Neutral

Well Joe, it's nice you own your own business. But the fact is Wendy the Wal-Mart Worker; Sarah the School Teacher and Fred the Factory Worker do not. They need tax help -- YOU DO NOT. So I am not going to cry because you have to pay taxes. I'd much rather give Fred,Wendy or Sarah a tax break before I give you a break.

Reply to this Comment | Report This

Neutral

C'mon, of course Joe the plumber is an implant by the Mccain campaign. Part of their short coming is their inability to be suttle! Fox news is the co-conspirator, what more evidence do you need?

Reply to this Comment | Report This

Neutral

The Top 50 Swing Voters: #27 - Joe The Plumber

#50 - Hockey Moms - Demographic Power Play
#47 - People with STDs - Burning for Change
#40 - Anonymous Sperm Donors - Swimming Against The Tide
#36 - Master Debaters - Everybody's Doing It
#29 - Nudists - Sticking To The Issues

http://swingvoters.wordpress.com

Reply to this Comment | Report This

Neutral

Why don't Fred, Wendy, and Sarah own their own businesses? Do you think Joe woke up one day and discovered that "wow, all of a sudden I own my own business."? Taking the plunge to start a business takes courage, skill, stamina, and ambition. By increasing Joe's taxes you actually remove the incentive for those "coming up behind you" to start their own. Besides how do you know Joe doesn't need a tax cut. Why, by definition, is he suddenly "rich" because he shows a certain income? You don't know his balance sheet. Lastly, even if he didn't have his taxes raised, he still pays more than Fred, Wendy, and Sarah simply because he makes more. 25% of any bigger number makes a bigger number than 25% of any smaller number. So do we really raise Joe's taxes because he is "not paying enough" or because we are going to... "make that 'rich SOB' pay"?

Reply to this Comment | Report This

Neutral

" GOOD GRIEF" MAcCAIN, YOUR JUST A BLOCK HEAD CARTOON CHARACTER FROM THE CHARLIE BROWN PEANUT CREW. NOTHING MAKES SENSE WHAT YOU SAY AND THOSE FACE EXPRESSION, D*MN TOO MUCH BOTOX.

Reply to this Comment | Report This

Neutral

This Joe the Plumber guy is related to Charles Keating's son-in-law! Google it. Charles Keating's (Keating Five) son-in-law is Joe the Plumber's Father. His father was also vice president of the parent company of Lincoln Savings and Loan.

Republican plant... Again.

Reply to this Comment | Report This

Neutral

You know, this whole story and the comments made above just prove that this country is almost totally unaware of what is going on with the tax code. To begin with, Obama's claim that 95% of the population is below the point where they would get an increase is so falacious it is insulting to anyone with a grain of intelligence. Firstly, those at the bottom of the tax code pay NO! taxes whatever. And they make up something like 35-40% of the American public. Now, not only do they not pay any taxes, they actually get a check from the government -- for some odd reason -- to adjust for their "misfortune". These people will, of course, not suffer any tax increase because they don't pay any taxes anyway and zero-plus-zero still equals zero last I heard.

That means that the remaining 60% are the ones we are really talking about, with of course, the top 1-10% paying the vast maximum of the tax burden. And assuming that there is a sliding scale on this increase, those at the top will suffer the greatest increase. Which, of course, brings us to the question of how much is the "greatest" and how is this computed. Assuming that this tax increase will be based upon net rather than gross income, then there will be taxes upon only that income that can be taxable after all deductibles have been taken.

Now given the fact that anything remotely connected with the running of a business is legitimately deductible, say things like rent, utilities, supplies, maintenance, etc., that would reduce the tax burden considerably. At this point, what we're really talking about is approximately, as in the case of Exxon (always a goody to use for computations) they made roughly 8% profit despite their huge total gross income last year. Of course, other businesses of a smaller scale could also report minimal net profits which would mean they would have minimal tax exposure. And given the girations of the over 70,000 pages of tax law, this would not be difficult to do.

Now, if you raise taxes further, disregarding the factor of sophistication among those who have built up their own businesses over the years and have learned through experience how best to manage, then you will run into the point of confiscatory taxation levels in an attempt to reach a "level playing field" -- which is what Obama says he wants.

This, of course, requires that everyone have a communal interest in "sharing the wealth". If someone has worked 10-12 hours a day, including weekends and holidays, to build a business while others have taken 3 hour lunch periods and called in sick whenever fishing weather was good, I find it a bit hard to swallow to have to "share the wealth" with those who have not been quite a diligent.

Joe the Plumber is NOT a plant, he is a citizen who is concerned and frankly, he asked a legitimate question to which Obama gave his (unguarded?) answer. What Obama wants is Socialism (if not outright Communism) while Joe the Plumber wants capitalism and individual enterprise. That's the real difference between the two. Joe doesn't care to be "taken care of" by Big Brother! Neither do I!

There was once a really great Jewish comedien who had a discussion with his father and asked for his dad's advice about a business he was about to start, and whether and where he should seek help. His father's advice was "Son, if you're looking for a helping hand, you'll find one at the bottom of your sleeve!"

Obama, apparently, doesn't believe that.

Reply to this Comment | Report This

Neutral

Bravo Janice. Bravo. Very well said. It DOES need to be stressed that the "rich" are already paying a much higher rate of taxation. The pitfall is that there is a constantly changing tax code and the possibilities for reducing your tax load if you have your own business are endless. In my mind, the way to solve all of this is quite simply a flat tax. A business would be taxed on its bottom line which would be figured out by standardized accounting practices. An individual employee would be taxed on his/her gross income. I would suggest 15%. Again 15% of any big number is more than 15% of any smaller number. You make more you pay more. Simple math. Imagine this. A huge political weapon is dispensed with. No more pitting the "rich" against the "poor". No more threats to "make them pay their fair share". No more lobbying to get the tax code changed for the temporary benefit of big business. I would advocate anadjustable "basement" income at and under which either the flat rate is lowered or their is no taxation at all. Let's say $50,000.

Reply to this Comment | Report This

Neutral

"Who's Joe "The Plumber?" Makes me think plumber's crack, first off."

It figures that a black journalist would think about crack right off the bat.

Ok that was uncalled for ...but so was HIS first line.

The crux of the matter is that Obama is a Marxist.

Period.

Spread the wealth... pulease

Reply to this Comment | Report This

Neutral

But the fact is Wendy the Wal-Mart Worker; Sarah the School Teacher and Fred the Factory Worker have the same opportunity and if the government penalizes their success they will not be as likely to succeed. But what about the people that do not do as well as Wendy the Wal-Mart Worker; Sarah the School Teacher and Fred the Factory Worker? I guess they should be taxed more to give to those behind them...LISTEN: If success is penalized there will be less of it, successful people and business contribute to society and if Joe the plumber has a sucessfull business it is possible that his business could create jobs for people.(What a concept!!) So instead of kicking people down we should built them up and stop hindering with excessive taxes.

Reply to this Comment | Report This