Claudia Peters: Obama not for change

Advertisement

To the editor:

The Obama/Biden team has been claiming they stand for change. After listening for something of substance for the better part of a year, all I have heard is the same old Democrat message of class warfare and envy of anyone who prospers in America.

Then there is the same tired tax and spend message. Change? I submit that real change in America would be a promise of a smaller government and a reduction of government spending. Sen. Obama is proposing new spending of $1.3 trillion in his first term, if elected. This is in addition to the almost $1 trillion we are being asked to fork over to bail out the banks.

Let's put that into perspective. How much is a billion? A billion seconds ago, it was 1959. A billion minutes ago, Jesus was alive. A billion hours ago, it was the Stone Age. A billion years ago, no one on the Earth walked on two feet.

In a recent debate, Sen. Obama said $18 billion in earmark spending isn't a lot of money.

I don't know about the neighborhoods he lives in, but in my neighborhood, and I bet yours as well, $18 billion is a lot of money. Sounds like very cavalier attitude toward our hard-earned money that goes toward taxes.

Sen. Obama plans to increase the capital gains tax from 15 percent to 28 percent.

Do you have a 401(k) or plan to sell your home? Plan on keeping less of your own money. He plans to increase the tax on dividends as well as increase the tax on gasoline and utilities such as water, electric and gas. And plans to double foreign aid.

At the same time, he plans on cutting taxes for 95 percent of the population. We need to do some math here. At least 33 percent of all individuals pay no income tax. So how can they receive a tax cut? They don't. They receive a welfare check, plain and simple. Nice little vote buying ploy at real taxpayers' expense during an election.

Claudia Peters

Craig

Comments

Wapitipoker 6 years, 2 months ago

Claudia shouldn't be spreading the lies and misinformation that is rampant on the internet and in McCain commecricals. The 28% rate on dividends is not true. The increased tax on home sales is not true for the majority of homes ($250,000 for single/$500,000 for joint filing). The increase for those above that (average home price is US is far lower than that) would be from 15% to 20%. I encourage all readers to visit www.factcheck.org to debunk the myths from both side on their own.

0

rhammel 6 years, 2 months ago

I have to agree with Wapitipoker, that Claudia try coming up with facts; not using the McCain rhetoric. It is just plain old poppycock.

HOWEVER, should the Chinese economy go into the dumper and demand the money that the U.S. owes them for the Iraq war, where is the money going to come from?? I see us having to come up with a very big tax bite in probably the not so distant future. It will not matter who is president. We will just have to pay it.

0

nikobesti 6 years, 2 months ago

Claudia, $18 billion in earmarks IS small potatoes--less than 1% of our total budget. How is this a strategy to reverse a trillion dollar deficit? We spend that much in Iraq in less than two months. $18 billion a year in earmarks and $120 billion a year in Iraq. I find it truly funny that you push cutting less than 1% of our total budget as a solution for out of control spending. Sounds like you're falling for a distraction to me.

So McCain is proposing to cut a measly $18 billion, and has said several times that he doesn't think anyone should pay more taxes. Excuse me? What fantasy land do McCain and the Republicans live in where taxes aren't a necessary part of running a government? Guess he just plans on borrowing more money from China, which is exactly how Bush is paying for his hobbies. I'd rather hear an honest assessment of what we need to do in order pay for our own expenses instead of contending a government doesn't need tax dollars and continuing to pretend we can make everyone happy.

0

Requires free registration

Posting comments requires a free account and verification.