« The Atlantic Electoral Map: 10/14 | Main | Gallup's Two Likely Voter Models: Obama + 4, + 7 » McCain's "Pension And Family Security" Plan14 Oct 2008 09:14 am Messaging: Obama unveiled his "Middle Class Rescue Plan" yesterday; McCain unveils his "Pension and Family Security Plan." Substance: 5 parts. 1. Lower taxes for seniors tapping their retirement accounts and suspend rules that force seniors to liquidate their accounts during economic crisis. (1/2 New) 2. Accelerate the tax write-offs for those forced to sell at at a loss in the current market. (New) 3. Reduce capital gains taxes for '09 and '10. 4. His Homeowner Resurgence Plan, where mortgages would be purchased directly from homeowners and mortgage services and replaced with manageable fixed-rate mortgages. 5. For workers, eliminate taxes on unemployment benefits. Analysis: Depending on how much McCain's mortgage purchase plan actually costs and where the money actually comes from, his proposals could wind up costing more than Obama's. McCain has more targeted relief for seniors and, like Obama, proposes to avoid taxing unemployment benefits. The McCain campaign estimates that those making less than $100,000 who get canned would see their unemployment benefits rise by as much as 10%. Obama and Congressional Democrats want to extend the length of the benefits, which they say would help these folks more. Obama' proposals are targeted more precisely at incentivizing job creation, where McCain's doesn't cut taxes for small businesses or give them more access to credit. That said, McCain would charge that Obama's marginal tax hikes would hurt small business owners earning more than $250,000. Also: lower capital gains...... they're not exactly essential to getting the economy going in a year in which people do not have an awful lot of capital gains, although the McCain program calls this measure an incentive to do just that. More later... Comments (11)
I'm thrilled to see he's cutting capital gains to stimulate the economy! Next, I hope he gets rid of that awful tax on horse and buggies that's holding our economy down. 
A capital gains tax cut now is simply silly and unjustified. And it sets up a ridiculous fight when it would expire in a couple of years about how letting it sunset would be a tax raise. No, best just leave this one alone entirely.
Capital gains tax reduction is actually exactly what we don't need right now, since it will encourage people to sell their holdings during a period of already massive downward selling pressure. We want people to be holding on through the crisis not taking their gains. If he's worried about those who are being forced to sell for income crunch reasons, then it makes a whole lot more sense to cut the income tax to help out with those with income problems.
Unoriginal it seems, but I'll join the chorus scoffing at the reduction of capital gains tax. It does nothing helpful, in that most people aren't having capital gains this week. It hurts, in that in encourages those rare stocks with cap gains to sell now, when there's already lots of sell pressure. It's like the roundtable said "We can't have a Republican economic package that doesn't include cutting capital gains; Reagan said so" and gave it no further thought. As for the others: 1 is okay, 2 eh, 4 still nuts if they're buying at face value, and 5 is a good idea.
In your electoral map I suspect you got ND and SD mixed up - it is ND which is closer to tossup and SD the solid McCain one, according to everything I've read elsewhere.
While it might be very useful temporarily to offer a low capital gains tax targeted to actual investments made, say, in the next 6 months, it is passingly strange to claim that lowering all capital gains taxes -- for those gains resulting from decisions ALREADY made -- will stimulate the economy. How does one incentivize RETROACTIVELY? In short, economic stimulus comes from money being put to work (investments made) versus cashed out (investments sold). McCain has his plan precisely backwards. The whole purpose is to shift the greed/fear balance RIGHT NOW, not a year or two from now or a year or two in the past.
Clinton’s solution is a 90-day moratorium for foreclosures on sub-prime occupied homes, and a five-year rate freeze on sub-prime adjustable rate mortgages. The Bush administration has already responded with a 30-day cooling period on foreclosures; Clinton and her aides insist a longer freeze is essential for stabilizing a precarious situation for homeowners. But according to some economists and officials grappling with the crisis, her proposal, which also offers a $30-billion foreclosure fund that is triple the size of Obama’s, might only prolong the agony for homeowners. “A 90-day freeze is fine for what it is, but what happens on the 91st day?” Rokakis asked. “Why not a year? Or longer?” In San Antonio on Tuesday, Obama said that Clinton’s foreclosure freeze was potentially “disastrous,” rewarding “people who made this problem worse” by benefiting banks that profit from high mortgage rates. A “blanket freeze,” Obama added, might “drive rates through the roof for those trying to buy or refinance. Experts say the value of homes will fall even more, and even more families could face foreclosure.” http://michellemalkin.com/2008/10/13/obama-proposes-90-day-foreclosure-moratorium/ Obama called Clinton's foreclosure freeze disastrous in the primaries. Now he says he is for it. Talk about erratic. This is Obama who is so out of it he said the banking committee is my committee when he has never been on it.
@Jeff: You appear to be confusing the 90-day and 5-year issues. From Jimo: How does one incentivize RETROACTIVELY?
Do you think this will change even one voter's mind?
What really strikes me about John McCain's plan are two things: how much he may personally benefit from it and how few people it really helps. Items 1 to 3 seem to appeal to wealthy, seniors like John McCain, and I could see how he perhaps could benefit personally from these changes. However, realistically, how many seniors nationwide are concerned about tax write offs and capital gains and would benefit from this plan? We need to remember that 401(k)s, Roth IRAs, and online trading are relatively new devices that our elders could not take advantage of when young. Item 4 scares me since it sounds expensive and like a yet another new government agency. I am also curious if John McCain and his wife own their houses outright or if they are underwater with their mortgages and would benefit from these proposed writedowns.
|
Subscribe to this blog by Email Twitter || On Facebook || QIK Live Channel  Recent Posts
Monthly Archives
|
| 
Copyright © 2009 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
Since you don't allow comments on your latest electoral map, let me just congratulate you here for joining Chris Bowers' list of MSM who can't bring themselves to state the obvious: that Obama now has well over the number of electoral votes needed to win. You have gone the rest of the MSM one better though by granting Obama 268 electoral votes, 1 vote short of a tie that would be resolved by the House. Good job!
Posted by Ron E. | October 14, 2008 9:13 AM