needs if she didn't announce it in a goddamn press conference. Talk about selling your kid out for your own publicity. I find her disgusting and shameful as a mother, female, and human.
But honestly, I was not making fun of the kid, just Palin. Sorry if it came out otherwise. Passionate hatred of a politician often brings out the worst, and really I am sorry.
6 - Certainly not. Do I need to be making that much to find offensive socialist schemes aimed purely at wealth redistribution? Do you have something intelligent to say that might reflect an intellectually consistent belief system?
Who are you and what have you done with David Lat???
Concur w/ 33.
19: in the spirit of Aldous Huxley, repeat after me:
"I am happy to be a hard-working Delta. Alphas have to make decisions, and Betas have too many responsibilities. I am happy to be a Delta."
Possessions are fleeting. Happiness is born of passionate human relationships, and a decent, BigLaw-subsidized standard of living.
11- try checking the upper left-hand corner of the chart. See where it says FAMILY INCOME in bold?
Moron.
Lawyers - get the real stats for yourselves. Go to http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/06in11si.xls -- you'll see just how few people there really are with high AGI.
Only 943,398 with AGI of $500k+.
Only 354,093 with AGI of $1mm+.
108,425,446 tax returns for AGI under $75,000.
119,565,854 tax returns for AGI under $100,000.
Even BigLaw paralegals make more money than most Americans. That's reality. BigLaw isn't.
40,
Hey you live in NY and own a place? I do, single person one bedroom pays the same as a married couple. Are your living expenses split cause your married? Yup. Mine aren't. Choice or not, you could've just lived with your partner and had those same benefits without getting married. You chose your life. Don't complain now. The two incomes combined and your status as married qualifies you for economic perks I don't get. You know, legal financial security (instead of the living together situation), a larger mortgage qualification, etc.
You chose your life, stop complaining.
5 is correct - Also big deficits increase inflation which hurts the middle class more than the wealthy. Dont kid yourself...Obama will raise taxes to pay for many new spending programs but he won't raise taxes or cut spending in a way to balance the budget.
@15 - How is 5 incorrect, explain yourself, dipshit
43 - our bosses always have some excuse at their disposal for poor raises. As for selling stock, we'll worry about buying stock after funding for retirement, children's college funds and paying off student loans. If we were "very poor" we wouldn't have to worry about healthcare at all, its called Medicare. But maybe Obama can help do something about for-profit health insurance companies that have to pay more attention to their stockholder's wallets than the health of their customers.
THIS IS 2009 INCOME FOLKS -- THE BUSH TAX CUTS EXPIRE IN 2010!
McCain vows to extend the tax cuts. Barak vows to repeal them (at least for anyone making over 200K). Hence the impact will absolutely not be f-cking zero for those making between 226K and 603K in 2010.
It's right on the first page of the TAX POLICY CENTER website where Lat pulled the chart -- "These projections assume the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts expire in 2010 and the AMT is fully effective."
Don't you see that this is the heart of the tax plan distinction between the candidates and your chart is completely misleading...
35-38, maybe your post should be using condoms--looks like it's breeding
55 is right -- LAT needs to do his homework before posting misleading pro-obama BS.
56,
That was hilarious. I don't know what happened there, the screen froze. I apologize.
35-38
53: perhaps 15 was referring to 5's use of "HTH."
15 called 5 an idiot; he didn't say 5 was incorrect.
so ease back there on the namecalling, cowboy.
54: I missed the part in Obama's speeches and website, where he wants to nationalized healthcare. What other fantasies are rolling around in that dome of yours?
As for "excuses", this will be no excuse, your employer will actually have less money and will actually have to make it up somewhere and some smaller businesses will have to lay off people.
You sound like you have a job and work for a living, so it makes no sense to vote Democrat. You (and all other working people) will take all of the burden and receive little, if any, of the benefit.
Hope this helps.
i despise obama
Big deficits do add to inflation. Unfortunately, however, our deficits are not big enough. The government should use debt like a successful corporation - continue to borrow as long as the marginal return on investment is higher than the cost of funds. As a percentage of GDP, the national debt is very low. The government should tax less and borrow more.
55 and 57,
Lat didn't make the damn chart. It's on both of the linked websites. Blame the Washington Post or TaxProf or whoever made the chart. Lat was just reporting it. Give him a break. It's the only story posted today that's worth anything.
If you think this sucks, go read Hope's dribble on how to be the office whore.
Obama is to POTUS
as
Homer Simpson is to Sanitation Commissioner
The comparison is valid:
"Do we want old man Patterson (McCain) with his finger on the button (nuke button)?"
"Daddy (Obama) made a lot of craaaazy promises!"
Homer goes on stage with U2 / Bono.
Homer runs out of money in a month and sells out his town to get funding.
"Can't someone else (government) do it (bumblingly overmanage your life wastefully)?
Why do I have to choose between someone who will lower my taxes but doesn't support gay marriage or abortion rights and someone who is socially liberal but whose economic and fiscal policy doesn't make much sense. Why can't we have a candidate who is socially liberal enough to leave gay marriage and abortion alone (let the states decide for themselves) without influence from the religious right, but who also has some sense of how to stimulate the economy and handle foreign policy.
How many people live in this country and Obama and McCain are the BEST we can do? Southpark was right--most elections ARE between a douche and a turd sandwich.
@52 You chose to live alone and that costs more. This does not mean that other people who share a home should have to pay more it taxes. You also chose to be a moron.
What a stupid justification for a marriage penalty. Dont complain about a penalty because you SPEND the same amount. Yeah, let's base our tax rates on how much someone spends. Moron.
I agree with #5 and these issues need to be addressed. Doesn't BO plan to roll back ALL of the Bush tax cuts (death tax, marraige penalty, child credits) and is that figured into this chart? Also, doesn't he want to increase the upper cap on payroll taxes and won't that kick in at around $98K? Is this chart just income taxes? If so, that is unfair and misleading.
60,
You are retarded. We're in a recession. So what if you have a job now, you could be laid off soon like the other hundreds of lawyers. Adding to the economic health of the country in general helps everyone. I have a job, I have a nice home. You know what? Mine and 90% of americans property values have declined because the economy is shit. Bear Sterns collapsed. Shit sucks. Helping all this will help everyone. So what if you have an extra $5K tax break for one year. How's that gonna help you when the nations dollar means shit in the world economy and your property values plummet 20%.
So economically worth it. Good analysis! You and all the other morons win the gold star sticker from kindergarten economics 101. However, in the long run you're hurting everyone, including yourself and your children.
Obama will not have an impact on you, nor will McCain. Your ability to earna aliving in this profession is now dependent on whether the ABA will allow unfettered out sourcing. If it doesn't move to protect US lawyers, they might as well move the patent and trademark office to Banglore.
60: You are an idiot. Higher taxes, especially on the wealthy & corporations, adversely affect the economy.
That would have been Rudy Giuliani but because he can't run a campaign for shyte and because middle 'murka couldn't quite accept a one o'them Eye-tallyans, we are stuck with a the Crypt Keeper and Mrs. Perky versus Empty Promises and Hair-Plugged Plagiarizer.
We are in a recession?? Second quarter GDP growth was 3.3%, retard. Go back to kindergarten economics 101 for a refresher.
65 -- That would have been Rudy Giuliani but because he can't run a campaign for shyte and because middle 'murka couldn't quite accept a one o'them Eye-tallyans, we are stuck with a the Crypt Keeper and Mrs. Perky versus Empty Promises and Hair-Plugged Plagiarizer.
66, you are obviously stuck in a sexless loveless marriage. I bet you're fat too. And ugly. And not just run of the mill ugly, but grotesquely deformed ugly.
Like I said. You could've lived together and not have gotten married and avoided the marriage tax penalty if you chose to. Instead you chose marriage. Deal with it.
Anyone who believes that Obama intends to deliver on his promises to cut taxes is willfully blind. Obama is one of the very furthest to the left in the entire Senate, and he certainly plans to raise taxes and entitlements, not cut them.
67 see 55 -- The chart and projections assume all of the Bush tax cuts expire in 2009 and 2010. McCain said he would make them permanent.
-nuff said
If I were an outgoing OT07 clerk (or, as Lat loves to call 'em, "The Elect") I'd do everything in my power to take my $275,000-$300,000 bonus this year (instead of going to Tibet or something) and not risk an Obama tax hike on it.
This so-called recession is nothing but an invention by the liberal media to influence the election. As soon as Obama wins everything will be wonderful. The emperor has no clothes.
Lat time I looked, Clinton left office with a budget surplus and an economy that was chugging along. After 8 years of Bush and his band of thugs we have the largest deficit ever, an unwinnable war, an economy that hasn't bottomed out and the hatred of the world because of our incredible arrogance. All of you who complain that your taxes will be raised should try and remember that we are all going to have to pay the price for the Neanderthals that may or may not have actually been elected. McCain's female Spiro Agnew notwithstanding, do any of you actually think she is capable of being President. McCain will be in diapers in tow years and we will be relegated to this hockey mom automotan. I'm moving to Canada for a different reason.
I don't get it. Why do people care more about the abortions they won't have and the gay marriages they won't have than the taxes they WILL pay?
I personally don't care about abortion. The more people I meet, particularly lawyers, the more I see its usefulness.
Plus, assuming that the majority of folks getting abortions are Lefties who will raise kids that are Lefties, I see it as a net gain.
I watched Sarah Palin’s speech with more than a little satisfaction.
After all the hypocritical, false, and unbelievable personal and sexist attacks (she is really the grandmother of her daughter, a mother of 5 cannot take care of the kids and be VP ect.), and after predicting she was “Dan Quale with an up-do” and would fall flat on her face, Palin delivered a speech that was better than both Clintons’ Denver speeches (and they were great), Biden’s speech (which was flat) and more personal, connecting, skilled, moving, effective and engaging that Obama’s speech.
Sarah Palin is a natural communicator—more so than even Ronald Regan or Bill Clinton.
Regarding taxes:
As a Democrat, who meets Obama’s absurd definition of “rich” (i.e. household income of $25,000+) I do not want to see my taxes raised.
But more important than that is the effect that the Obama tax plan will have on the economy.
New growth in the economy is fueled by entrepreneurs.
But why would entrepreneurs take the risks they take with new businesses if they have to turn around and pay an increased SS tax, a confiscatory 60% (after state taxes) federal income tax, ect., and then pay an increased capital gains tax on long term investments?
In a down economy, Obama’s tax plan will spend more, tax more, and ruin growth.
Less revenue, fewer jobs (are you listening 2L’s?), and a growing national debt.
We desperately need to REDUCE spending, balance the budget and fix the economy.
Only one candidate is even promising to cut spending, and his/her name is not Obama.
Yes, Bush screwed to pooch, the economy, and much more. But we are where we are, and now is the time to tighten the belt and fix things.
79: I think just about everyone agrees that the Bush presidency has been a disaster. Most of us do not want another disaster, therefore McCain is the logical choice, unless you want to further ruin the economy, reward laziness with entitlements, and have less money in your pocket/bank account.
HTH.
72, you are mentally incompetent. Read the news. For fucks sake CNN has a damn "recession 2008 watch" ticker. So what if it was up a little. Is this how you justify your flacid penis to your wife as well.
If you don't see we're in an economic downturn, then you really must live in some shitty middle of nowhere place that doesn't matter. Say, Palin's vagina?
PS: I meant of course $250,000, not $25K
--81
79,
Do you also believe that aliens abducted your mother and 9/11 was a hoax. God are you fuckin insane!!
You're right. Bear Sterns probably was just lonely and wanted some attention too.
80 - If at some point in the future doctors are able to determine through prenatal testing whether a child will grow up to be homosexual and parents begin aborting such children, you will see a sudden change in opinion about abortion, at least among those in the gay community.
81: Agreed. We need to get back to true conservative values. Nothing involving religion, gay marriage, abortions, ect..., but true FISCAL conservative values. I could really care less about social neo-cons and I would venture to say that most intelligent, rational voters could care less as well.
Balance the budget, cut government programs & agencies, stop funding the war, and don't raise taxes, and will we all be better off.
83:
And what a warm, rewarding, comfortable place that would be.
83-
The fact that CNN has a "Recession 2008 Watch" for an economy that grew last quarter is absolute proof that the media is trying to create a recession. Your brilliant rebuttle proved 72's point. Way to go!
84: you don't have to correct a post that nobody cares to read.
68 - actually, you're the "retard" - you can only spit back the slanted info you get from MSNBC and perhaps the Daily Kos.
We are NOT in a recession - a recession is defined by having 2 negative growth periods and sadly for the liberals, we actually had 3% growth this quarter. I an not saying this is the strongest economy we've know, but gas prices are stabilizing and things seem to be turning around. Unemployment is still well under 6%, a number that use to be seen as "full employment"
I prefer to keep working hard and to be optimistic about our country and the economy instead of wringing my hands and bitching about our gov't and country.
Try looking at how the rest of the world lives - Americans have it so good.
- NOT 60, just someone sick of the liberal's bitching and moaning.
81,
Way to not look at the issues. Hmmm. Could possibly investing in science and research, say alternative energy and stem cell research really impact the economy and send it booming? Aren't these hundred billion dollar projects?
Doesn't the Iraq war cost millions a day? Can't we save that money?
You're right. No stem cells, no alternative energy research, more war all add up to economic growth. At least I'll get an extra couple hundred measly dollars to spend on my childs tuition bill so she can get a job in a country where research isn't valued and be outcompeted by international kids. Great plan.
Cosign 89.
83: You need to google "economic recession" and see what the definition is. The fact that there was an increase at all negates any possibility of a recession.
HTH.
Palin had 5 kids. You know that vag is like a hot dry playground slide.
The bemused, admiring smile on veteran network anchor Bob Schieffer’s face as Plain took on the media said it all.
The mouse not only roared, she altered the course of a presidential election.
93,
A recession is a contraction phase of the business cycle. In the USA, the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) defines it more broadly as "a significant decline in economic activity spread across the economy, lasting more than a few months, normally visible in real GDP, real income, employment, industrial production, and wholesale-retail sales."[1] Newspapers often quote the rule of thumb that a recession occurs when real gross domestic product (GDP) growth is negative for two or more consecutive quarters. However, not only is this a flawed measure that fails to register several official (NBER defined) US recessions, the quotation has been taken out of context from a 1974 New York Times article that listed a number of rules of thumb, the rest of which have been ignored [2]. A sustained recession may become a depression.
87: Agree. I wish people would stop voting on hot button social issues that shouldn't even be in the purview of the federal government and would think more about foreign policy, economics, and what kinds of social programs we should (or shouldn't) federally fund. I am socially very liberal but think there would be tremendous benefits to privatizing social security etc. It is too bad that we had Bush for 8 years and the republican party has become so socially and ethically retarded. I can't in good conscience vote for either of these two candidates, but it does make me feel somewhat comforted that Obama has at least read the Constitution once, because I am not sure Bush ever has, unless they make some kind of "Ernie & Bert learn about America" picture book.
Learn something recession unbelievers. Just cause were up a little when we're in the greatest economic downturn since the great depression means nothing. it's still technically a recession. There is no "recession = 2 quarters" definition. Someone just made that up as an estimate.
There's this lovely little thing called knowlege. Don't just google, read one thing, and make a decision. Don't be ignorant, it's highly unattractive.
96: Thanks for proving my point.
-93
87: Agree. I wish people would stop voting on hot button social issues that shouldn't even be in the purview of the federal government and would think more about foreign policy, economics, and what kinds of social programs we should (or shouldn't) federally fund. I am socially very liberal but think there would be tremendous benefits to privatizing social security etc. It is too bad that we had Bush for 8 years and the republican party has become so socially and ethically retarded. I can't in good conscience vote for either of these two candidates, but it does make me feel somewhat comforted that Obama has at least read the Constitution once, because I am not sure Bush ever has, unless they make some kind of "Ernie & Bert learn about America" picture book.
93, you're retarded. Read how the 2 cycle measure was wrong? I disproved your point. I hope to God you're some 1L posting on this site and not a lawyer.
96
50 - Right, the table makes it clear, but it's Lat's analysis that I was responding to, and his analysis ignores the fact that the income levels represent "family" income. That should have been obvious. But, since you signed your message "Moron," maybe it wasn't obvious to you.
God damn dat Obama is pug ugly. Damn boy! Whats wrong with you?
96-
So you are smart enough to realize that the economy is cyclical. Then is Clinton responsible for the economy he handed Bush, or is he responsible for the giant pop that followed in 2001 when the bubble burst? And is Bush responsible for the marvelous economy of the past 4 years that gave you two pay raises, or for the current phase of contraction.
Bush has made a lot of mistakes, but to blame it all on him, especially when Congress is largely Democratic, is stupid. And to raise taxes and government spending on entitlements during "a contraction phase of the business cycle" is the even more stupid.
Anyone who says 3.3% economic growth is "up a little" is completely clueless about economics. I bet you majored in astronomy.
79 -- the deficit is about 167 billion. Far less than it was last year and definitely not the highest it's ever been.
96/101:
From your post: Recession = "...a significant decline in economic activity spread across the economy"
This has not happened.
Hope this helps.
Watch this:
http://www.comedycentral.com/videos/index.jhtml?videoId=184086
90: apparetly you not only "care[d ]to read" it you took the time to comment on it.
Just like the Dems who are still crying this moring--even though Palin is "inconsequential".
The Obamatrons are protesting too much.
Al things being equal (awful war, dismal economy, incumbant republican president with 28% approval rating) the Obama should be 20 points up, but is virtually even. (Lok at the so called swing state pollng.)
The "girl" just sunk an already lurching Obama ship.
104, "Bush has made a lot of mistakes, but to blame it all on him, especially when Congress is largely Democratic, is stupid." -- Congress has only been "largely democratic" since 2007. It was Republican for the overwhelming part of his presidency. HTH.
65- McCain is your man. He favors a repeal of Roe, which would allow the states to decide the issue. He also opposed a constitutional amendment banning same sex marriage as antithetical to the principles of conservatism.
Also, he's wicked handsome.
Notice that the "insider" comparing her to Steve Forbes is unwilling to be named.
Looks like Obama's communities are gonna need a little more organizing:
http://cbs2chicago.com/local/chicago.summer.shootings.2.810166.html
I'd take Palin's experience over Obama's any day. And Obama is at the TOP of his ticket.
107,
I disagree. Real estate developement, travel, employment services, manufacturing services as a whole in the US are down, mortgage industry, etc.
Just a few.
We may disagree, it's ok you know. (just wanted everyone on this board to understand that).
Signed,
Not 96
55 hits the nail on the head and I can't believe Lat was so f-ing gullible as to post this drivel. The Tax Policy Center is hardly an unbiased source as it's run by Brookings (center-left) and Urban Institute (far left). Bottom line is everyone with Biglaw salaries will get punished bigtime under the Obama plan (as will many with far less income). The only real beneficiaries are those who already suckle at the govt teat who will now get all kinds of refundable credits for having the strength to wake up in the morning and sit on their asses.
Dude--If she like wins the vice presidency, what am I supposed to call her pregnant daughter--The First Whore or The First Slut?
The economy was doing just fine until the Dems took over Congress. In fact, the Clinton economy was in recession until the Republicans took over Congress in 1994. Maybe the focus should be on who controls Congress instead of who is President.
113 - That's the last straw! We need to pull out of Chicago!
Say it with me:
No blood for pizza!
No blood for pizza!
No blood for pizza!
98-
"the greatest economic downturn since the great depression"
What are you talking about? And to follow that with a lecture about how the other person is so stupid? Is this Joe Biden?
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/271413.php
111,
You just made me vomit on myself. He's f-in 80.
Republican's your not voting for McCain, he's gonna die. You're choosing Palin.
I'm not writing this as a dem or rep, but I'm just pointing out the obvious. He's above the life expectancy. The odds are he's gonna die while in office (not wishing it on him, it's a statistical fact the odds are in favor of him dying).
Just be realistic about this. And no talk of sex with 80 year olds, it's just gross.
116:
Like, dude, call me when yo graduate from HS.
In the meantime, try washing you mouth out with soap....
The only experience Obama has is as a lowly state legislator. He has 2 years in the Senate, PRACTICALLY ALL OF WHICH HAVE BEEN SPENT RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT. He has done nothing. His only claim to the office is that he is a black guy who delivered a nice speech in 2004.
Bush was a dumb ass in 2000, and he is a dumb ass now.
His party should have nominated John McCain then, and we would not be in this mess.
Fortunately, we have a chance to fix things by electing McCain-Palin.
Yes, Obama is going to cut taxes. Then, he is going to implement all his new programs. And then he is going to wave his magic wand and magically find the money to pay for those programs without raising taxes.
I get it now. I am totally going to vote for The One.
One other thing to keep in mind: Obama's elimination of the payroll tax ceiling will hit Biglaw partners especially hard since they're technically self-employed - in fact, this change alone will raise their marginal rate by more than 12 points. While this may not evoke much sympathy on the surface, it means that the partner you work for will either: (a) take home far less money (likely a cut of $100K or more) and have to consider giving up his place in the Hamptons; or (b) ride your ass even harder to bill more hours and keep up his paycheck. Gee, I wonder which option he'll choose...
Obama's Chicago is definitely a quagmire.
I bet CWT associates are hoping that Obama loses. The last thing they need is the government taking $ from their employers, thus necessitating a decrease in the payroll as a means to maintain their incomes at the previous level.
122,
And when McCain dies of old age, you'll have that 20 month governor of Alaska who'se under investigation for abuse of power running things. Great argument. Palin took the experience argument off the table. Democrats know it. Republicans know it. Get a real argument.
not 122
110-
And the economy was doing fine (remember your two raises...or the two raises you will benefit from when you finish law school) for most of his presidency. Then the Dems come in and things start to go down the toilet.
122: Stop touting that b.s. Obama is qualified. He's a smart, driven, and more than capable individual who could effectively lead the country.
The problem is with his policies. I don't know why the media and republicans continue to spout this garbage that he doesn't have experience, can't be commander in chief, ect...
Why are the media and republicans not getting the message out about his policies? They need to expose that taxes will go up, govt spending will go up, entitlements will go up, and the ecnomy will be run into the ground with an Obama presidency, not some b.s. about qualifications or feeling "safe", or some other nonsense.
HTH.
The economy is in the shitter because of the mortgage industry and their practices. Plain and simple. It should've been regulated and watched. It wasn't. That was the beginning of the end.
That's all. Now it's a vote on who can clean it up better. Most people fucked are in the lower income brackets who had adjustable rate mortgages they can't pay. The Obama tax cuts will help them the most.
This political cycle won't be won by upper middle class lawyers who are complaining about the taxes on their $200K salaries. It's gonna be decided by <$40K people.
Stop bitching about "oh no, me and my husband each make $400K, are taxes will be higher." It's not about you. It's about the millions that will become homeless.
120 - Glad you don't let facts get in the way of your arguments. McCain actually had his 72nd birthday last week - yes, that means he's not 80 today, but rather will be when he's wrapping up his SECOND term and VP Palin has had 8 years to prepare for her ascendency to the top spot.
Oh, and in case you didn't know, your change-agent Biden is only a few years behind at 65.
We have a winner - 117 gets it, Congress has more control over the economy than the Pres.
Obama! Obama! Obama!
P.S. Like a majority of Americans, I don't give a shit if your taxes go up. In fact, I really really hope they do.
Love and Obama,
Government lawyer.
120:
do you know mccain's blood pressure? cholesterol? history of family illness? other risk factors? unless you are a doctor who has analyzed mccain's medical history, then you are in no position to opine as to his life expectancy.
Has anyone mentioned to these fine senators that they can't take their LEGISLATIVE roles to the EXECUTIVE branch?
132,
I may be wrong, and I admit it.
However, in my world I'm voting for a president first, not a vice president.=VP factor only comes into play as a backup, say, the president dies.
And even if he's 72, the average age of death of american men is 74-74, so the odds are still in favor of him dying in office. That's all I was saying.
132,
I may be wrong, and I admit it.
However, in my world I'm voting for a president first, not a vice president.=VP factor only comes into play as a backup, say, the president dies.
And even if he's 72, the average age of death of american men is 74-74, so the odds are still in favor of him dying in office. That's all I was saying.
135,
it's basic statistics you moron. The same as you have a 50% chance of flipping a coin and it landing on heads. I don't need to know your personal luck factor on heads to make that determination.
What the hell? Learn something before speaking.
115 --
55 here. Lat was suckered by that sexy chart with red and blue highlights and little pictures of the candidates smiling. He just had to post it without checking whether the numbers made any sense. He actually implied that there was a major tax policy change on the part of Obama subsequent to Ted Frank's posts (which reflected the candidates' positions on the Bush tax cuts of 01 and 03). The reality eliminating the Bush tax cuts and restarting SS Tax after 250K will kill associates in big law making over $250K and wound associates making 164-250 (married filing jointly 200-250).
A woman's right to choose to have an abortion isn't going away under McCain (nor does he want it to because the Republicans would never win office again). If you choose based on national security and the economy McCain is your man. If you choose your candidates based on how closely their social views match yours, vote for the all lawyer team.
Regan was 73 when elected BY A F-CKING LANDSLIDE!
-- nuff said
141: Poor argument since it is well documented that Regan had dementia during the latter half of his presidency.
135-
first off, namecalling means i win.
second, by your rationale, obama is more likely to end up in prison or on drugs when he takes office. foolish right? that's what happens when you take statistics out of context.
The "millions who will become homeless" ...do you mean the millions of people who bought more house than they could afford with variable interest rates and no savings? When are liberals going to demand a modicum of personal responsibility from anyone?
Incidentally, to all of you Obamamites who want to claim credit for the Clinton/Rubin free market economy and economic expansion. Obama rejects Clinton and Rubin's views. He favors massive expansion of government jobs and free cash to the bottom 20% of tax payers (everyone paying less than $4000 in federal taxes, will get the difference up to $4000 in a government check). Clinton was about ending welfare as we know it, Obama is about creating a new, national welfare state. Clinton signed NAFTA and opposed trade protection for domestic industries, Obama is all for it. If you want to live in Canada or France f-cking move there, don't recreate it in America.
is obama really going to create brackets at $2.8m and at $600k.....b/c i have no problem taxing someone making $2.8m. it's just that biglaw associates are currently paying the same or close to the same tax rates as the richest of the rich and biglaw associates ARE NOT RICH.
so hopefully Obama will also make cap gains progressive only for the truly rich as well.
Naval Academy = TTT.
This election wont be won or lost by the Obama or McCain hardcore commentors on this board.
It will be won by which candidate can reach out to those who aren't sure. Basically, who is going to appeal to those middle american's who share both republican and democratic values.
With that in mind, McCain looks stronger and more experienced than Obama. However, Palin is strongly disliked by many in the middle for her conservative views, and also her inexperience and family situation.
It's a toss up at the moment. But I think Palin was an incredibly poor choice based on winning over the independent middle.
Just my two cents.
Signed,
Impartial
146 -
There will be no new brackets: The top two will go up (see the 08 chart below). NOTE: They will go up a hell of a lot more once the Bush Tax cuts expire in 2010. You also have to factor in the restart of SS tax at 250K, that's another 7% off the top.
Tax Rate Single Married Filing Jointly
10% Not over $8,025 Not over $16,050
15% $8,025 - $32,550 $16,050 - $65,100
25% $32,550 - $78,850 $65,100 - $131,450
28% $78,850 - $164,550 $131,450 - $200,300
33% $164,550 - $357,700 $200,300 - $357,700
35% Over $357,700 Over $357,700
If you live in NYC and make 164K or more your taxes will go up under Obama in 09 and then go up a lot more in 2010.
143,
You are dumb. The statistic is the death rate. Something that happens to everyone on the planet. Not based on race, or socioeconomic, educational background as your jail analogy.
Man, that was so ignorant I think I just became stupider reading it.
137/138 -
Your statistics are completely useless (remember the old Mark Twain quote). Yes, the overall life expectancy for American men is somewhere around 74 years, but this is an overall average that accounts for all males whether they die in infancy, as teenagers, or at a very old age. Such figure is not relevant for someone who's currently 72 since they obviously have not died at infancy, as a teenager, or at any other time. There are actuarial tables that give life expenctancy at a given current age. I don't have it in front of me right now, but I think for men who have already reached the age of 70 the life expectancy is around 85-86 years. Yes, this means that the odds are McCain could serve out two full terms and still have several years left to retire. The bottom line is this age crap that the Dems are arguing is a pathetic, unfounded and frankly dishonest distraction that is used purely to scare people into voting for The One.
-132
Since when is not owning a home the definition of "homeless"? By that definition most NY associates are homeless. Thos who lose their homes when they default on their mortgages become what we refer to as RENTERS.
Signing on to 151.
Duh! 137/138 are obviously too young to have ever bought life insurance.
That chart is a little inaccurate. It doesn't show the percentage of your tax cut---it shows the opposite of the change to your after tax income. Note that most low-income taxpayers actually pay no income tax, and even earn a credit. Obama would increase the credit, effectively increasing the amount of "negative tax" people pay (i.e., increase the redistributive payment they receive).
Thus, Obama's tax plan appears to be more generous than McCain's not because it actually cuts the taxes more, but because it gives out free money to certain favored classes (i.e., likely Obama voters).
Yes, believe the charts, and feel yourself tingle as you vote for the big O.
For now, print out the chart and save it along with your Tax Year 2007 1040 and a pay stub from this month.
In 2011, compare to your TY 2010 1040 and a pay stub.
"The Tax Policy Center is hardly an unbiased source as it's run by Brookings (center-left) and Urban Institute (far left). "
agree. getting quite sick of hearing the Tax Policy Center promoted as some unbiased source.
150-
before you start calling people dumb, why don't you learn to write a sentence?
"Something that happens to everyone on the planet."
-sentence fragment, not a sentence- you fail
"Not based on race, or socioeconomic, educational background as your jail analogy."
-sentence fragment, poorly punctuated otherwise and nonsensical- you fail 3X
the substance of your post is even worse. a variety of factors influence life expectancy, just as a variety of factors bear on whether someone ends up in jail or on drugs. it is foolish to rely on a single factor (age) in determining how many additional years Mccain will live.
otherwise, this is fine work.
149: Don't forget about the increase in captial gains tax, too
"John McCain would put on a strong battle against Hillary, though I fear he would be crippled simply on account of the age factor (72 in August). If the presidency ages one at 3-1 year rate, one term could advance McCain into his 80s."
-Chuck Norris
In dog years McCain would be 100 at the end of his first term.
Chuck really said he would cripple McCain if Hillary was his opponant? Karate Chop.
Um....has anyone run the numbers on the graphic? The math is way, way off. A commenter on TaxProfBlog pointed it out, so I crunched a few - look at the line for incmoes ranging from $66,355 to $111,645. The graphic claims the McCain plan will reduce average taxes by $1,009, or $1.4%. That would mean earners in that bracket are currently paying an average of $72,071 in taxes. Disbelievable as that may seem, it's even weirder on the Obama side of the chart, where the cut for those earners would be $1,290, or a 1.8% decrease. Why is that weird? Because it indicates that earners in that bracket are currently paying an average of $71,666 in taxes. Same people, different current average.
How stupid can these people be?
Charts are kind of useless to us. There's a big gap between $200K and 500+. Adn since most of us spend our law firm careers in the range between the two (sometimes closer to the lower limit, sometimes closer to the top), this doesn't provide much information.
Of course, assuming that its a website with spin, the midpoint between 200K and 500K is 350 k, so arguably if "the closest to my income is 349K, then I get a cut." Somehow I doubt that.
157,
Congrats on proofreading a post!!! You win. Please also comment on how I used three exclamation points, which you are obviously infuriated by.
You are dumb. The point was the death average takes everyone in that sex in America into account, regardless of race, economics, etc.
The jail analogy was concerning black men. It was a much smaller subset of the male population. Smaller sample sizes are more strongly influenced by outside factors. Again, simple statistics.
And I hope you get herpes you yuppie asswipe. And. I dont give a shit - about; sentence structure when positing, on a site. I hope I put as many fucked up signs in to piss you off as possible just because you are that big of a douchebag. I bet your kids are ashamed to call you daddy.
Dear Women:
We need to be more vigilant about the use of the words "slut", "whore", and the like.
African Americans have successfully made the use of the "n" word political and social suicide.
Gays have also been successful in eliminating the "f" word from American parlance.
However, Women are the last social group that can be routinely and publicly denigrated and humiliated through disgusting name calling.
It is NOT ok to call a black person a n----.
It is NOT ok to call a gay a f---.
IT IS NOT OK TO CALL A WOMAN A SLUT OR WHORE.
These words are used to bring shame on women's natural biological capabilities - to have children, to be sexual beings. There is nothing to be ashamed about that. If someone used the n word or the f word on this board, it would elicit OUTRAGE and CONDEMNATION. But the words "slut" and "whore" - even "bitch", "dry vag" - are thrown around and no one says a word.
Lat, Elie -- are you listening!?!?!
164,
And I will call a man a douchebag, tool, small flacid penis, ballsack, and any other name I like. Get over it.
Sincerely,
a bitch
Dear 165:
Then I guess all the black people should get over the n word , too.
And all the gays should get over the f word.
Signed,
A Decent Person
164,
Calling a pregnant 16 year old a slut is just truth.
Call em how you see em. Is not a rose a rose?
A slut has a definition that means what it's used for. On the other hand, a fag is defined as a pile of sticks, not a homosexual. In the same way a nigger is a stupid person, not a black person. Your argument lacks merit.
And apologies if you're offended I used the actual words instead of "n word." They were used to make a valid point and we're all adults here. I despise the "don't ever say it, it's not PC" when used to make a legitimate point that has nothing to do with offending by using the terms. That's just juvenile.
166,
see 167. Thanks.
A decent person as well.
165 - NO I WON'T GET OVER IT!!
I have only started. I am sure you and the people like you would be much happier if all the strong women would just sit down and shut up and just take whatever men, and the media, and women who have been brainwashed want to throw at them. But I won't.
And I am sure that the first people who wanted to stop the use of the N word were also beaten and called names and probably much worse. So, that's fine.
whore = a woman who engages in promiscuous sexual intercourse
a pregnant teen? If the shoe fits. . .
167 - The fact that Bristol Palin is pregnant tells us one thing: she has had sex at least once. How exactly does that make her a slut? Is your mom a slut because she got pregnant with you? Was Obama's mother a slut? If you're going to get all uppity with definitions, fine:
Main Entry: slut
Pronunciation: \ˈslət\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English slutte
Date: 15th century
1chiefly British : a slovenly woman
2 a: a promiscuous woman; especially : prostitute b: a saucy girl : minx
So...where does being 17 (not 16) and pregnant fall in there? You can't equate pregnancy with promiscuity - not the same thing. I guess there's arguably some literal sauciness involved in a teen pregnancy, but that's really more about the guy, right?
169 - laid much?
Might want to note that the Tax Policy Center, a think tank run jointly by the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute, is a democratically controlled institution, prone to putting up propaganda that magically, and of course, unpartisanly, shows Democrats are better than Republicans.
I can equate promiscuity with pregnancy because she was unwed. Sex should be saved for marriage, the bible says so. Therefore to have sexual relations out of wedlock means one is promiscuous.
NO _ YOUR argument lacks merit.
The word slut means:
1. a dirty, slovenly woman.
2. an immoral or dissolute woman; prostitute.
Sarah Palin's daughter is not dirty or slovenly because she had sex. You don't know how many times she had sex or with how many partners she had sex. You are calling her immoral for having sex out of wedlock or at a young age, but I would venture to guess that you have done the same. She is getting this treatment because she is FEMALE! If she were a man, and did not bear the evidence of her sexual activity in her womb, she would not be subjected to PEJORATIVE WORDS. Calling a rose a rose is not pejorative. Calling a black person a n--- is pejorative, even though it comes from the latin, which simply means black.
Your argument that the n-- word and the f-- word are offensive because they originally had meanings that did not describe what they are now used to describe is not even worth addressing.
The word slut is a negative word reversed solely for women and used to direct shame on them. It is not a neutral word like "rose". It's called: connotation.
Close, 11/102, but since you said "Lat's TABLE," you clearly meant the TABLE, and not his analysis.
I stand by my hypothesis that you are a moron. And one that tells stupid lies when caught out.
175,
way to only pick the 2 definitions of slut that fit your argument. Aren't you a one sided idiot.
And if it was a son who had a pregnant girlfriend who was 16 i'd say the same thing. But thanks for telling me what I'd do or who I am or what my sexual history is.
Basically it just proves you are so closed minded and in your own ass that you don't even open your mind to listen. To me, a pregnant teenager who is not married is a slut. Always has been, always will be.
Finally the argument you wont even address is the entire argument. That's the basis for their offensiveness. Slut, whore, etc have been used for hundreds of years to describe people like Palin's daughter. And they always will be.
Finally, Since this is a law blog I will make 1 legal argument: First Amendment motherfucker. Kiss my vag!
And you miss are a judgemental, ignorant cunt. A smelly cunt at that.
52/74 = Really? Taxing people differently based on marital status is justified because its a choice and saves money? Why not then tax people who choose to live with a roommate or people who chose to live in Jersey or at a higher rate? 66, although entirely without tact, is correct.
Dear 175:
Don't feed the trolls.
179,
People who live in Jersey do pay a different tax. . . it's called. . . . wait for it. . . wait for it. . . State Tax! BAM! Suck it! I am King of the World!
First of all, people who pay a higher percentage of their income in taxes should get a bigger tax cut. That is only fair.
I don't know if you've heard this parable, but here it goes. Five friends go to a bar, one of whom is rich, another who is middle-class, and three who are poor. The bartender tells them it will be $2 per beer ($10 total), but the poor guys don't have any money. The rich guys say, no problem, we're all friends here, I'll pay for you all as long as the middle-class guy takes care of himself. So rich guy ponies up $8 and middle-income guy ponies up $2. For a while, they continue the bar visits and the rich guy continues to pay. One day they walk in, the rich and middle-income guys pay the bartender but as the bartender is walking back to the register he stops. He says, "you know what, you guys are great customers, never cause me any problems, so I'm only going to charge you half price from now on." He slides $5 in front of the five friends. The rich guy reaches for four of the one dollar bills when one of the poor guys stops him. "Hold on a minute. He gave the discount to all of us. I should get my fair share, $1." The rich guy is shocked, and says, "but I foot 80% of the bill for our beer. Shouldn't I get 80% of the discount? You didn't even pay anything!" After some arguing, the rich guy picks up $4 and storms out." The next day, the bartender walks up to the group of guys but the rich guy is not there. "Only four of you today? That'll be four dollars. All the guys look at each other and suddenly realize they can no longer afford beer.
The very basic point is, if you pay 30% of your income in taxes and I pay 10% of my income, your tax rate should be cut by 3% if mine is cut by 1%.
Second, this all assumes that Obama can actually pay for everything he wants to implement with his tax increases on the rich (an assumption which the Tax Policy Center did not research, because they focus on inflows only). This is a huge assumption which many have suggested is patently untrue.
131 writes "Most people fucked are in the lower income brackets who had adjustable rate mortgages they can't pay."
Then why did they take them out. Who takes out a mortgage without reading the documents and figuring out whether they can pay it if the rate changes. Whatever happened to personal responsibility.
183,
they are stupid, 131 didn't say otherwise. But the fact is what's done is done. If not bailed out now, they will be using foodstamps and other government programs later. No matter what, the smart fiscally conservatives ones alsways have to bail out the stupids.
Some of us are just more willing to do it. It no longer angers us. Stupidity is always rampant. Look at the lady above about to have a stroke over the term "slut." Not the brightest bulb in the box. Letting a blog about tax piss her off so much.
It is what it is people. Deal with it.
A Liberal
Pastor Manning for President!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U4-TZspqlOs
183, personal responsibility is not a popular campaign slogan. Free money and health care for all (with very little detail on how it will be paid for) is popular. Telling people they are entitled to anything other than the opportunity and freedom to work hard and make something of themselves is popular. Strategically selecting a cut-off for your tax hikes at an income level that most voters in the country do not earn is popular. Suggesting people should have to do things on their own makes them wonder why they need you in the White House. Suggesting that you will provide every need and desire gives people a clear reason to put you in the White House. Is this really rocket science?
Pastor Manning!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KY-to8M4hCI&feature=related
go to http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/31/business/31view.html -- look at the chart.
Since 1948, EVERY income bracket has had higher family income growth under Democratic presidents than under GOP. Even the top 5%.
N word.
Lat -
based on the chart you posted, you appear to be off by a factor of ten here:
"If your adjusted gross income is around $150,000 -- let's say you're a first-year associate at a firm that's not quite on the $160K scale, like a decent midsize or regional law firm -- your Obama tax cut will be $235.76."
Looks like it should be north of $2000.
What gives?
190 - Lat put those numbers through the calculator, which gives you the $235 figure.
I'm not sure whether to answer your "what gives" with 'duh,' 'doi,' or 'durrrrrr.' Tough choice, y'know?
Dear 188:
Yes, but we won't know the stats for the next Dem adminstration until the end of the McCain adminstration.
Thanks to Obama's dumb veep pick and Sarah Palin.
But isn't it a little disingenuous to look only at the party of the President? As others have pointed out in this thread, Congress has a significant effect on the economy and economic growth, so shouldn't the NYTimes chart show a little more detail? How much growth did families across the brackets listed experience under Republican Congresses versus Democrat Congresses?
There are too many comments here. Perhaps the ATL community could use a little more organization.
Obama for ATL EIC: A job he's qualified for
If you make more, you should pay more. You can afford it. Learn to live on $400,000 instead of $500,000. its a hell of a lot easier than for someone who made $50,000 to live on $40,000.
I'm horny. I'm 27 and a female and cute. since ATL absolutlely blows these days lets just turn it into a dating/sex servicing site for lawyers. I'm in midtown W 50's, leaving soon. Sex anyone? Dirty and quick cause I'm tired and have work at 7am. Thanks.
21: http://stuffwhitepeoplelike.com/2008/02/24/75-threatening-to-move-to-canada/
196,
Over at 53 and B-way. Where you at?
163-
What you fail to realize is that you are making my point for me: statistics are unreliable. 151 illustrated this point quite well with regard to life expectancy figures.
I guess if your argument was that it is more likely for a random 72 year-old to die in the next 8 years than for a random 47 year-old to die in the same period, then congratulations. You are brilliant. If you wanted to argue that McCain is more likely to die in office than Obama, then you have failed miserably.
I must say: you have embarrassed yourself by bringing a child (real or hypothetical) into a debate about politics.
No matter... I will now retire to my yuppie mansion and eat filet mignon prepared by my indentured servant.
Stay classy,
157
163-
What you fail to realize is that you are making my point for me: statistics are unreliable. 151 illustrated this point quite well with regard to life expectancy figures.
I guess if your argument was that it is more likely for a random 72 year-old to die in the next 8 years than for a random 47 year-old to die in the same period, then congratulations. You are brilliant. If you wanted to argue that McCain is more likely to die in office than Obama, then you have failed miserably.
I must say: you have embarrassed yourself by bringing a child (real or hypothetical) into a debate about politics.
No matter... I will now retire to my yuppie mansion and eat filet mignon prepared by my indentured servant.
Stay classy,
157
19/200,
The point is it's more likely for a 72 year old to die than Obama. . . are you riding the short bus? That is the point of the statistic.
Love,
A statistician.
201-
actually, no, that's wrong. The statistic would compare:
random 72 year old compared to random 47 year old
not
random 72 year old compared to Obama.
and if that was really the point, you could have been as productive huffing glade.
This is for the idiots who were calling the race over just a couple of days ago when Dalai Bama was up by 8 points
This is for the idiots who were calling the race over just a couple of days ago when Dalai Bama was up by 8 points. I told you so.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/04/opinion/polls/main4416798.shtml
Hello: Obama's grants to people who are not currently paying any taxes are not "tax cuts."
Therefore, you can delete most of the "spending money" he's planning to redistribute from the tax cut table.
195, taxes of $100k on $500k would be a dream for most high earners. That's only a 20% income tax. They're paying a hell of a lot more than that, especially in states and cities with income taxes, like DC with its 9+% marginal rate.
So it's more like telling some guy to learn to live on $250k instead of $500k, while still encouraging him to work hard enough to earn $500k so that he can afford to pay your recockulus tax rates.
This new editor blows ... complete left-wing bias.
207 -- LAT? Left wing bias? Are you f%#$ing kidding me? Mr. David "O'Scanlan-Fed. Soc." Lat?
Wow -- Rs will really tell themselves anything to justify McCain over Obama
I thought liberals were suppose to be educated people? Why can't they give a logical argument for any issue? All they have is emotional arguments. Its sickening.
You think Above The Law has an agenda? You feminist hags can't stand to see an intelligent woman that is pretty and can still have a sex life and procreate in her 40's.
Completely disappointed to see this liberal BS here. Most of these infantile comments clearly come from liberals who have no understanding of how relative tax rates are calculated, probably because they've been on welfare or subsidized by everyone else their entire lives and never had to pay substantial taxes. Hello, TTT losers. Easy to suggest that everyone ELSE (i.e, successful, educated HARD-WORKING professionals) should pay for YOUR health care, education, etc when you're too lazy or stupid to be successful on your own.
Chin up Republicans: If Obama wins, it just means more tax-planning work for attorneys, CPA's, financial planners once the myopic liberals realize just how much money Obama's plan is costing them. I would love to send all Obama supporters off to their own island----with 90% of them drawing substantial welfare off the 10% who actually work, I give them a week.
seriously, wtf is with the liberal bias? i am done with this stupid blog.
211 for President.
209 as 211's running mate.
I'm not joking either.
How do you cut the taxes of a family making less than $19,000 by more than 5%??? They don't pay any taxes as it is. Ditto for those under about $40,000.
Why aren't we liberals clamoring for the FairTax? It reduces to 0% the taxes of all of those under the poverty line. The efficiency of the system, lack of distortions, and encouragement for the return of business to the U.S. would seem to be too good to pass up. We would be through with this constant debate about tax rates and brackets, which never will be perfect, as there only would be one rate to set--which could be set based simply on government funding needs.
Looks like a lot of folks here want to go back to the 1700s and slavery. Too bad for those that aren't as smart or lucky as them to get good positions. Those less lucky or less smart or perhaps have some disability will just have to subsist on whatever toilet wages are thrown to them without healthcare or enough money to live without having to work 2-3 jobs.
Its bullshit for you to say that other people don't work as hard as you. Yes they do, at 2 or 3 jobs, they just didn't have the smarts or the social benefits that others have. For that they should be punished by being denied healthcare? or food? or clothes? They might as well be slaves, lucky for whatever scraps of food or clothing their masters allow them to have.
I'm not saying that some people aren't lazy, sure there are. But not everyone making less than $50,000 is "lazy." Just like not everyone that makes more than $200,000 "works hard." You can't convince me that Paris Hilton "works hard" or Britney Spears. Yeah, just a couple of isolated people, but so is the "lazy" claim for someone that makes less than $50,000.
Maybe its not "logical" to want to pay more in taxes, but "emotional." Is that so wrong to want to help fellow human beings who aren't as fortunate, one way or another, as oneself? And those that don't want to help, well the price of living in a civilized society is that those more fortunate have to pay to help those less fortunate.
206 - I'm pretty certain that no one here pays exactly 35% (or whatever) on their gross salary. There are things called deductions, exemptions and tax credits that lower the ultimate amount one pays in taxes. For example, although my gross salary falls somewhere in the 28% bracket, the actual tax I paid was closer to 12% of my gross income.
So while perhaps someone who made $500,000 might pay more than $100,000 in taxes, they are not paying $153,600 either (which is actually 35% of the amount over $357,700 plus $103,791 - according to the tax rates for 2008).
So yeah, they may have to "make do" on merely $350,000 instead of $375,000 if the tax rates go up.
216-
Newsflash. Obesity is now the health care epidemic amongst the poor in this country. According to the census bureau a couple of years ago, 91% of those in the lowest 10% of households own color TVs, 74% own microwave ovens, 55% own VCRs, 47% own clothes dryers, 42% own stereos, and 23% own dishwashers. Our economy has virtually rid the nation of true poverty (i.e., "1700s and slavery"). It's no longer a question whether or not you own a car (or a horse, or whatever), it's what kind of car you own. It sure as hell didn't happen because of redistribution of wealth from those who earned it to those who didn't. It's because the rising tide of the economy lifts all boats.
216 -- First off, Paris works damn hard to remain in the news and on the covers of magazines, which is increasingly difficult as she ages. Those videos of her running announcing her presidency didn't just make themselves.
It's a fact that the hardest working segment of working Americans are professionals earning in the 200K zone (see headline in nytimes business last week). Real hours have gone up and up for this segmant while real hours for working class Americans have gone down.
Times quote for the lazy: "Officially, the average workweek has changed little in the last two decades. But those figures mask a shift in who works the most. In 1983, the lowest-paid workers were more likely to work long hours, according to the National Bureau of Economic Research. But by 2002, the most highly paid workers were twice as likely to work long hours as the lowest paid."
--nuff said
219- nice points about those who work the most. I'm certainly not one to defend Paris as a person, but she does earn what she makes. There are many others in similar positions who don't sell the magazines that she sells. She certainly adds more to the economy than I do (even though I may spend 2500 hours a year in the office), and she should be compensated accordingly.
RE: the 600K to 2.8M bracket: does the tax rate go up within the bracket or are there similar percentage increases for someone making 650 and 2.5?
All chicks who have kids are sluts.
the bigger question is why does the federal government need a ~$3trillion budget? government and spending from both sides is way too big. raising taxes won't help the economy. cutting taxes only makes sense if we cut government. it's really not rocket science.
Thanks for the link to my site!
To correct a mistake common to those who'd rather stick their fingers in their ears than actually examine the candidates' tax plans objectively, the Tax Policy Center numbers that I use at ObamaTaxCut.com take Capital Gains, Social Security, etc into account -- every Federal income tax policy that's been announced by the candidates as off the end of August.
If the rich lawyers here want to gasp at the size of their Obama Tax Increase and/or compare it to results under McCain, I have another site here:
http://alchemytoday.com/willobamaraisemytaxes.html
218 - I'm sure that workers' lives have improved out of the shear generosity and compassion of business and has nothing to do with governmental laws on things like minimum wages, overtime, work-place safety, child labor, consumer safety and the like.
You know why the poor are obese? Because they are so busy working 2-3 jobs, they don't have time to shop for groceries and cook nutricious meals, nor the money to pay someone to do it. They end up relying on fast food and ready-made processed foods.
Stereos? that's a dated term, do you mean with a record player with a radio or are you talking a CD player with speakers? VCRs? can you even buy a new one anymore? Color TVs? normal analog or cable ready, as opposed to plasma, lcd and hd? They are all now dirt cheap, or those, along with those clothes dryers and dishwashers are "owned" via Rent-a-Center
Um...your little calculator doesn't work, 224.
225 - that is the dumbest rationalization for obesity. People make time for things that are important to them. Buying groceries and assembling basic, healthful meals is cheap...it takes a few minutes a day, a few ideas, and 45 minutes once a week to go to the grocery store. People eat fast food because it's easy, not because other alternatives are so drastically more difficult.
Stop making excuses for people. It's demeaning, and doesn't help anything.
226 - Thanks for the detailed bug report? It works in every web browser I've tried so far.
This story is the biggest piece of rubbish I have ever seen. How is it that your taxes will be essentially flat if you make 226k to 600k if Obama is raising taxes (or I forgot rolling back the bush tax cuts) on those brackets. Plus, I doubt they account for the social security tax increase. It currently caps at 102k and Obama says no increase for 102k though 250k but once you hit 250k you get hit for your entire income. That is a $9750 increase if you make 250k at the rate of 6.5% which is what I think ss is. Brookings = total propaganda and rubbish.
224, your calculator does not work.
224 - I'm using IE, and it says N/A for both McCain and Obama no matter what numbers I plug in.
Detailed enough?
216, cry me a river. You and your liberal cohorts are below 211 and 209.
strike that - beneath*, not below
Thank you, ATL, for this post. I didn't know who I was going to vote for, but now the choice is clear. According to the Obama Tax Calculator, with an Obama win in November I can quit my job next year, still pull down over 200 grand, and on April 15th of 2009 I will wake to find a brand new Porsche in my driveway courtesy of the Federal Government! Thanks Obama! You now have my vote!
You people have got to be kidding. You really think you EARN $200K as a 1st yr associate? Umm, no. Especially when you consider that 1/2 your billable hours are spent on ATL instead of giving yourself carpal tunnel by clicking through documents like the trained monkey you are.
REAL wage-earners - like steel mill workers, teachers, nurses, those in construction or service industries - are the only ones who should be able to gripe if their taxes are raised (or in a McCain administration, no relief is given).
To all those complaining without reason (i.e., you're worried that the taxes on your 1/2 million dollar income will rise slightly), get some perspective. Count your blessings that you're not starving to death in a 3rd world country or infected with a common disease that you can't afford the medicine to cure. Get over your entitlement, and stop fixating on hording another few thousand dollars so you can buy Burberry jackets for your toy poodle. Think about someone else for a change. If you think that's "Marxist," then I guess I can live with that designation. But can you live with yourself?
235: I can live with myself. There's one thing that money can't buy and that's poverty.
BTW, do you need your diaper changed?
I think it's funny when I hear people complain about the price of gas going up a few pennies per gallon. Let's say it goes up 5 cents per gallon and the average sedan holds about 15 gallons of gas (give or take)... so you're really complaining about an extra 75 cents spent? Are you that poor??
237, for some people who have to drive to work - the non-NYC-elite, for instance - that fill-up occurs on a bi-weekly basis or more. $1.50 a week might not be a lot to you, but to a family on a budget, it might mean the difference between having meat on the table that night or not.
Incidentally, it's pretty despicable for the privileged to make fun of others for being poor. If you're ugly (and since you're a lawyer, the odds are better than not), it would be like me telling you just how ugly you are, for no other reason than my own sick gratification. Or in this case, as a well-earned life-lesson.
A thing that is troubling about this entire debate is that it pits rich against poor when it shouldn't. It is the government that is robbing all of us. If you work hard, I am not saying you should pay more taxes because you make 25k and I make 250k. But why do you think I am getting over on someone if I pay 90k in taxes instead of 120k.
Well said, 239.
I do love the liberal morons in biglaw who exclaim "but I'd be happy to pay more taxes, and I make just as much as you, so it's not like I'm asking something of you that I don't ask of myself." Last time I checked, you are always welcome to pay more than your share. The IRS will gladly accept your check.
224 -- As pointed out above, the calculator doesn't work. Second, my point is that your tax calculator (if it did work) would only follow the Tax Policy Center's numbers which assume the Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 will expire in 2010. McCain is on record in favor of extending the tax cuts which would produce completely different results in 2010. Of course your calculator and the pretty chart Lat posted only address 2009 taxes and conveniently ignore the massive increase that will hit every wage earner making over 160K under Obama's plan in 2010.
Finally, as noted above, restarting SS tax at 250K precludes a zero increase in taxes for wage earners making $600K. An additional 7.65% applied against the $350K in income above $250K would result in an additonal tax burden of $26,775 for social security tax alone.
-- 55
Ah - I get it now. Thanks 241. I was trying to figure out how brookings could be so wrong so blatantly. They are ignoring the Bush tax cuts. Wow. Ridiculously misleading and as noted ignores entirely the payroll tax increase associated with removal of social security cap. I love propoganda. Too bad many will look at this and say - see, Obama isn't going to raise taxes. Unreal. Guess I will just have to settle in to being decreed rich by the ruling class even though I borrowed 120k to go to school, live in one of the most expensive cities in the world and didn't have a pot to piss in until I started at big law. Oh well, no credit for time served I guess.
Right now I live in Jersey which has ridiculous income tax rates.... I pay a total of 49% of my income in taxes... thats including, municipal, RE, Fed and state income... i qualify for very few deductions. If Obama wins it would be devastating to the economy. I think they only good that might come out of it is real estate, because everyone will be buying up properties which make no money in order to show bigger losses on their tax returns. So now is the time to start buying distressed properties. Don't rent... .you'll regret it.
235 - How do you live with yourself, spending all that income you earn instead of distributing it to the poor?
As 240 notes, nothing is stopping you from cutting a check to the IRS. Nor is anything stopping you from giving your money away to charity. So why don't you sell your Beemer, move into a shitty little apartment and distribute your excess income to those more in need of it. At least then you will be able to lay your little Marxist head down at night without guilt.
235
Real wager earners? Teachers? In the last year I only had about 75 days without a single hour billed--including weekends. That means that I worked about 290 days. Show me one teacher in this country that worked more than I did.
Why should the productive effort of 1/3 of my time go to the government (i.e., almost 100 days of work), when teachers work about 200 days a year and pay only about 10% of their income in taxes (i.e., 20 days of work)?
Let's put teachers out on the side of the highway picking up trash for 80 days a year to even things out a bit. They have the free time, after all.
Hey Speech Nazi:
I don't know if you're a lawyer or not, but you are not very intelligent. You have overlooked a huge difference between fa****/N word and slut.
Fa***** and the N word are derogatory terms for characteristics with which people are born. People are born black and, despite what right-wing nuts believe, people are born gay. It is horrible to call someone a nasty word for conditions they cannot control.
Slut, however, is not a general slur for women. It is reserved for promiscuous girls and women, who do things like get pregnant when they are 17. There is nothing wrong with using a derogatory term for someone who gets pregnant at 17. It is a negative action, sort of like doing drugs.
I also note, that her nasty boyfriend Levi dude is equally a slut and should equally be condemned.
241:
I don't see how it's remotely unfair to compare two plans as they compare to current law. Extending Bush's tax cuts for all brackets would be an uphill battle for either Presidential candidate up against a very Democratic Congress.
The TPC numbers include Obama's repeal of Bush's tax cuts for the top 1% ... otherwise you wouldn't see such an increase in taxes for the top 1% in that pretty graph now, would you?
Hey didn't Jesus's mom get pregnant at 17?
-- WWJD
245 - so why don't you become a teacher if the life and less taxes are so great?
227 - you must be a man. Usually takes me more than "a few minutes" to cook a well-balanced, nutritious meal for my family. And that's just dinner (so add more time to make healthful breakfasts and lunches). Grocery store runs also tend to take at least an hour.
Also, most poor neighborhoods don't have large grocery stores, they have convenience stores, which tend to be sorely lacking in healthful food (or at least a decent supply of them) and they are even more expensive. Its actually fairly well documented that the poor's obesity problem is related to the difficulty the experience in obtaining healthful food and meals and having the time to cook. But generally no one cares because they are poor anyway.
247:
There's certainly nothing unfair about discussing 2009 taxes, provided you don't go misleading everyone with a headline like, say, "calculate your Obama tax cut" when your taxes are going up not down. The guy who made the calculator to which Lat linked (224) said he incorporated "every Federal income tax policy that's been announced by the candidates as off the end of August." But he excluded the huge difference of the candidate's announced policies regarding the Bush tax cuts. Now you want to have it both ways -- you want to count Obama's announced policies (no matter how impossible they are to pay for) and you want to discount McCain's announced policies because you think he can't get them through Congress.
Actually the TPC numbers assume the Bush tax cuts expire for both candidates in 2010 and the chart shows your taxes in 2009. You just have to read the fine print at the bottom of the page. Obama intends to raise taxes substantially in 2009 on the top 1% as shown in the chart, but that has nothing to do with the separate issue of the expiration of the Bush tax cuts in 2010.
245: As a BigLaw associate raised by a single teacher, I would like to invite you to kiss my ass. You should really stick to criticizing BigLaw partners, or those who are *gasp* TTT. Teachers are way, way out of your league.
245: As a BigLaw associate raised by a single teacher, I would like to invite you to kiss my ass. You should really stick to criticizing BigLaw partners, or those who are *gasp* TTT. Teachers are way, way out of your league.
246 - I would argue otherwise. I think the gay slur you reference is used to describe someone not based on how they were born, but based on the fact that they love the taste and feel of cock in their mouth, which seems abnormal to, well, normal folk. It is a distinction with difference.
Likewise, the "n-word" as you describe it is used to describe actions not merely one's skin tone. That's why it applies to black liberals but not black conservatives.
249 - 227 here. I'm a woman and a practicing attorney, and I cook dinner for my husband and me about nights a week. Occasionally, I get ahead on weekends by making a lasagne or something that will serve us all week, but most nights I start from scratch and have something healthful in 30-40 minutes. Not a major time commitment. I make one round of muffins on Sundays that last us through the week.
If you make a list ahead of time and organize it by where things are located in the store, the grocery shopping doesn't take very much time.
But it's a lot easier to just make excuses for other people, for sure.
251/252, I don't think 245 was criticizing teachers. Instead, 245 was criticizing the notion that teachers are real wage earners and associates at big law firms are not. Teachers have protected jobs with lengthy vacations doing something they likely enjoy and for which they often receive praise from the public at large. They also pay only a tiny percentage of their income in taxes. Associates fear for their jobs, have virtually no vacation, work on stressful and tedious matters, and receive scorn from the public. They also are asked to pay an ever increasing share of taxes in this country. 235 indicates that associates are not even real wage earners and have no grounds to complain about higher taxes. Puhlease
What a shock that the liberal Tax Policy Center would try to float the lie that taxes will go down if Obama is elected.
Like the man said, if you believe this, I've got a bridge to sell you.
Obama Tax Cut.com
http://alchemytoday.com/details.html