Political Punch
Power, pop, and probings from ABC News Senior White House Correspondent Jake Tapper

« Previous | Main | Next »

Obama Calls Higher Income Taxes the Wealthy Will Pay Under His Plan ‘Chump Change’

November 03, 2008 11:01 AM

In an interview with MTV's Sway, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., was asked by a viewer -- Matt from Iowa -- "Mr. Obama, if your desire is to spread the wealth around, what incentive is there for me to try to work hard? If I am only going to get more taken away from me, the more money I make, why wouldn't I just slide into a life of relaxation and let rich people take care of me?"

Said Sway, "You know, a lot of people are asking similar questions, and I kinda want you to specify. What does this mean exactly?"

"What is amazing to me is this whole notion that somehow that everybody is just looking out for themselves," Obama said. "I mean, the fact is, we just talked about student loans. Well, when young people who have the drive and the skill to go to college can't afford to go to college, how do you think we pay for scholarships or loan programs? That money doesn't grow on trees. It's got to come from somewhere, and the attitude that I have is that, if we want to grow our economy, the way it grows is from the bottom up. You don't just give tax breaks to millionaires and billionaires. What you do is make sure that the tax code is fair."

He continued: "I want to give a tax cut to 95 percent of working Americans, but in order to pay for that, I'm going to take the tax rates back to what they were in the 1990s for people who are making more than a quarter of a million dollars a year. People who are making more than a quarter of a million dollars a year, if they are paying 2 or 3 percent higher in taxes, the notion that they're somehow going to stop working, or this young man is going to not want to be successful, that just doesn't make any sense. Back in the 1990s, we created more millionaires, more billionaires, because the economy was growing, everything was strong, you had at every income bracket, people were doing well. So this idea, that somehow everybody is just on their own and shouldn't be concerned about other people who are coming up behind them, that's the kind of attitude that I want to end when I am president."

Said Sway, "Just out of curiosity, for those that are being taxed that are making over $250,000 a year, how much difference would it be from how they are being taxed today?"

"Right now, they are getting taxed at 36 percent. Under Bill Clinton in the 1990s, they were being taxed at 39.6 percent. You're talking about a 3.6 percent difference, and, you know, for, you know, the average person who is making half a million, a million dollars -- people like you, Sway -- that's chump change, that's nothing. But it could make a big difference for that young person who is trying to figure out whether they can go to college or not, if we could give them more of a break or give them more scholarships or grants to go to college."

Matt did not care for that answer.

"You say that the difference between 36 percent and 39.6 percent is 'chump change,'" he responded. "But I think even people that are in that income tax bracket would disagree." Matt said that Obama claims to want to make the tax system "fair," but he said it's "unfair" to punish people who work hard.

Incidentally, how much is this "chump change"?

The Tax Policy Center says a person or family making $500,000 a year would pay $3,363 in additional income tax under the Obama plan.

A person or family making $1,000,000 a year would see their tax burden increase by $28,301 under the Obama plan.

Chump change? You be the judge.

- jpt

November 3, 2008 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (295)

User Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

What i don't understand is why people making 250k a yr are taxed at the same rate as people making 5,10,20 times that much??? Dosent make sense to me!! the system is a joke!welfare is totally out of control and i dont believe in paying for people who CHOOSE not to work!

Posted by: katie | Jul 22, 2009 12:57:15 PM

Regardless of how much money people make, it is just that. Their money. I understand we have to build a strong economy but what about the single individuals without children who pay into the system? A single individual pays more taxes from their paycheck than one with a child or children. People with children have a list of agencies & organizations willing to assist them with housing, food, and healthcare whereas a single individual is ineligible for the programs.
When income tax time rolls around, the people with children who paid little taxes recieves their money back and an extra $1500 per child. A single individual is then given a measly $700-800 rebate after they've paid into the system. It's like being taxed, double.
That is ludacris and a smack in the face to all the hardworking people who are motivated to achieve a better life. I'm not saying one should be greedy but to the parents who scam & scheme to work 4-5 months out the year and still recieve all that money back, while single individuals work all year long and recieve peanuts is a mockery. It's like the harder you work, the more they take. Do nothing and you'll be living the American Dream.

Posted by: Moka Honta | Feb 3, 2009 10:07:19 AM

I can't believe the riot over taxes. We have a business and I pray for the day that we make enough we can pay the "extra" taxes because that means we have succeeded! We came to life with nothing and we will leave this life with nothing. What we have in our life on earth should be used to help ourselves and others. Taxes build roads, build businesses, send kids to school. Shut up you whiners. If you make that much more it will not hurt you to pay a little more and if it does than you are living above your means or in excess, that is what is wrong with the republican America.

Posted by: jane | Nov 4, 2008 1:48:37 PM

Warren Buffet also stated that he would not have picked ANY of the presidential candidates, INCLUDING Obama, to run his company when he retires because none of them are qualified. If Obama isn't qualified to run one single American company- Berkshire Hathatway- then why is he qualified to run America? Next time someone quotes Warren Buffet, remember that question. We are electing completely unqualified people to run this country and they have collectively run it into the ground. What makes anyone think that giving the government MORE money and creating MORE government entities and programs to figure out how to spend it will EVER work? What government-run entity has EVER been successful, either fiscally or socially? And we want to Federalize health care? Has everyone in this country gone completely mad?

Posted by: swandarox | Nov 4, 2008 4:22:39 AM

3K on 500K is chump change. Trust me.

Also, note that Warren Buffet, who is no "socialist", supports Obama and has high prize for his economic plan. I don't think people on this net should double guess Warren B. on what is good for the economy an capitalism of this country.

Posted by: sdahl | Nov 4, 2008 2:24:16 AM

Look, Obama is a socialist in the closet. his friend and mentor Bill Ayers is an outspoken Marxist anarchist and unrepentant terrorist.

Alan Colmes spins this as saying but look at who Obama is also friends with, doesnt this count?

Here is an analogy for anyone who wants to go down that road: If you have a bowl of soup and are eating it outside under a tree and a big bird drops a turd right into the bowl of soup? what do you say or do? oh well its still good Chicken soup with veggies that are good for you?

Some people would say no, toss it out, its polluted. Those are the people who say Obama's shady past and continual links to anti Americans has spoiled it all. Toss out Obama, he is polluted.

But the hardcore democrats who support Obama anyway? close their eyes, stir the soup and pretend everything is okay.

Posted by: Bradz1234 | Nov 4, 2008 1:21:38 AM

If anyone actually bothered to look at the Tax Policy Center link, the assumptions laid out to get those figures were absurd. It was assumed that a family would have $75K in deductions. Because of phaseouts on deductions as income increases, to get to that $75K figure for an itemized deduction, the taxpayer would have to start out with about $100K in deductions. It also assumed that 40% of the deductions were based on mortgage interest, 40% on state income taxes and local property taxes and 20% on charitable donations. Really, 20% to charity? Hell, Joe Biden's annual contributions avereaged out to less than 1% per year. Even Obama, before he gave a lot the year his second book came out, averaged less than 3% a year. How many taxpayers in America does anyone think actually contribute 20% of their pretax income to charity?
The chart also jumped from 200K (which according to Obama, means no change) to $1M. Where was the famous $250K figure where your taxes would actually make that first 3% jump? I fall into the current 33% tax bracket. I just pulled my 2007 tax return. The jump from 33% to 36% is $7,947.83 for me, based on all other factors concerning the calculations of taxes (current phaseout rates, lower tax brackets remaining the sames, etc.). To me, almost $8,000 isn't "chump change" - it's a semester of my daughter's college tuition.

Obama is an empty suit.

Posted by: Lynne | Nov 3, 2008 10:50:49 PM

Yes, it is chump change. Believe me, if I was making $500,000 a year, paying an extra $3,363 wouldn't bother me at all. It is silly to think someone won't aim for that higher income because they would have to pay slightly higher taxes.
This is a pretend issue brought to you by the Republicans.

Posted by: Lydia | Nov 3, 2008 9:13:16 PM

Kevin -

His grandmother wasn't critically ill? She just died today, so tell me, how stupid do you feel now?

Posted by: Lisa in NY | Nov 3, 2008 4:50:37 PM

dr john, where have you been? warren buffett gave a huge portion of his entire wealth to the gates foundation to try to stop infectious diseases in africa, as a doctor, how could you have missed this? before he dies, he plans on giving it all away, with small bequests to his children. it is the largest tranfer of wealth from an individual to charity in the history of our country. and they are doing real work - good work - effective work. if you really are a doctor, they could use some volunteers. i know doctors who go for a month every year. i'll post the connection if you really are interested in giving back.

Posted by: Mara | Nov 3, 2008 4:31:17 PM

Cut the salaries of all of the people in business at the top. Then you can also cut the salaries and unfair distribution of wealth caused by professional sports figures. Just look at what they get in salaries, or winning a golf tournament and add in endorsements. Figures are gross and I hear no complaining about them. Look at ticket prices, an average family can not afford to go to the games. In addition to the money we put them on pedestals and look how many of them let us down.

Posted by: William | Nov 3, 2008 4:25:07 PM

carl - i love your post. why are people going all crazy over somebody who makes $250K a year? my brothers all do - and they are happy to pitch in more - because we came from dirt poor - and they know what a little bit of help cn do. we all need it. america has got to have a middle class to survive. clinton got it. obama gets it. bush did not - and wwas over the worst economy since the depression. mccain is simply clueless - but at least he used to be honest enough to admit it.

Posted by: Mara | Nov 3, 2008 4:21:14 PM

I think what Obama really meant to say was that GOP Chumps like Matt from Iowa are going to have to Change their attitudes from the ME FIRST era of the Bush Administration if this country is ever going to get out of the rut it is in.

What Obama could have also mentioned that George Bush and all the chumps, like John McCain are the greatest redistributors in our history.

Bush and the GOP took the future wealth of Americans (our children and grandchildren's money) and gave it to present day millionaires and billionaires. How is that? Those tax cuts of the Bush era all came from BORROWED MONEY JUST PILED ON TOP OF THE NATIONAL DEBT.

SO, either some of you Chumps are going to have to CHANGE or our future generations will be completely screwed.

$5 Trillion added in George Bush's administration, largely due to tax cuts that were not paid for. Meanwhile the ratio of our national debt as a percent of GDP is now over 70%.

Fool me once - Ronald Reagan increased the debt as a % of GDP by 20%.

Fool me twice - George H.W. Bush increased the debt by roughly 13%.

Fool me three times!!! - George W. Bush increased the debt by 15% as a % of GDP.

(The Debt went down as a % of GDP under both Carter and Clinton).

So, here is the message. Chumps, CHANGE!

Posted by: Bud | Nov 3, 2008 4:14:53 PM

You know, no one likes taxes, but if we are going to wage wars overseas and build needed infrastructure at home, and bail out our "free markets", then someone has to foot the bill.

Posted by: ChrisNBama | Nov 3, 2008 4:05:57 PM

"Why did he go over seas to visit our guys but he wouldn't even shake the hands of the guys that supported him" . ...

Sorry Kevin, if you believe Senator Obama wouldn't shake the hands of our military personnel overseas, you've bought into a whole line of right wing media crap that is just not truthful.

Check out veterans organizations to see who they believe has done better by the service men and women - you'll find they rate Senator Obama far higher than McCain.

P.S. - the 'examples' you site where he supposedly shows his 'hatred of America' are not that strong or convincing Kevin. They're as weak as the fact he was condemned for a while for not wearing a flag pin. That does not mean you 'hate' your country. We've seen many pictures since then of McCain without a flag pin during his campaign speeches.

I wish you the best Kevin and hope you and your family are not hit too hard by this current economic mess.

Posted by: pefros | Nov 3, 2008 3:48:12 PM

Yes, a 2.8% tax increase making a million and a 1.6% increase on 500,000 is chump change.

Posted by: OTF | Nov 3, 2008 3:38:20 PM

Well you tell me to do some research when i already have. Why don't you go to a book store sit with a cup of java and read his books for yourself. He doesn't place his hand over his heart for the pledge, he doesn't belive in our national anthem, and i am sure there are tons of other things that he has or hasn't done to substantiate my feelings. It really doesn't matter what you or i or any other american thinks or feels on these subjects because in all actuallity we don't vote the president into office. We place that job into the hands of our state representatives in the electoral college. They do not have to vote as we vote. So no harm no foul, and i appologize for my views thoughts and feelings, but this is america and i just don't see him as an american. When i look at him i see someone that hates our country. Why did he go over seas to vist our guys but he wouldn't even shake the hands of the guys that supported him? He stayed for one day and then was gone. He spent more time in hawaii with a sick grandmother that was not in critical condition than he did with our boys that are giving thier limbs and lives to defend our country from TERRORISM! Palin went over there and stayed for a week. She dressed in full gear and went to the front lines. I have more respect for her than someone who looks down at the people defending our countries beliefs.

Posted by: Kevin | Nov 3, 2008 3:31:42 PM

Senator Obama's stance on coal is very clear:

"I am a big proponent of clean-coal technology and I want us to move rapidly in developing those sequestration technologies that are required. A huge percentage of our electricity is generated by coal. What we need to do though is to put clean coal technology on the fast track and that means money. It means investment in research."

Posted by: pefros | Nov 3, 2008 3:24:24 PM

Kevin we both agree that some church goers (perhaps most) are hypocrites. All of us have our shortcomings; none of us is perfect.

And I also agree with you that - when not reduced to cheap and totally unfair media sound bites - Reverend Wright's sermons often 'hit the nail on the head'.

I still have no admiration for your hateful, unsubstantiated claims that Senator Obama 'hates America'.

You say Senator Obama 'hates America' because of things he said in his book - like what?

You provide no substantiation at all.

Posted by: pefros | Nov 3, 2008 3:10:10 PM

Only in Liberal La-La Land could "g*d America" be screeched from the pulpit and declared "taken out of context" when someone took offense at it.

I'm trying to think when I ever heard any minister preach "g*d America"... nope... can't think of a single time.

Posted by: marylou | Nov 3, 2008 3:00:18 PM

Post a comment





 

POLITICAL VIDEOS