In a strictly financial sense, who should I vote for if my family makes < $200K/year

[Anonymous]

For the moral and social issues, I know who would get my vote. But I want to understand who will hurt my family the least in a financial way. We have HHI of between $125 - $150K.

And would your answer change for some of my family's situations? Some of them are between $50-$75K.

[Anonymous]

Democratic administrations have been better for income growth in these income categories than Republican ones.

[Anonymous]

Obama is not going to raise taxes but romney will drop your rate to 8%

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443792604577574910276629448.html

The heart of Mr. Romney's actual proposal is a 20% rate cut for anyone who pays income taxes. This means, for example, that the 10% rate would fall to 8%, the 35% rate would fall to 28% and all the brackets The heart of Mr. Romney's actual proposal is a 20% rate cut for anyone who pays income taxes. This means, for example, that the 10% rate would fall to 8%, the 35% rate would fall to 28% and all the brackets in between would fall as well. The corporate tax would fall to 25% from 35%. in between would fall as well. The corporate tax would fall to 25% from 35%.

[Anonymous]

This question only matters if you live in Virginia.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This question only matters if you live in Virginia.

Sent too soon. I meant to say add that MD will vote Obama no matter how you vote.

[Anonymous]

The economy does better under democratic presidents. The imaginary benefit of Romney's tax cuts (which I doubt would happen as advertised) won't matter if the economy is in the crapper. Plus, his tax cuts will necessitate government constriction, which means all jobs in our area will take a hit (not just gov't employees, but goods and services, education, real estate, etc). Unless you are wealthy, it's no contest that you need to vote for Obama.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The economy does better under democratic presidents. The imaginary benefit of Romney's tax cuts (which I doubt would happen as advertised) won't matter if the economy is in the crapper. Plus, his tax cuts will necessitate government constriction, which means all jobs in our area will take a hit (not just gov't employees, but goods and services, education, real estate, etc). Unless you are wealthy, it's no contest that you need to vote for Obama.

I disagree, romney is attempting to start getting the private sector to hire. Traditionally The private sector employs more people.

[Anonymous]

Obama.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The economy does better under democratic presidents. The imaginary benefit of Romney's tax cuts (which I doubt would happen as advertised) won't matter if the economy is in the crapper. Plus, his tax cuts will necessitate government constriction, which means all jobs in our area will take a hit (not just gov't employees, but goods and services, education, real estate, etc). Unless you are wealthy, it's no contest that you need to vote for Obama.

I disagree, romney is attempting to start getting the private sector to hire. Traditionally The private sector employs more people.

How? By cutting taxes for the wealthy?

Because Bush did that and he's who caused this mess in the first place.

Data on economic growth under presidents since the Great Depression: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2008/10/14/opinion/20081014_OPCHART.html

[Anonymous]

I was talking to someone in my office who is a crazy conservative. Which is weird b/c I work for a tree hugging nonprofit. Anyway, she stated that oh well if student grants and loans are cut and people are left behind, that's just the price you have to pay for progress. If that is the sentiment, it cannot be good for middle class people. In DC, I consider people making $200 and under, as middle class.

[Anonymous]

Democrats for sure--they care about middle class tax cuts, Pell grants for middle class students, quality public education and public services. Republicans' main focus is cutting taxes for the rich, which they would like to pay for through cuts to programs that benefit the lower and middle classes or through deficit spending (a la Bush).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The economy does better under democratic presidents. The imaginary benefit of Romney's tax cuts (which I doubt would happen as advertised) won't matter if the economy is in the crapper. Plus, his tax cuts will necessitate government constriction, which means all jobs in our area will take a hit (not just gov't employees, but goods and services, education, real estate, etc). Unless you are wealthy, it's no contest that you need to vote for Obama.

I disagree, romney is attempting to start getting the private sector to hire. Traditionally The private sector employs more people.

How? By cutting taxes for the wealthy?

Because Bush did that and he's who caused this mess in the first place.

Data on economic growth under presidents since the Great Depression: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2008/10/14/opinion/20081014_OPCHART.html

First off you are listing a source of an OP-ED piece on the crazy left wing new york times.

HERE is a partisan analysis of Romney vs Obama. Note that Romney cuts taxes FOR ALL not just the rich.

"Romney: Would reduce each of the Bush-era income tax rates by 20%. So the top rate would fall to 28% and the bottom rate would fall to 8%."

http://money.cnn.com/2012/09/07/news/economy/tax-obama-romney/index.html?iid=HP_LN

[Anonymous]

Obama.

But where the party divide gets murky for me is for small businesses. I don't own one so I don't pay as much attention as I should. I would think state and local regulation is what's burdensome here, not necessarily federal. But I could be wrong. In general, I think Obama/Dem is the way to go at the federal level.

[Anonymous]

Jeez, can we please, please stop the grover norquist insanity?

We cannot tax cut our way out of this mess. As a matter of fact, tax cuts got us a significant amount of the way INTO it.

Why do we think it is going to be different this time around?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For the moral and social issues, I know who would get my vote. But I want to understand who will hurt my family the least in a financial way. We have HHI of between $125 - $150K.

And would your answer change for some of my family's situations? Some of them are between $50-$75K.

In addition to the tax issues, you have to look at what public services your family uses. If anyone in your family (say retired parents?) gets social security benefits or Medicare or Medicaid benefits these programs will be cut. The Social Security impact will be long-term rather than short term. Right now, the program has the funds to last only a relatively short while longer (some say it will run out of money as early as 2029). And that is with benefits at the current level. However, with Romney, there is always the chance that to cut money from that program, they will attempt to reduce benefits to make the SS money last longer. With the Medicare cuts, elderly and other Medicare recipients may end up with more out-of-pocket expenses for their managed care. There's a lot more to this than just the income tax decrease. You can have more take-home pay from lower taxes, but still have a harder time if you have to pay for more services that you get through public assistance. All so that people like Romney, who will not be creating any jobs, can save more money than you make in a year.