McCain's economic plan boosts middle class »
Posted By Wolfie2007 9 months ago in Business & FinanceJohn McCain's economic plan is designed from the ground up to raise incomes and create jobs for Americans - especially middle-class Americans - and get our economy moving again. It is in sharp contrast to Barack Obama's plan, which does not treat the middle class well and which will reduce jobs rather than create them. Let's compare the plans.
Read Full Story at sfgate.com »
2213 Views Share Story 50 Comments Report
Who Also Submitted:
Other Related Articles:
Why not submit a story?
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 233 (view all)
-
redtomatoComment removed: User banned.65 Replies
-
24%
Wolfie20079 months ago
FTA
Reply
The results are similar for other middle-class families. If that family earned $42,000, they would receive $4,350 more with McCain than Obama. If the family did not receive health insurance from the employer, they would do even better under McCain's plan, receiving a tax refund of $3,287. Under McCain's plan, the lower a family's income, the larger the percentage reduction in taxes.-
PsychoHosebeastComment removed: User banned.
-
0%
dunkirk8 months, 4 weeks ago
Not true. Under McSame a family int eh 32-62000 they recieve 340 and some change under Obama that goes up to 1400. Obama has much more lucrative tax benfits for the middle class then McSame who gives his biggest breaks to the uber rich. The goes on a deficit spending spree to fund his pipe dreams energy plans.
Reply
-
32%
Wolfie20079 months ago
FTA
Reply
McCain's economic plan is comprehensive and helps the middle class in many other ways. By promoting domestic energy production, including nuclear power and exploration and production of oil and gas - which Obama has opposed - McCain will reduce the price of gasoline, electricity and heating oil. By promoting free-trade agreements, he will reduce taxes on job-creating exports and reduce the prices that middle- and lower-income families pay for food and clothing. In contrast, Sen. Obama opposes good trade agreements - voting against the Colombia free-trade agreement - that would create jobs in America.-
67%
hyperbola9 months ago
The Columbia "free trade agreement" has more to do with the US supporting the narco-trafficker government of Uribe than anything else. It is the sort of imperialistic hegemony that both Columbians and Americans would be better off without.
Reply
U.S. "Free Trade": Death, Drugs and Despair in Colombia
Pedro Arenas is not a person that most of the elites in the U.S.--in the mainstream media, inside the Beltway think-tanks, and in elected positions on Congress--would meet in order to understand the real crime of so-called "free trade." For the elites, so-called "free trade" is an unassailable concept, something that is as natural and obvious as the sun rising in the east and setting in the west. But, for hundreds of thousands of Colombians like Arenas, so-called "free trade" is a question of life and death. And, in our name, our government--Republicans and potentially key Democrats--is pushing to sign death warrants for Colombians in the guise of a so-called "free trade" agreement between our two countries.
This might strike some as a bit hyperbolic. But, the proposed deal would, at the very least, push thousands of farmers off their lands. And, as likely, empower the paramilitary death squads that have flourished, in part through the U.S. financing of the "war on drugs, but also via the strengthening of the powerful business interests who fund some of the most violent political forces in Colombia. Here is the tale, in relative brevity, of the intersection between so-called "free trade," political violence, economic violence and drug cultivation.
.... Put simply, the deal would benefit business and political interests tied to the paramilitary forces. If you have any doubts about the links between the government and these right-wing paramilitary forces, check this out. In November 2006, two powerful senators and two members of Congress--allies of President Uribe - resigned because of evidence they had conspired with paramilitary groups. The Uribe government was rocked this past Monday when its foreign minister resigned:
The foreign minister of Colombia resigned Monday as the government of President Álvaro Uribe, the Bush administration's closest ally in South America, struggled with a scandal that has disclosed ties between paramilitary cocaine-trafficking squads and some of Mr. Uribe's most prominent political supporters....
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jonathan-tasini/us-f...
-
-
33%
Wolfie20079 months ago
FTA
Reply
The most worrisome aspect of Obama's economic plan is that he would raise tax rates in a weak economy. I know of no sensible economic theory that says that increasing taxes, or even planning to increase taxes, in a recession is a good idea. Rather, it is flawed economics. Raising taxes could turn a recession into a depression, and would significantly harm middle-class families. No matter how you look at it, McCain's economic plan helps the middle class much more than Obama's.-
75%
hyperbola9 months ago
Actually fiscal responsibility and reducing the wealth transfers to super-rich gamblers are more likely to get us out of the economic mess created by "neo-liberals" ever since Reagan. We don't need any more of the profligate borrow and spend of the GOP that has mortgaged the future of us and our children.
Reply
The GOP will start to sound credible again when they stop lying in political campaigns.
McCain's ads on taxes are just plain false - Washington Post
THERE IS a serious debate in this presidential campaign about the fundamentally different tax policies of Barack Obama and John McCain. Then there is the phony, misleading and at times outright dishonest debate that the McCain campaign has been waging -- most recently with a television ad.
...The facts? The nonpartisan Tax Policy Center found that the Obama plan would give households in the bottom fifth of the income distribution an average tax cut of 5.5 percent of income ($567) in 2009, while those in the middle fifth would get an average cut of 2.6 percent of income ($1,118). "Your taxes" would go up, yes -- but not if you're someone who is sweating higher gas prices. By contrast, Mr. McCain's tax plan would give those in the bottom fifth of income an average tax cut of $21 in 2009. The middle fifth would get $325 -- less than a third of the Obama cut. The wealthiest taxpayers make out terrifically...
http://www.propeller.com/story/2008/08/31/mccains-... -
50%
mesodude9 months ago
But didn't Bush cut taxes during for the least needy Americans while we're at war in two countries? What was his precedent for thinking THAT was sound fiscal policy? Had that ever been done in American history? In fact, had there ever been a war where a President handed out tax cuts galore, ENCOURAGED Americans to spend beyond their means (by being the poster child for layaway) and caused a conflict in oil rich regions of the world that DIDN'T result in a huge spike in oil prices? And yet STILL cons want to blame the horrific results of Bush's mind-boggling GOP enabled failure and incompetence on those on the left? Obama has it exactly right about the McCain camp. Cons, have you NO idea how erratic and just plain dangerously unstable your behavior has been these last 8 years? Cons?! ;-(
Reply
-
-
75%
tchef9 months ago
McCain's plan is just more trickle down economics that has led us to where we are today. Look around you, it doesn't work. If you want the economy to improve you have to get the money in the hands of those who will spend it. You can cut the taxes to the rich all you want but if the middle class doesn't have money to spend on things they need no one will buy the products and services that the rich have to offer.
Reply
The best way to create jobs is to have people who can purchase goods and services. -
50%
nostalgia9 months ago
"The best way to create jobs is to have people who can purchase goods and services."
Reply
What kind of logic is that?
How can people purchase goods and services if they don't have a job??
The jobs must come first or do you propose the government simply hand out checks so people can purchase goods and services???-
64%
tchef9 months ago
I'm not talking about handing out checks. I'm talking about keeping more of the money earned by the middle class in their hands. What new businesses and jobs are the rich going to create if no one can afford their products and services. Right now the cost of living has gotten so high there is little money left to buy anything else. No money to go to restaurants, or see a movie. What good are the tax breaks for the restaurant owner if there are no customers? A healthy middle class makes a healthy economy.
Reply -
-
73%
lbrtyordeath9 months ago
It's the same kind of logic involved in the "economic stimulus" packages. It's the same kind of logic that led Bush to tell us to go out and buy stuff after 911.
Reply
You're viewpoint is so upside down I barely can comprehend. "How can people purchase goods and services if they don't have a job?" Well.....um....economics 101, supply and demand, the higher demand for products there are the more people are needed to produce them. Umm...errr....and the Gov't handed out some pretty damn HEFTY checks to Wall Street, so I just......wow.
I don't even feel like arguing this anymore. I'm probably already beyond your grasp. -
100%
IanFraigun9 months ago
If you believe that show me one single instance in this countries history where employees were hired to create products that nobody was buying. Maybe a startup company or a new process, but if the products are not purchased quickly those people will be turned out without work.
Reply
The other comments were right. You need to have consumers with money to buy the products or there can never be long term employement available to make those products.
-
-
64%
miklkit9 months ago
We call him McSame because he is just more of the same discredited BU**SH**.
Reply
This is what he represents.
http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/faq.html -
67%
Teech9 months ago
McCain's plan loots what the Bushtapo has not yet stolen from middle class working people.
Reply
McCain taxes any employer contribution to health care as regular income. He gives you a nickel and then takes away 5 dollars and calls that a benefit.
McCain continues corporate communism by rewarding corporations that have sent jobs offshore and stolen the cash from pension plans to fund parachutes and inflated salaries for CEO's.
Socialism is bad, unless it is to bail out McLame's big business contributors.
McCain can lie all he wants, he's used to it. Palin can continue to lie about opposing inventments in Darfur when ABC and others have clearly exposed her for a Bush class liar.
McCain can continue his efforts to block the Troopergate investigation in Alaska. Anything to perpetuate lies and obstruct justice.
McCain continues with the deficit spending and all the policies that have created the worst financial meltdown in U.S. history.
McCain promises to keep spending 10 billion per week in Iraq to enrich his Halliburton and Big Oil cronies.
McCain offers NOTHING more than 4 more years of the worst presidency in the history of democracy.
And on and on and on and on. Lies, lies, lies, and more lies on top of that.
In November you will learn that the American voters have finally come to admit the horrible mistake they made in the past two elections. -
29%
GLee9 months ago
It isn't hard to figure out that if we increase spending by One Trillion Dollars that new money is going to come from someone....... The Obama Plan increases the country's spending by this amount. It is NUTS!
Reply-
29%
nostalgia9 months ago
Well it might be under $1 trillion
Reply
Biden said the $700 billion bailout of Wall Street he voted for, along with Obama and McCain, might force the Democrats to reconsider their promise to double foreign aid. -
68%
Goppy9 months ago
That's an easy one GLee ... all Obama has to do is ratchet down the Massive, Unprecedented, Wild n Crazy Spending that the Republicans promoted during the Bush years!
Reply
Hey, here's a question ... why are you worried about what Obama MIGHT do ... but you never voiced the slightest concern while Bush was bankrupting our nation and borrowing $1.4 TRILLION from our Ideological Nemesis ... the COMMUNISTS in China?
I guess you are more interested in supporting an extremist Right Wing Ideology than protecting our nation .... our flag ... our freedoms.
Is that it? -
64%
hyperbola9 months ago
Well GLee, we could start by cleaning up the massive corruption associated with the Pentagon. That would give us trillions.
Reply
The Pentagon Bailout Fraud
... In other words, sometime in 2009 the direct costs of the war the Bush administration once predicted would cost perhaps $50-60 billion in total will stand at more than $800 billion, or $100 billion above the cost (if all goes well, which it won't) of the bailout of the financial system now being proposed in Washington.
Estimates of the true long-term costs of the President's war of choice, including payments of health care and veterans benefits into the distant future, soar into the budgetary stratosphere. They range from the Congressional Budget Office's $1-2 trillion to an estimate by economists Joseph Stiglitz and Linda J. Bilmes of up to $4-5 trillion. So we're talking somewhere between one-and-a-half and seven bailouts-worth of taxpayer dollars flowing into the morass of disaster, corruption, and carnage in Iraq.
There has been much moaning, air-sucking, and outrage about the $700 billion that the U.S. government is thinking of throwing away on rich New York bankers who have been ripping us off for the past few years and then letting greed drive their businesses into a variety of ditches. In fact, we dole out similar amounts of money every year in the form of payoffs to the armed services, the military-industrial complex, and powerful senators and representatives allied with the Pentagon.
-
-
-
redtomatoComment removed: User banned.
-
-
-
-
71%
NoWayMan9 months ago
first, this is simply an op-ed piece. this is not an article, nor is it a hard news story.
Reply
In fact its written by one of John McCain's economic advisors.
now, the first point the piece makes is that the McCain tax plan will increase the exemption for children from $3,500 to $7,000 per child, and he will provide a refundable health care tax credit of $5,000 for every family.
That sounds great. But what this piece fails to mention is that in McCain's plan, you will be taxed, as income, on the money that goes to your helath plan through your employer. Which means for each $5000 McCain claims to save for you, he will then take $12,000. AND, 20 million people will be dropped from their existing plan.
So, this piece, from John B. Taylor, an economic adviser to John McCain, is obviously slanted.
also, when it comes to bashing Obama's tax plan, McCain is simply lying:
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/more_tax_d...
------
BOTTOM LINE: I'll go with the 4 Nobel Prize winners in Economics who have officially endorsed Obama and say his tax plan will have a better net benefit for the American people.-
redtomatoComment removed: User banned.22 Replies
-
-
65%
Goppy9 months ago
Okay ... I cannot get any youtube link to work.
Reply
They work ONCE ... and then no more.
OmegaTomato ... if you want proof that you are a LIAR regarding your efforts to SPIN Phil Grahm's words ... just type in the keywords youtube, grahm, & whiner.
You will be rewarded with numerous examples of Phil Grahm saying our economy is strong and the only problem is Whining Americans.-
28%
lovemylibs9 months ago
Here's a fun youtube exercise. Watch this ad from Barack Obama scolding McCain for saying the fundamentals of our economy are strong:
Reply
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6reQLzgywzk
Now watch Obama say that we have the long-term fundamentals to make this economy work:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Ac3oWW7Ilw
Now remember that McCain made his statement first and was pilloried for it. Obama said it several days after McCain, after he used McCain's words in an ad that was supposed to mean something, dontcha know.
-
-
24%
Wolfie20079 months ago
Here are a couple of Noble Prize winning economists for Obama. I would let either of these two count beans for me. Note, the fist one says we have to stop worrying about deficit reduction.
Reply
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zk8XpLHG_4A-
-
33%
mesodude9 months ago
A) That's from April of this year (and we only see part of the interview)
Reply
B) The first thing the NYU guy says is that we have to be prepared for changing circumstances (things look a little bleaker today than they did in April, no?)
C) That's why he supported Obama's approach over Clinton's or McCain's
-
-
68%
nikkibabe9 months ago
His Economic plan is what Bush has done last 7 years. The guy who recycled his economic plan, Mr. Graham said that recession is only in people's minds and Americans have become a bunch of whiners.
Reply
Fundamentals of the American economy are strong. Bush's economic policies have really boosted the nation.
So, good luck middle class. You are going to get better, lots of jobs, incomes, lower costs and cheapest gas under MCCain. -
20%
Wolfie20079 months ago
Funny thing about Bush's economic plan it was working really well until liberal democrats took over congress in 2006 promising to change things. Boy, did they ever, the economy nose dived into the toilet and now they claim they can fix it. What a joke, they broke it and now they say they can fix it.
Reply-
-
Republicrat1844Comment removed: User banned.1 Reply
-
40%
mesodude9 months ago
But didn't McCain say the economy was basically sound one moment and then within a matter of hours the next thing we knew, he was saying "Stop the world. Super McLib is here to save the world (just don't ask me to multi-task)"? And Bush and his wipes have been saying for years that everything is wunnerful. Then, suddenly we hear him sounding like he's doing a guest spot on one of those old Western Union commercials. "Um, America? Forget what I said last week. We're up sh*t's creek. Please give me 700 billion dollars today (no questions asked) or the world will implode overnight." ROTFLMAO. If things were going so freaking great, your chimpy hero would not have been blindsided and suddenly be looking at the world's economy teetering on the brink of doom. You cons are an absolute hoot. LMAO ;-P
Reply
-
-
Republicrat1844Comment removed: User banned.5 Replies
-
63%
hefaa19 months ago
Nope, more fearmongering. Obama plan is supported by the best Economist in the world. We know now that trickle down economics the brain child of Bonzo Reagan does not work. Bush kept it going and again TDE failed again
Reply
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/12/business/12scene...
Money must flow from the ground-up. Elect McCain and we'll get Phil "Enron" Gramm as the Secretary of the Treasury and then we're really screwed. He's another proponent of Trickle Down Economics.-
43%
most_reasonable9 months ago
Trickle-down economics is now holding the middle class by the heals and catching what is left in their pockets. Phil says that the American Middleclass is a bunch of whiners.
Reply -
-
-
44%
romellev9 months ago
Yeah right, you're comment about McCain's economic plan is like fairy dust, all illusion and not reality. Obviously, your not a smart guy like most economist who side with Obama's economic recovery plan.
Reply -
46%
Daylight9 months ago
He can provide everybody a job, all he has to do is to start another couple wars and enlist all those who are jobless, the problem is solved.
Reply -
60%
lloydm659 months ago
I'll say it, the economy was in pretty good shape until the bust.I seen the housing boon doggle a long time ago,and warned people it was going to fail.In June of 06 I wrote a letter to my paper,the Dallas News that we were in for a spill.I was in the business for fifty five years.We have here in the metroplex countless thousand of laid off workers,not employees just worker.These folks chose to work off the books,and now they whimper,and moan because they can't draw benefits.Sort of like the home buyer who decided to buy a bigger house in the hope it could be refinanced in a year,or so.That my stupid friend is not buying a home,it is pure, and simple speculation.When you feel like gambling I suggest a casino,you know going in the house always wins.
Reply-
0%
sinophil499 months ago
lloyd - I disagree. The economy was NOT in good shape.
Reply
Under Clinton, the median (not mean) income rose from $36,959 in 1993 (the year he took office) to $51407 (the year Bush took office). This was a rise of 4.8% per year.
Under Bush, the median rose from $51407 in 2001 to $58407 in 2006 (the last year I could find statistics). This is an average of 2.7% per year.
For the same periods of time, the inflation rate under Clinton for 8 years was 2.6%. The inflation rate for Bush for 6 years was 2.7%.
So compared to inflation, income under Clinton had REAL gains. While under Bush the first 6 years, income was stagnant. The last 2 years, I bet the statistics have become far worse.
The poverty levels under Clinton decreased from a high of 13.7% to 11.3% in 2000. Under Bush the poverty levels again started rising to 12.3% in 2006. The number of poor rose from 31.1 million rose to 36.5 million. The income gap also has increased under Bush.
The mortgage crisis and the credit crisis the past 18 months have simply added a bigger exclamation mark to Bush's horrible economic legacy.
-
-
70%
bonaroo9 months ago
The issue at this point, both economically and politically, is one of trust. If Republicans had plans that worked, why haven't they been using them. It doesn't take a genius to see that. I don't understand who believes that McCain, who has supported the same failed policies of Bush, can now offer up something that really makes a difference.
Reply-
67%
reallypsst9 months ago
I agree MCcain doest have any real fix for the country , what is his motive at age 72 money , power, what is driving this relic of the old hardliners to run this nation, he still doesn't get it, the rich don't need help . People need to wake up and smell the coffee , we saw what wealthy politicians think of the poor , that means you the middle class this country is moving closer to becoming a third world monarchy were there is only the rich and the poor.
Reply
-
-
63%
most_reasonable9 months ago
McSame admits he doesn't know anything about economics. He relies on advisors like Phil (American middleclass are a bunch of whiners) Gramm. The same "adviser" that spearheaded the elimination of banking oversight and our current crises.
Reply -
50%
ETproductions9 months ago
The TRUTH about new RepubliCon economics and tax policy. http://zfacts.com/p/318.html
Reply -
60%
ConsAreNonGrata9 months ago
The last tax cut Paris Hilton got paid off.
Reply
Why not have some more? Our troops don't need health care.
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.