Tag Archive for 'John McCain'

John McCain announced today amid the roaring that is his vacuous campaign that he would suspend his campaign and get to work to help broker a deal on the bank bailout.  This is one of the more amazing stunts I’ve ever seen.

John McCain has said before that “The issue of economics is something that I’ve really never understood as well as I should.”  He serves on the Senate committee for Commerce, Science and Transportation, and while it has the word commerce in it’s title it has nothing to do with credit, housing and financial services.  John McCain has missed 64% of all the votes in the United States Senate this year, where was his leadership then?

So Senator McCain, before we go along with this little bit of kabuki theater, how about you tell us what you can actually do to help the situation?  What do you have to offer?

Just to go a little further, this morning at 8:30 Barack Obama called Senator McCain “to ask him if he would join in issuing a joint statement outlining their shared principles and conditions for the Treasury proposal and urging Congress and the White House to act in a bipartisan manner to pass such a proposal.”  Senator McCain schemed for 6 hours, called him back and said “Sure!” and then announced this stunt.

That’s not country first.  That’s McCain first.

How about you show up on Friday and try to show the American who will be the right person to lead them for the next four years, and leave the stunts to someone else, yeah?

Update: Demand the Debate 2008 we deserve it.

Update 2: This morning while Obama was waiting for a phone call from McCain about a joint statement, McCain was visiting with his new favorite heiress, Lynn de Rothschild.  I can only hope it was to get her advice on the economy.

In light of the major news today and over the weekend, I think it’s an appropriate time to lay out the facts about Obama and McCain’s tax policies.  Now, let me note that given the ever increasing worry over the long-term prospects for a continued recession, I wouldn’t be very surprised if these policies change over the next two months, and I’d be very surprised if either candidate sticks to them in office.  That being said, we only have the information currently at hand, and this is as good a starting point as any.

CNN Money tackles this issue in an article, but the table to the right that they produce based on data from the non-partisan Tax Policy Center analysis of the candidates’ programs sums everything up quite well.  Let me pause to say something here: this is an independent and agreed to be credible analysis of the candidates’ policies; if we can’t agree upon the chart to the right as fact, or at least as a close approximation appropriately used as a jumping-off point for discussion, we’re not going to be able to have a very constructive discussion here.

I am, and have been for some time, a big supporter of Obama’s tax plan as illustrated to the right.  Over the last 8 years, the only segment of the population that has seen an increase in real, after-expenses income are the top 5% of income earners.  Moreover, the increase within this group has been substantial.  And while there’s no doubt that Obama’s tax increases for those making above $607K is substantial, it’s not until you get to the top 1% of earners ($2.9M and above) that you see a real hit (and let it be noted, that most of those making more than $2.9M a year, are making way more than that).  Plus, the hit isn’t really even a hit if you subscribe to the (I think legitimate) liberal talking point that this merely rolls back the Bush temporary tax cuts.

For nearly everyone making under $607K a year, and for everyone making under $227K, you see a tax decrease under both plans.  But if you make under $112K, you’re going to see a decrease of substantially more under Obama.

Now, here’s the kicker, and I think in light of our current economic situation, it’s a very untenable and irresponsible kicker:

Under both plans, all American taxpayers could pay a price for their tax cuts: a bigger deficit. The Tax Policy Center estimates that over 10 years, McCain’s tax proposals could increase the national debt by as much as $4.5 trillion with interest, while Obama’s could add as much as $3.3 trillion.

Which means we need more revenue, less spending, or (ideally) a combination of the two.  I would love to see someone force both candidates to outline what budget cuts they’d make; especially with McCain claiming he could find $1 Billion in cuts tomorrow…

Well, we know what Alan Greenspan thinks:

In an interview with Bloomberg Television, Greenspan argued that the country couldn’t afford the tax cuts being proposed by John McCain without an equally massive reduction in spending.

“I’m not in favor of financing tax cuts with borrowed money,” he said. “I always have tied tax cuts to spending.”

But the real question is what do you guys think?