Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jesse, the rich are able to take advantage of legal deductions that most people can't. Romney said he wanted to lower the tax rate for everyone but take away tax deductions that only the rich are able to take advantage of. A lower marginal tax rate would have been very good for middle class.
Romney believed that by doing this businesses would start hiring again. When companies hire these people come off unemployment and off welfare and into jobs. Because more people are working more people are paying taxes instead of taking money out of the system they would be paying into the system. At the same time because more people are working and people get to keep more of their money they would spend it.
Average income per worker is 24K annually. They aren't going to feel the tax burden, but the lucky few remaining middle class Americans sure will. More of those 24K/year earners will be earning an unemployment check as a result. Consider it a mandatory vacation thanks to Obama and all the rest of the clowns. Some might be lucky enough to score some government freebies. Children will pay for themselves in this new economy.
At any rate, Dem, Rep, it doesn't matter. These people are all the same. Each is just as clueless and far from the real issues as the next. We are turning into a "service based economy", which is another way of saying, the majority of jobs are going to be low profit margin, low paying, and they are going to suck big time. I think the term "service based economy" is a nice way of saying the economy is backwards and unsustainable. How will the bulk of workers contribute to a viable, productive economy on a Walmart income? Not gonna happen.
As much as I despise Obama, there is nothing Romney can really do to change the course. The economy has been hollowed out, and the only way out of this mess is to reconstruct and rebuild one that works. That doesn't mean every average student goes to college and gets a liberal arts degree. That means Americans relearn the value of productive occupations, and hopefully, earn a fair income providing goods and services for consumers here and abroad. That's basically the only way to build a viable economy. I have yet to hear any politician drift from their usual rederick to actually address the real issues. People can't consume without actual wealth generating jobs.
If Congress does nothing and the United States plunges off the "fiscal cliff" in three months, taxes would rise for 90 percent of Americans due to automatic increases in income and payroll taxes and other financial shocks, said a report issued on Monday.
We are long past the deadline and president Obama went overseas to do some non-essential foreign travel (Burma, Cambodia, Thailand and Myanmar). Obama does not mind if we all go off the fiscal cliff. I have been saying that way before election.
Everyone better cut back on spending, you got what you wanted. sorry
Bet if Daddy Bush or Baby Boy Bush had all this economic problem right now and went overseas, like Obama, some people would think that was the best thing they could do at this time. Doesn't matter what Obama does, it will be wrong.
Bet if Daddy Bush or Baby Boy Bush had all this economic problem right now and went overseas, like Obama, some people would think that was the best thing they could do at this time. Doesn't matter what Obama does, it will be wrong.
kygman, if you can't talk like an intelligent knowledgable person please do not post because it makes you look... unintelligent.
No I am not saying that, you really need to put down the Obama pom poms. Obama himself has said he would veto the Bush tax cut extensions on everyone and everyone will pay more in taxes. Think of it this way, if you voted Obama in your took a chance on Obama would veto the extensions but on the other side if Obama got his way millions would lose their jobs. Never give government permission to increase taxes because it will come back to bite you unless you are a taker. I have a feeling that someday the gravy train for takers will have to end.
Yes we went past the deadline in 2010 but Obama extended the Bush tax cuts because he said we were in a bad economy but we are still in a bad economy but Obama said he will veto the Bush tax cuts if they include the extension of the Bush tax cuts for higher income people. The bottom line is if you raise taxes on the small businesses they will cut cost elsewhere and it may be your job. The republicans know this and don't' want to do it because it will kick us back into another recession.
Now as it sits, "everyone" will pay higher taxes.
If you would have voted for Romney this would not be an issue, your tax rates would have been eventually reduced and you would have more money to spend effectively jump starting the economy and a wider tax paying base with less people on the dole (expenses).
I completely disagree with you.
My family owns a small business in the top bracket and we have owned numerous businesses in the past too. In reality, no small business owner would fire employees simply because of an increase in federal income tax. Likewise, no small business owner will hire employees simply because of a decrease in federal income tax.
Think about it! Would you really want to produce less, lower your customer service, lower your sales, damage your business's reputation over a 5% increase on income over $250,000? You would lose more in sales firing employees than the 5% increase because you won't be able to keep up with demand. Also, if you cut employees, your expenses will decline, meaning now instead of being taxed on $300,000 profit, you will be taxed on $400,000 profit.
DEMAND is what drives a business owner to hire or fire employees, not taxes. I'm speaking from my family's personal experience. If you think about it logically, you will understand too.
There is another argument that can be made that a tax increase would boost the economy because business owners will want more write-offs, so they are more likely to make long term value adding investments. Instead of paying more in taxes, I'd rather update my computer systems and write-off the expense to lower my taxable income, while making my business more efficient.
My family owns a small business in the top bracket and we have owned numerous businesses in the past too. In reality, no small business owner would fire employees simply because of an increase in federal income tax. Likewise, no small business owner will hire employees simply because of a decrease in federal income tax.
Think about it! Would you really want to produce less, lower your customer service, lower your sales, damage your business's reputation over a 5% increase on income over $250,000? You would lose more in sales firing employees than the 5% increase because you won't be able to keep up with demand. Also, if you cut employees, your expenses will decline, meaning now instead of being taxed on $300,000 profit, you will be taxed on $400,000 profit.
DEMAND is what drives a business owner to hire or fire employees, not taxes. I'm speaking from my family's personal experience. If you think about it logically, you will understand too.
There is another argument that can be made that a tax increase would boost the economy because business owners will want more write-offs, so they are more likely to make long term value adding investments. Instead of paying more in taxes, I'd rather update my computer systems and write-off the expense to lower my taxable income, while making my business more efficient.
I can agree and disagree with you but remember just because you are in your situation does not mean that everyone is or thinks the same as you. Yes, if demand is reduced then business will contract and more people will be layed-off. But if taxes are increased on the middle class (as it stands now because we are still in gridlock) then that will reduce demand. Also because of Obamacare and higher taxation businesses will reduce as many expenses as possible... not give raises, change their employees status from full time to part time.
As far as buying equipment, why buy a new computer system if you don't need it just to save taxes. That does not make sense.
I can agree and disagree with you but remember just because you are in your situation does not mean that everyone is or thinks the same as you. Yes, if demand is reduced then business will contract. But if taxes are increased on the middle class (as it stands now because we are still in gridlock) then that will reduce demand. Also because of Obamacare and higher taxation businesses will reduce as many expenses as possible or even change their employees status from full time to part time.
As far as buying equipment, why buy a new computer system if you don't need it just to save taxes. That does not make sense.
I agree taxes should not be increased on the middle-class because they make up the bulk of demand. Democrats don't want to this happen either. They proposed two separate votes, one on the middle-class and one on the top bracket, but Republicans basically want all or nothing. When it comes to deficit reduction, we need a balanced approach so the cuts can be more gradual to not send us back into a recession. That is why 80 CEOs of major companies such as Aetna, Microsoft, John Deere etc signed a letter asking for a Simpson-Bowles approach, which has a 3-1 ratio of spending cuts-tax increases.
The computer system is just an example, but think about it. You have a successful business with old computer systems. They work fine, but you have been wanting to update them so you can run more programs, to increase efficiency and speed. This is not something on your MUST-DO list, but something on your EVENTUALLY list. When a small business has a good year above the top bracket, they look at their EVENTUALLY list. The higher tax rate is an incentive to stop dragging your leg on these types of projects. Would you rather send $10k to Uncle Sam or receive 40% off new computer systems. This cost can be written off, so now your taxable income declines.
When it comes to Obamacare, I agree with you. I don't think businesses should foot the bill, I would rather see big tax increases on cigarettes and other items that increase health costs.
I agree taxes should not be increased on the middle-class because they make up the bulk of demand. Democrats don't want to this happen either. They proposed two separate votes, one on the middle-class and one on the top bracket, but Republicans basically want all or nothing. When it comes to deficit reduction, we need a balanced approach so the cuts can be more gradual to not send us back into a recession. That is why 80 CEOs of major companies such as Aetna, Microsoft, John Deere etc signed a letter asking for a Simpson-Bowles approach, which has a 3-1 ratio of spending cuts-tax increases.
The computer system is just an example, but think about it. You have a successful business with old computer systems. They work fine, but you have been wanting to update them so you can run more programs, to increase efficiency and speed. This is not something on your MUST-DO list, but something on your EVENTUALLY list. When a small business has a good year above the top bracket, they look at their EVENTUALLY list. The higher tax rate is an incentive to stop dragging your leg on these types of projects. Would you rather send $10k to Uncle Sam or receive 40% off new computer systems. This cost can be written off, so now your taxable income declines.
When it comes to Obamacare, I agree with you. I don't think businesses should foot the bill, I would rather see big tax increases on cigarettes and other items that increase health costs.
Again, I do not agree. Never vote to increase taxes on any group because it will effect the middle class be it through loss of jobs, higher prices or the government never being satisfied. Also building tax increases in on a tax on the rich now this tax "on the rich" will increase taxes on people in the middle class. Look up Alternative Minimum tax, this tax was put into law exactly the same way.
Government needs to learn how to balance a checkbook the same as everyday people do. People go bankrupt and lose everything if they are not financially responsible but government only wants more money from where they can get it.
Anytime the government takes money out of the system it hurts the economy, period. Government also takes a huge handling fee before it gets to the poor.
kygman, if you can't talk like an intelligent knowledgable person please do not post because it makes you look... unintelligent.
No I am not saying that, you really need to put down the Obama pom poms. Obama himself has said he would veto the Bush tax cut extensions on everyone and everyone will pay more in taxes. Think of it this way, if you voted Obama in your took a chance on Obama would veto the extensions but on the other side if Obama got his way millions would lose their jobs. Never give government permission to increase taxes because it will come back to bite you unless you are a taker. I have a feeling that someday the gravy train for takers will have to end.
there are many reasons that Romney did not get elected. Personally,I usually vote democratic,simply because I am pro union.However I do vote the other side occasionally. I voted for McCain last time.I am not fond of Obama,not approving of his foriegn policyand some other issues.........I was even thinking of a Romney vote.The thing that tipped me was Ryan's budget proposals to the house. In those he wanted to take my Railroad retirement and combine it with social security. He said "we get payed too much".
That system is for all intents and purposes,a private pension.It has been that way since 2001. It is one of the few pensions that is financed by the employer and the employees that is financially sound. Even the railroad companies lobbied him to leave it alone....they and the unions got no response.........
summation?? Ryan flippantly tryed to just ruin about 1.5 million peoples pensions without even looking into the particulars or even responding to inquiries. I would venture this was also a large factor in Romneys demise.
A lot of blue collar union voters lean and do vote conservative you know... even though they are union.
Another reason. i see not just a cold shoulder from republicans against unions. they want them totally abolished.do not take our only voice...........even russia allows trade unions.......
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
