Vote for me, I’ll cut your taxes. No, vote for me, I’ll raise the taxes on those bad “rich” people.

Every four years as presidential candidates step forward and seek your vote, the promises fly by as quickly as the confusion over how those promises would affect you.

Political spinmeisters attempt to come up with examples of “average” folks to use as comparisons. Having an example can help a voter put themselves in another shoes.

This year, the example that’s been bantered around is “Joe, the plumber.”

The problem with such examples is that few taxpayers are exactly alike so trying to define them — especially with nebulous, yet to be passed tax code — is a little silly.

Each candidate promises to help the “middle class” but how do you define that? How do you define “rich” and should they pay even more taxes than they already do?

A couple of facts should be considered relative to the presidential promises.

First, presidents cannot change the tax code; only Congress can do that.

America’s tax code is so complicated that it takes a trained tax professional — and occasionally a lawyer or two — to properly interpret it.

Perhaps, rather than continuing to spew what often prove to be empty campaign promises, our elected leaders would be wise to revise the current tax code, simplifying it and reducing some of the penalties tied to success.

Only then will “average” Americans truly see a benefit for the long haul.