Many pundits declared “Joe the Plumber” the winner of last night’s debate between Barack Obama and John McCain. If suddenly becoming famous counts as winning, then they’re right. But beyond that, it’s not so clear how much of a winner he really is.
He claims to like McCain and dislike Obama, especially the latter’s tax plan, but:
- He admits to making far less than $250,000 per year right now, which means that Obama’s tax plan would be far better for him than McCain’s.
- He says the firm he wants to buy “makes” about $270,000 per year, but it’s unclear whether that figure represents revenues or profits. If the former, then the taxable profits would be far below $250,000 and, again, he would do better under Obama’s plan than McCain’s. On the other hand, if the figure represents taxable profits, then he would be doing quite well for himself – certainly better than most plumbers – and the additional $600 in taxes (on $270,000) he would pay under Obama’s plan would not be a difficult problem.
His fundamental dispute with Obama appears to be that, if he becomes extremely wealthy someday, he shouldn’t have to pay more taxes. (I’ll assume he’s referring to tax rate, not the actual dollar amount.) Although there are attractive arguments for a truly flat tax rate, the fact remains that we’ve had a progressive income tax rate for much of our nation’s history, and there are compelling arguments for keeping it that way, especially during our current financial downturn.
It’s ironic that Joe, given his current circumstances, is complaining about Obama instead of McCain. It’s equally ironic, although not too surprising, given his campaign performance to date, that McCain would bring attention to someone who has more to lose from his (McCain’s) tax policies than his opponent’s.
It will be interesting to see what Joe does if Obama wins and is able to implement his tax policy. Will Joe accept his tax cut even knowing that it comes at the expense of someone making more than $250,000?