Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-24-2010, 01:05 PM
 
33,387 posts, read 34,847,766 times
Reputation: 20030

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by city414 View Post
Anybody who lives in reality....Seriously!
yes, keep reading

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tymberwulf View Post
First, define rich. Do you mean Bill Gates rich or do you mean anyone making more than 250,000 a year rich?

If the former, then no tax breaks don't help create jobs. If you mean the later, then yes, because most small business owners make (if successful) more than 250,000 a year, and they are the ones who will be most likely to create more jobs if there is more money in their businesses.
actually you can include people like bill gates in this argument. when taxes are cut, ALL the rich invest more money in various areas, which encourages businesses to expand, or encourages new business start ups. part of the reason is that gates, among other super rich, have set up foundations to keep their money away from the federal government tax collectors, but as a result of setting up those foundations, they have to give away a certain percentage of the foundations net worth every year. in years where tax rates are high, the foundations give away the minimum amounts possible. when tax rates are lowered, the foundations give away more.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaymie View Post
When Bush put in the "tax cuts for the rich " I was waitressing , I made about , reported about 45 grand. I saved 3,000 that year. I got interested in what businesses paid more or less tax . I started my own .
Its a long story short but its true..
just another success story for when taxes are lowered. this poster took the chance and started their own business in a business friendly environment. kudos jaymie

Quote:
Originally Posted by city414 View Post
Okay then so whats all the fuss about these wealthy tax cuts and not simply saying or providing tax cuts for the middle class?

the big guys are continuing in swallowing up the small guys still
when taxes are cut, they are cut for EVERYONE, not just the wealthy. for instance i made the more money during the bush years than i did during the clinton years, yet i paid less in taxes during the bush years, and not just percentage wise, but in total.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sanrene View Post
You have three examples that prove it to be true.

JFK, Reagan and Bush tax cuts ALL increased revenue to the Treasury = increase number of jobs.
add to that list harding

Quote:
Originally Posted by nononsenseguy View Post
Does anyone seriously believe that soaking the rich is one way to stimulate the economy? ... Seriously!

Soaking the rich has never worked. It always results in less revenue to the Federal Governmen. And it does lead to fewer jobs being created. When you remove incentives, fewer people take risks. Fewer risk takers, fewer business start ups.

This is common sense. And it has been proven, over and over again.
very true. what liberals do not seem to understand is that taxes can control the economy. higher taxes slow the economy, and that means LESS revenue to the government. lower taxes means the economy grows, and that means MORE revenue to the government.

all you need to is check out the laffer curve to realize this. the laffer curve, for those who do not know what it is, tells us that tax revenue to the government expressed as a percentage of the GDP generally runs 20-22% of the GDP. when you raise taxes, the GDP falls, and so does tax revenue. when you lower taxes, the GDP climbs and so does tax revenue.

remember the old saying "the power to tax is the power to destroy". if you want more of something, you lower taxes on that thing. if you want less of something you raise taxes on that thing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-24-2010, 01:09 PM
 
59,088 posts, read 27,318,346 times
Reputation: 14285
Quote:
Originally Posted by Feel The Love View Post
Just look at how the last eight years wrapped up for that answer.
Being you made the claim, please provide the amount of revenue the government collected in each of those 8 years.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-24-2010, 01:24 PM
 
24,832 posts, read 37,348,515 times
Reputation: 11538
Quote:
Originally Posted by city414 View Post
also well off, or just plain janes and joes who own small business

ALOT OF PLACES(types of business) YOU ARE REFERRING TO sometimes keep the jobs in their family or just dont plain hire at all


"Giving tax breaks to a company will not create "demand" for that companies goods.
If a company has emough "demand" they would already be hiring people.They are not gonna create a job just to put the product into inventory, and pay taxes on them at the end of the year."
You miss the point...

A business would not have to "hire" to help the economy.

Let us say a new business is all family run. These are still jobs, BTW.

That new business is also a consumer.

They need stock, buildings, equipment....I am sure you get the picture.

They are members of the community.

They pay property taxes and support local efforts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-24-2010, 01:29 PM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,118,301 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by city414 View Post
Anybody who lives in reality....Seriously!
And what do you think they do with their money? Its called capital preservation, if you give them an incentive to spend, rather than save, then yes.. it results in JOBS.. If you dont understand this, then I'm assuming you work for a poor man..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-24-2010, 01:31 PM
 
24,832 posts, read 37,348,515 times
Reputation: 11538
IMO, Obama has been so anti-business that things will not change much until he is gone.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-24-2010, 01:32 PM
 
5,758 posts, read 11,637,967 times
Reputation: 3870
Taxes were actually far higher back during other periods of economic expansion, like the 1950's.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-24-2010, 01:32 PM
 
880 posts, read 2,025,295 times
Reputation: 637
Personal wealth does not create jobs companies do.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-24-2010, 01:33 PM
 
24,832 posts, read 37,348,515 times
Reputation: 11538
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
And what do you think they do with their money? Its called capital preservation, if you give them an incentive to spend, rather than save, then yes.. it results in JOBS.. If you dont understand this, then I'm assuming you work for a poor man..
Really there is not much of an incentive to save in the US either right now.

Investing out of the US is the best move at this time.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-24-2010, 01:34 PM
 
9,879 posts, read 8,020,347 times
Reputation: 2521
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009 View Post
Yes.

Is there anyone who does not believe this? Seriously?

How many jobs have you recieved from a poor man? Are buisnesses owned by the rich or the poor?

The more money I have beyond our monthly living expenses, the more I invest in our buisness (ag in Brazil and the US). I am a physician but our "buisness" is agriculture.

When the Obama tax increases go into effect, will I continue to invest more in our buisness? No. I will let it ride with no plans for expansion but only maintaining payment for expenses.
A good business man would never just let their business "ride" if it was growing, regardless. Are you a doctor who grows pot
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-24-2010, 01:34 PM
 
24,832 posts, read 37,348,515 times
Reputation: 11538
Quote:
Originally Posted by tablemtn View Post
Taxes were actually far higher back during other periods of economic expansion, like the 1950's.
But, there were very few rules to follow.

Just the environmental rules make a huge difference.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:52 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top