Under Obama, a $4000 tax on the middle class

We are now in the “Summaries section” of our discussion. I have agreed to present here only what I feel to be my better arguments, as a convenience to our readers. I will forgo rebuttals, since these final arguments largely answer them. Before I begin, I want to honestly thank my partner for having participated in this contest with me. I also want to express gratitude for the readers who have followed the debate to this point. A $4000 tax hike on the middle class really is an incredible claim The claim that middle class taxes would increase by $4000 requires that we also believe that they will increase by 6.67% - again, this is an increase over and above any existing tax rates. To reach such a staggering jump in rates over just the next four years is something that simply cannot be denied with the usual “he said- she said” partisan back and forth. Practically speaking, for almost every American to so suddenly lose 6.6% of their total income would absolutely require at least some news media coverage. And no one believes it, except Fox NEWS It has occurred to me that one method for establishing that President Obama is not planning any such rate hike, therefore, is to survey the reactions of reputable news outlets. This is a simple task. The media outlets that are “most trusted names” in news and such have all taken a look at this, since the very famous debate mention. Politifact: “Pants on Fire” rating. (That means it’s not true) http://www.politifact.com... FactCheck.org “Mitt Romney’s $4000 Tale:” (Mitt Romney falsely claims…”) http://factcheck.org... Salon.com: (Nonsense) http://www.salon.com... Boston Globe: (Romney’s hometown newspaper) “Playing Loose”: http://www.bostonglobe.com... Romney doesn’t buy it either, not really. And Obama won’t say that he really is planning on it. Another way that I can establish that current law does not allow for rates to climb by $4000 is to survey the two campaigns. I was surprised to learn, while studying this, that the Romney campaign also does not think that Obama will raise taxes by $4000 on middle class families. The $4000 figure was got by way of a study that attempted to show how the national deficit would be paid out on a family-by-family basis. It wasn’t an estimate of how the president intends to raise taxes, only a criticism of the national debt. Governor Romney himself claims that president Obama will raise taxes over his next term, but not by $4000. It is also important to note that Romney has said that he does not believe that President Obama raised taxes in his first term. "I admit this, he has one thing he did not do in his first four years — he’s said he’s going to do in the next four years, which is to raise taxes," said Governor Romney. [2] But Romney says lots of things. The IRS also disagrees that there will be any $4000 tax hike But the best way to evaluate current law – outside of the political water cooler gossip, is to look at the actual real laws. These can be found on the IRS website, which hosts a “tax calculator.” I invite everyone to have a look at it; it’s fairly fast to use, and very authoritative. It can be found here: http://www.irs.gov... This calculator works for the upcoming, post-Bush tax cuts year, meaning after January 1st, 2013. It will only take a moment, and anyone who looks at it will see that there is no $4000 tax hike coming. Since we are all aware of whether or not we have paid $4000 in extra taxes already, this calculator will help us to find out if we will begin to do so after the end of the Bush tax cuts next year. For those worried, I’ve good news: the sky is not falling. We will not lose 6% of our income after January 1, 2013. Rather than prove this with some liberal, pro-Obama blogs (to counter some conservative, anti-Obama blogs) I have decided to just use the IRS – look at it, use it, be reassured. There may be some question remaining as to whether or not purchasing health insurance is identical to paying taxes. Now that we’ve a hard look at the cold institutional IRS website, we see that tale for what it is, as well. Our health insurance premiums will not be paid to the IRS. Health insurance is not a tax, regardless of what the greyfaced old men at the Supreme Court may pout. The health insurance that we purchase is ours – it does not belong to our Congress. The individual mandate will not be collected by the IRS, it will not be spent out by Congress, and reductions in our health care needs will not be considered “tax cuts.” The penalty will not be levied against the broad middle class, further. This penalty will reprove those scofflaws who wish to flaunt our system, and have us pay for their irresponsibility with our hard work. At any rate, this penalty will only average about $600. The tax cuts awarded by the Affordable Care Act will average $5000. [1] Seeds and stems We are pretty much done here; our taxes will not increase by $4000, so speaketh the IRS. Health Insurance is not a form of taxation. The penalty for ignoring the law is a small fine, and ObamaCare provides bountiful tax cuts – tax cuts with which almost the entirety of our nation can afford health care for our middle class families. Also the poor families. (If a reader punches their figures into the IRS tax calculator, and then realizes that they do not earn the ‘middle class’ income… I encourage them to simply make something up.) My final argument then, is: Health Insurance is not a tax – it is a way to pay for health care costs which might otherwise be unaffordable. The penalty for not following the new rules are mild, just an average of $600 – but the tax cuts in ObamaCare are massive. But, most importantly, taxes are not going up anywhere near $4000 – according to the IRS.I ask our readers, as they evaluate our performances here, to please remember that I have not used any "pro-Obama" liberal blogs to support my case here. I used the IRS, who is bound by law to be as accurate as possible. (The average Bush tax cut for a middle class family was only around $1600 - not $4000.) This source simply cannot be refuted; these calculations are based on current law - not hypothetical. The figures are also for after January 1, 2013, after the Bush cuts are set to expire. That is, "unless congress acts, and makes the middle class cuts permanent" as the President is fond of saying over and over. [1] http://thinkprogress.org... [2] http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com...