Under McCain's tax plan, this country will have a deficit around $8.6 trillions (source: TIME magazine). That's trillions with a "t."

Before I go any further, let's review what fixed the deficit under Clinton. Right-wingers like to say it's pure luck that Clinton fixed it. Wrong. A big part was the tax increase under Bush Sr. that pushed the deficit to balance level (combined with cuts under Clinton).

This time around, if McCain's plan is implemented, you'll see a similar scenario. Ballooning deficit leads to low consumer confidence leads to a slow economy. And the only way to fix it, just as it was the only way to fix it under Bush Sr., was a tax hike on everybody!! Including the rich, middle, and poor.

If McCain was a straight-line conservative like Bush, he'd probably not implement a tax increase and keep deferring to the next administration. But McCain is a maverick. He doesn't play by the same rule. If a tax hike is needed, he will increase taxes. And if you study his plan, there is no other outcome. Voodoonomics always lead to huge deficit and subsequently a tax hike. Always.

If McCain is elected. Expect to fork up more to Uncle Sam. I guarantee it.

__________________
Faith in a holy cause is a substitute for the lost faith in ourselves. The less justified a man is in claiming excellence for his own self, the more ready is he to claim all excellence for his nation, his religion, his race or his holy cause.

-- Eric Hoffer.

I think that neither one of them can responsibly cut taxes.

If it's to pay off the def, I'll bite more taxes.... What I won't pay is for other fucking lazy ass bastards to sit around watching Jerry fucking Springer on my dime.

It's not the tax, it's the use of the tax that I object to.

__________________


Great Quotes from Great Americans:

"With regard to the words 'general welfare', I have always regarded them as qualified by the details of the powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphisis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators."James Madison, Father of the Constitution

You're correct. In fact, and I posted this some time ago, even McCain's senior economic advisor has come out and publically said that either candidate would have to raise taxes. That includes McCain.

That further exposes McCain as the sweaty, cringing panderer that he is.

Swampland - TIME.com » Blog Archive The McCain Tax Increases–Continued «

John McCain: same liar, different day.

uhm and the tax increase under clinton?

__________________

"The captain has turned off the `No Dubbing' sign. You are free to speak any language you choose."

Just another Democrat Party Inconvenient Truth.

The elephant in the room, which the libs don't want to mention, is that McCain MIGHT have to raise taxes vs Obama who WILL raise taxes.

Also not mentioned is McCain wants to CONTROL spending vs Obama who wants to INCREASE spending.

The OP is more of the same. /yawn

__________________
Andy
Cynical Optimist

The myopic, blinkard pig-ignorant lie that RWs keep repeating is that McCain might raise taxes. He most certainly will. There is no way, under the current finanical circumstances we are in, that he cannot.

Suckers walk.

It's no secret McCain likes a balanced budget & in fact has fought against pork barrel spending all throughout his years in the senate. He also voted AGAINST the Bush 2 tax cuts, because he felt it gave to much to the wealthy in this country. What McCain will not do, is increase taxes while our economy is in this horrible slump. McCain understands that raising ANYONE'S taxes during a bad economy only makes it much worse.

On the other hand--you have Obama's stated tax plan--which is: To raise taxes on 5% of the population, while still planning on adding 1 TRILLION dollars in his new spending proposals, while expecting this same 5% to give the rest of us, (or 95% of us) a tax cut. All this while the same 5% is going to pay for our national health care insurance. LOL.

I think that what helped Clinton with the deficit was the technology bubble economy that existed during his administration.

There is no need in trying to fix the budget deficit by raising or lowering taxes. The way to balance the budget is by having a healthy economy, and a little bit of inflation.

Lower taxes will not do much for the economy. The way to drive the economy is by having major investments (public and private) in infrastructure development (interstate highways did it in the 50s and the Internet did it in the 90s). Building a fossil-free energy infrastructure is the way to drive the economy forward. It calls for massive investment, lots of jobs in America (you can't build a power grid in India to deliver power to Cleveland), and eliminates the massive transfer of wealth to the ME and Venezuela. Obama seems to understand this and I expect that this is why he picked energy as his top priority when asked by Brokaw in the second debate (McCain said he was going to do everything at once).

So if McCain will be forced to raise taxes irregardless of his plans for the budget, how exactly will Obama pay for all his promises?

How are we going to pay for our free healthcare, our expansion of the national service programs, improved education, and fighting AIDS in Africa? Something in Obama's new paradise will have to give...and it will likely be the American taxpayer.

Obama is no Clinton. Don't kid yourself. If you wanted a Clintonian to fix the economy, she lost in the primaries...

__________________
"The most important single central fact about a free market is that no exchange takes place unless both parties benefit."
- Milton Friedman

"The quickest way of ending a war is to lose it."
- George Orwell

There is actually a case for middle class tax cuts, those cuts generate immediate spending as they go to people with unmet needs, this boosts the economy, which is something that needs to be done.
By the same token tax cuts for the wealthy do nothing for the economy, and tax increases on the wealthy actually improve the economy.
So a combination of tax cuts for the middle class and tax increases on the very wealthy would do the most to get the country through this downturn and back to growth.

__________________
“ The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state.”

Adam Smith , The Wealth of Nations 1776

"We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; we know now that it is bad economics"
FDR's second Inaugural Address

One candidate has expressed a desire to, at a minimum, not increase spending. The other cannot find any part of the new spending he is proposing that might have to wait or be lessened until economic conditions permit.

If you even have to think about your choice after that then you are just not thinking.

__________________
Socialism doesn't create a rising tide that lifts all boats. It drains the lake and teaches the boat riders not to help themselves by rowing.

Jesus loves you, allah wants you dead

"Every government interference in the economy consists of giving an unearned benefit, extorted by force, to some men at the expense of others."

Ayn Rand

I was trying to figure out which was "one" and which was "the other". I looked at the transcript from the second debate (Complete John McCain-Barack Obama Debate Transcript, Oct. 7, 2008 | Top of the Ticket | Los Angeles Times) and found this question from Brokow:
"There are new economic realities out there that everyone in this hall and across this country understands that there are going to have to be some choices made. Health policies, energy policies, and entitlement reform, what are going to be your priorities in what order? Which of those will be your highest priority your first year in office and which will follow in sequence?"

McCain's answer: "I think you can work on all three at once." It wasn't really clear if he then tried to prioritize fixing entitlements as the highest.

Obama's answer: "We're going to have to prioritize, just like a family has to prioritize. Now, I've listed the things that I think have to be at the top of the list. Energy we have to deal with today"

So, based on their answers, I assume that McCain = "the other" and Obama = "one".

Did I unwind your references correctly?

But, returning to the OP...

I'm not sure that McCain has the status in the Senate to allow him to push through any kind of tax increase, especially with a Democrat majority in both houses and a Democrat President.