How caring is Obama...follow the money! (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> Current Events >> Election 2008



Message

P31W -> How caring is Obama...follow the money! (3/26/2008 9:10:32 AM)

2006 tax return, Obama's combined reported taxable income of $983,626 and claimed deductions for $60,307 in charitable donations. (a tithe would be 98,363)

2005 tax return combined reported taxable income $1.65 million claimed $77,300 in deductions (a tithe would be $165.000)

2002 - the year before Obama launched his campaign for the Senate the Obamas reported income - $259,394, ranking them in the top 2 percent of U.S. households - deductions claimed $1,050

Folks that's less than half of one percent of their income!!!!!,

The average U.S. household gave $1,872 in 2002

The national average for giving in the US is about 2.2 to 4% and most of those people are NOT seeking political office and don't plan to have their giving records open for public expection. They simpley do it because it's in their hearts to care for others!!! Not for political gain.



jbow -> RE: How caring is Obama...follow the money! (3/26/2008 10:09:43 AM)

quote:

The national average for giving in the US is about 2.2 to 4%


That is horrible... and inexcusable.

J



relady -> RE: How caring is Obama...follow the money! (3/26/2008 11:01:02 AM)

There are also many Christians, myself included, who do not claim a tax deduction for their tithe. Perhaps Mr. Obama does the same. We don't know so we don't need to be judging giving by what's on a tax return. I don't deduct absolutely everything because there are certain things that, while I am "allowed" to deduct them, I don't think it's right to do so.



Jhud -> RE: How caring is Obama...follow the money! (3/26/2008 11:04:12 AM)

Thanks for the post; here is a better breakdown:

Obama Releases 2000-2006 Tax Returns

The irony of the left-winger who claims to care about 'the poor' and yet gives less than 1% of a quarter of a million dollar income would be great comedy if it weren't very sadly the case concerning Barak 'keep warm and well fed' Obama.



P31W -> RE: How caring is Obama...follow the money! (3/26/2008 11:16:06 AM)

quote:

There are also many Christians, myself included, who do not claim a tax deduction for their tithe. Perhaps Mr. Obama does the same. We don't know so we don't need to be judging giving by what's on a tax return.


So you take the "standard" tax deduction?

You do realize that most people don't itemize because they simply don't have enough deductions to do so. It "pays" them or is to "their own benefit" to take the standard deduction.

For the tax year 2002 when Obama gave a little over $1K the standard deduction for married filing jointly was $7,000.00

quote:

I don't deduct absolutely everything because there are certain things that, while I am "allowed" to deduct them, I don't think it's right to do so.


Can you please explain what it is you are allowed to take but don't believe it's right and "why" you don't believe it's right?

I want to see if you understand how our tax system really works and why you believe it's a wrong indicator of what a person gives to charity.



P31W -> RE: How caring is Obama...follow the money! (3/26/2008 11:25:32 AM)

Thanks Jack that is a better site.

Another verse tells us that even a Child is known by their "actions".



ljmac -> RE: How caring is Obama...follow the money! (3/26/2008 12:05:20 PM)

It's easily demonstratable that conservatives give more money as a percentage of iincome to charity than liberals do, so Obama's cheapness in 2002 is not surprising. There are notable exceptions like Warren Buffet, but much of his so-called charity is questionable, such as his lustful support of for killing the unborn.

Al Gore had the same cheapness problem as Obama. While VP one year the Gores tax return showed less than $500 in charitable deductions.

Beyond mere cheapness, it's also a commentary on their intelligence. Such cheapness is just plain politically stupid and gives credibility to the argument that their concern for the poor is phony.



wing2000 -> RE: How caring is Obama...follow the money! (3/26/2008 1:23:25 PM)

Has John McCain made his tax returns available?



P31W -> RE: How caring is Obama...follow the money! (3/26/2008 1:38:45 PM)

Someone correct me if I am wrong but McCain said he would release his on April 15?

McCain's charitable giving does not concern me as much as Obama's because Obama is running on the idea that he "cares" about helping the poor and oppressed people. McCain in saying that he is a "leader".

Looking over Obama's 2000 return shows they paid more in real estate taxes than they gave to chairty. They paid several times more (about 5) in interest than they gave to chairty.



Jhud -> RE: How caring is Obama...follow the money! (3/26/2008 1:51:57 PM)

quote:

Has John McCain made his tax returns available?


Would that make Obama less a hypocrite?



wing2000 -> RE: How caring is Obama...follow the money! (3/26/2008 2:02:45 PM)

quote:

quote:

Has John McCain made his tax returns available?



Would that make Obama less a hypocrite?



Let's see who all the hypocrites are.... :o



P31W -> RE: How caring is Obama...follow the money! (3/26/2008 2:29:29 PM)

hypocrite

1 : a person who puts on a false appearance of virtue or religion
2 : a person who acts in contradiction to his or her stated beliefs or feelings


(I've already discussed Obama's defination of sin, salvation and the like under the theology thread - christian doctrine - titled "Black Liberation Theology" and it shows that what Obama calls "salvation" is not considered orthodox.)

Now that I am looking at his "actions" I am seeing that what he says he believes about himself and his motives are not inline with what he has done in the past with his "own money".



P31W -> RE: How caring is Obama...follow the money! (3/26/2008 2:34:49 PM)

John and Cindy McCain gave away almost a million dollars between 2000-2006.

They have their own foundation they give to. Most of their giving goes to the foundation and then distributed to various causes they support.

http://www.guidestar.org/FinDocuments/2006/860/817/2006-860817541-031154ca-F.pdf

Here is the foundations 2006 tax return. If you study the return you will see they gave over $80K that year to the foundation. On about page 13 or 14 you can see how funds were distributed. You can also see that the McCains recieved no money from the foundation in any form.



Jhud -> RE: How caring is Obama...follow the money! (3/26/2008 2:36:30 PM)

quote:

Let's see who all the hypocrites are....


Well, we can see when he makes his returns public - for now, we only know about one hypocrite for sure, Barak Obama.



relady -> RE: How caring is Obama...follow the money! (3/26/2008 4:27:30 PM)

quote:

Can you please explain what it is you are allowed to take but don't believe it's right and "why" you don't believe it's right?
No, I do not take the standard deduction, I itemize. I am a small business owner since I am a Realtor and sell Partylite. I do not take a deduction for everything I give to charities, and I do not take a deduction for tithe to my church. I know I can, I simply choose not to. I simply choose to give without taking something back for it. I'm just making a point that using someone's tax return as a way to judge them on their charity is maybe not always as accurate as one might think.



P31W -> RE: How caring is Obama...follow the money! (3/26/2008 4:39:28 PM)

quote:

I simply choose to give without taking something back for it.


You don't get anything back. That is a false idea that some people have who do not understand our tax system.



Jhud -> RE: How caring is Obama...follow the money! (3/26/2008 4:40:38 PM)

quote:

No, I do not take the standard deduction, I itemize. I am a small business owner since I am a Realtor and sell Partylite. I do not take a deduction for everything I give to charities, and I do not take a deduction for tithe to my church. I know I can, I simply choose not to. I simply choose to give without taking something back for it. I'm just making a point that using someone's tax return as a way to judge them on their charity is maybe not always as accurate as one might think.


Perhaps not, though I think you are sincere enough not to double your claimed charitable giving if you were to decide to run for office (and I guarantee when Obama's 2007 returns come out, they will be higher still)



Random -> RE: How caring is Obama...follow the money! (3/26/2008 8:31:00 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: P31W

quote:

I simply choose to give without taking something back for it.


You don't get anything back. That is a false idea that some people have who do not understand our tax system.



What are you talking about? If she already itemizes, claiming her tithes would result in less taxes for the year -- that is "getting something back". She, for personal reasons, chooses not to take this deduction.

I am CERTAIN that she is not the only person who feels that way. I don't feel that way, but I have met others who do.

Just one example, to claim this deduction you need proof/receipt. You can't get a receipt and remain anonymous, as a general rule. So, if you believe your giving should be anonymous, you might be in the same boat as her.

It is NOT a crime to pay more taxes than is required (i.e. not take all valid deductions).

I have no idea if Obama gave more than he claimed, but her point is valid -- just using someone's tax return is not proof of how much they gave to charity.



rainbowtvp -> RE: How caring is Obama...follow the money! (3/26/2008 9:44:43 PM)

I am not concerned about it- and I have put some thought into it. As has been said, not all Christians (and others) believe in tithing and not all report all of their charitable giving (I know I have seen both of these topics debated in the finances threads here). Why it would suddenly increase could be just that someone pointed out that he should be making these contributions known- not necessarily showing an increase in giving.

But even more important for me, I don't care what a candidate does with his money as long as it was earned honestly and spent honestly.

Tara P



Jhud -> RE: How caring is Obama...follow the money! (3/26/2008 10:59:05 PM)

quote:

I am not concerned about it- and I have put some thought into it. As has been said, not all Christians (and others) believe in tithing and not all report all of their charitable giving (I know I have seen both of these topics debated in the finances threads here). Why it would suddenly increase could be just that someone pointed out that he should be making these contributions known- not necessarily showing an increase in giving.

But even more important for me, I don't care what a candidate does with his money as long as it was earned honestly and spent honestly.


So let's be clear here; you believe that two Harvard educated lawyers, one of whom was a state legislator and aspiring US Senator, were unaware that they should be 'making these contributions known' until the same year he decided to run for the Presidency? Okay.

That of course would be easy enought o disclose - he could simply say "I gave to such and such organization but neglected to report it" - which could then be confirmed by said organization. I won't hold my breath for such disclosures.

And I don't care either what a candidate does with his money, unless he is preaching about caring for the poor while neglecting to actually do so himself from his signifcant wealth.

All this of course on top of the fact that he has been criticizing Hillary for not disclosing her tax returns.



stamper_ben -> RE: How caring is Obama...follow the money! (3/27/2008 7:58:32 AM)

quote:

And I don't care either what a candidate does with his money, unless he is preaching about caring for the poor while neglecting to actually do so himself from his signifcant wealth.
Jack, you're forgetting that Mrs. Obama's job with the hospital in community relations is paying her over $300 grand a year. Surely that's giving back, isn't it? I mean relations with the community and all...



P31W -> RE: How caring is Obama...follow the money! (3/27/2008 8:22:18 AM)

quote:

What are you talking about? If she already itemizes, claiming her tithes would result in less taxes for the year -- that is "getting something back".


Paying in less taxes on money you didn't benefit from is not "getting something back". It's called not being taxed on money you didn't benefit from. Put another way "not suffering for doing good". I don't "get anything back" when I give to a charity and claim it on my tax forms. I simply have a reduction in what "I give them". (same thing when I have a monitoring service on my home....the insurance company reduces my premium but they don't give me money back)

In the case of Obama. He claims that the "government" not the individual is in a better position to know how to help needy people. Because "he" claims to be the person who can best lead our country in doing this it's not unreasonable for me as a taxpayer whom he IS SAYING NEEDS TO PAY MORE TAXES....to know if he is a good streward of the money he posses. (if he is not a good steward of his own money there is not way he needs to be trusted with other people's money)

From looking at his tax forms we can tell one of two things. Either he does not believe "helping organizations" are worthy of his money OR he is a bad stewart of what he has been given and pays in more in taxes than he has to knowing full well the amount of waste in washington and could have given it to the needy directly without all the governmental red tape.

Either way he is a bad steward and not worthy to tell "me" or anyone else that "they" need to allow Him to handle their money.

I have been thinking. On a 250K income with "HIS" talk I would have expected to see at least a 50K deduction on his tax form and then would have taken it forgranted that he gave to causes/people that were also not deductable like folks do who are "givers". That would have saved him about 12-13K in taxes which he could have given directly to an organization such as our multi-country organization that provides utility assistant to our elderly and disabled people. (it was started by our local NAACP group and his a wonderful helping organization) That money "could" have help to pay the power and gas bill for a good hundred people.

Bad stewardship all the way around. The man is not "fit" to handle OPM>


quote:

Just one example, to claim this deduction you need proof/receipt. You can't get a receipt and remain anonymous, as a general rule. So, if you believe your giving should be anonymous, you might be in the same boat as her.


This is what she said in post 3

"I don't deduct absolutely everything because there are certain things that, while I am "allowed" to deduct them, I don't think it's right to do so. "

Because she used "allowed" in the way that she did I have to believe that she is allowed to take the deductions. Had she given them anonymouly she would not have been "allowed" to take them just like the rest of us are not allowed to take deductions for the ones we give anonymously.


BTW, I have been really ticked off with our Sunday School books lately because TWICE they have mentioned people only giving a tithe inorder to "get the tax deduction". My husband told me I need to write them and explain to them that when people give away money they don't do it inorder to "get the tax deduction"!!!! No one get's rich in this country by giving money away unless God blesses them. Uncle Sam does not "help" the giver - they simply don't "tax him/her" for being one on the amount given properly.



P31W -> RE: How caring is Obama...follow the money! (3/27/2008 8:25:16 AM)

quote:

Jack, you're forgetting that Mrs. Obama's job with the hospital in community relations is paying her over $300 grand a year. Surely that's giving back, isn't it? I mean relations with the community and all...


ROFL



Random -> RE: How caring is Obama...follow the money! (3/27/2008 12:17:46 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: P31W

Paying in less taxes on money you didn't benefit from is not "getting something back". It's called not being taxed on money you didn't benefit from. Put another way "not suffering for doing good". I don't "get anything back" when I give to a charity and claim it on my tax forms. I simply have a reduction in what "I give them". (same thing when I have a monitoring service on my home....the insurance company reduces my premium but they don't give me money back)


This is just semantics, and not really relevant. At the end of the day, had she deducted these items, she would have paid less in taxes. Since she already made the donations, claiming the deductions versus not claiming them gives her more money. Call it getting something back, call it not suffering for doing good, either way, she ends up with more cash. She apparently has personal reasons to refuse this "benefit" and that is her right.

quote:


This is what she said in post 3

"I don't deduct absolutely everything because there are certain things that, while I am "allowed" to deduct them, I don't think it's right to do so. "

Because she used "allowed" in the way that she did I have to believe that she is allowed to take the deductions. Had she given them anonymously she would not have been "allowed" to take them just like the rest of us are not allowed to take deductions for the ones we give anonymously.


You may be right, but nitpickyness aside, had she desired to deduct the amounts, she would have not given anonymously. She also put the word allowed in quotes in her OP, so I don't think the distinction you are drawing is meaningful, I think it semantics.

Regardless of the reason, people sometimes choose not to report all of their giving for personal reasons. I am NOT saying Obama is in that camp, as I have no way of knowing that. I am saying it is possible.

I would go further and say that if Obama does give more and doesn't claim it because he wants it to be anonymous/confidential/private/personal then he would be very unlikely to publicly acknowledge it now. If he wanted to do that, he would have claimed it in the first place.

I personally claim everything that is legal and legitimate. But, I think that is a personal decision, and if God convicts someone to give anonymously, or to disclaim any "benefit" from their giving for some other reason, it is not up to me to question them.

I would have liked to see more giving from Obama, personally, and I am a little disappointed that it's not more, if in fact he claimed everything. But, I would have the same expectations of any of the candidates, not just him.



P31W -> RE: How caring is Obama...follow the money! (3/28/2008 8:51:28 AM)

quote:

I personally claim everything that is legal and legitimate. But, I think that is a personal decision, and if God convicts someone to give anonymously, or to disclaim any "benefit" from their giving for some other reason, it is not up to me to question them.


Random you keep talking about "she" my post is about Obama. I know she interjected herself into the discussion and I took the bate. I have not however argued with her about her "reasons" to do what she did. Only her belief that you "get something back" when you take the deduction.

I don't want her to walk away from the discussion with the false idea that those of us who do take the deduction "get" something back for our giving. We don't. That's why I mentioned our Sunday School literature. It's Lifeway and pretty popular material. Yet the author's - two differant ones- have gives thousands of people the idea that if you give money and take the tax deduction they may be doing it only to "get something back". This is false!

quote:

This is just semantics, and not really relevant.


I disagree. Most people who use the saying "getting something back" also view the home mortage loan as a good way to save money on taxes. The truth is both giving and paying interest have the same ramifications.

Not claiming the interest you paid to Uncle Sam simply means you paid more in taxes. Claiming the interest you paid simply means you didn't have to come up with "more money" to give the government. Not that you got something back or saved any money. You saved on your tax liability in that you didn't have to pull MORE money from your account but you didn't save or get anything. You have less than you did to begin with if you give to chairty and pay interest and take the deduction. You have even "less than that" if you don't take the deduciton. (I know this is no new to you but to many many many people it's new)

It's the false ideas that is going around that people give just to "get back" something from Uncle Sam. Too many people have said< "They only give money to the Chruch so they won't have to pay taxes". They honestly believe it "benefits" the individual to give money to Chairty and then claim it on their taxes. I believe it was Rhippie who was involved in a thread about this very topic not too long ago.



Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI