"We can't allow tax cuts for the rich to expire!!"

[Thunder]

I mean, the rich are the ones who make the jobs!!

Look at all the jobs they are creating in the USA!!

If we raise their taxes, all the job creation will stop!!

...oh....wait...riiiiiiight.





Just another example of Republican schizophrenia.

 

[Stylesjl]

'Yes but if we raise taxes the job losses will be even worse' is what they can argue

 

[T.A.M.]

I don't think raising taxes on millionaires is gonna effect the job market much in a negative way.

TAM

 

[XBoxWarrior]

"I'm rich beotch"...was a famous quote from Dave Chappelle.

How many folk has he hired lately...."NONE"

Well, maybe that's cuz he quit his job? Or was he a sekrit Frenchie?

/loved the Chappelle show
//miss you Dave

 

[Thunder]

'Yes but if we raise taxes the job losses will be even worse' is what they can argue

considering very few jobs are being created anyways, I don't see how anyone honest can argue that raising taxes on the rich will create fewer jobs.

edit mine.

 

[Earthborn]

Or was he a sekrit Frenchie?

Even worser, sekrit Muslin.

 

[shemp]

If only the rich would expire, there'd be plenty of jobs burying the bodies.

 

[casebro]

How do we measure rich- as income, or property?

So far as jobs go, they are directly related to the economy. And the economy is nothing more or less than money going around in circles. Unless Dave Chappelle buried his in a coffee can in his back yard, it is still in the economy, banked or invested, it ain't sitting idle.

Whether the rich pour their money into the economy directly, or via the tax man, it will still be fueling the great circle route that is the economy.

So, what does fuel the economy? Borrowing. Grab more money, send it around the circle. It isn't the cost of money, interest rates can't get any lower . In this economy, few have the confidence to mortgage their future. It takes anticipation of good times.

The election might help give more people dreams of a brighter future, and THAT will make more jobs. "By FSM, them republicans are pro business, they will get this economy out of the doldrums." Maybe so, since all it takes is perceived confidence. Maybe.

 

[T.A.M.]

Yes but buying high priced collector items, fancy cars, multi million dollar homes, contributes much less to JOB creation, then that same value of money spent at the local restaurant, or the local hardware store, by low to middle income earners.

TAM

 

[Bob Blaylock]

It's worth noting that this thunderous thread was started by a parasitic government bureaucrat, who makes his living directly on the backs of the taxpayers. Of course he's going to argue for allowing government to consume a greater share of the economy. He knows on what side his bread is buttered.

For those of us in the real world, who make out livings by doing honest work, at honest jobs; letting government take more of the economy, leaving less in the hands of the companies and entrepreneurs who employ us, isn't such a good idea.

 

[casebro]

Yes but buying high priced collector items, fancy cars, multi million dollar homes, contributes much less to JOB creation, then that same value of money spent at the local restaurant, or the local hardware store, by low to middle income earners.

TAM

It doesn't matter what you spend your money on. Buying a multimillion dollar home means a bunch of contructiuon workers are needed to build another multimillion dollar home. Cars, collectibles, ditto. Cars get built, collectibles get scanvenged, and auctioned, all part of the economy. The builders will buy supplies at the local hardware store (Home Depot?) and spend their wages at the local restaurants.

OR, the rich doctor will send some off in taxes, then buy the house, and dinners out with the rest. The amount sent off in taxes is also in the economy, given to welfare recipients. And you put some by in investments or bank accounts. All the same, all part of the economy.

Now if we could just get you to go dig up that stash buried in your back yard, and do something to put it into the economy, we would all be better off.

 

[leftysergeant]

Whether the rich pour their money into the economy directly, or via the tax man, it will still be fueling the great circle route that is the economy.

No. If theyt get a big tax break, they invest in physical plant in China or create Ponzi schemes like credit default swaps, commodities derivatives or for-profit health insurance. It sucks money right out of the system, leaving the working schlub with no choice but to borrow money in order to consume enough to keep the small businesses that used to be the major employers in business.

DRop the low-eartners off the tax rolls and they will spend mopst of their income locally, keeping the small businesses healthy.

Tax breaks for the investor class lead to consolidation of ownershjip and strangulation of small businesses.

"By FSM, them republicans are pro business, they will get this economy out of the doldrums." Maybe so, since all it takes is perceived confidence. Maybe.

Been there! Done that! Sucked!

 

[eeyore1954]

considering very few jobs are being created anyways, I don't see how anyone honest can argue that raising taxes on the rich will create fewer jobs.

edit mine.

Do you really think the fact that few jobs are being created anyway has much to do with whether raising taxes on the rich will cause even less jobs to be created. If some people who make a lot of money will spend less or hire less there will be less jobs regardless of how many jobs are being created today.

Personally I don't think it will make much diiference if taxes rate are allowed to revert back but your argument is not valid.

 

[T.A.M.]

It doesn't matter what you spend your money on. Buying a multimillion dollar home means a bunch of contructiuon workers are needed to build another multimillion dollar home. Cars, collectibles, ditto. Cars get built, collectibles get scanvenged, and auctioned, all part of the economy. The builders will buy supplies at the local hardware store (Home Depot?) and spend their wages at the local restaurants.

OR, the rich doctor will send some off in taxes, then buy the house, and dinners out with the rest. The amount sent off in taxes is also in the economy, given to welfare recipients. And you put some by in investments or bank accounts. All the same, all part of the economy.

Now if we could just get you to go dig up that stash buried in your back yard, and do something to put it into the economy, we would all be better off.

I agree it all contributes to the economy, but I do not think it is equal. I would think that the purchase of 5 Chevys at $20K each, puts more people to work, then a single $100K Lexus. 5 Homes at $300K each, puts more Construction workers to work then a single $1.5 Million home. I could be wrong, but my common sense tells me that it is true. Luxury items are not always more expensive because more work went into them...so in terms of job creation, I would think the purchase of MORE items of lesser value would be better then the purchase of LESS items of greater worth.

TAM

 

[leftysergeant]

If some people who make a lot of money will spend less or hire less there will be less jobs regardless of how many jobs are being created today.

The fools who were running the country a few years back told us that tax cuts would encourage the investor class to start hiring people. They didn't, but they tanked the ecconomy while the deficit went through the roof.

They had their chance. They profitted nicely. Now it is time for them to put back into the system so that the rest of us get a break for a while. No country ever failed because the working class had too much, but a lot of them fell because the working class had too little.

Personally I don't think it will make much diiference if taxes rate are allowed to revert back but your argument is not valid.

Austerity has never worked. Your thesis is defective.

 

[SezMe]

For those of us in the real world, who make out livings by doing honest work, at honest jobs; letting government take more of the economy, leaving less in the hands of the companies and entrepreneurs who employ us, isn't such a good idea.

What is an honest job? Is every government job dishonest? For example, the guy who works down at the sewage plant that processes the **** you dump every day. Is he dishonest?

 

[Jimbo07]

related to the economy. And the economy is nothing more or less than money going around in circles. Unless Dave Chappelle buried his in a coffee can in his back yard, it is still in the economy, banked or invested, it ain't sitting idle.

Whether the rich pour their money into the economy directly, or via the tax man, it will still be fueling the great circle route that is the economy.

Except, in concentration of wealth, the tin can is exactly what happens. If a rich person (or a much more modest saver, like me) puts their money in a bank account or some other stable, low rate investment, then it only gets into the economy if the bank uses the money for investments. Any money that you, me, the rich, or the banks sit on, "in reserve," is not being used in the economy.

Or to quote the caricature of Bill Gates on the Simpsons, "I didn't get rich by cutting a lot of cheques."

I agree it all contributes to the economy, but I do not think it is equal. I would think that the purchase of 5 Chevys at $20K each, puts more people to work, then a single $100K Lexus.

Production line with robots, or an artisan's hand-crafted leather?

 

[leftysergeant]

Production line with robots, or an artisan's hand-crafted leather?

If the artisan sewing that leather seat lives in Japan, it isn't going to make me much difference how much he earns.

 

[Jimbo07]

If the artisan sewing that leather seat lives in Japan, it isn't going to make me much difference how much he earns.

or the robots!

 

[leftysergeant]

or the robots!

Hey, as long as the guy who programs the robots lives and pays taxes and buys groceries here, I'm cool with his getting paid reasonably well.