The real party of NO, the GOP, steps it up

[Riot]

Originally Posted by hoovesupsideyourhead

without calling names..and its hard..if the wealthier people ie small owners dont keep the tax breaks they have there is no way they will hire new or stay at least the way they are..do you agree..

I just googled and searched, and I could not find one economist who said extending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest would create jobs. I did find where even Dick Cheney says they do not But he's not an economist.

Find me one economist that says this is true, that the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy will create jobs.

I can find 20 that say not to do it. Find me one that says it's a good idea. Go ahead, convince me to change my mind.

Tax cuts that reward putting money in a business owners pocket does not make that person chose to rather invest it into his business. It takes money out of the business. People do not hire more, produce more, make more capital investment until the consumer demand is there, first. They do not do any of that just because they have a little extra money in their pocket. That's a good way to go broke - have more business than you have demand for!

And let's get straight what the "wealthiest" pay in taxes: it averages about 17-18% (because they have deductions and accountants and tax shelters). And the tax cuts for those up to $250K? That is on adjusted gross, not gross. So extending tax cuts up $250 covers people whose gross is up to $300 at least.

----------------------
And this appears to NOT be a done deal in the House:

Rep. Peter Welch (D-Vt.) circulated a letter to his colleagues urging them to oppose the deal on grounds that it is "fiscally irresponsible." Addressed to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), the letter reads as follows:

A staffer for the congressman said that he was sending the letter to all Democratic offices and would be announcing co-signatories likely tomorrow. Opposition to the measure within the halls of Congress is abundantly clear. The Huffington Post's Howard Fineman reported that House Democrats could pose a problem for a potential deal over the weekend. And a "Democratic congressional source" told CNN on Monday that "we won't rubber stamp a deal between the White House and [Senate Minority Leader] Mitch McConnell...we want to make it clear. Don't take our support for granted."

[hoovesupsideyourhead]

Originally Posted by Riot

I just googled and searched, and I could not find one economist who said extending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest would create jobs. I did find where even Dick Cheney says they do not But he's not an economist.

Find me one economist that says this is true, that the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy will create jobs.

I can find 20 that say not to do it. Find me one that says it's a good idea. Go ahead, convince me to change my mind.

Tax cuts that reward putting money in a business owners pocket does not make that person chose to rather invest it into his business. It takes money out of the business. People do not hire more, produce more, make more capital investment until the consumer demand is there, first. They do not do any of that just because they have a little extra money in their pocket. That's a good way to go broke - have more business than you have demand for!

And let's get straight what the "wealthiest" pay in taxes: it averages about 17-18% (because they have deductions and accountants and tax shelters). And the tax cuts for those up to $250K? That is on adjusted gross, not gross. So extending tax cuts up $250 covers people whose gross is up to $300 at least.

----------------------
And this appears to NOT be a done deal in the House:

ok lets say you are a small busness owner with some of your own money invested. you have 4 employees.and not making head way you keep employee number 4 on because hes loyal shows up on time ect. now if you lose your tax break. what happens.. hes gone period..you down size..in hopes of the big economic bounce back your waiting for..and waiting for..now this owner may make 300k or higher..whats good about this picture.
there arent enough chairs..

[Riot]

Originally Posted by hoovesupsideyourhead

ok lets say you are a small busness owner with some of your own money invested. you have 4 employees.and not making head way you keep employee number 4 on because hes loyal shows up on time ect. now if you lose your tax break. what happens.. hes gone period..you down size..in hopes of the big economic bounce back your waiting for..and waiting for..now this owner may make 300k or higher..whats good about this picture.
there arent enough chairs..

As an experienced small business owner I'll say the mistake in your business scenario above is that it's unrealistic: keeping on one employee too many when "you're not making headway". That's a very bad business decision. You don't run a business as a charity. Losing a small tax break has zero to do with that poorly run business in the example. It was doomed with the much larger expense of an employee the business couldn't afford.

And any owner taking out $300K from a business that "isn't making head way" is a complete moron. "Some" of your own money invested? Try all of it. That's how small businesses work.

Look at this "deal" that Obama has made - first, it is all unfunded. All of it.

Secondly, look at what was important to the GOP: they voted no on tax cuts to the middle class, they voted no on tax cuts for those up to a million, they voted yes only for tax cuts to those millionaires and above. They voted yes for lowering the estate tax from 55% to 35%. Where are the GOP priorities? Not jobs, not deficit reduction, not the unemployed. Only with concerns of the wealthy.

Aside from the above, it's a massive unfunded stimulus bill (payroll tax deductions, unemployment, etc) Now, I've already seen details that say it should generate about 176 billion in stimulus, which is a good, job creating thing.

But the key is "unfunded". Adding to the deficit. The tax cut for those earning over 1 million should be thrown out to help fund this.