This is awesome – I’m pretty sure it’s accurate as well. While Obama’s side might look “fair” to many people, I think it will encourage the affluent to leave the country or move their businesses offshore, as well as their investments. It is a plan that will force our exports to decrease and our imports to necessarily increase since there will be less domestic industry. It is Rand’s nightmare realized. This will lead to a dramatic cost of living increase, and eventually another depression. It’s a question of whether we want a nation of workers who get a little more money per year but are massively unemployed, therefore increasing the tax burden on other workers over a period of time, or whether we want to continue borrowing tons of money from foreign nations, not paying down the debt, fighting increasingly expensive wars (which, of course, Obama wants to do as well), and decreasing our taxation, which is also unrealistic in the long term.

Obama’s plan to saturate the professional market with highly educated people, yet force the owners of businesses away from the country through very large increases in personal income tax, capital gains, and corporate taxes will either lead to massive unemployment or a population of outsourced labor a bit similar to what we’re seeing in India at the moment. While I do not support cutting taxes and increasing spending, I actually concede that John McCain’s plan is slightly more reasonable than Obama’s fiscally, mostly because of the opposition to push a ridiculous amount of funds into things like Americorps, his “Civilian National Security Force that is … just as well funded” as the military, and, last but not least, healthcare. I have a feeling that when Obama’s taxation plan fails to live up to the cost of the social programs he proposes to create, we will see even more increases of taxation of corporations and the rich, giving them even more reason to leave. I believe McCain’s plan will fail in an entirely different way, relying upon even more borrowing and foreign investment, eventually leading us into the same fate many other countries have faced – not being able to pay even the interest on their loans from afar. If McCain were to have to raise taxes to responsibly pay down the debt, I believe he would do it in a much more sane way than we see on the right side of the above figure.

Now, the Obama campaign has addressed this very concern, but it mostly addresses earmarks. McCain also primarily denounces earmarks when he talks about “cutting spending.” Earmarks have been demonized into being the worst wasteful spending possible, but the real problem is the number of social programs Obama will create, build upon, or perpetuate. For instance, he is a proponent of building low-income housing, which has created crime-ridden neighborhoods for years. He and McCain support the mortgage bailout that is happening right before our eyes, which will save the irresponsible house-flippers who made bad investments in their homes or obtained mortgages with terrible terms, as well as save the organizations that made this possible, Fannie and Freddie. The lenders themselves, while marketing bad loan products, are simply the middlemen, and the guarantee that Fannie and Freddie would buy any mortgage-backed-security-bundle they created is what has caused this mess. But, instead of those people having to stimulate the rental property industry and “lose” their homes (which just means the banks lose, housing prices go down, and people who don’t own homes currently have access to cheap property), we’ve decided to punish all the people of America for the mistakes of the few.

I still believe that my taxes will increase when the people most able to leave the country decide they don’t want to lose an extra $700.000 per year, and when the top 1% leave, we will be left with 28% more tax burden. All that needs to happen is for 3,000,000 people to leave.

Update

Obama laid out some of the things I said in a speech yesterday by the looks of it.