Bingo in a Picture....! (or Two)

Submitted by Traveller on Sat, 08/30/2008 - 2:55am. Tags:

Politics

Ain't that the truth?

But then, so is this.

AS IS This....Yes, it will make some of you crazy(though if you study the damn chart and numbers it shouldn't)...but at least you're seeing it up front and you can't say I ever hustled you.

I'm good that way.

Traveller
--

Traveller's blog
Login or register to post comments

Interesting, Trav (#114117)

by aireachail on Sat, 08/30/2008 - 3:07pm

This week, I suppose I had this one emailed to me 4 or 5 times at least. It generated quite a bit of conversation at work.

And I was surprised...the $$ works out pretty well for my family.

Excess on occasion is exhilarating. It prevents moderation from acquiring the deadening effect of a habit. - W. Somerset Maugham

(

)

Easy enough, McCain's giving me back more.... (#114012)

by Bernard Guerrero on Sat, 08/30/2008 - 9:37am

....than Obama, and he'd be more aggressive than Obama with regards to the furriners. Screw Barry.

The ultimate result of shielding man from the effects of folly is to people the world with fools. -Herbert Spencer

(

)

Ha (#114096)

by HankP on Sat, 08/30/2008 - 2:07pm

so you'll trade the health of the overall economy for a couple thousand bucks (which your kids will have to pay back, with interest). Talk about a myopia utopia.

I blame it all on the Internet

(

| parent )

I see no overall boost to.... (#114127)

by Bernard Guerrero on Sat, 08/30/2008 - 3:24pm

...."the health of the overall economy" (please define, if you get a minute) from getting a guy in there who is going to lower the returns to investment. I am, however, happy to cut loose the under-educated and under-skilled.

The ultimate result of shielding man from the effects of folly is to people the world with fools. -Herbert Spencer

(

| parent )

"cut loose the under-educated and under-skilled" (#114137)

by Username on Sat, 08/30/2008 - 3:37pm

... like your parents, as you mentioned before. Awesome!

(

| parent )

The poor end up in jail or on the dole, a net expense. (#114131)

by BlaiseP on Sat, 08/30/2008 - 3:32pm

Since the rich always find tax shelters, courtesy of the likes of UBS, (a massive engine of tax cheatin' we never would have uncovered without some disgruntled insider), we rich guys have nothing to fear.

Tax salaries and bonuses, lower capital gains taxes, seems like a working strategy to me.

(

| parent )

Except, of course (#114092)

by JKC on Sat, 08/30/2008 - 1:59pm

the increasing number of "furriners" who own the US via US Treasury bonds sold to cover your precious tax cuts.

(

| parent )

JKC, when you owe the bank..... (#114124)

by Bernard Guerrero on Sat, 08/30/2008 - 3:21pm

...a million, you have a problem. When you owe the bank billions, the bank has a problem. I have no problem trading paper for stuff. Of course, if the buck stays weak and the Fed doesn't raise much that'll get more difficult, but I'm willing to trade a bit for a boost to domestic manufacturing.

The ultimate result of shielding man from the effects of folly is to people the world with fools. -Herbert Spencer

(

| parent )

It's a curious feature of modern conflict (#114010)

by Kierkegaard on Sat, 08/30/2008 - 9:21am

that the losing side always produces by far the best art ;)

(

)

Cold Water For Both Sides: (#114007)

by JKC on Sat, 08/30/2008 - 8:45am

from the same source-

Senator Obama’s plan would substantially increase the deficit compared with current law and would add $3.5 trillion to the national debt over ten years.

and...

McCain’s overall tax plan be much more regressive in 2012 than in 2009 because expiration of the Bush tax cuts makes the baseline much more progressive.17 Measured against current law, the fully-phased-in McCain plan would cut 2012 taxes for those in the bottom quintile by 0.9 percent of income, or about $100 (table 7). Households in the middle of the income distribution would receive an average tax cut of 3.1 percent of income, or $1,441. The top fifth would receive an increase in after-tax income of 6.4 percent or $13, 909. The largest cuts would go to those at the very top of the income distribution; the top 1 percent would receive cuts averaging 9.5 percent of income ($126,902) while the top 1 in 1,000 would see their after-tax incomes rise by 11.6 percent, or about $680,000, more than ten times the relative gain of those in the bottom quintile.

Of course neither tax plan will be enacted in its current form. If no battle plan survives its first encounter with the enemy, then no legislative proposal survives its first encounter with Congress. Neither plan, IMHO, deals with either deficit or debt adequately.

(

)

Good job, Trav (#114000)

by HankP on Sat, 08/30/2008 - 2:58am

that first one is perfect.

I blame it all on the Internet

(

)

Thanks Hank, but it is Really The 3rd Picture that is Important (#114001)

by Traveller on Sat, 08/30/2008 - 3:04am

...if people would just study the tax plan numbers of each candidate....ALL of McCain's support would evaporate instantly.

But people won't do the work.

Sorry, but this is the message I will be carrying from now to November.

Best Wishes, Traveller

(

| parent )

Whaat is the source of your chart? (#114002)

by tomsyl on Sat, 08/30/2008 - 3:15am

I'd like to know whether it came from a neutral source and how the numbers were calculated before spending any time on it.

Even a dead midget is far from light. - Confucius

(

| parent )

The Tax Policy Center is the source (#114004)

by Blue Neponset on Sat, 08/30/2008 - 6:39am

Sorry I didn't see it in my CNN link.

Here is a link to the TPC report. LINK (warning PDF)

The source isn't the Heritage Foundation, Exxon/Mobil or the American Enterprise Institute so some conservatives may see the report as biased.

But she's a queen, and such are queens
that your laughter is sucked in their brains. -D. Bowie

(

| parent )

Thanks BN. I'm not looking for biases per se; (#114181)

by tomsyl on Sat, 08/30/2008 - 6:20pm

I just want to know what sources, assumptions and math underlay the conclusions shown in the graph. I'll follow up.

EDIT: My first impression of the study you linked to is that the graph Traveller reprinted cannot possibly be understood or put into perspective without reading the underlying assumptions in the report itself, particularly w/r/t the enormous effect of the two candidate's health insurance plans. Also, both candidates' plans project to long-term tax revenue reductions in the trillions of dollars, meaning of course that both plans themselves are totally unrealistic without corresponding reductions in the Federal budget. We all know the likelihood of that happening.

That said, this excellent study provides very useful information regarding the likely impact on individuals and the US economy as a whole. I hope it provides grist for discussions here by the people here who know far more about economics than I do.

Even a dead midget is far from light. - Confucius

(

| parent )

Here is CNN with the same numbers (#114003)

by Blue Neponset on Sat, 08/30/2008 - 6:26am

LINK Travellers chart is way prettier.

The source isn't Fox News, the RNC or the White House Press Office so some conservatives may see this information as biased though.

But she's a queen, and such are queens
that your laughter is sucked in their brains. -D. Bowie

(

| parent )

Recent Diaries