Anonymous wrote:^ i call shenanigans. First of all, if yih ate making 500, there is no way you re paying a 40% tax rate, as that doesn't exist until next year. Further, I find it hard to believe that you don't have any deductions that bring tha to a much lower effective tax rate. If you are including state taxes, that is another issue altogether.

Anonymous wrote:
But the larger point is that it is hard to vote for higher taxes, despite the possible social implications of voting for Romney. We will pay almost 200k in taxes this year. We feel that at some point, and it is hard to say exactly where that point is, it is more than our fair share.

Anonymous wrote:I am the 500k poster -- not the same person who said she couldn't find money to replace a 12 year old car. The 12 year old car poster said they made considerably less. (Coincidentially, I have a 10 year old car that I am not going to replace unless it dies on me, but yes, I could find the money to replace it if I really wanted to.)

But the larger point is that it is hard to vote for higher taxes, despite the possible social implications of voting for Romney. We will pay almost 200k in taxes this year. We feel that at some point, and it is hard to say exactly where that point is, it is more than our fair share. We come from lower middle class families and have worked very, very hard for what we have. We have student loan debt. Our parents will soon likely need financial help from us. We have members of our extended families who could also use some help. We pay for private school for three kids, due to the horrid public school options available to us. Because we are not the super wealthy, we don't have unearned investment income or second homes or any "loopholes" available to us. We live in an economically diverse area where, yes, we see people living in housing projects with Escalades and expensive sneakers and we are bitter. We know, in our heads, that not everyone is like that -- that the people taking advantage are a small fraction. But it is getting harder and harder to fork over the 200k without feeling like something needs to change, like we are supporting those that are perfectly able yet not WILLING to support themselves.

Anonymous wrote:I am the 500k poster -- not the same person who said she couldn't find money to replace a 12 year old car. The 12 year old car poster said they made considerably less. (Coincidentially, I have a 10 year old car that I am not going to replace unless it dies on me, but yes, I could find the money to replace it if I really wanted to.)

But the larger point is that it is hard to vote for higher taxes, despite the possible social implications of voting for Romney. We will pay almost 200k in taxes this year. We feel that at some point, and it is hard to say exactly where that point is, it is more than our fair share. We come from lower middle class families and have worked very, very hard for what we have. We have student loan debt. Our parents will soon likely need financial help from us. We have members of our extended families who could also use some help. We pay for private school for three kids, due to the horrid public school options available to us. Because we are not the super wealthy, we don't have unearned investment income or second homes or any "loopholes" available to us. We live in an economically diverse area where, yes, we see people living in housing projects with Escalades and expensive sneakers and we are bitter. We know, in our heads, that not everyone is like that -- that the people taking advantage are a small fraction. But it is getting harder and harder to fork over the 200k without feeling like something needs to change, like we are supporting those that are perfectly able yet not WILLING to support themselves.

Anonymous wrote:Hi, I am Sandy, except my husband and I aren't doing as well financially as we once were and our kids go to public school. I am like the OP in that I am not sure who to vote for. I worry about the Supreme Court and whether Mr. Romney really can pull off a smaller government without catering to the right wing nuts.

I worry that my family cannot afford any more in taxes because I need to save for my kids college, even though my student loans aren't paid off. DH has a job that pays much less than he made during the last election. Me too.

PP, you speak of $9K as being chump change. I drive a 12 year old car and pray it will last until I can find the money for a new one. I worry that Mr. Obama will not spend my $9K nearly as wisely as I would, and I wonder why, when I have made sound fiscal decisions and I am still afloat, I must pay for people that made bad financial decisions. It's like lending my irresponsible brother $500 knowing he won't spend it the same way I would, might spend it on beer instead of bills, and I will never get it back. Why isn't everyone dipping a little deeper into their pockets?

Anonymous wrote:Hi, I am Sandy, except my husband and I aren't doing as well financially as we once were and our kids go to public school. I am like the OP in that I am not sure who to vote for. I worry about the Supreme Court and whether Mr. Romney really can pull off a smaller government without catering to the right wing nuts.

I worry that my family cannot afford any more in taxes because I need to save for my kids college, even though my student loans aren't paid off. DH has a job that pays much less than he made during the last election. Me too.

PP, you speak of $9K as being chump change. I drive a 12 year old car and pray it will last until I can find the money for a new one. I worry that Mr. Obama will not spend my $9K nearly as wisely as I would, and I wonder why, when I have made sound fiscal decisions and I am still afloat, I must pay for people that made bad financial decisions. It's like lending my irresponsible brother $500 knowing he won't spend it the same way I would, might spend it on beer instead of bills, and I will never get it back. Why isn't everyone dipping a little deeper into their pockets?

Harvard Professor Martin Feldstein’s Study

Harvard professor Martin Feldstein wrote a Wall Street Journal op-ed that purported to show that it was possible to close enough tax deductions and loopholes for the wealthy to pay for Romney’s tax cuts. In fact, Feldstein’s analysis shows the opposite. His study neglected the fact that lowering rates by 20% also reduces the value of deductions by 20%, while he also ignored Romney’s repeal of the estate tax. The Tax Policy Center found that “taking the estate tax and other effects into account, Feldstein’s proposals come up at least $90 billion short of revenue-neutral” in 2015. Tellingly, in his attempt to make the numbers add up for Romney, Feldstein redefines middle class as below $100,000, and his assumptions include significant cuts in tax deductions and exclusions for all families making more than $100,000 a year—an income level that reflects a family with a police officer and a teacher, for example. Even under an “illustrative” example Feldstein has given, these families would have to pay income and payroll taxes on their employer-sponsored health insurance for the first time, and they would lose their child tax credit. In other words, as the Tax Policy Center notes, Feldstein’s study demonstrates that Romney’s plan would indeed be a tax increase on middle-class families—he just denies that these families are actually middle-class