>>>>Marcia, for example has already stated that she intends to earn less deliberately so she won't have extra taken away from her to be redistributed. Sounds a little like cutting off one's nose to spite one's face, but people make decisions that make sense to themselves and to their own lives.
>>>>
>>>>It depends on how much the tax rate goes up at 200K or whatever the arbitrary number is. If I have to pay, for the sake of argument, 30% on what I earn under 200K but once I cross that threshhold, I have to pay 50% of what I make in taxes, I get to keep more of what I earn by not crossing the threshhold. Doesn't make sense to earn more just so that it can be redistributed.
>>>
>>>Like I said. Whatever makes sense to one's self. If that's how it works out for you, then yes, that makes sense, but I got the impression from your post, that you've already decided that if Obama wins, you will go into 'semi-retirement'. Since the numbers haven't yet been published afaik, you can't have already done the calculation. Possibly I misunderstood what you said.
>>
>>We're going to have to wait and see.
>
>No. I refuse to. So, what are my other choices? ;)

Consult the magic 8 ball? :o)

It is also difficult to determine because historically, campaign policies and promises are often nothing like policies put into bills, voted on and passed and signed when in office.

If he goes centrist (like Clinton) it might not be so bad.


>
>>Most of it will depend on the house and the senate anyway. If the house or senate are predominantly Dem, Obama will be able to institute his planned changes. If, however, either are predominantly Repub, then very little of it may come to pass.