Who Actually Pays The Taxes??

[Zoomie1980]

what percentage paid of the tax load doesn't matter to me one bit, just a partisan talking point....what percentage of ones gross earnings or rather gross income, does.

it is the only way apples can be compared to apples...

nor can income taxes be the only taxes drawn out and scrutinized....since income taxes only bring in revenues for less than 1/3 of our yearly federal budget spending...SS taxes almost bring in another third, then corporate, gas, excise taxes and licence fees etc bring in the rest....not leaving out that we are borrowing a near trillion this year alone for this year's deficit......in fact, we may actually be borrowing more than income taxes even bring... in revenues this year!

so, focussing solely on income taxes while not focussing on FICA taxes, gas taxes etc and all the other taxes and what we are borrowing to pay for our budget deficits, is honestly a waste of time and tells us nothing, when it comes to tax fairness imho...

I can't discern a salient point in that. Are you clamoring for a flat tax rate? As it is the wealthy pay by far a higher percentage of their gross income in taxes than the middle or lower class does. It's not even close.

FICA is a FLAT tax, we ALL pay EXACTLY the same percentage rate no matter what we earn....up to about $100,000 which is almost all of us...

 

[Toro]

Corporations should not be taxed, the individuals receiving the profits of the corporation should.

I'm going to set up a corporation and contract myself out instead of being a waged employee. All my wages will instead be income paid into a corporation. Any income I earn that I do not pull out of the corporation I will invest and earn investment income tax free indefinitely. Thus, I will be able to lower my effective tax rate and pay a lower effective rate than someone earning my same wage.

 

[Zoomie1980]

The rich dude has write offs and in the end, still has a lot of money.

Or, gas companies should be able to charge you $100 a gallon because you can afford it.

I'm not going to explain fairness to you. The guy who makes $40k deserves the tax break. We outnumber them. We make what they sell. We buy what they sell. We have the power in america.

A guy that makes a mill should give half of it to uncle sam so the guy that makes $40k can live and save. Yes, that is how america works best.

And someone has to pay for iraq. The rich are benefitting from iraq and our kids are dying, not theirs. Except mccains son. I give him props, but still a bullshit war that the rich need to pay for.

No, the rich dude, even with loopholes pays 38% of the total tax load and pays a much higher percentage of his income in taxes than the middle or lower class (zero for those folks).

The guy making $40,000 pays NO income tax at all if he is married and has a family of four.... Can't cut from 0%.

Iraq is a the cheapest war in American history in terms of % of GDP spent. It is also the safest for the troops. We lost more troops in ONE DAY on Iwo Jima and Normandy than in the entire Iraq "war". In the Battle of Kursk, the Russians lost 450,000 troops in one WEEK.

 

[Toro]

Care I respect your opinion and admire your passion for Barack Obama , however his economic and energy policies are the EXACT reasons why I am not voting for Barack Obama. To me while it is a noble idea to cut taxes for anyone that is burdened by it, it is a terrible idea to cut taxes for for some and not all in a retro active get back at people and companies that because of their success in this country that all the sudden makes them bad. While I don't doubt, that his tax plan if he should prevail will be implemented, when you take that and the new labor plans that congress plans to have Barack Obama sign. Your tax cut is a zero sum gain, in that Barack Obama while cutting taxes will also be trying to find new ways to keep companies from moving offshore and laying off people. This tax plan is ill conceived and very short sighted and while I have no plans to support any of the two major candidates in this election I am doing everything in my power to keep enough Republicans in the Senate to fillibuster some of this ill conceived social spending that Barack Obama plans on spending.

Consider this Care, you won't have a Middle Class if they have no place to have a job to earn enough money to fall into the Middle Class. What Barack Obama doesn't seem to understand is you cannot force a company to turn back the clock to the good old days of 1962 when Joe Lunch Pail at local 999 had a job at the plant for 50 years. One more thing to consider, these green technology jobs he speaks of, one thing he doesn't tell you is that the United States is behind in almost every single Green Technology catagory. We import solar Cells from Japan, and China, we Import Lithium Ion batteries from China and Japan, and Hybrid technology from Japan. Barack Obama's pie in the sky plans my on the surface sound appealing but when you really stop to think about them at least for me, they make no sense whatsoever and are in most cases retro-active and short sighted.

The idea that there will not be a middle class is not supported by any evidence whatsoever. The percentage of those statistically defined as middle class has fallen by about 2% over the past three decades.

What is empirically true is that if by "disappearing middle class" you mean widening gaps of income between the middle class and the richest, over the past 100 years, that gap has tended to widen under Republicans, not Democrats. It widened under Reagan/Bush and did so under W.

The other unusual notion is that raising taxes by 3%-5% on the wealthiest people, somehow the US economy will be devastated. This is silly, and is not supported by any evidence. The US economy has grown under both rising and falling marginal tax rates. To conclude that, somehow the economy would be damaged because the highest marginal tax rate is to be increased from 36% to 39% escapes me, considering this was the exact same argument used when Slick Willie raised taxes, and the people who made this argument turned out to be dead wrong.

It is also a gross underestimation of the American people that raising taxes would be structurally bad for the economy. Americans are hard working, industrious and innovative people. Taking 40% of the highest earners' income instead of 35% isn't going to change that.

 

[Navy1960]

FIRST and FOREMOST, i have no passion in support for barak obama so there is nothing for you to admire on that....i am a diehard hillary supporter!

I think the democratic tax plan offered is stronger and better for ALL of America verses the same OLD approach of the republican tax plan that has been PROVEN the past 8 years to NOT work....except for the very, very few... jobs were not increased....so few jobs were created under president bush's reign that he actually might hold or nearing a tie, as the worst job record kept on all presidents in our history....this is the republican strategy that mccain is just following when it comes to his tax plan...

and yes, i honestly can see how you would think trickle down would work, but it simply does NOT work, unless it is done under strict parameters like reducing the higher tax rate from 50% to 30%....but from 39% to 35% it is not effective....there are studies on this and as mentioned, Laffer- the Economist who created the idea of trickle down, states recently himself.

this has nothing to do with any kind of passion for a candidate...it has to do with analysis and my conclusions of the analysis.

consider this Navy, if the middle class was not there to create and make or sell the products sold, or is not out there with enough money to buy the products that are sold, there would be no business.
I don't believe that if you make something, they will buy it... supply side economics...

I believe if they have the money, the demand goes up and the increased supply will follow the demand.

I was a Buyer/Product Marketing Director for 3 major corporations and in 20 plus some years working, i NEVER created or bought a product that there was not any demand for it....i bought and developed product that there was demand for.... Demand, ruled my supply, supply never ruled my demand....

So this is why i take the approach, of spread the wealth around and believe that if you do, EVERYONE will benefit, including the businesses that create jobs based on DEMAND, and the very wealthy as well because i have proof of 20 plus years working, that trickle up, most certainly works.

Care

The middle class Care get that way from what? being employed in most cases by the very same people that your party intends to raise taxes on. When those taxes rise, no matter what the top rate is, that rate is passed on to the Middle Classs in several forms, as I mentioned before, and in some cases eventually losing that job. So without the spending power to spread that wealth around all you end up doing is creating a deeper recession. The very fact that the Democratic party thinks that it's somehow okay to take from someones income for personal gain of others in order to level the playing field is really Care the Base reason why I could never be a Democrat. That thinking is not only contrary to every founding principle that this nation was fouded upon it is a path to a form of government that is a proven failure. It is in many ways blantently a fundamental change in our form of government that is ill conceived and the thinking that leads to it shows for all that follow that thinking a complete lack of knowledge of the principles that this nation was founded upon. My question would be this, this Obama Middle Class tax redistribution scheme is an attempt to tell the Middle Class what? That they have paid too much in taxes during the Bush Years? While I know this Obama scheme holds great appeal to Obama supporters, sadly this tax cut will have long lasting problems for this nation and it's my hope that if Barack Obama does prevail that Republicans hold onto the at least enough seats in the Senate to block this democratic free for all.

 

[Toro]

The middle class Care get that way from what? being employed in most cases by the very same people that your party intends to raise taxes on. When those taxes rise, no matter what the top rate is, that rate is passed on to the Middle Classs in several forms, as I mentioned before, and in some cases eventually losing that job. So without the spending power to spread that wealth around all you end up doing is creating a deeper recession. The very fact that the Democratic party thinks that it's somehow okay to take from someones income for personal gain of others in order to level the playing field is really Care the Base reason why I could never be a Democrat. That thinking is not only contrary to every founding principle that this nation was fouded upon it is a path to a form of government that is a proven failure. It is in many ways blantently a fundamental change in our form of government that is ill conceived and the thinking that leads to it shows for all that follow that thinking a complete lack of knowledge of the principles that this nation was founded upon. My question would be this, this Obama Middle Class tax redistribution scheme is an attempt to tell the Middle Class what? That they have paid too much in taxes during the Bush Years? While I know this Obama scheme holds great appeal to Obama supporters, sadly this tax cut will have long lasting problems for this nation and it's my hope that if Barack Obama does prevail that Republicans hold onto the at least enough seats in the Senate to block this democratic free for all.

You know that in the mid-30s, FDR raised the highest marginal tax rate to 83%, right?

Now, I'm not saying that it would be good policy to do that today. Quite the opposite. It would be horrible. But increasing the top marginal tax rate from 36% to 39% on those earning more than $250k and increasing capital gains and dividend tax rates from 15% to 20% is in no way "a fundamental change in our form of government"

The Bush administration wrecked the budget by stupidly cutting taxes and increasing spending. All that did was increase the amount of taxes your children will have to pay. So, to say we should actually pay for what we spend - at least once this recession ends - sounds pretty reasonable to me.

 

[sealybobo]

No, the rich dude, even with loopholes pays 38% of the total tax load and pays a much higher percentage of his income in taxes than the middle or lower class (zero for those folks).

The guy making $40,000 pays NO income tax at all if he is married and has a family of four.... Can't cut from 0%.

Iraq is a the cheapest war in American history in terms of % of GDP spent. It is also the safest for the troops. We lost more troops in ONE DAY on Iwo Jima and Normandy than in the entire Iraq "war". In the Battle of Kursk, the Russians lost 450,000 troops in one WEEK.

Anyways, obama is only rolling back the taxes to the clinton era, and it was ppl making $100k or more, Obama's is $250k plus, and its only an extra $300 for every $10k above $250. bfd.

Yes you can do better than zero. In Alaska, palin taxes the oil corporations and she gives it to the broke ass citizens. Why's it cool for her to do that and we can't do that for our citizens?

America is for we the people. Not we the corporations. First of all, $40k a yr with kids is poverty...

And the iraq war has driven up inflation big time. Love how you try to right wing spin it as an inexpensive war.

And those 4000 plus lives wasn't worth it. They want us out. What did you win? What did WE win? Mook tada el sadr will ultimately be president and ally with iran. Biggest blunder in american history. Are you kidding me?

 

[Navy1960]

The idea that there will not be a middle class is not supported by any evidence whatsoever. The percentage of those statistically defined as middle class has fallen by about 2% over the past three decades.

What is empirically true is that if by "disappearing middle class" you mean widening gaps of income between the middle class and the richest, over the past 100 years, that gap has tended to widen under Republicans, not Democrats. It widened under Reagan/Bush and did so under W.

The other unusual notion is that raising taxes by 3%-5% on the wealthiest people, somehow the US economy will be devastated. This is silly, and is not supported by any evidence. The US economy has grown under both rising and falling marginal tax rates. To conclude that, somehow the economy would be damaged because the highest marginal tax rate is to be increased from 36% to 39% escapes me, considering this was the exact same argument used when Slick Willie raised taxes, and the people who made this argument turned out to be dead wrong.

It is also a gross underestimation of the American people that raising taxes would be structurally bad for the economy. Americans are hard working, industrious and innovative people. Taking 40% of the highest earners' income instead of 35% isn't going to change that.

While I wont argue your point on Americans work ethic, the economic climate of 2008 vs. 1993 are very different. The idea of raising the marginal tax rate to 40% or in your words "Taking" and then giving it back to the Middle Class in the form of tax cuts is going to help narrow this gap? I do hope your kidding? You don't raise the top rate and close tax loopholes and institue a "windfall profits tax" in the hopes that it will somehow narrow the gap between the Middle Class and the wealthy. While of course there is innovation here in the United States , if the cost of doing business in the United States is too high, then those very same wealthy people and companies that provide those jobs here will find places where the cost of doing busines is not so high. There will be no shortage of countries offering shelters in for them as well . So you talk about this gap, you want the gap to narrow, well so do I, but you don't make it narrow by punishing the people that have the capability to provide the Middle Class with the means to increase their wealth. You provide them incentives to provide jobs, and find ways for them to employ Americans, and one of them is not increasing their cost of doing business here. In the end a tax cut for the Middle Class is not a tax cut when you don't have a job for taxes to be cut.

 

[sealybobo]

While I wont argue your point on Americans work ethic, the economic climate of 2008 vs. 1993 are very different. The idea of raising the marginal tax rate to 40% or in your words "Taking" and then giving it back to the Middle Class in the form of tax cuts is going to help narrow this gap? I do hope your kidding? You don't raise the top rate and close tax loopholes and institue a "windfall profits tax" in the hopes that it will somehow narrow the gap between the Middle Class and the wealthy. While of course there is innovation here in the United States , if the cost of doing business in the United States is too high, then those very same wealthy people and companies that provide those jobs here will find places where the cost of doing busines is not so high. There will be no shortage of countries offering shelters in for them as well . So you talk about this gap, you want the gap to narrow, well so do I, but you don't make it narrow by punishing the people that have the capability to provide the Middle Class with the means to increase their wealth. You provide them incentives to provide jobs, and find ways for them to employ Americans, and one of them is not increasing their cost of doing business here. In the end a tax cut for the Middle Class is not a tax cut when you don't have a job for taxes to be cut.

Empty threats. Leave. And we'll invite a chinese bank to open branches. Or we'll tariff your imports. And then small start up companies can compete against you. If you want to do business in the us, you have to support the american worker. And you have to pay american taxes. So the ceo only makes $5 mill instead of $10.
All the gop arguments and threats are old. So what you pay an extra $1k? How's business? Do you want us to come back and spend more money? Then give us $2k extra back. The rich will still be rich. The way things are now is not america.

And just 1 month ago mccain said the economy was strong for god sakes. This is a no brainer.

 

[Care4all]

The middle class Care get that way from what? being employed in most cases by the very same people that your party intends to raise taxes on. When those taxes rise, no matter what the top rate is, that rate is passed on to the Middle Classs in several forms, as I mentioned before, and in some cases eventually losing that job. So without the spending power to spread that wealth around all you end up doing is creating a deeper recession. The very fact that the Democratic party thinks that it's somehow okay to take from someones income for personal gain of others in order to level the playing field is really Care the Base reason why I could never be a Democrat. That thinking is not only contrary to every founding principle that this nation was fouded upon it is a path to a form of government that is a proven failure. It is in many ways blantently a fundamental change in our form of government that is ill conceived and the thinking that leads to it shows for all that follow that thinking a complete lack of knowledge of the principles that this nation was founded upon. My question would be this, this Obama Middle Class tax redistribution scheme is an attempt to tell the Middle Class what? That they have paid too much in taxes during the Bush Years? While I know this Obama scheme holds great appeal to Obama supporters, sadly this tax cut will have long lasting problems for this nation and it's my hope that if Barack Obama does prevail that Republicans hold onto the at least enough seats in the Senate to block this democratic free for all.

you are not paying attention navy...small businesses employ nearly 80% of the people in our country, big corporations employ 20%....

Soooooooo if your concern is with wanting businesses to employ more americans then we should be concentrating on the small businesses that employ the 80%....

Small businesses in America Average only $45 k in net earnings....and small businesses and s-corps will get a nice tax cut under the democratic plan, moreso than mccains plan... you keep skipping over this VERY FACT and keep concentrating on these big corporations who only employ 20% of the country instead of the BIG kahuna...the small businesses

And i am not saying there should not be reforms to the corporate tax structure as well but one thing at a time and the Corporate tax structure has already been reformed to bring taxes down many, many many times the last several decades.... (at one time corporate income tax receipts were equal to income tax receipts brought in....now they bring in much less of the treasury revenues in proportion to our income taxes.)

I believe it is your side blowing the taking from the rich and giving to others out of proportion for purely parisan reasons...

I don't doubt for one iota that you believe this, but i think you are believing it based on a false pretense...I'm sorry!

The rich will get richer, if the middle class has more money...that's just a fact.

So, just because Democrats support the middle and the poor paying less in taxes so they have more of their own money to spend does not mean this is being done at the expense of the rich...the rich are only supplying the stimulus to make their own businesses better....

There is NO NEED for the business to hire more people if the business itself is not experiencing sales increases...NO ONE is going to add someone to their payroll if the sales increases or obvious projected sales increases do not justify doing such.... the only way for businesses to increase their sales is to have a very healthy middle class because that covers near 80% of our citizens who ARE the purchasing power of our country.

This is why giving a larger tax break to the middle class is so very important in a recession....no business is going to add people to their payroll during a recessionary period without the sales to justify it imo.

anyway, looks like you are just stuck on what you believe and i suppose, i am as well...so once again, we are to the point of agreeing to respectfully disagreeing!!!

care

 

[Zoomie1980]

Anyways, obama is only rolling back the taxes to the clinton era, and it was ppl making $100k or more, Obama's is $250k plus, and its only an extra $300 for every $10k above $250. bfd.

Yes you can do better than zero. In Alaska, palin taxes the oil corporations and she gives it to the broke ass citizens. Why's it cool for her to do that and we can't do that for our citizens?

America is for we the people. Not we the corporations. First of all, $40k a yr with kids is poverty...

And the iraq war has driven up inflation big time. Love how you try to right wing spin it as an inexpensive war.

And those 4000 plus lives wasn't worth it. They want us out. What did you win? What did WE win? Mook tada el sadr will ultimately be president and ally with iran. Biggest blunder in american history. Are you kidding me?

We're going to get a permanent base at Striker, a HUGE airbase in the Kurdish region of Iraq within F-22 range of Georgia, Azerbaijan, and the Caspian-Aral Sea natural resource district. That, all by itself, is worth 10X what we have spent in Iraq.

Iraq has cost 4.1% of GDP (4,100 combat deaths)

Vietnam 14.3% (58,000)

Korea 7.8% (27,000)

WWII 38.8% (425,000)

WWI 18.8% (125,000)

Spanish-American War 6.5%(12,000)

Civil War 51% (680,000)

 

[Navy1960]

You know that in the mid-30s, FDR raised the highest marginal tax rate to 83%, right?

Now, I'm not saying that it would be good policy to do that today. Quite the opposite. It would be horrible. But increasing the top marginal tax rate from 36% to 39% on those earning more than $250k and increasing capital gains and dividend tax rates from 15% to 20% is in no way "a fundamental change in our form of government"

The Bush administration wrecked the budget by stupidly cutting taxes and increasing spending. All that did was increase the amount of taxes your children will have to pay. So, to say we should actually pay for what we spend - at least once this recession ends - sounds pretty reasonable to me.

yes I am aware of what Roosevelt did, but it's a rather short sighted view if you are only looking at the rise in rates on taxes and cap gains. The fundamental change comes from taking wealth from one segment of the population while providing a benefit to another segment that you are not providing to another. This is where that "Taking or Spreading the Wealth " mantra comes from. Where suddenly to level the playing field we are in your words "TAKING" from one tax bracket to provide a benefit to another in an attempt to level the playing field. Not that the words, self reliance, or personal responsibility, mean anything, thats all beside the point as these ethical arguements are generally lost in this election. However, my point is that you can raise the top rate as high as you like, in todays economy that top rate rise accomplishes not one thing if that wealth and business moves offshores too offset any rise in taxes. Let's take the windfall profit tax on oil, when that is implementated, I encourage you to go to the gas station the next day and see the percentage rise in gas that has been passed onto you the consumer.

 

[dilloduck]

you are not paying attention navy...small businesses employ nearly 80% of the people in our country, big corporations employ 20%....

Soooooooo if your concern is with wanting businesses to employ more americans then we should be concentrating on the small businesses that employ the 80%....

Small businesses in America Average only $45 k in net earnings....and small businesses and s-corps will get a nice tax cut under the democratic plan, moreso than mccains plan... you keep skipping over this VERY FACT and keep concentrating on these big corporations who only employ 20% of the country instead of the BIG kahuna...the small businesses

And i am not saying there should not be reforms to the corporate tax structure as well but one thing at a time and the Corporate tax structure has already been reformed to bring taxes down many, many many times the last several decades.... (at one time corporate income tax receipts were equal to income tax receipts brought in....now they bring in much less of the treasury revenues in proportion to our income taxes.)

I believe it is your side blowing the taking from the rich and giving to others out of proportion for purely parisan reasons...

I don't doubt for one iota that you believe this, but i think you are believing it based on a false pretense...I'm sorry!

The rich will get richer, if the middle class has more money...that's just a fact.

So, just because Democrats support the middle and the poor paying less in taxes so they have more of their own money to spend does not mean this is being done at the expense of the rich...the rich are only supplying the stimulus to make their own businesses better....

There is NO NEED for the business to hire more people if the business itself is not experiencing sales increases...NO ONE is going to add someone to their payroll if the sales increases or obvious projected sales increases do not justify doing such.... the only way for businesses to increase their sales is to have a very healthy middle class because that covers near 80% of our citizens who ARE the purchasing power of our country.

This is why giving a larger tax break to the middle class is so very important in a recession....no business is going to add people to their payroll during a recessionary period without the sales to justify it imo.

anyway, looks like you are just stuck on what you believe and i suppose, i am as well...so once again, we are to the point of agreeing to respectfully disagreeing!!!

care

So you're suggesting that we spend our way out of the recession ?

 

[Care4all]

So you're suggesting that we spend our way out of the recession ?

yes, it is how every recession ends, with more sales....

 

[elvis]

Anyways, obama is only rolling back the taxes to the clinton era, and it was ppl making $100k or more, Obama's is $250k plus, and its only an extra $300 for every $10k above $250. bfd.

Yes you can do better than zero. In Alaska, palin taxes the oil corporations and she gives it to the broke ass citizens. Why's it cool for her to do that and we can't do that for our citizens?

America is for we the people. Not we the corporations. First of all, $40k a yr with kids is poverty...

And the iraq war has driven up inflation big time. Love how you try to right wing spin it as an inexpensive war.

And those 4000 plus lives wasn't worth it. They want us out. What did you win? What did WE win? Mook tada el sadr will ultimately be president and ally with iran. Biggest blunder in american history. Are you kidding me?

hes rolling them back to the Clinton era? Then everyone's taxes will increase.

 

[Navy1960]

you are not paying attention navy...small businesses employ nearly 80% of the people in our country, big corporations employ 20%....

Soooooooo if your concern is with wanting businesses to employ more americans then we should be concentrating on the small businesses that employ the 80%....

Small businesses in America Average only $45 k in net earnings....and small businesses and s-corps will get a nice tax cut under the democratic plan, moreso than mccains plan... you keep skipping over this VERY FACT and keep concentrating on these big corporations who only employ 20% of the country instead of the BIG kahuna...the small businesses

And i am not saying there should not be reforms to the corporate tax structure as well but one thing at a time and the Corporate tax structure has already been reformed to bring taxes down many, many many times the last several decades.... (at one time corporate income tax receipts were equal to income tax receipts brought in....now they bring in much less of the treasury revenues in proportion to our income taxes.)

I believe it is your side blowing the taking from the rich and giving to others out of proportion for purely parisan reasons...

I don't doubt for one iota that you believe this, but i think you are believing it based on a false pretense...I'm sorry!

The rich will get richer, if the middle class has more money...that's just a fact.

So, just because Democrats support the middle and the poor paying less in taxes so they have more of their own money to spend does not mean this is being done at the expense of the rich...the rich are only supplying the stimulus to make their own businesses better....

There is NO NEED for the business to hire more people if the business itself is not experiencing sales increases...NO ONE is going to add someone to their payroll if the sales increases or obvious projected sales increases do not justify doing such.... the only way for businesses to increase their sales is to have a very healthy middle class because that covers near 80% of our citizens who ARE the purchasing power of our country.

This is why giving a larger tax break to the middle class is so very important in a recession....no business is going to add people to their payroll during a recessionary period without the sales to justify it imo.

anyway, looks like you are just stuck on what you believe and i suppose, i am as well...so once again, we are to the point of agreeing to respectfully disagreeing!!!

care

laughs, well your right but again don't suffer under the impression that I am voting for McCain because I'm not. On the small business thing, let's say I have have a small business that has a gross revenue of about 1.4 million a year but on the books I show a a net revenue of about 214,000.00 of course I know like any other business person that under the Obama redistribution plan I will stay under that number, however thats my business net and does not include my personal salary. So if you have millions of small businesses that fall under that catagory, while they won't see a rise in taxes if they fall below that 250K Mark but those that do, be they through the salary of the owner or the net of that business that they own, the people that suffer are the employee's and customers of that business because as a business owner you pass on the cost to the consumer or you reduce costs but laying off employee's. Your right though we will have to agree to disagree on this one. On a side note, I think its a wonderful idea to stimulate the middle class, as long as you do it in conjunction with offering incentives for business and yes those mean nasty wealthy people to keep jobs here in this country.

 

[sealybobo]

yes, it is how every recession ends, with more sales....

He knows how it works, becausee bush did it for 8 yrs. I kept saying the economy was in trouble but republicans kept pointing to corporate profits and they told us the economy strong. But it was all oil companies and defense company profits. Or companies made profits by going mostly overseas, or letting us go.

So it will be better to give millions of us thousands rather than bush giving thousands a million bucks. We'll spend it.

Or we'll use the money to save up for our own business so we don't need your minimum wages.

 

[Zoomie1980]

He knows how it works, becausee bush did it for 8 yrs. I kept saying the economy was in trouble but republicans kept pointing to corporate profits and they told us the economy strong. But it was all oil companies and defense company profits. Or companies made profits by going mostly overseas, or letting us go.

So it will be better to give millions of us thousands rather than bush giving thousands a million bucks. We'll spend it.

Or we'll use the money to save up for our own business so we don't need your minimum wages.

If you are earning minimum wage you are either a high school kid with a part-time or summer job....or you are someone too stupid to find you own ass with both hands....

 

[Care4all]

laughs, well your right but again don't suffer under the impression that I am voting for McCain because I'm not. On the small business thing, let's say I have have a small business that has a gross revenue of about 1.4 million a year but on the books I show a a net revenue of about 214,000.00 of course I know like any other business person that under the Obama redistribution plan I will stay under that number, however thats my business net and does not include my personal salary. So if you have millions of small businesses that fall under that catagory, while they won't see a rise in taxes if they fall below that 250K Mark but those that do, be they through the salary of the owner or the net of that business that they own, the people that suffer are the employee's and customers of that business because as a business owner you pass on the cost to the consumer or you reduce costs but laying off employee's. Your right though we will have to agree to disagree on this one. On a side note, I think its a wonderful idea to stimulate the middle class, as long as you do it in conjunction with offering incentives for business and yes those mean nasty wealthy people to keep jobs here in this country.

the higher taxes would be $300 dollars for every $10,000 they earn over and above the $250k net earnings....certainly a slight increase in the employee's productivity could cover this expence....i do not believe it would harm us....rising transportation/gasoline prices is more of a threat for a business.

anyway, nice talking with you over this....

care

 

[Navy1960]

the higher taxes would be $300 dollars for every $10,000 they earn over and above the $250k net earnings....certainly a slight increase in the employee's productivity could cover this expence....i do not believe it would harm us....rising transportation/gasoline prices is more of a threat for a business.

anyway, nice talking with you over this....

care

My point has always been, when you cut taxes and increase spending you accomplish nothing and thats exactly what Obama plans on doing. It should be an interesting 4 years to be sure if he prevails, but I will survive this current president and the worst one before him which was Carter, so Barack Obama's little giveaway will be just one more in a long line I suppose. As always I enjoy our debates Care .