Tax Plans: Obaba vs. McCain

There seems to be quite a bit of confusion about the differences in the proposed tax plans of Barack Obama of John McCain. A recent article in The Washington Post broke down the numbers according to annual salaries.

I will be honest and tell you that my tax burden will go up under Obama's plan. However, losing a few additional thousand dollars a year will not hurt me financially. I am much more concerned about the larger population of tax payers. Plus, if the economy grows under Obama has it has historically done under Democratic presidents, I will recoup that money down the road. (see earlier post)

So, check out the numbers below and decide for yourself which plan makes the most sense for not only you, but for the country.

Obama and McCain Tax Proposals
According to a new analysis by the Tax Policy Center, a joint project of the Urban Institute and the Brookings Institution, Democrat Barack Obama and Republican John McCain are both proposing tax plans that would result in cuts for most American families. Obama's plan gives the biggest cuts to those who make the least, while McCain would give the largest cuts to the very wealthy. For the approximately 147,000 families that make up the top 0.1 percent of the income scale, the difference between the two plans is stark. While McCain offers a $269,364 tax cut, Obama would raise their taxes, on average, by $701,885 - a difference of nearly $1 million.

(Courtesy: The Washington Post)

Is History Siding With Obama’s Economic Plan?

A friend sent me this New York Times article, which examined the effect Democratic and Republican presidents have had on the national economy.

The article includes some really pertinent information, especially as it relates to the upcoming election.

"Simply put, the United States economy has grown faster, on average, under Democratic presidents than under Republicans.

The stark contrast between the whiz-bang Clinton years and the dreary Bush years is familiar because it is so recent. But while it is extreme, it is not atypical. Data for the whole period from 1948 to 2007, during which Republicans occupied the White House for 34 years and Democrats for 26, show average annual growth of real gross national product of 1.64 percent per capita under Republican presidents versus 2.78 percent under Democrats.

That 1.14-point difference, if maintained for eight years, would yield 9.33 percent more income per person, which is a lot more than almost anyone can expect from a tax cut."

So regardless of your views on the upcoming presidential election or your opinions on the differences between Barack Obama and John McCain's respective economic plans, the article definitely makes for an interesting read.

Is History Siding With Obama’s Economic Plan?