there seem to be a few inconsistencies in there, especially regarding taxes on lower income individuals.

Eg.

OBAMA

(reversion to pre-Bush tax cuts)

Single making 30K - tax $8,400
Single making 50K - tax $14,000

then it says:

[Obama's] proposed tax cuts and credits, aimed at workers earning $50,000 or less per year, would cost the Treasury an estimated $85 billion annually.'

kind of seems as though it will be one or the other.

Also, most of the discussions that I have heard regarding inheritance taxes exempt farms, etc.

also consider the costs of the current programs that some of these will be replacing. for example, this is a paper discussing what the estimated costs of the NCLB legislation would be if fully implemented and properly funded: Public spending on K-12 education was $422.7 billion in 2001-02. If we use a broad -- yet easily justified and extremely conservative -- estimate of 20% added costs for the nation as a whole, that translates into a national increase of about $84.5 billion. An estimate of 35% additional costs yields a national increase of $148 billion.

as for the energy plan, the transition to new energy sources is a necessary one, and the quicker this occurs, the better for the nation as a whole. It could be argued that the Obama plan does not go far enough in investing in this necessary and important area.

I don't think anyone would argue that there is not a need for some sort of international control over nuclear fuel, and a desperate need for an update and strengthening of the nuclear nonproliferation treaty, especially considering one of the big slogans heading into Iraq involved fear mongering over nuclear weapons in the hands of a brutal dictator. 50 million seems like a pretty small price to pay to avoid that.