11 Comments Add your own

• 1. kaus  |  July 11th, 2008 at 6:35 pm

  Obama is on record for wanting to raise the capital gains tax. This tax indeed affects those making income of less than 250k. If I sell my house or sell stock….your rebuttal is a lie. What a disgrace.

• 2. Pat Cunningham  |  July 11th, 2008 at 6:47 pm

  Kaus: There’s nonsense floating around the Internet to the effect that Obama would impose a 28 percent tax on the profit from “all home sales.” It’s false. Both Obama and McCain would continue to exempt the first $250,000 of gain from the sale of a primary residence ($500,000 for a married couple filing jointly) which results in zero tax on all but a very few home sales.

• 3. Pat Cunningham  |  July 11th, 2008 at 6:49 pm

  One other thing, Kaus. As one who seems to be backing McCain, you shouldn’t use the word “disgrace.” That’s the word McCain uses to describe the way the Social Security was designed to work. You don’t want to remind people of that.

• 4. Pat Cunningham  |  July 11th, 2008 at 6:59 pm

  Kaus: FactCheck.org, which is even-handed on examining claims made by both sides in the presidential race (including dubious claims made by Obama), has got the straight skinny on some of these lies about Obama and taxes: http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/would_obama_tax_my_profits_if_i.html

• 5. kaus  |  July 11th, 2008 at 7:51 pm

  Thanks Pat. Good info. #1 blog.

• 6. Pat Cunningham  |  July 11th, 2008 at 8:09 pm

  Kaus: J. Bradford Delong, who is professor of economics at the University of California, a former Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Treasury, an associate of the National Bureau of Economic Research, and a visiting scholar at the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, has examined the tax proposals of both presidential candidates and has concluded that the difference is this: By the year 2013, at the end of the next presidential term, Obama’s tax plan likely would cost less than one-half of one-percent more than McCain’s as a portion of the Gross Domestic Product — chump change, relatively speaking. But to hear some people tell it, Obama is going to tax us all to death. It reminds me of all the scary talk of how Bill Clinton was going to raise deficits through the roof. Instead, he balanced the budget and even produced a huge surplus. Isn’t it funny how Republicans are no longer pushing for a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution? In the ’70s and early ’80s, they thought that was a great idea. And then Reagan presided over huge budget deficits. And don’t blame those deficits on Democrats in Congress. You see, Reagan NEVER vetoed a spending bill. In fact, Congress spent less money than Reagan asked for in his budget proposals.

• 7. kaus  |  July 11th, 2008 at 8:29 pm

  Great stuff….but for the record I still think the capital gains tax stinks….but I dig a balanced budget.

• 8. Menlo Bob  |  July 11th, 2008 at 11:56 pm

  Sauce,

  You mean fellow blogger and economist of all things Democrat Brad DeLong. Do you ever check neutral sources–do you know any?

  Incidently, that Newsweek poll that had Obama up by 15? Check it now. I do believe it was an outlier–not that it ever mattered. Tough way to begin a weekend though.

• 9. Pat Cunningham  |  July 12th, 2008 at 7:59 am

  OK, Bob. Why don’t you come up with an economist of similarly impressive credentials who has different numbers for the comparative tax impacts of the McCain and Obama plans by the year 2013. Meanwhile, I’ll stick with DeLong’s numbers rather than the nonsense in the preposterous e-mail to which FactCheck.org refers in the link in Comment No. 4 above. Let me know how your search turns out.

• 10. Menlo Bob  |  July 12th, 2008 at 11:50 am

  “You see, Reagan NEVER vetoed a spending bill…”–Sauce

  Well then, this story is probably wrong.

• 11. Pat Cunningham  |  July 12th, 2008 at 11:58 am

  Good catch, Bob. I stand corrected.

Leave a Comment

Name Required

Email Required, hidden

Url

Comment

Security Code:

Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed