Is Obama A Socialist?

[GarfieldJL]

And

 

It wouldn't be unusual if he was trying to get a job which you'd get a criminal background check for, the only thing he did was ask Obama a question. Since there was no legitimate reason for the background check, it was illegal and people are facing criminal charges.

 

 

I have a feeling that had it not been for the coincidence that she donated money to Obama's campaign, this wouldn't even be news.

 

Probably not, unless she worked on the Obama Campaign, because there wouldn't be anything really there except she acted on her own. The fact she's a maxed out donor, ties her to the Obama Campaign.

 

 

Of course it'll be on a network whose sole purpose at the moment is to jump all over Obama and the Democrats for the slightest little thing.

 

You notice any other networks bothering to even report on this fact, regardless of what you may think it is newsworthy. If something similar happened only we substituted John McCain in for Obama, the Mainstream Media would be going nuts.

[Astor]

Probably not, unless she worked on the Obama Campaign, because there wouldn't be anything really there except she acted on her own. The fact she's a maxed out donor, ties her to the Obama Campaign.

 

Right. She gave them money - it doesn't mean she's working for them, or doing anything untoward on their behalf.

[Jae Onasi]

There is a fair amount of snarkiness going on in this thread and I've deleted some of the more egregious posts. Keep it civil in accordance with the amended Kavar's rules, please.

 

Discussion of Joe the Plumber needs to relate back to the topic, otherwise they're off-topic posts. Thanks.

[GarfieldJL]

Discussion of Joe the Plumber needs to relate back to the topic, otherwise they're off-topic posts. Thanks.

 

To tie Joe the Plumber into this discussion, the revelation of Obama's socialist viewpoints first surfaced when he went into Joe's neighborhood for a photo op and Joe asked him a question. Up until that point Obama and the mainstream media managed to keep it hidden.

 

Obama Explains His Tax Cut Plans to Plumbing Business

 

The response Obama gave, was brought up repeatedly by Senator McCain in the third debate. Obama's response then was to attack and smear 'Joe the Plumber', which indicates that there is something to this.

Obama Mocks Joe the Plumber, Crowd Laughs I'm going to see if I can find a video that just has Obama's statements with the crowd.

And Biden also Mocked 'Joe the Plumber for not having a license which as Jae and myself have pointed out he didn't need to work as a plumber.

Biden Mocks Joe the Plumber on Leno for Not Having Actual Plumbing License

 

All this points out to me is that this Socialism charge has struck a nerve and has real merit. The Presidential Candidates mocking each other and complaining about the media is one thing, but Joe isn't running for office, he wasn't at an Obama rally, Obama entered Joe's neighborhood and all Joe did was ask a question.

[Astor]

To tie Joe the Plumber into this discussion, the revelation of Obama's socialist viewpoints first surfaced when he went into Joe's neighborhood for a photo op and Joe asked him a question. Up until that point Obama and the mainstream media managed to keep it hidden.

 

Hang on, you've already claimed that Obama's socialist viewpoints came about a few years ago - with the distribution of wealth comments.

 

Which is it?

 

All this points out to me is that this Socialism charge has struck a nerve and has real merit.

 

There's no charge - unless you're claiming that Obama is a criminal? So far all there has been are accusations.

[GarfieldJL]

Hang on, you've already claimed that Obama's socialist viewpoints came about a few years ago - with the distribution of wealth comments.

 

The comments were out there, but the general public really didn't know about them for the most part till 'Joe the Plumber' asked Obama the question. That's what kicked up the search for other instances where he made similar comments. That's how 'Joe the Plumber' caused Obama's socialist viewpoints to come to the public's attention.

 

 

There's no charge - unless you're claiming that Obama is a criminal? So far all there has been are accusations.

 

That isn't the only meaning of the word 'charge.'

 

6. to accuse formally or explicitly (usually fol. by with): They charged him with theft.

7. to impute; ascribe the responsibility for: He charged the accident to his own carelessness.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/charge

[ET Warrior]

Obama Mocks Joe the Plumber, Crowd Laughs

Well, if you take the quote completely out of context and put a negative spin on it, sure, that sounds like he's mocking Joe. But if you look at the entire quote he is not. Not even close.

[Jae Onasi]

OK, Garfield, we've established that the 'redistribution of wealth' comment that Obama made to Joe is viewed by conservatives at least as a socialist tenant. We've not only beaten that dead horse, we've squashed the poor thing into little bits and then smeared it into a paste across the highway. Time to move on both here and in other threads.

[El Sitherino]

I'd also like to add that everyone drop the subject of "Joe the Plumber", leave the poor guy alone. Whether or not his specific county has requirements about operation with a plumbers license does not matter, as well it's not relevant to anything of worthy discussion. That is, unless you want to start a debate about the restrictions and protections for customers the local representation has as far as contract labor. It's not too alien of an idea for a town to want to hold some old values of good local labor, the local plumber, mechanic/car-buff, the local carpenter, the accountant, etc.

 

Point is, leave Joe alone.

[GarfieldJL]

My point is if you listen to the Radio Interview from 2001: Interview

 

Then listen to what he said with Joe, these are two different instances where he talks about spreading the wealth around.

 

And to that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution, at least as it’s been interpreted, and the Warren Court interpreted it in the same way that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. It says what the states can’t do to you, says what the federal government can’t do to you, but it doesn’t say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf. And that hasn’t shifted. And one of the, I think, tragedies of the civil rights movement was, because the civil rights movement became so court-focused, I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalitions of power through which to bring about redistributive change. And in some ways we still suffer from that.

--Blog

 

It goes on to say:

Maybe I’m showing my bias here as a legislator as well as a law professor, but I’m not optimistic about bringing about major redistributive change through the courts. Y’know, the institution just isn’t structured that way.

 

Now put that in context with, the first video I posted in post #129.

[El Sitherino]

You realize personal income and the total earnings of a business are seperate things, right?

 

The $250,000 is income, not business. Two completely different things.

[GarfieldJL]

You realize personal income and the total earnings of a business are seperate things, right?

 

The $250,000 is income, not business. Two completely different things.

 

It actually depends on what kind of a business that we're referring to?

 

Are we talking about a Sole Proprietorship, a Partnership, a Corporation, or a Cooperative? Because if I remember correctly from my business law class, each one has different tax codes.

 

Additionally with the legal differences and size of the business they react in different ways to tax hikes, for instance, a Corporation just passes the cost on to the consumer or lays off employees or both.

[El Sitherino]

Okay, but my income tax is different from my business tax.

[GarfieldJL]

Okay, but my income tax is different from my business tax.

 

You didn't answer the question, depending on the type of business you have, affects whether or not it falls under your personal income taxes or not.

 

The key to remember though is that Federal Taxes are on Gross income or the gross amount of money that the business takes in. The net is after all of the expenses are figured in.

 

There are several groups that would be directly affected by the tax plan Obama has proposed one of which is sole proprietorships, which is one of the more common kinds of small business.

[mimartin]

No matter how you slice it or dice it, you are only taxed on profits. Sales + other income – expenses = profits (this is simplified). That is the same for any business.

The key to remember though is that Federal Taxes are on Gross income or the gross amount of money that the business takes in. The net is after all of the expenses are figured in.[/Quote] Anyone preparing their own taxes please disregard this or you will be seriously overpaying your taxes. I’ve prepared taxes for myself, my father and friends that own small business, sole proprietorships, partnerships and LLC and this is not true. However, we all know the government needs money so if you want to do it this way that is fine with me.

 

If this was true, most small business owners would be working for someone else and we would never hire anyone.

[El Sitherino]

You didn't answer the question, depending on the type of business you have, affects whether or not it falls under your personal income taxes or not.

 

The key to remember though is that Federal Taxes are on Gross income or the gross amount of money that the business takes in. The net is after all of the expenses are figured in.

 

There are several groups that would be directly affected by the tax plan Obama has proposed one of which is sole proprietorships, which is one of the more common kinds of small business.

 

Except the $250,000 is only in regards to income tax, not business. Discussing business profit and what is taken from there has no bearing on an employees income tax.

 

If I work at Target and earn $250,000+ a year, I'll be taxed at a higher percentage. I'd have no problem with that, that's a lot of money. Mind you I'd have to be some sort of Head Executive of some area branch to make anywhere near that much.

[Jae Onasi]

The key to remember though is that Federal Taxes are on Gross income or the gross amount of money that the business takes in. The net is after all of the expenses are figured in.

I know mimartin already noted it's wrong, but I'm chiming in and agreeing with him that this couldn't be more incorrect. Fed taxes are paid on net, not gross. I see patients in my own small practice, and I do my taxes myself (love Turbotax). I know without a doubt that I pay taxes on my net, not my gross. Please don't spread this misinformation anymore.

[GarfieldJL]

I know mimartin already noted it's wrong, but I'm chiming in and agreeing with him that this couldn't be more incorrect. Fed taxes are paid on net, not gross. I see patients in my own small practice, and I do my taxes myself (love Turbotax). I know without a doubt that I pay taxes on my net, not my gross. Please don't spread this misinformation anymore.

 

Jae, I must respectfully point out that based on sources I've found, both you and mimartin are mistaken. Just so there isn't any misunderstanding, I'm not saying either of you filed your taxes incorrectly, I'm just saying you and mimartin have gotten your terminology wrong, if we want to be technical it's taxable income that mimartin, you, and myself were thinking of. However, taxable income is calculated from the adjusted gross income which is calculated from gross income. Net Income is what you get after all expenses including taxes have been factored in.

 

According to dictionary.com Net Income is defined as:

1. A company's total earnings, or profit. Net income is calculated by taking revenues and adjusting for the cost of doing business, depreciation, interest, taxes and other expenses. This number is found on a company's income statement and is an important measure of how profitable the company is over a period of time. The measure is also used to calculate earnings per share.

 

Often referred to as "the bottom line". In the U.K., net income is known as "profit attributable to shareholders".

 

2. An individual's income after deductions, credits and taxes are factored into gross income. Deductions and credits are subtracted from gross income to arrive at taxable income, which is used to calculate income tax. Net income is income tax subtracted from taxable income.

--Net Income

 

 

Additional source Legal Dictionary: Income Taxes (which is a nonpartisan site).

Regardless of the changes made by legislators since 1913, the basic formula for computing the amount of tax owed has remained basically the same. To determine the amount of income tax owed, certain deductions are taken from an individual's gross income to arrive at an adjusted gross income, from which additional deductions are taken to arrive at the taxable income. Once the amount of taxable income has been determined, tax rate charts determine the exact amount of tax owed. If the amount of tax owed is less than the amount already paid through tax prepayment or the withholding of taxes from paychecks, the taxpayer is entitled to a refund from the IRS. If the amount of tax owed is more than what has already been paid, the taxpayer must pay the difference to the IRS.

 

Additional Sources include:

wikipedia.org: Income tax in the United States

wikipedia.org: State Income Tax

[mimartin]

GarfieldJL you are wrong. If you would have even looked at the links I posted you would have noticed that you do start with Gross Receipts or Sales in part 1 -Line 1 of the Schedule C, but Schedule C – Profit or Loss From Business (sole proprietorship) then deducts BUSINESS EXPENSES.

 

Tax preparation 101. (I usually get paid for this).

 

Line 5 is your Gross Profit after subtracting Returns and Allowances and Cost of Goods Sold.

 

You then add Gross Profit to Other Income to get GROSS INCOME on Line 7.

 

Lines 8 through 27 is where you add up your TOTAL EXPENSES.

 

You put TOTAL EXPENSES on line 28.

 

You then SUBTRACT line 28 from line 7 to get Net Profit or Net Loss. Net Profit or Net Loss is what you put on your 1040.

 

Your tax rate is base on your NET PROFIT or NET LOSS after adding Personal Income and Subtracting Personal Deductions.

 

In this example the Sole Proprietorship is taxed based on Net Profit or Net Loss.

 

This is from the United State Department of Treasury.

 

(love Turbotax).

I love it too. No use getting audited over a simple arithmetic error. This reminds me, GarfieldJL I believe I’m doing my taxes correctly as I have been audited twice in the past 8 years.

[GarfieldJL]

GarfieldJL you are wrong. If you would have even looked at the links I posted you would have noticed that you do start with Gross Receipts or Sales in part 1 -Line 1 of the Schedule C, but Schedule C – Profit or Loss From Business (sole proprietorship) then deducts BUSINESS EXPENSES.

 

Tax preparation 101. (I usually get paid for this).

 

Line 5 is your Gross Profit after subtracting Returns and Allowances and Cost of Goods Sold.

 

You then add Gross Profit to Other Income to get GROSS INCOME on Line 7.

 

Lines 8 through 27 is you TOTAL EXPENSES.

 

You put TOTAL EXPENSES on line 28.

 

You then SUBTRACT line 28 from line 7 to get Net Profit or Net Loss. Net Profit or Net Loss is what you put on your 1040.

 

In this example the Sole Proprietorship is taxed based on Net Profit or Net Loss.

 

This is from the United State Department of Treasury.

 

I'm taking it that you're not keeping your business and your personal income seperate then, or its your sole source of income? And that this business is a business where you sell actual goods like a small retail store.

 

I was going off the idea that your business is being treated as a legal entity similar to a small corporation in which case I don't think we're even looking at the same tax codes.

 

I was talking about personal taxes here, as it relates to your business. As I said though it really depends on how your business is set up, that determines what taxes you pay.

 

Going off of other tax forms involving personal income such as: http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f4852.pdf

 

It looks more like we're referring to Gross Income as far as business this is giving me a headache, and we could keep arguing back and forth on this till our fingers finally fall off and there is a bloody mess on the keyboard. And since this is the IRS we're talking about we could probably find sources to argue back an forth for probably the next 100 years, about the current tax code.

 

Getting back to topic I was trying to point out taxes under the Obama Tax plan, which seems to be fluctuating all over the place.

 

An article of interest getting back to topic: Another Change in the Obama Tax Brackets?

 

Also trying to find a video copy of the interview where an Obama Advisor said the taxes would be figured for businesses on gross income.

[mimartin]

I'm taking it that you're not keeping your business and your personal income seperate then, or its your sole source of income?

Then you are not talking about a sole proprietorship or a partnership! Although you mentioned sole proprietorship more than once, you are talking about a LLC! Still does not matter, you get to deduct business operating expenses and cost of good sold.

 

I don't have the time or the patience to do show you how to properly use those tax forms right now, but most small business go into a Limited Liability Corporation in order to save on taxes and limit their exposure to losses. I’ve looked into it, but it is not worth the paper work to me as it would require the Corporation to be licensed with the State and Federal Government. It would save on my taxes, but not enough to make up for the extra $900.00 it would cost to license myself and the Corporation with the SEC.

[GarfieldJL]

mimartin in my post above I suggested we drop it, cause given time I could probably find something to contradict your statements (once I recover from being cross-eyed reading through IRS tax forms and documents (they really need larger font)) and it would keep going back and forth for weeks.

 

Getting back to topic I was trying to point out taxes under the Obama Tax plan, which seems to be fluctuating all over the place.

 

An article of interest getting back to topic: Another Change in the Obama Tax Brackets?

 

Also trying to find a video copy of the interview where an Obama Advisor said the taxes would be figured for businesses on gross income.

 

Okay so now we have a third tax cutoff.

 

$250,000 to $150,000, to $120,000?

 

It looks like the term 'rich' is getting smaller and smaller.

[mimartin]

mimartin in my post above I suggested we drop it, cause given time I could probably find something to contradict your statements (once I recover from being cross-eyed reading through IRS tax forms and documents (they really need larger font)) and it would keep going back and forth for weeks.

No, you wouldn't and no we would not go back in forth for weeks. Because I will go straight to the source and you will continue to go to bias and wrong interruptions of the source. In case you did not read it the first time, I have a degree in Accounting. I am not bragging because I don’t believe a piece of paper makes someone more intelligent than anyone else, but I have a degree in Accounting/Finance and a Masters in Finance. I know a little about the subject even though it is not my source of income. I did nine sets of returns last year for dinner and beer.

[jrrtoken]

It looks like the term 'rich' is getting smaller and smaller.

The way you that said it made it sound as if that was a bad thing...

[Q]

Well, I was led to believe that discrimination of any kind was a bad thing. What do you think penalizing people for being wealthy is?

 

Actually, the shrinking taxable income cutoff is nothing new. They've made this same BS "tax the rich; stick it to the man" claim in every election as far back as I can remember (which is quite a long time now) and the cutoff amount always shrinks in a most predictable and rather drastic fashion. In short, they lie.

 

I'm not saying that the Republicans don't. It just pains me to see people that I respect buying into this same old crap over and over again like it was gospel, and always like it was something brand spanking new. It isn't. It's just the same old crap.