The Public Is as Uninformed as Palin on Obama's Tax Cuts

Reader Comments
Back to blog

And I wasn't disappointed either. jj of TX sure had some brilliant comments. A homophobic, macho, right wing goof ball from Texas?? What a surprise!! He probably has a rifle rack on the back of his pickup and more dogs living under his porch than flies on a cow pie.
Having said all this, Gallupo is right. Obama cut taxes. He will allow the tax cuts for the top margin to reset, as they were supposed to by agreement when the law was passed in 2001, but the middle class tax cuts will be retained. The rich need to pay more; even T. Boone Pickens agrees!! Why should we have tax cuts for the rich at a time of mammoth deficits? As they say in Texas; "This is no kinda thang fo'a mang!!"
By the way, the rich will benefit from these middle class tax cuts as much or more than the middle class itself. According to the limp wristed, lilly livered, liberal, dope smokin'tree huggin' aaalitists at the CBPP;
"This is because the 2001 tax law’s reductions in the lower tax brackets benefit not only people whose incomes fall within the lower brackets but also those whose incomes exceed those brackets.
In fact, high-income people actually receive much larger benefits in dollar terms from the so-called “middle-class tax cuts” than middle-class people do.1 Specifically, recent estimates from the Joint Committee on Taxation show that extending just the middle-class tax cuts would provide more than $6,300 in tax cuts to households with incomes above $200,000, on average, compared to $1,132 in tax cuts for households with incomes between $50,000
and $75,000. The Joint Tax Committee estimates show: Households with incomes exceeding $1 million will receive an average tax cut of $6,349 in 2011 if the middle-class tax cuts are extended while the high-income tax cuts are allowed to expire."
http://www.cbpp.org/files/8-13-10tax.pdf
We also need not worry about them thar deficits quite so much. According to another aaalitist, pointy headed, northeastern intelleckchull, James Galbraith (and a good hardy Scottish feller to boot!! Cryin' shame, it is!!)in an interview with Jewboy, Ezra Klein sez;
"What people worry about is that the federal government won't be able to buy bonds. But there can never be a problem for the federal government selling bonds. It goes the other way. The government's spending creates the bank's demand for bonds, because they want a higher return on the money that the government is putting into the economy."
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/05/galbraith_the_danger_posed_by.html
We do need more fiscal stimulus, boys!! The sooner the better.

steve of IL 9:57PM October 20, 2010

You ask the rhetorical question, "Is Palin really that dumb?"
I think you're mistaking "unpolished" for "dumb" - perhaps purposefully so.
Generally, I prefer people with common sense, who speak plainly - rather than with pseudo intellectual elocution.
For instance, I like Lincoln's Gettysburg Address, but not Edward Everett's.
I think Palin channels a little of Harry Truman, Mark Twain and Will Rogers - all favorites of mine.
Now Obama, on the other hand, well... has more of Ceasar, Napoleon, and is perhaps even Faustian - egotists often are.

R.L. Schaefer of CA 12:57PM October 20, 2010

Every year I help low income and over 65 individuals file their federal income taxes. The tax "cuts" referred to in this blog are actually called a make work pay credit. Vitrually everyone I helped do their taxes had never heard of this credit, and did not understand it even after I explained it to them. People do not connect the term "tax credit" with a tax cut. A second point is that about 90% of the seniors I helped did not know whether they received the "one time" Social Security payment of $250. Knowledge of this payment is required to calculate the make work credit. The government makes things so complicated that the average person cannot understand what is going on.
Dee Too. Thanks for explaining the health care tax on real estate profits over $500,000. I beileve this tax is in addition to any capital gains taxes that are paid. With the proposed changes in tax law and the health care bill the tax rate on profits could be as high as 23.8%.

Bob of TX 11:00AM October 20, 2010

At least Palin represents her gender well unlike a limp wristed, lisp speaking, dweeb like you. Gallupo, you are as pitiful as you are useless and that is saying something. By the way, do they have "don't ask, don't tell" in the journalist profession, if so you are violating the law!

jj of TX 9:49AM October 20, 2010

DeeToo of SC, first off the first amendment DOES NOT address separation of church and state. It prohibits the "establishment" of a government back religion. The "separation of church and state" that libs so often use when it's to their advantage came from a Supreme Court decision under Justice Black. So the "bubble-head" was correct in her response to the question.
Second I don't know if you have been watching what is going on in Europe but it seems that all the "Free" and "worry-free" social programs seem to becoming too expensive for those government to afford. Now people like you want to follow the same path, why. I also wonder why you came back to America to live if living in Europe was so grand???

Larry of CA 9:11AM October 20, 2010

The liberal basis of this entire left-handed blog ...the New York Times!
But don't take my word for it: http://newsroom.ucla.edu/portal/ucla/Media-Bias-Is-Real-Finds-UCLA-6664.aspx
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1904788/posts
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/09/22/mccain-honcho-steve-schmidt-the-new-york-times-is-a-pro-obama-advocacy-organization/
Let's see if Scott Galupo can read us something from a non-partisan (unbias) source ....I doubt it!!

Haberdashery of ID 4:26AM October 20, 2010

We ARE a bunch of idiot, pathetic, loser morons. We should hang our heads in shame at what we have done to our once great republic. Gotta think that it all goes back to the motor-voter crap, though.

Voted 50 times already, this week! of NV 7:52PM October 19, 2010

$ 200,000 for Caterpillar. Because of obamacare regulations McDonald and many companies may stop their health care. I lost my heath care.
Yet obama claims you can keep your heath care. If not forced to stop. He failed to mention that.
Health insurance premiums had to go higher to pay for added cost. Nothing in life is free but your Mother’s love. For example having to accept you with your pre-existing cost. Get insurance and next day heart operation. Common sense warrants higher rates.
One must wonder if that was not obama’s plan. Show bad heath companies raising rates to make public upset. Then go for what he wanted all along, SINGLE PAYER.
Government got big settlements some years back for cigarettes. Then raised tax significantly.
Now California wants to legalize pot so they can tax. Bill Clinton may not inhale but most everybody else who does pot inhales deeply. You think that is good for your heath ?
Actually, tax cuts compared to tax increases, wonder which is more.
Do try reading ALL THAT SARAH WROTE. Misquote of "death panel" and quoting what SNL said then liberals claiming Sarah said it is pathetic.

Bill Hedges of MO 7:08PM October 19, 2010

as mentioned in FactCheck - there are high income qualifications that also must be met before the tax is imposed on the sale of property.
They said it is highly unlikely you will ever have to consider this even if the POFIT from the sale is high - based on the number of qualifiers.
Please read the entire FactCheck article - they can explain it better than I.
Just didn't want you to get the wrong impression. Sometimes I write quickly, and I don't make the point well enough.
Thanks

DeeToo of SC 6:37PM October 19, 2010

Not anything most of us will have to consider.... If I make a half million dollars on my house, I won't care what the taxes are....
There is a tax on PROFITS over $250,000 for a single person, or $500,000 for a married person. Please remember it is on PROFITS ONLY.
1. If you bought your house for $300,000 and sold it for $575,000, then there would be a tax on the $25,000 over $250k less any costs of the sale. For most people - that would be more like $10k taxable in the end. If married, you would pay no tax.
2. If you paid $300,000 for your home, were married, then sold it for $875,000 after all real estate fees, etc., you would pay 3.8% of $75,000 - which is $2,850. If your profit is $575,000, paying $2,850 will not be much of a problem.
If you are a senior who has been a homeowner all these years, you probably own your house free and clear. You'll be able to buy quite a spot for the $875,000 minus $2,850 cash.
A friend of mine sent me one of those famous emails trying to scare everyone into thinking the end of days is near, and the same claim you cite was mentioned. I pulled up FactCheck, and found it to be nonsense. I emailed back to the friend, and said I know he's OK - but told him it was irresponsible to distribute unverified claims. He called and apologized.
Don't believe evrything you read on partisan politics websites, or in emails sent by creeps or well-meaning people who don't check facts. Often the "facts" stated there are half-truths. Just read the article on Fact Check (link attached).
http://www.factcheck.org/2010/04/a-38-percent-sales-tax-on-your-home/
This was in the health care bill, I read it on the web before it was passed. No big secret. As a senior - I welcome opportunities to pay if I am so wealthy that the bracket touches me when it's time for me to downsize, and I am alive because I had better healthcare during the prior years. I lived in Europe for a long time, and experienced worry-free healthcare insurance. This is long overdue. I can't wait!

DeeToo of SC 6:13PM October 19, 2010