COLUMBUS, Ohio - Democratic Sen. Barack Obama on Friday called for higher payroll taxes on wage-earners making more than $250,000 annually, a step that would affect the wealthiest 3 percent of Americans…
By CHARLES BABINGTON, Associated Press Writer
Continued at the link.
So, Obama is already targeting white Americans, talking about policies and tax increases that would mostly affect white American males who are once again, being punished for their entrepreneurial skills and successes. Obama’s proposed payroll tax is not only unfair to white American males who make up most of the 3% richest Americans (while $250,000 is certainly nothing to sneeze at, it doesn’t exactly put a person in the ranks of a Rockefeller) it is also unfair to those who make $250,000 on their own. Those person in double income households that meet or exceed the $250,000 threshold with their combined salaries, will escape this most unfair and blatant form of discrimination and punishment. Is Odama encouraging mediocrity among the working and middle class? Example:a person could go for that promotion, but if it would kick him into a higher tax bracket, he could decide to back off a little and let someone else take the hit rather than pay higher taxes as a punishment for his ambition. Some would say that it is his choice not to go further in his career, I say the payroll tax handcuffs don’t really give him much of a choice. This is especially bad news for families living on a single income such as one parent is staying home to raise the children or a single parent trying to make ends meet with daycare costs, rising gas prices, rising food costs, etc. Just because a person makes $250,000 doesn’t mean they are living on easy street and should be punished.
Increasing taxes is not a cure all when budgets get tight yet that is the first place many in office look when the spending gets tough, the week raise taxes. Why not cut back on unnecessary spending? Do we really need all of these government funded programs?
Here, in the city in which I live, we are facing some serious budget issues. Will city and local government officials release their spending receipts from the last few years so that cuts may be made to secure the budget and the future of the city. Of course not. Instead, the city is proposing to sell off our parks to builders in order to raise enough cash to balance the budget along with a 1% sales tax increase. Everyone else has to live on a budget, why not the people who are running the city (into the ground)?
Obama, we don’t want a president who targets minorities, even if they are rich and white. Your proposed tax increases are discriminatory.


June 14th, 2008 at 5:38 am
Wow what different worlds we live in! The high tax bracket here in Australia a few years ago was $50,000 (higher now but i don’t know the exact amount) a lot lower than $250,000!!! and 12% tax, oh boy!!! i think i’m coming to America to live!!! the high tax bracket here are taxed…. wait for it… don’t faint…. 48%!!!!! yes, 48 cents in a dollar goes to the government! very different systems though, we have a public health system so it’s different all together and can’t really be compared but on the 12% and the $250,000 as being the threshold, I’m so envious!!!! when I was on $40,000 a year, i was taxed about 30%. BUMMER!!! lol!!!
June 14th, 2008 at 6:02 am
I would prefer it to be lowered to 50K or 75K if we do end up having to pay. It would impact more people and feel more like a group effort than a punishment. Passing laws that only impact (taxes) or benefit (SB-200 for example) 3% of the populace just doesn’t seem ethical.
June 14th, 2008 at 6:03 am
P.S. I think the Boston Tea Party was over a 7% tax.