Author Topic: Comparison of Bush and Clinton federal tax plans  (Read 1942 times)

shootfighter1

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5681
  • Competitor- NABBA Nationals Overall Champ
Comparison of Bush and Clinton federal tax plans
« on: March 11, 2008, 08:50:15 AM »
These are federal taxes only (does not include state & local).  This info comes from a reputable and corrected public tax record.  I am not a big Bush supporter but am passionate about the amount of taxes we as Americans pay.  Its important to know the record and to make judgements on the future of our tax burden and system.


There has been a recent email circulating which compares federal taxes paid under the Bush administration vs the Bill Clinton administration.
While the basic message of the comparison is correct (federal income taxes have indeed fallen under George Bush for all groups at all points on the income spectrum), the chart created by the author of this comparison contains some mathematical errors making the lower taxes under Bush more impressive.  However, even in the corrected comparisons, taxes for all are still lower under Bush.  This is important because the facts have been distorted by the media.  Bush has proportionally cut tax rates for the wealthy (over $200,000/yr who still pay a greater % of income to taxes) but everyone has paid lower taxes under Bush compared to Bill Clinton.

The table below presents the correct amount of tax paid by each of the hypothetical taxpayers in the comparison. Note that this comparison does not take into account the Alternative Minimum Tax, and the taxpayers in these examples take the standard deduction and do not have children.


Taxpayer Tax under Clinton, 1999 tax law / Tax under Bush, 2008 tax law

Single, income of 30,000 $3,157.50 / $2,756.25 
Single, income of 50,000 $7,262.50  /$6,606.25 
Married, income of $50,000 $5,085.00 / $4,012.50 
Single, income of $75,000 $14,262.50  /$12,856.25 
Married, income of $75,000 $9,426.50  /$7,762.50 
Single, income of $125,000* $29,378.50 / $26,472.25 
Married, income of $125,000* $23,426.50  /$19,462.50 

shootfighter1

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5681
  • Competitor- NABBA Nationals Overall Champ
Re: Comparison of Bush and Clinton federal tax plans
« Reply #1 on: March 11, 2008, 08:55:50 AM »
This is the original calculation (initial email):


Taxes under Clinton 1999             Taxes under Bush 2008

Single making 30K - tax 8,400           30K - Tax 4,500


Single making 50K - tax $14,000             50K - tax $12,500


Single making 75K - tax $23,250             75K tax $18,750

Married making 60K - tax $16,800           60K tax $9,000


Married making 75K - tax $21,000           75K tax $18,750


Married making 125K - tax $38,750         125K - tax $31,250

Whichever formula you use, you can see that everyone making $30,000 and up has paid less taxes under Bush.  Fault him for his administrations spending...not tax code.
Hillary and Obama will both repeal the Bush tax cuts, which not only affect people making over $200,000, but their plans will also affect married couples, and the majority of the middle class (for Obama) and nearly half the middle class (for Clinton).  Tax breaks will only be seen for low income Americans.  Obama's definition of 'rich' starting at $70,000/yr is absurd.  Please look at Obama's actual platforms and plans before you vote for him.  His policies are not moderate.
 


Brixtonbulldog

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4884
  • TAKE YO FUCKING JACKET WIT YA
Re: Comparison of Bush and Clinton federal tax plans
« Reply #2 on: March 11, 2008, 08:59:16 AM »
Excellent post.. unfortunately it is completely unappreciated by most on this board.

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Comparison of Bush and Clinton federal tax plans
« Reply #3 on: March 11, 2008, 09:02:00 AM »
Taxes were similar.  Their borrowing was DRASTICALLY DIFFERENT.

Can you look at this chart and blame Clinton for our debt?

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31866
Re: Comparison of Bush and Clinton federal tax plans
« Reply #4 on: March 11, 2008, 09:04:04 AM »
Taxes were similar.  Their borrowing was DRASTICALLY DIFFERENT.

Can you look at this chart and blame Clinton for our debt?
wow, looks exactly like the unemployment graph too ;D

shootfighter1

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5681
  • Competitor- NABBA Nationals Overall Champ
Re: Comparison of Bush and Clinton federal tax plans
« Reply #5 on: March 11, 2008, 09:04:57 AM »
Thanks bulldog...and perhaps your right.  But facts are facts (and often public record).  There are distortions on both sides and they must be called out.
I am an independent and supported Ron Paul...but I can't stand distortions.  The liberals have distorted tax policies greatly.  People need to understand the facts and decide.  I favor less government spending (which we have NOT seen under Bush), less taxes while protecting personal freedoms and the economic and national strength of our country.
If even a handfull of people see this and understand, then the post was not a waste of time.

Brixtonbulldog

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4884
  • TAKE YO FUCKING JACKET WIT YA
Re: Comparison of Bush and Clinton federal tax plans
« Reply #6 on: March 11, 2008, 09:08:43 AM »
I favor less government spending ..

Agree.. but I also think if there is one thing that should deserve more funding than anything is nat'l def/border security.

I liked RP but he marginalized himself from the beginning.  Sad since I consider myself a libertarian.

Now que the 240/HC/Neuro/WarHorse/StrawMan liberal distortion in 3.. 2.. 1..

shootfighter1

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5681
  • Competitor- NABBA Nationals Overall Champ
Re: Comparison of Bush and Clinton federal tax plans
« Reply #7 on: March 11, 2008, 09:09:23 AM »
Bush's spending and borrowing has been a disaster as well.  You can't tax less and spend more!  I agree.
Bush has not followed traditional republican ideas.  The current republican party does not have a united agenda at all.  But traditional democrats (hard working blue collar and union workers from the 1930s-1970s) have also seen their party change a lot as well.  I was speaking to a 60yr old retired union democrat yesterday and even though he won't vote for a republican, he is disenchanted with the current democratic party which, as he stated, wants bigger goverment, more entitlement programs, higher taxes that now cuts into the middle class, champions minority agendas/continued affirmative action, and is more welcoming to illegal immigration.

I hate the two party system, we have more than two lines of thought on both sides.

Brixtonbulldog

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4884
  • TAKE YO FUCKING JACKET WIT YA
Re: Comparison of Bush and Clinton federal tax plans
« Reply #8 on: March 11, 2008, 09:15:42 AM »
Not a response to anything said here but just a little something to add to the fire..

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=290040956404368

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31866
Re: Comparison of Bush and Clinton federal tax plans
« Reply #9 on: March 11, 2008, 09:17:38 AM »
Taxes were similar.  Their borrowing was DRASTICALLY DIFFERENT.

Can you look at this chart and blame Clinton for our debt?
side note, per 240, it is now manditory in political that if you post a graph, you post boobies too :P

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Comparison of Bush and Clinton federal tax plans
« Reply #10 on: March 11, 2008, 09:26:55 AM »
Brix,

I contend that they both tax similarly, but repubs borrow much more.

What say you?

Brixtonbulldog

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4884
  • TAKE YO FUCKING JACKET WIT YA
Re: Comparison of Bush and Clinton federal tax plans
« Reply #11 on: March 11, 2008, 09:36:16 AM »
Brix,

I contend that they both tax similarly, but repubs borrow much more.

What say you?

Ok.. let's say the repubs borrow more.  What does that mean for the average American?

No democrat will lower taxes.  Since I believe we are overly taxed as it is (BOTH for useful and necessary uses like military, services, etc and useless waste like the "programs" liberals usually throw taxpayer money at) I will continue to support candidates who understand that its not thier money to take and give me more of MY money back.

Dems will continue to raise taxes until everyone is under big brothers wing and has to turn to the gov't for every form of support.  And no republican president has every borrowed more than the country could pay back into a surplus in a few years.  Dems (and apparently you) keep overstating how much debt we're in and what that really means in order to fight every tax break and come up with new reasons to take American money.

This is NOT what this country is about.


Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31866
Re: Comparison of Bush and Clinton federal tax plans
« Reply #12 on: March 11, 2008, 09:37:35 AM »
What say you?
I say you watch to much O'Rielly :P

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Comparison of Bush and Clinton federal tax plans
« Reply #13 on: March 11, 2008, 09:44:42 AM »
Ok.. let's say the repubs borrow more.  What does that mean for the average American?

No democrat will lower taxes.  Since I believe we are overly taxed as it is (BOTH for useful and necessary uses like military, services, etc and useless waste like the "programs" liberals usually throw taxpayer money at) I will continue to support candidates who understand that its not thier money to take and give me more of MY money back.

Dems will continue to raise taxes until everyone is under big brothers wing and has to turn to the gov't for every form of support.  And no republican president has every borrowed more than the country could pay back into a surplus in a few years.  Dems (and apparently you) keep overstating how much debt we're in and what that really means in order to fight every tax break and come up with new reasons to take American money.

This is NOT what this country is about.


How am i overstating our debt?  My graph is from the treasury dept.

Brix, I don't argue with you much here... I don't consider you a smart man, a rational man, even a well-intentioned man.  You're very angry at everything you perceive to be anti-neocon and you scream over facts.

Your point was that they tax similar.  And you're right.  if you cannot comprehend the impact of borrowing 5 trillion in the last 7 years, so be it.


Brixtonbulldog

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4884
  • TAKE YO FUCKING JACKET WIT YA
Re: Comparison of Bush and Clinton federal tax plans
« Reply #14 on: March 11, 2008, 09:58:29 AM »

How am i overstating our debt?  My graph is from the treasury dept.

I should clarify.. you use this graph as if this is an uncontrollable and unrecoverable misjudgement on the part of the Bush admin.  It is not. 



Brix, I don't argue with you much here... I don't consider you a smart man, a rational man, even a well-intentioned man.  You're very angry at everything you perceive to be anti-neocon and you scream over facts.

That's funny.. I believe I've been saying the same regarding yourself for years now.  "Scream over facts" ?!?!  lol.. funny how you have had so little to back up your absurd political and conspiracy ramblings that when you actually find factual information you act like the other thousand times you made an ass of yourself never happened. 


Your point was that they tax similar.  And you're right.  if you cannot comprehend the impact of borrowing 5 trillion in the last 7 years, so be it.


No it wasn't.. my point is that dems attempt to tax more and more.. do you need to read my post again? 

And why would you think I am angry?!?  Saddam is dead.. we own Iraq.. Bush is still prez.. the Rep nominee will probably be prez.. and to top it all off I've been paying less taxes since Bush has been in office. ;D

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Comparison of Bush and Clinton federal tax plans
« Reply #15 on: March 11, 2008, 10:08:09 AM »
my point is that dems attempt to tax more and more

Correct.

They repeatedly inherited massive debts from republican spending, as my graph clearly showed.

Dems had to raise taxes and cut spending in order to fix the imbalance.

Once the repubs got back in, it happened all over again.  They spend without brakes.  Dems then have to tax like crazy to fix it.  Feel me?

shootfighter1

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5681
  • Competitor- NABBA Nationals Overall Champ
Re: Comparison of Bush and Clinton federal tax plans
« Reply #16 on: March 11, 2008, 10:09:18 AM »
There is definite differences in taxation and when you compare Obama's plan with the existing Bush plan, the divide will be even greater.  I agree wholeheartedly with bulldog...the government takes too much of our $ at the federal, state and local levels.  If you are making $90-100,000 and being taxed 35% of your wages, thats just crazy....particularly when much of it goes to programs that don't benefit you directly (and misguided wars)
Some taxes were supposed to be temporary but because of increasing government spending by both sides, they are here to stay.

Again, Bush has not represented traditional republican principles.
No administration should borrow as much as we have under Bush.  Thats why Ron Paul's voice is important.

shootfighter1

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5681
  • Competitor- NABBA Nationals Overall Champ
Re: Comparison of Bush and Clinton federal tax plans
« Reply #17 on: March 11, 2008, 10:13:28 AM »
Yes, 240, the whole trend of increasing gov borrowing, spending and debt is very worrisome.  Look at your graph from the 1970s until now!

Obama wants to tax more and spend more.  What is rarely mentioned is that he wants to take troops out of Iraq but greatly expand our military presence and spending in Afghanastan.
I'm not backing anyone in particular this election (anymore) but Obama as president would be a mistake IMO.  We should be voting Clinton vs McCain.

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Comparison of Bush and Clinton federal tax plans
« Reply #18 on: March 11, 2008, 10:15:01 AM »
Yes, 240, the whole trend of increasing gov borrowing, spending and debt is very worrisome.  Look at your graph from the 1970s until now!

Obama wants to tax more and spend more.  What is rarely mentioned is that he wants to take troops out of Iraq but greatly expand our military presence and spending in Afghanastan.
I'm not backing anyone in particular this election (anymore) but Obama as president would be a mistake IMO.  We should be voting Clinton vs McCain.

i am not crazy about obama.  i've voted repub in every election so far.

mccain is hard to believe right now... he pandered so far right to get the nomination, now he's trying to move to the center.  The slow flip flop :(

shootfighter1

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5681
  • Competitor- NABBA Nationals Overall Champ
Re: Comparison of Bush and Clinton federal tax plans
« Reply #19 on: March 11, 2008, 10:17:32 AM »
Somewhat true, but look at his record to see who he is.  Right now both sides are playing to their parties to get votes.  McCain is a moderate and barely a republican.  This election isn't exactly right vs. left.
I'm not crazy about him either but I like Hillary and McCain better than Obama.

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Comparison of Bush and Clinton federal tax plans
« Reply #20 on: March 11, 2008, 10:23:55 AM »
i agree with ya there.

i'm the hardest on the repubs because they're my party.

If my kid has a problem with borrowing (spending thousands on the Visa), I'm not going to bury my head in the sand and pretend I don't know.  That's shitty parenting.  Instead, I'll cut up the visa and teach him how $ works.  Same with mccain.  He admits he doesn't know much about economics, and said he'll keep right on borrowing like Bush has.  It's irresponsible, that's why I disagree with it.

other people THINK they're being loyal to their party by excusing/ endorsing/ ignoring every dumb move their party makes.  That's a mistake.  If they were more honest, people would trust them on topics and their views.  I can't believe joelocal's take on ANYTHING repub related, because he's never admitted one flaw with the party.  when he says they're doing something right, hey, it doesn't matter cause he ALWAYS says that.

When I say the repubs did something right, you can put a little more stock in it, cause I'm not a bleating repeating sheep.  I'm honest and self-critical and I have high standards.

The Coach

  • Guest
Re: Comparison of Bush and Clinton federal tax plans
« Reply #21 on: March 11, 2008, 10:25:33 AM »
Taxes were similar.  Their borrowing was DRASTICALLY DIFFERENT.

Can you look at this chart and blame Clinton for our debt?

I've asked you a couple of times to show the source of that graph.....so show us.


The girl can stay :D

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102396
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Comparison of Bush and Clinton federal tax plans
« Reply #22 on: March 11, 2008, 10:32:13 AM »
I've asked you a couple of times to show the source of that graph.....so show us.


The girl can stay :D

data from the US treasury dept.

please, call BS on it...

shootfighter1

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5681
  • Competitor- NABBA Nationals Overall Champ
Re: Comparison of Bush and Clinton federal tax plans
« Reply #23 on: March 11, 2008, 11:15:50 AM »
I agree 240, I am the same way.  I don't give two shits about party lines.  Both parties do stupid things.  Heavy borrowing, spending and taxing are the wrong things to do.