Obama Kisses Billions Goodbye

Another ill-informed attempt by the mainstream media to try and manipulate the Presidential race. With Obama trending upwards and McCain plummeting in the polls the mainstream media will make every effort to attack Obama and lay off of McCain until the race is competitive. One question for the author of this article: since when is a salary in excess of $250,000 middle class, or even “upper middle class” which I think is something you just invented? I’m certain internal deliberations went on in your mind, if not a discussion with your editor, as to whether the American people were dumb enough to think that people making a quarter of a million dollars per annum are in the middle class. Which one of you guys coined the phrase “upper middle class” to solve the problem? You guys are geniuses, congratulations.

WHERE IS JOHN McCAIN’S PLAN????????????

Dear Bob: “the mainstream media will make every effort to attack Obama and lay off of McCain until the race is competitive”, what are you smoking? Go ahead and tax the upper income earners more and watch how they stop spending and hiring. The left will never understand economic incentives. Go educate yourself about the early 90′s disaster called, “The Luxury Tax”. You’ll see how even the class-envy hungry Democratic Congress saw what a stupid idea it was and rescinded it the next year. Any small business person making over $250,000 will simply become a subchapter S corp and take his pay as dividends instead of wages, and you’d do the same thing just like when you buy something on sale at the grocery store like Coca Cola…..don’t you feel bad about the poor hourly workers at Pepsi? Shame on you Bob.

June 12, 2008: “But I’m not for quote ‘privatizing Social Security,’ I never have been, I never will be.” John McCain, during invitation-issued town hall meeting in New York City.
November 18, 2004: “Without privatization, I don’t see how you can possibly, over time, make sure that young Americans are able to receive Social Security benefits.” John McCain, Nashua, New Hampshire.
For more great quotes and other interesting facts about John McCain, visit http://www.StopThinkVote.com

come on guys, lay off the idea that either of the candidates is going to present a plan that will bear any resemblence whatsoever to something the Congress will pass – I am puzzled that anyone here thinks these are serious proposals; the O-man does get credit for making suggestions, but there is no way that will pass Congress in the form presented; as for anything McC could put forward in the heat of a campaign would be only so much rhetoric – the Dem leadership, which in just about any practical post-election scenario, will still control Congress, will NEVER pass a Pubbie plan (witness Bush’s very modest privatization plan, which was, like O’s, not raising anywhere close to the $$$ that are needed to head off disaster in the Social Security area). Bottom line, folks, anything that gets through Congress in the next Administration will have to be a compromise and what we have seen so far would be DOA, so are trial balloons at best or political pablum for the masses at worst.

“Any small business person making over $250,000 will simply become a subchapter S corp and take his pay as dividends instead of wages.”
There is already a trend towards this with the current self-employment tax. Of course issues such as reasonable compensation come into play, but I know few people who make $250k even in today’s climate as small business owners say the full amount is to be classified as wages. So, the net effect is – nothing will change.

The fool doesn’t know want he wants except votes. The hell with policy, after he is president he is set for life!!
Light up another mentol reefer!!

Let me see…Michelle Obama reported income in the range to be exemted from SS taxes. Senator Obama’s salary is in the proposed exempted range..Hummm…anybody else smells fishy business?

In ordr for social security to work you have to have people working to pay into it, if the retiress aredrawing on the ss and nothing is added to it eventually it will run dry and since Mr. Bush saw nothing wrong with outsourcing JOe and Hank and Bob and Jane’s jobs who is working to pay into social security. MCX Bush want a to just do away with it. That is his plan.

i hope that Americans have better understanding of economical principles now then russian peasants in 1917 when comunists were selling change too…

A Muslim until he was 20? Where do people come up with these fantasies? I ask where, but I know why–they don’t want to say “I hate him because he’s black” so they have to come up with this BS.

Obama knows nothing about much of anything. He gives speeches without substance.
He is embarrassing to the American people.

Personal message for:
Gary Nowlin
Please go to this web site and learn more about Obama.
He is confirmed Muslim.
http://www.danielpipes.org/article/5354

Aren’t Obama’s proposals nothing more than extended welfare payments to those who don’t want to work! How do they benefit the working class?

I’m a democrat (and no I’m not a fan of Hillary Clinton). From what I have seen so far I agree more with McCain’s policies. I would like to see some town hall meetings between the two and have some confusion why Obama won’t participate. I will say that some of the comments made by Michelle Obama have scared me away.

Barack Hussein Obama was named after his Kenyan Muslim father, but he himself was born American, in an American state (Hawaii), and raised by his American Christian mother and her American Christian parents. His father left his life when he was two. He has never been a Muslim.

Typo corrected:
I think a good American should be glad to invest in our security and our economy. I would gladly pay a higher tax if the tax dollars were going toward programs for the elderly, the mentally ill and low-income families who want to be trained for a job that would transition them from welfare-to-work. Let’s remember that welfare was thought up by republicans as a way to control ordinary people’s economic standard. Obama will make it possible for the lower income families to ear a decent living, which will boost the economy and help establish stability in the long run. Vote OBAMA for president of the USA in November 2008.

To Ann:
Am I not a good american for providing jobs and paying taxes? The government doesn’t produce anything, they only collect taxes. The government will collect far less taxes by raising them on the folks that provide the jobs. Welthy folks don’t mind paying their fair share which is currently around 35% of their income. Isn’t that enough taking into account the wear, tear and stress most job providers have? When you raise the taxes on this group they will simply come up with ways to pay less. They didn’t become successful by being stupid. Go ahead, try to tax the beejebers out of the folks that provide the jobs, see what happens. There certainly will be some change.

Obama remains a clueless fool. Why or why would any vote for the dingdong?

This must be the time of night when all your racist posters are finally drunk.

Well Off:
I’m happy to hear you are so wealthy. So, you say you have employees? How many of these employees are you giving a fair wage to? Do these employees not give you an honest day’s work? Then, why aren’t you giving them an honest day’s wage?
Your success is only as valuable as the people you have building it for you. If your employees cannot live on the stingy wages you parse out, perhaps your success isn’t so glamorous.

Obama Just says stuff that sounds good to lure people in. Not that he knows what he is talking about.
Now if could guarantee that the money going into SS would be used for retired persons and not every other social program, or other social programs being taken out of it.
If That the other social programs they already dip into SS for, would stop using SS funds.
If the government would pay back all the money they borrowed from SS fund.
SS would probably be sound if the government would use the program for only what and how it was set up to be used.
Obama just floats stuff and says stuff for votes. He never gives specifics or how to’s. Because he has no clue.

What I find credible is that since the Democrats (Nancy Pelosi and Company) took charge over Congress in 2006, our gas has risen $1.50 per gallon and almost $80.00 per barrel of oil. Now, I can see the Democratic Congress have no idea whats going on, just like their candidate, Obama. A lot has been blamed on Bush and rightly so, however, the President can only do so much with a Congress like we have now. I think Obama will continue this increase in gas/oil, as well as taxes (Windfall), etc. McCain is a maverick, far to liberal for the GOP, however, he has the right ideas to get the country moving in the right direction. I say, support McCain, Obama is a joke, empty suit with no substance.

Why dont we agree that a fair share is 10%, and tax everyone at that rate? You keep saying his fair share, but our tax system is anything but fair. The top 10% actually pays 64.89% of the total tax. On second thought maybe you are right, I would prefer to pay my share as opposed to the 64% I currently pay.

I just can’t believe Obama is even a nominee for president of United States. Are we lacking smart, accomplished and competent people in this great country that someone with Illinois state senate and 3 years US senate experience become is being considered as president to lead the greatest country on the face of the globe? Obama has flip flopped on anything he said, yet he continue to accused his opponent. He is good at rushing to get some academicians to write a proposal that he say is a policy, anytime he is challenged or the poll shows that he is lacking something. Obama has no fix on anything, simple because he has experience or understanding of them, except writing speeches on the issue.
On this social security issue; he only responded because his opponent accused him of planning to raise taxes. Obama has no experience, and understanding of all the issues, when it comes to govern a country.
Recently, he made a comment concerning the Supreme Court ruling on the Guantanamo prisoners to suggest that they can be treated just like the bombers of the 1993 World Trade Center. When his opponent campaign criticized him of being naive to suggest that the current war on terror should be treated as a law enforcement, he could not response himself, but sent a loser like John Kerry and former counter-terrosim director, Richard Clarke to attack McCain. Following that, today, he quickly arranged a photo section seating among a team of 17 so-called national security advisors. You could see that he appeared so fake among the team, and look like someone who does not even belong there.
This is typical of Obama. He quickly rush to assemble people for photo section, anytime his credential or experience on anything is challenged. How are you going to get a concensus advise from a team of 17 national security advisors? This is purely political gimmick.
Fellow America, the stakes are so high to trust this nation in a very naive hand to govern.Obama has no judgment or experience to lead this country. Lets not just follow the speeches of change, when we do not know what kind of change we are getting. Think fellow Americans, and vote no to this naive, very far left liberal called Barrack Hussein Obama

I know its long, but some out there need to read it!!!!
A Restaurant Tax Story
(written by Victor Boc, and told on his radio program)
Every day, ten men went to a restaurant for dinner. They always ordered the same meals, and the bill for their food always came to exactly $100.00. They did this day after day, year after year, without variation.
They did not divide the cost of the bill up equally among them, however. Since some of the men were more wealthy than others, they all agreed that an equal split would be unfair to those with less money. So, the men decided to pay the bill in precisely the same way we all pay our income taxes.
The first four men paid nothing at all. They ate for free. The fifth man paid $1.00; the sixth paid $3.00; the seventh paid $7.00; the eighth paid $12.00; the ninth paid $18.00. And the tenth man, who was by far the richest of them, paid exactly $59.00, which was most of the $100.00 bill. He didn’t mind, however, since he could afford to pay that amount. All was well. The ten men were happy with this arrangement, and they continued to eat at the restaurant every single day, enjoying their time together.
Then one day… the owner of the restaurant threw them a curve. As they stood at the counter to pay their bill, he announced that he would reduce the cost of the meals for them. “Since you are all such great customers, and I am so appreciative of your business,” he said, “I am going to reduce the total bill for your meals by $20.00. From now on, your ten dinners will cost you only $80.00.”
The men were pleased. But the situation did present a problem. How were they to divvy up the savings among them? Obviously, they could not simply credit $2.00 (one-tenth of the $20.00 savings) to each of the ten men, since that would mean that the first four men would actually be getting paid $2.00 to eat! No good. It only seemed fair that the first four men, who paid nothing to begin with, should likewise not get any of this $20.00 refund. But still, there was a problem. If they now divided the $20.00 savings among the remaining six men, that would be $3.33 per man. If that amount were subtracted from each man’s payment, then the fifth man and sixth man, who had been paying $1.00 and $3.00 respectively, would then be getting paid to eat. That wouldn’t work, either. No, the solution to this problem required some ingenuity.
Just then, the restaurant owner, who had been listening to the discussion, interrupted. He offered a solution. He suggested that the fairest way to settle this dilemma would be to reduce each man’s bill by the same proportion as he had been paying in the first place. The owner walked over to his calculator and figured out the amounts each man should pay. And so it was agreed.
The fifth man, instead of paying $1.00, now paid nothing, just like the first four men had always done. The sixth man paid $2.00 (reduced from $3.00); the seventh paid $5.00 (reduced from $7.00); the eighth paid $9.00 (reduced from $12.00); the ninth paid $12.00 (reduced from $18.00). This left the tenth man with a bill of $52.00, instead of his previous bill of $59.00. The men paid their bill according to this arrangement, and they left the restaurant, satisfied.
Outside the restaurant, however, the men began to compare their savings. The sixth man started complaining. “I only got one dollar out of the $20.00 savings. That’s not much,” he said. He pointed to the tenth man and declared, “And he got $7.00. What gives? That’s not fair. He’s rich. He doesn’t need the money. Why did he get $7.00, when I only got $1.00?”
“Yeah, that’s right,” exclaimed the fifth man. “I only saved a dollar, too. It’s unfair that the rich guy got seven times more than I did! I surely have a much greater need for money the he does.”
“That’s true,” shouted the seventh man. “Why should he get back $7.00, when I got back only $2.00? That stinks! The wealthy get all the breaks. The rich just get richer.”
“Wait a minute!” yelled the first four men in unison. “We didn’t get anything at all. Not one stinking cent! The rich fellow, who drives here every day in a Lexus, got $7.00, and we all take public transit to this restaurant, and we got nothing at all. This system exploits the poor.” With that, the men became angry. “And I lost everything,” said one of the four. “My wife left me, my daughter is in the hospital, and I can’t get work. I could sure use a break. Instead, I got not one lousy penny of the $20.00, and I have to watch this guy who’s filthy rich take $7.00 of it! I won’t stand for it!”
The nine men surrounded the tenth. Their anger mounted as they continued to express their resentment at what they thought was a supreme injustice. Finally, they lost control of their senses. They beat up the tenth man. They left him bloody in the street, and they went home.
The next day, the tenth man did not show up for their regular dinner. The nine men sat down and ate without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something: they were $52.00 short! Needless to say, that was the last time those men ever ate at that restaurant.
I wish I could say that these nine men learned a valuable lesson, that they came to understand the principle upon which a tax cut is based. But they didn’t. They were too stupid to understand.

Big Joe: Your post implies that Barack Obama is not smart. Mr Obama was elected President of Harvard Law review. It is an honor bestowed by his peers as a distinguished scholar. Mr McCain was 894 out of 899 at the Naval academy. In case you do not understand there were only 5 classmates who were academically less proficient that Mr McCain. I think ir is Mr McCain not Mr Obama that needs to prove his intellect is sufficient for the job.
There seems to be a concerted effort on this web site to spread incorrect information about Mr Obama. You can’t make an informed decision with misinformation.

Mary: Mr Obama is not responsible for the past failure of social security. His plan will make it solvent over the intermediate term. Criticizing Obama who will do something compared to McCain who will do nothing makes you not Obama seem inept.
The statement any taxes reduced in one area will be raised in another area needs further amplification, It is not intelligible.

Bwahaha…what has Obama ever made solvent? Ummmm??? Nothing, but yet we have claims that despite his billions off figures and his other clueless remarks that he is going to make SS solvent—-where? In Never Never land?

Why don’t you Osama…..I meant Obama supporter just get over with please the dude ain’t got nothan man. Oh and answering your question “where is John Mccain’s purposal for social security? Once again this could only be heard on a debate that Obama does not want. Oh and for FRANCIS….even you have not heard it from John Mccain yet but so far doing nothing about it would properly save you enough money to retired on your own. I rather have that than tax the crap out of me and still would not promised me of any future.

You mean Obama is FLIP FLOPPING on an issue according to the way the wind is currently farting?
What a shock!!!
Problem for Obama is he doesnt have Hillary Clinton to COPY anymore.

Unless everybody pays in – nobody is exempt, there’s maybe a chance.
Right now, with the way the law is, there are too many ways to avoid paying taxes. Imagine they just contract work out – there would be no payroll taxes.
Obama is relying on payroll taxes. But business has a way of avoiding payroll taxes – ie, through contract work. So unless there’s a new law that no employer will be exempt from paying payroll taxes, I can see employers will find way to cut their taxes.
I see employers will cut down their hiring and just do contract work and avoid the payroll taxes.
However, it’s a noble attempt. Rather than destroy the idea, suggest ways for him to improve it.

Ronn
Obama is only the Democratic Nominee because the DNC members took a risk and they used affirmative action by laws in counting the delegate votes say in the caucueses which had less popular vote than a primary and for that reason alone his nomination is questionable nevermind other character questions

Deebsflo
you arent acknowleding the fact you cant win without Hillary supporters… I dont care if you are rustrated you have to be nice to Hillary supporters and you will accept Hillary as VP and like it!

Stantiam:
I respectfully disagree with you. Affirmative action which is giving someone special treatment because of a personal characteristic was not used in assigning votes in caucuses. What distinguishes caucuses from primaries is that caucuses are in public they last longer and in many but not all cases they occur at night. These rules were in place in most caucus states for around thirty years both candidates knew about the rules and were not set up this year especially for Obama. They were fair elections no one was advantaged by them, but the Clinton campaign made a mistake in not preparing for them. Clinton blamed Obama for her failing to do well in caucuses but it was her campaign team that was to blame. Obama is a very well organized leader and he proved that by running a smarter campaign. Obama was smarter than Clinton when it came to contesting caucuses.
Believe me if there was any corruption invoting I would acknowledge that.
The DNC rules are that the superdelegates were to decide on their own who to vote for. If all the superdelegate votes were removed and only elected delegates voted, Clinton still would have lost by 100 votes. The Clinton talked so much about this that they confused the truth. This election was honest. The Clinton’s have more political friends than Obama and that is why in the beginning they had more superdelegates. That only changed because Obama proved to them that he was the better candidate. Clinton bragged more but Obama was smarter. It was not because of affirmative action or because Obama had more pull, it was because he proved he has the stuff to win.
The only thing I care about is winning and I thought Obama plays a better game while Clinton talks a better game.

Staniam:
I will not hurl insults at Clinton supporters And I agree that in many of the key states Obama can not win without them. I think that if you are open minded you will find that Obama stands for most of the same things as Clinton. He won the nomination fair and square, he in no way cheated and someone who says he cheated is a liar. As I said before Obama had more regular delegates than Clinton. So if there were no superdelegates Obama would still have beaten Clinton. So Obama won the most elected delegates and the most DNC delegates.

The private accounts by themselves without added payroll taxes will not solve the SS problem. The biggest problem with private accounts is that if we have a run of bad years and we could, who will make up for the money that was lost in the market. The return on the S&P 500 was .7% per year during Bush’s seven plus years in office. Adding dividends it comes to around 2.5%. That is less than the government bond over the same time period and the government bond is the investment for social security. The return on government bonds was between 3 and 5.5% but I do not know the average.
The private accounts is a dangerous solution that may not work as it did not work during Bush’s term. If however you want to take additional funds and put it in private accounts that will be good.

Ronn
there is no way the country can afford 1.3 trillion of new spending… other things have to come out of the budget to do the things he wants… and its not that Obama and Clinton have basically the same policies… for one thing true 100 percent universal health care should be a mandate and employers should help pay it!(obama will not do that because of Insurancr lobby contributors) and Mccain is the same on global warming and other moderate to liberal issues… he already said he wouldnt overturn Roe v Wade… another thing… it is condecendin g at bnest to say oh well Clinton could be a supreme court Justice or governor of NY that wont fly it has to be VP

Staniam:
Even if all of the delegates were counted in MI and FL Obama still had the most elected delegates and his lead in super delegates would have gone up from the super delegates from MI. In the case of Fl, I do not know. But what I do know is with and withou the superdelegates Obama beat Clinton fair and square. You referred to obscure rules. By that what do you mean. Every candidate is responsible to know what the rules are and they have to live by them. Clinton knew what the rules were and if she did not it is because of her failing.
By the way I do not agree that all the delegates should have been counted but I think in the final outcome Obama will let them be counted and he will still win.
I did not mean to be arrogant, I was angry because I felt that everyone was attacking Obama unfairly. When the attacks were not unfair I let them pass.
I too won’t back down if I have the facts on my side but I am not here to argue for the sake of arguing. And if I do not have the facts or if I am wrong I will admit it. It is cowardly to continue to fight when in you heart you know your wrong. I am not accusing you of anything I am telling you where I am coming from.
Arrogance is not something I would be proud of.

As a small business man, I can tell you this ssn plan would probably be just about it for me. I pay my wife and I a modest salary, about $3100 a month total. This pays the bills, but not much else. Because I am self employed, I pay an additional $450. a month in SSN (actually a tad over that). I also hire a young lady to work part time for me in my second business (for which my wife and I take virtually no salary) and I actually pay the 15 percent on her salary of 8.50 an hour. But, that is not all folks. Last year I had to pay over 1000 dollars in federal unemployment tax on my wife and I. BUT, if I fired myself, I could not collect unemployment because I am self employed! Why am I paying this money? We contribute about 50k to the local economy each year through the costs of my business-advertising, incentives, business cards, gas, vehicle purchases (modest vehicles which we use until they die. My last cost 20k, has 70k miles on it, is 3 yrs old and I hope it makes it to 140k and another 3 – 4 years. We live in a mfg home. Take very few vacations. Pay for my son’s college. And so on. We do not make any profit on our labor (80 hours or more a week for myself)until we hit about 90k in revenue for a year. So, we make 20=30k in profit. BUT after the 8 to 10k in additional income taxes, most of that goes away. If I had to pay ssn on that too, I would just hang it up and and get a job at Micky D’s. I would quit generating all that money that is spent into this local economy. I would work less and have time to do the work I hire the part time gal to do. In short, those of you whining about the evil rich just need to get off of your hintermost quarters and start producing. Do not like your wages? Create a job for yourself. I have created two at my current location. The biggest problem w/ congress is most have never had to run a business. When you become responsible for that, you understand how abysmally stupid most tax policy is. Employees and Rent are the two biggest costs of a business. The government certainly makes the first worse and many of its policies exacerbate the second.

Dave
I too would get a job at mickyds and have guaranteed wages and benefits tha way but why is it so hard for small business owners to pay only the partial cost of insurance when their employees generate a profit for them and take the heat when they dont usually dont have to deal with wevery day stuff of the business just let their employees like me do it… its a tad unfair

Ronn
Obama will not win if he doesnt chose Clinton Webb and Nunn have problems iof their own… you talk about Clinton people getting over their freustrations you must do the same… i have gotten far more profanity laced insults hurled at me on these blogs than I have given out! If Obama chosing clinton takes away your rationale for votign for Obama thats tough your going to have to suck it up and like it!

Dave: I do not see how Obama’s will effect you. Your income tax will be lowered and at least from what you say here by more than McCain’s plan. However I am tired now and can’t look it up.

It does not matter what numbers are in the package, it is the total cost of the package that counts. So, if I hire someone and pay them 9 dollars an hour x 40 hrs = $360 a week + about 30 percent more in various government costs +120 (unemployment, ssn etc), + 100 a week in health care, + the cost of keeping track of all of that ($25 per week for my business) I now have a package of close to $600 a week or 2400 a month to hire one minimum wage employee. There is no way in the world I would contemplate that in my primary business (Real Estate). I am in the top ten percent for my area and gross about 120k a year. Per my above, that means maybe 50-55k a year after expenses including salary. Like the guy complained about contractors–I get the work I can not get done myself that way. I hire a small business man to foto my homes at $60 a pop. I hire a gal to do my website and create my tours at 150 a month retainer and a bit more in busy months. I just work more hours doing the administrivia because the cost of hiring an assistant would mean I would have nothing left at the end of the day. (I do not want to expand this out into multiple agents which is another post.)
There is an idea that the profits should be shared. Not so. (I do think some profit sharing ideas are good within reason) The profits are what you earn for taking the risks of running a business. If a company does not make money for the owners or stock holders, it has no business being in existence. Its job is not to provide jobs, it is to make profits for the investors. Obviously, if you take care of your people, they take care of you; however, if you take too good care of your people, the business goes away and those poeple are now out of a job.

Dave
I have full insurance for a business with about 25 employees till new owners bought it and dropped my insurance and now I have the exact same company that I pay triple what I paid back then and gert no help in the insurance cost… thats wrong

You have no argument from me re the cost of health insurance. I made a decision in Dec 1972 in Saigon Vietnam that I was going to spend 20 years in the service for the free (not quite) health care. For the next 18 years or so + another 5 as a DOD civilian I went where My Uncle sent me and did what he said to do primarily for that reason. I am extremely grateful at this point of my life that I did so. I would suggest that there needs to be a hard look at WHY medical costs are so high. Many reasons–cost of litigation, stupid awards, government regulation (huge costs there w/ senseless requirements), high labor costs, illegal alien health care being underwritten through emergency room service, demand for the best care now and so on. I think the only way we will get a hold on it is when there are multiple levels of care available and the dangers of offering it are not so catastrophic. If they were permitted to exist, I am sure there are lots of dedicated people who would open low cost or free to needy care. Do you know the level of waste that is mandated by health codes? Through my church, we have collected excess materials and shipped them to several places in the world for hospitals (africa, Asia). If a package is opened, anything not used is trashed. These are often individually wrapped, perfectly clean and safe items.
Finally, my last station was at the embassy in Bangkok, Thailand (92-97). I had my gall bladder removed, an umbilical hernia fixed and kidney stones rotor rooted out of me. These were done by US trained doctors in top notch hospitals. I do not recall the cost, but the total of the three w/ a couple days of hospital stay were certainly under ten k. Conversely, one of the soldiers I supported was bitten by a snake in Vietnam and we medivaced him to BKK. I took him to Chulalongkorn Hospital because it is one of the best snake bite hospitals in the world, but, took him to the emergency room which provided pretty much free care to those who needed it. There was one guy who had a motorcycle accident and we walked by the xray of his cracked skull as the doctor was talking to him. People were literally dying around us and the place was crowded but the care was there and it was free. (My soldier was so embarrassed to be there taking up the doctor and nurses’ time as he knew if the snake had been poisionous, he would have been long dead.)
Anyway, I agree the issue needs lots of work. BUT UNCLE SAM CAN NOT DO IT. 60 or more cents of every dollar in government programs goes to management of the program.

Dave,
I think you missed one very important cost. Of every health care dollar only$0.70 goes to medical care, doctors, hospitals, rehabilitative services etc and $0.30 dollars goes to administrative fees For Medicare that figure is$0.95 and $0.05. Those figures in other countries is also less for administration. The insurance companies are inefficient and their executives are among the best paid CEO’s in the nation. I believe that Obama’s plan will bring down some of those administrative fees and health care will cost less. I do not know whether Obama makes that claim but I think it will happen.

Ronnn, I would be very surprised if your numbers hold true for government health care programs. The government spends about 60 to 70 percent of the gross cost of the program on the admin of the program. I know the fraud and waste level for medicare/medicade is in the billions for just NY and FL. I think in the article I read, that figure was for a quarter, but, would not be dogmatic on it. If only 30 percent of each dollar goes to admin, after all, admin is really a lot of different areas of operation, that is not too awful.
I believe active competition is really what can bring down both cost of insurance and health care. In my current industry for example: In 97 when I moved to eastern Washington State, you took land listings at ten percent and typically split it 50 50 between list and selling broker. The mls was not that strong, computer access was limited and there was a lot more control by individual agents. In 12 years, the internet puts it all out there fore everyone to see. We have three times the number of agents we did and you very rarely see land listed for more than 3 percent per side. Occassionally it is even at 2.5 percent to the cooperating broker. (this is nuts because it just is not worth the time, Micky D’s would be a pay raise on a typical land transaction at that commission level. $1000 before in house splits, taxes, gas etc. Maybe a 500 dollar check to an agent for 200 or more hours of work.) Yet, because the level of competition is so high, the cost of the labor/service has come down to 30 percent of what it was ten to twelve years ago. So perhaps, break up the insurance monopolies, permit the transfer from company to company, let the little guys bundle to get the discounts. Finally, a program that costs 110 billion a year will suck the economy dry. It is just not sustainable. Like having the Iraq war forever. Also, the cost by definition will continually increase. (The nature of bureocracy (sp) is to increase. I spent 26 years or so in some of the best the world has to offer.)
But to both of you, Ronnn and Staniam, appreciate the civil argument/discussion. These are truly difficult issues and important issues for all of us and for the country. I am not normally on this board (show up on abc a bit more regularly as dwath1) so if I do not chat w/ you again, all the best to you and may McCain win! (I do not have the video cam on so you can not see me holding my nose. I did meet him a time or two during my service and have a good impression of him from that, but, I really disagree w/ so many of his policies, but, not as much as I disagree w/ Hill and Obama. Good luck and good night. dave

Dave
yea Health Care needs to be fixed and it should be a small price to pay for employers to help with health care cost but people like Ronn think that Obama shouldnt give in on anything… nevermind like you said there will be enough money to pay for everything e wants… but we should start with healthcare and work from there

F. Richard Guye,
“Go ahead and tax the upper income earners more and watch how they stop spending and hiring.”
We already have. Trickle down does not work. What’s their excuse for not spending and not hiring now? And don’t give me that “We need more H1Bs to compete globally” crap. CEO pay has never been more out of line while they claim they can’t hire more Americans.
Obama 08!

“The substantial revenue difference between Obama’s 2007 idea and his 2008 plan will make it harder to shore up the federal retirement program.”
Hogwash. By NOT increasing the tax on the business, but increasing the tax on the earners making more than $250K, the business would have no justification for laying off people. Businesses do not operate to, or have concern for, employees’ personal tax rates. The bottom line for businesses won’t be hurt while at the same time, businesses will be offered incentives for hiring.
Every person hired contributes to SS, so I don’t see the so-called net loss. The real issue is how to prevent people that make over $250K from cheating on their taxes — gaming the system.

Hope For Change
Hiring is all well and good but its the living wage increases and the health care that should be partially provided by the business owners… if not that and there is no VP hillary then there isnt goingto be a president Obama!

Jjv,
The best thing about blogs is this. There may be bias in the study/question, but the people not studied/questioned get to statistically refute the findings.
The media IS biased against Obama. Every question posed starts from a biased position and leaves him having to defend non-sense. These are called “fair questions” and “issues”. For example, “Why don’t you wear a flag pin?” A fair question would be “Have you ever worn a flag pin?” or “Will you ever wear a flag pin?”
A biased study result could show that African American men running for President don’t wear flag pins. An unbiased study would show that most men don’t wear flag pins. An even better study would probably show that most Americans don’t find wearing a flag pin criteria for selecting the President.
Obama 08!

Obama substantive proposal addresses
the fact that Americans are living longer, and baby boomers are retiring.
Polls show Obama ahead in Florida,
Ohio, and Pennsylvania.

if i as a working stif have to pay a certain percentage on all my income–so should the big earners keep it equal and stop the rich boy crap.

Obama’s ideas are never new, just the same old crud pitched with a new slant. I have been a democrat for 30 years but I believe that an Obama presidency will run our nation farther into the ground than it already is. His ideas are not well though out and a bit pedestrian. For the agent of “change” that he claims to be, I have to say (yawn) I have heard it all before. How about coming up with something outside the box?

Obviously, Senator Obama, as regarding social security or any matter, has not a clue as to what he is uttering. As a tool of the elitist-run, DNC, the Illinois Senator merely parrots whatever Howard Dean/Nancy Pelosi and other out of touch, self-proclaimed “intellectually” endowed far left of center extremists dictate in a scheme to elect a flash-driven charlatan in November.

I think every dam voter should go to the polls in November and vote for NADER!
Now that WILL be CHANGE!!

hp
as long as not republican—the last 8 years have sure been a learning experience—if anyone wants more of the same–they must have mental issues.i have never seen this country in such bad shape—anyone want to argue to the contrary.

The article said that Obama was going to tax Capital Gains at a lower rate. When did he make that change? I thought his stance to tax Capital Gains at the regular income rate was to make some Hedge Fund managers pay taxes, but the **** with millions of middle class wage earners who own mutual funds who have to pay taxes on distributions that they don’t see in their wallet and which may not be there when they actually do sell the mutual fund.

Let’s see the Democrats were the first to get their hands on the SS fund when LBJ opened it up to fund his war in Viet Nam.. And then Al Gore cast the deciding vote as vice president that placed a income tax on the benefit. Thus reducing the benefit. I don’t think we can afford to let the Democrats play with this again or our elderly will receive nothing.

George,
Obama has more morals than mc-more-war. mc-more-war cheated on his first wife after she waited for him to come back from the war and then went off and married his millionaire wife.

You are not going to fix it by raising taxes – eventually you will have to tax everyone at 30% or more just for SS and there simply isn’t enough money for that.
The solution is to raise the retirement age eligibility. It should be going up just like life expectancy. When SS was started, the life expectancy was about the same as the eligibility age.
Or lower the future benefits for anyone more than say less than 50. That will give people 15 years to adjust. The sooner you do it, the easier will be the transition.

It cracks me up when any discussion of Social Security comes up, since both sides have it wrong.
Whatever happened to being responsible and saving your money for retirement so you do not have to depend on the government to support you? This works at all levels of income, give up something, save the 10%, otherwise you are screwed, and unless there is someone charitable out there to help, then tough. The results of your decision not to save.
It is so much easier to depend on the government though…you don’t have to do anything and all the hard workers out there paying taxes will take care of you.
Social Security should be abolished, how about that for saving tax money.
But as with all government programs, once they are in place they are impossible to remove, since those dependent upon them will raise such a fit that the benefits that have become their “right” are being taken away.
Amazing how our rights of “life, liberty, and happiness” can be defined to be government handouts.
It’s amazing that American’s survived before the 40s and FDR’s New Deal of government handouts. What did the retirees do then?
If you are not happy, look in the mirror, not at the government.
The anonymous quote concerning how people begin to vote those in office who promise the most from the treasury is beginning to look more and more true…

I for one do not want anything. Just leave me alone. Stop making me pay for people who choose not to care for themselves. Add a basic financial planning class to High School and get rid of all these failed Government programs. If we teach people how to save, and give them all the money the government steals/wastes the problem will correct itself.

Rasmussen polls show McCain ahead in FL and OH. media is pretty silent today after pimping those other polls yesterday. They both can’t be right.

Diesel,
You must be an insurance agent. Nobody in their right mind would want to pay into a system that is practically guaranteed not to pay the benefit. The idea of ss is to have a benefit at a certain age. It is not just to support the ssa office employees for administering the benefit. Get it?

Woah that last post by Brian was totally brilliant. Seems like he just shut down the NeoCon train on this page.

my friend wants to know if this is $250000 net or gross income