Skip Nav
Fifty Shades of Grey
18 Films Even Sexier Than Fifty Shades of Grey
Relationships
The Ultimate Dating Bucket List
Relationships
I'm 24 and Engaged, and No, I'm Not Too Young to Get Married

How Much Will Each Candidate Save You in Taxes

Breaking Down the Real Tax Savings Promised by Candidates

WIth the only things certain being death and the T-word — and Liberty's incredible breakdown of the candidate's tax plans as inspiration — I wanted to see exactly how the two candidates' tax-onomies translated, graph-style.

Three out of four voters now see taxes and the budget deficit as "extremely" or "very" important issues this campaign — right behind health care and the war in Iraq — and since both of those projects require big infusions of taxpayer dollars, knowing exactly how much you will or won't be paying says a lot about the tale of two wallets — yours, and the governments.

To see the real numbers in dollars saved,

.

Here's the dollar amount saved (or increase) per income bracket, per candidate:




And the percent change of income:




With the raw numbers behind it, if that's more your style.

Which plan appeals to you?

Thanks to yesteryear for her data crunching prowess! And here's a closer look at the analysis behind the numbers.

Source

Around The Web
Join The Conversation
hlantsmom hlantsmom 7 years
What I would like to know is how you expect a man to do anything productive in the office as President of the United States when he has not put forth or even contributed to one piece of legislation during his 143 DAYS as a US Senator? He is soooooo proud of the country he wants to run that he REFUSES to place his hand over his heart during the National Anthem and won't salute the American Flag. He is so busy hyping people up about CHANGE, but just exactly how does he plan on doing this when he has yet to do anything other than register present during his 3 year/143 day term as a Senator?
lilkimbo lilkimbo 7 years
There's a wildlife refuge that has been there for some time. Hey, if you think it's a good idea to get rid of it, be my guest. I would be curious to see if spending for Alaska increased when Palin became governor. My guess would be no, but I could be wrong.
lilkimbo lilkimbo 7 years
There's a wildlife refuge that has been there for some time. Hey, if you think it's a good idea to get rid of it, be my guest. I would be curious to see if spending for Alaska increased when Palin became governor. My guess would be no, but I could be wrong.
Jillness Jillness 7 years
Ima, do you have a link? I would really love to read that article! :)
Jillness Jillness 7 years
Ima, do you have a link?I would really love to read that article! :)
Jillness Jillness 7 years
But is it a wise investment for Federal dollars to pay for projects that will be utilized by less than 1 millon people? If there are only a few people living on that land, why does it need to be taken care of?
Jillness Jillness 7 years
But is it a wise investment for Federal dollars to pay for projects that will be utilized by less than 1 millon people?If there are only a few people living on that land, why does it need to be taken care of?
lilkimbo lilkimbo 7 years
I'm getting ready to leave for the day, but in regards to Alaska and spending, I think anyone with common sense would realize that any time you have a large amount of land that needs taking care of and few residents living on that land, spending per resident is going to have to be higher. Alaska also obviously has unique needs in relation to weather and location that no other state has.
Imabeliever Imabeliever 7 years
They called it alaskonomics.. oh and about oil prices and alaska's oil benefits.. "Alaska is, in essence, an adjunct member of OPEC. It has four different taxes on oil, which produce more than 89% of the state's unrestricted revenue. On average, three-quarters of the value of a barrel of oil is taken by the state government before that oil is permitted to leave the state. Alaska residents each get a yearly check for about $2,000 from oil revenues, plus an additional $1,200 pushed through by Palin last year to take advantage of rising oil prices. Any sympathy the governor of Alaska expresses for folks in the lower 48 who are suffering from high gas prices or can't afford to heat their homes is strictly crocodile tears."
Imabeliever Imabeliever 7 years
At some point we will need to raise taxes and cut unnecessary spending.. the war is bleeding us into catastrophic debt. So if we have to raise someones taxes I say let it be the people making $500,000 and more please.. that my opinion.. Looks like more war to come too with our trouble with Russia, Iran, North Korea.. we need the dollars here if possible. I don't trust McCain and Palin when I just read on Time.com "Alaska ranks No. 1 in taxes per resident and No. 1 in spending per resident. Its tax burden per resident is 2 1/2 times the national average; its spending, more than double.Alaska also ranks No. 1, year after year, in money it sucks in from Washington. In 2005 (the most recent figures), according to the Tax Foundation, Alaska ranked 18th in federal taxes paid per resident ($5,434) but first in federal spending received per resident ($13,950). Its ratio of federal spending received to federal taxes paid ranks third among the 50 states, and in the absolute amount it receives from Washington over and above the amount it sends to Washington, Alaska ranks No. 1." Yet she is great at reforming?
lilkimbo lilkimbo 7 years
Anyway, I have to get going. Work calls! This has been an interesting discussion. Have a great day.
lilkimbo lilkimbo 7 years
Right, but I guess I don't see what that has to do with deregulation.
Jude-C Jude-C 7 years
Stewart went to jail because she knowingly circumvented the "known risk" aspect of trading, didn't she? Her insider knowledge removed a large part of that risk. She gave herself an illegal advantage over the others who were playing by the rules and by known risk.
lilkimbo lilkimbo 7 years
Well, if that's what deregulation implies, I guess there has been no deregulation then, because we have never had all regulations removed.
lilkimbo lilkimbo 7 years
I don't get what you're trying to say with the first part of that post. The market operates on known risk, but she went to jail because she was operating on known risk? (I know why Martha Stewart went to jail, but I don't get your statement that the fact that the market operates on known risk is why Stewart went to jail.)
Jude-C Jude-C 7 years
Lil, I would think that the term "deregulation" implies absolute removal of all government restrictions, regulations, parameters, or any other checks or controls. So if we're all at least in agreement that some government controls are needed, then it wouldn't really be deregulation.
Jude-C Jude-C 7 years
Lil, I would think that the term "deregulation" implies absolute removal of all government restrictions, regulations, parameters, or any other checks or controls. So if we're all at least in agreement that <b>some</b> government controls are needed, then it wouldn't really be deregulation.
lilkimbo lilkimbo 7 years
I will have to look more into that.
Jillness Jillness 7 years
But dont you agree that the market operates on known risk...which is why insider trading is illegal. Which is why Martha Stewart went to jail..she knew about increased risk and conducted business based on information that wasn't publically known. Banking deregulation allowed banks to hide the risks they were taking. And I don't think that the economy is where it is completely based on the mortgage crisis, but I do believe the mortgage crisis played a big factor in where we are now, and that crisis was the result of deregulation.
Jillness Jillness 7 years
But dont you agree that the market operates on known risk...which is why insider trading is illegal. Which is why Martha Stewart went to jail..she knew about increased risk and conducted business based on information that wasn't publically known. Banking deregulation allowed banks to hide the risks they were taking. And I don't think that the economy is where it is completely based on the mortgage crisis, but I do believe the mortgage crisis played a big factor in where we are now, and that crisis was the result of deregulation.
raciccarone raciccarone 7 years
I think I have to disagree with that last point. Bush raised taxes as a result of the recession he was facing. After '87, the market leveled and then started to decline in Bush 41's first term. He was actually making a fiscally conservative choice at that point because he was trying not to go deeper into deficit.
lilkimbo lilkimbo 7 years
And how is deregulation not the correct term? How is deregulation exclusive from "manipulated in a different way."
lilkimbo lilkimbo 7 years
No one (at least not here) is saying that the government should have NO regulative power on financial markets.
lilkimbo lilkimbo 7 years
Read what I posted earlier, when I stated that I'm not completely against government regulation.
lilkimbo lilkimbo 7 years
I'm sorry, I should have said that I didn't mean to call your idea silly. I meant to say any idea that blames something like the housing situation on one factor is silly, not the idea that deregulation should take part of the blame.
5 Money Lessons Every College Grad Should Know
Obama Changing Americans' Behavior With Science
Lottery Horror Stories
Yes She Did! Ex Obama Volunteer Calls Self Expert, Cashes In
Who Is Tiffany Trump? | Video
Barack Obama on Check Please! Chicago
Common Tax Deductions That People Forget

POPSUGAR, the #1 independent media and technology company for women. Where more than 75 million women go for original, inspirational content that feeds their passions and interests.

From Our Partners
Latest Love
X