By Elizabeth Woods
For those who thought Obama was going to win this election by a landslide, recent polls are sure to scare them. With the “Palin effect” still sweeping across the country, polls are swinging in the direction of McCain, and with only 49 days left until a candidate is selected, Obama supporters should indeed be worried. Obama’s campaign has responded by trying to reinforce the message of “change” and the bad economy, emphasizing it’s likely to get worse under the McCain administration. In his speeches given today in Grand Junction and Pueblo Colorado, Obama focused on the economy and attacked McCain’s position on this issue. It seems that this has become his major tactic to fight against the “Palin effect.” I can’t help but ask: is this a good tactic or a bad one for the Obama camp? That all depends on what people know about the economy and what they know about the economics Obama is really subscribing to.
The economy is definitely a main issue that voters are paying attention to this election, and for those who think the economy under McCain will likely be a repeat of the Bush years, this tactic will probably bode well. But, to those who are paying attention to the election, we have also noticed an increase in T.V. ads that also show Palin and McCain hitting on the economy and what they will do to reform it. Their policies also agree with lowering taxes, lower health care costs, and opening new markets to create more jobs for Americans.
Obama’s tactic of blaming all the economic problems on the Bush administration won’t go over well for some who are knowledgeable of how the economy works. A lot of the economy’s problem can be blamed on high gas prices and widespread foreclosures. The rise of gas prices doesn’t necessarily put Democrats in a positive light, considering they have consistently been against offshore drilling, drilling in Alaska, and have been opposed to nuclear energy. The mortgage crises is more of a result of legislative congress than actions by Bush, and was inevitably progressed by greedy lenders . May I point out that congress control most of federal spending and legislation, and Democrats have controlled congress for the past two years, so where is their accountability when it comes to our financial problems?
Obama wants to decrease taxes for the lower income earners and tax the top 5-10% of high income earners. To 90% of Americans this sounds good, but where is he going to get all of the money for all of his big changes? While Obama talks of change, what he really wants to do is subscribe to the same old “liberal” agenda, incorporating more government into society, and increasing taxes. Under Obama’s plan, people who earn over $250,000 a year will see significant tax increases, not just the super rich.
According to the website of fiscal facts, in 2006, the most recent available data showed that under the Bush Administration the economy was robust. Hmm… a time when congress wasn’t dominated by the Democrats. From this website we can see that the top 1% of earners paid 40% of all federal income taxes, and we also see that there was an overall increase in individual incomes across all income groups. The top 25% earners, classified as people earning over $65,000, paid 86.3% of federal income tax. People with an AGI (adjusted gross income) of $154,000 or more were constituted the nations top 5% earners. So just who is Obama going to tax? According to this it‘s middle class Americans who make around $154,000. You can also compare the two candidates and where each one stands on taxation. You can see that Obama is planning to significantly raise the taxes on those people that are already paying 80% of the federal income taxes. Obama is also planning on increasing the estate tax. Nearly 50% of a persons estate will be taken after death. This person who has worked hard their entire life, and who has paid the majority of the federal income tax will get half of it taken away by the government. This is an absurd form of double taxation. Why should the government be entitled to this persons money?
Maybe the cornerstone of Obama’s economic plan is to redistribute the wealth to help those who need it, but what about the people that have worked hard for their money. Should they be punished for having ambition and motivation to succeed? Some people do need government aid, but that is not the majority of Americans. If people take a closer look at the economic plan of Obama, it may not be a very good strategy for him after all.
By Elizabeth Woods