The job creator has become the messiah in our economic doldrums. Some say we need to provide these messiahs with all sorts of economic advantages so the rest of us may have the privilege of working.
They also say we cannot raise taxes on the wealthy because, if we do, they would not have the funds to hire more employees. They could hire now if they wanted to but uncertainty in the global market makes them fearful of investing. If there is a tax increase for those making over $250,000 per year, it would only affect 3 percent of the small businesses in the United States.
Perhaps those 3 percent could take some of their income, and hire a new employee and lower their tax bracket? (That may be an incentive) Also, not all job creations are equal.
There were plenty of “small business jobs” selling low-grade mortgage-backed securities (yielding economic crash); hard selling subprime mortgages to folks who really could not afford them (housing market bust); marketing sugar-laced junk food to our children (diabetes and obesity anyone); add your own … Let’s try to think outside the BUCK$ and do what’s right.
Harvey Stone
Scottsdale
Arizona Willie posted at 2:02 pm on Thu, Aug 16, 2012.
The Republican Party and Romney show the American people their contempt when they refuse to show us Romney’s tax returns.
They think the American people are so stupid we will forget about it before the election.
Romney refuses to release his tax returns BUT he demanded several years of tax returns from people wanting to be his VP!!
How hypocritical can one person be?
Do we really want to elect such a two-faced person to the Presidency?
Arizona Willie posted at 8:18 am on Thu, Aug 16, 2012.
VofReason, spending has been cut before but somehow the money always disappears into a different pocket
If spending was cut and resulted in a bit of a surplus -- Republicans would claim it was proof taxes were too high and demand another tax cut.
They would not allow it to be used to pay down the debt because they don't really care about debt or they would have voted tax surcharges to pay for Bush's wars instead of borrowing the money.
Republicans preach " personal responsibility " but refuse to raise taxes to pay the bills they created for Bush's wars.
Spending cuts cannot generate enough revenue anyway -- unless you eliminate the Defense Department. That is the only place with enough spending to cut to make a significant difference.
But of course, Republicans won't touch defense -- they want to terminate Social Security and Medicare -- programs that help people.
Republicans don't make much money from Medicare and none from Social Security but they make a double ton from their defense contractor stocks. So they aren't about to touch that.
When you cut future spending you only reduce the amount added to the deficit. It we cut a billion dollars in spending it would only mean that instead of borrowing 17 trlllion dollars we would borrow 16.9 trillion.
When you have an income tax surcharge legally dedicated to the debt .. then the money generated can actually pay on the trillions we have already borrowed separately from the next years borrowing.
In other words an income tax surcharge can be used to pay on the balance on the nations credit card instead of simply making a payment on the amount due.
Spending cuts simply allow us be able to make a payment on the amount due -- they don't pay on the balance. So we continue to pay interest on interest on interest because we ( the nation ) never pays on the balance.
It takes an increase in revenue to pay on the balance -- like getting a second job and dedicating that paycheck to paying the balance.
Spending cuts are like working an hour of overtime -- yeah it gives you a < little > more money but not enough to make a significant difference.
When you owe $10,000 on a credit card you need to make payments of thousands at a time on the balance, not pay 10 dollars over the payment due. Which is all spending cuts allow.
Yes, technically that is paying on the balance. But it is overwhelmed by the interest you are paying and makes no significant difference. Unless you make payments of thousands at a time on the principal, the balance is going to keep on going up and up and up and up.
VofReason posted at 1:42 pm on Mon, Aug 13, 2012.
Hmmm. So most of the small business owners are not rich. We know that small business drives employment in the US. So why haven't we had job growth if the tax increase purposed will not effect them? Another question, we also know that there is a major portion (40% or so) of people who pay no federal taxes. What is their motivation for seeing the Government run more efficiently?
VofReason posted at 1:36 pm on Mon, Aug 13, 2012.
Willie says "Just " cutting spending " === the war cry of the right === will not pay one penny on the current debt. " No certainly not. I mean what kind of a financial advisor would ever tell you to reduce your current spending so you could pay down your debt. That is just silly- right? No more likely they tell you, when your in a hole, keep digging.
Rodini posted at 3:42 pm on Sat, Aug 11, 2012.
I wonder...have any of you above finished High School...got a GED?
Or just incapable of listening or understanding English?
Less than 2-3% of small business owners are millionaires....so most of America's jobs are NOT created by millionaires but by average Joes who probably borrowed money from family or friends to start their business and Obama has NO plans to add to their tax burden..WAKE THE HECK UP PLEASE!!
Rodini posted at 3:39 pm on Sat, Aug 11, 2012.
How is preventing a giveaway of $250,000 more to the 1%ers punishing success?
ROFLMAO...really??
So since most of them are already paying lower rates than the middle class...I guess that means millionaires and billionaires really shouldn;t be expected to pay any taxes at all?/ROFLMAO!! PLEASE??
Rodini posted at 3:35 pm on Sat, Aug 11, 2012.
Right On Harvey...glad to see you GET IT !! Unlike some of these others like The Loon who doesn't seem to understand that it's not wealth redistribution but ending extreme income inequality which weakens America and everyone who is not a million or billionaire. such ignorance is unacceptable in this once great nation, that's been dragged backwards from 30 years of Republican economic insanity!!
This nation has gone backwards since 1980 with the exception of the Clinton years and it's high time we get it back on the path to prosperity once again...and Bush proved beyond a doubt..with a net loss of private sector jobs.....that giving the farm away to the 1% does absolutely NOTHING to increase jobs! Plain and Simple.
Leon Ceniceros posted at 12:50 am on Sat, Aug 11, 2012.
Harvey, even China doesn't believe in ........."wealth redistribution".....anymore.
Do we...."redistribute children"...from Mormon familes that have 6-7-8 kids and give some of them to ......"childless families" ???
Do we ...."redistribute SAT scores"....from people who did well by studying and going to class everyday and give it to............"truants or kids who have never cracked a book" ???
Do we .........."redistribute cars"....and make people who buy Porches or Cadillacs through their hard work and make them buy 2 Ford Focuses and give one away to a ..."pregnant at 16 Mom" ???
Why in the World should you want to ...."PUNISH"...anybody who was more successful, smarter, had a better job, was better looking than you ???
I guess that's why Gawd made Democrats.
chatmandu002 posted at 10:01 pm on Fri, Aug 10, 2012.
Harvey,
Go ahead and keep punishing success. You'll end up with no one successful.
antirino posted at 8:28 pm on Fri, Aug 10, 2012.
The Bush tax rate cuts actually resulted in increased revenue because the economy expanded. Check out the Laffer curve. We are on thie high side of that curve so lowering rates will increase revenue.
We have billions of dollars of wast in the federal budget. Let's cut out the waste first. Anybody who thinks there is no wast in a 3.5 trillion dollar budget is a fool.
Arizona Willie posted at 2:00 pm on Fri, Aug 10, 2012.
The country DOES have a revenue problem.
The Bush administration started TWO unfunded wars and the unfunded Medicare benefit program and refused to raise taxes to pay for it so they BORROWED the money.
That turned the small surplus Bush inherited into a huge deficit.
Just " cutting spending " === the war cry of the right === will not pay one penny on the current debt. I doubt if it would reduce spending anyway because no matter what program you cut out, Congresscritters will grab the money for their pet projects. Programs have been cut before but spending didn't go down at all.
" Cutting spending " is a euphemism for getting rid of Social Security and Medicare.
The REAL goal of the right is to drive the country into bankruptcy by BORROWING AND SPENDING and using bankruptcy as an excuse to terminate Social Security and Medicare. Two programs they have hated and fought from day one.
When you are deep in debt you don't cut your income .. you get a second job or whatever it takes to make more money so you can pay the debt.
But the only solution Republicans can come up with -- no matter what the issue or problem -- is " cut taxes and spending and eliminate regulations on business ".
Well we cut regulations on business and that brought us the financial meltdown as Wall Street stole everything that wasn't nailed down.
How is the country supposed to pay off the debt if we cut taxes?
In the past when the country was in debt we had income tax surcharges to pay it.
Republicans won't even talk about that. They don't want the debt paid. They want it to get worse so they can declare the country bankrupt and default on the debt.
chuckles3 posted at 1:33 pm on Fri, Aug 10, 2012.
People advocating increasing taxes on the 'wealthy' are either ignorant or just want to punish the successful and 'lucky'. Or, they have an agenda and are being intellectually dishonest by not admitting it. Possibly all three.
Raising their taxes would not significantly reduce our out-of-control spending and deficits. I have listed the figures before and will not do so again.
We do not have a revenue problem folks. We have a spending problem.
Talk to me about cutting spending and we can argue about how and where. Do not give me class warfare rhetoric, it does not have any place in a real discussion of our problems. Neither does the race of our President. I do not disagree with him because he is half black. I disagree with him because his policies, aided and abetted by Congress, are destroying the Country.
Accuracy posted at 12:46 pm on Fri, Aug 10, 2012.
Harvey Stone wrote: …. “They also say we cannot raise taxes on the wealthy because, if we do, they would not have the funds to hire more employees.”
President Barack Obama asked Congress for a one-year extension of tax cuts for those making less than $250,000 a year, but not for those making more . . . or the wealthier Americans.
Tax cuts is the perfect vehicle for election campaigns, and House Republicans are also pushing for an extension of the tax cuts.
While at the same time, Obama is campaigning on raising taxes on households earning more than $250,000 a year, and raising taxes on small business owners at a time when Americans need jobs.
Tax increases on families and job creators will create more economic uncertainty and fewer opportunities for struggling middle class families.