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.
Love Canal? Is that the first thing you think about when regulations come to mind? That's the same as likening every new oil well to the Deep Horizon. Sh$t happens, and no amount of regulating will stop it. Look at banks and toxic assets as an example.
that's the WORST possible example you could use.
those toxic assets built up at banks precisely because we let them.
...that four more years of Obama's policies will bring back 5% unemployment. I just don't see though how raising taxes on small businesses and individuals making more than $250,000/yr, requiring all businesses to provide healthcare, and imposing strict environmental regulations on corporations is going to create jobs. How liberals will it create jobs? I haven't heard an answer for that.
Very easy answers:
-Taxes have been at various higher rates in the past while our economy did fine, or even improved. You would cringe to hear what our top tax rates were like while the US economy was exploding in decades past.
-New health care laws and environmental regulations can be problematic for businesses, but they open up opportunities elsewhere. Doctors' offices will have to hire more personnel in the first example. In the second, environmentally sustainable energy companies can expand, and simply bringing existing coal and oil processing up to par will take skilled workers. Both instances are tradeoffs to improve people's lives and health, and are not strictly losses.
-Taxes have been at various higher rates in the past while our economy did fine, or even improved. You would cringe to hear what our top tax rates were like while the US economy was exploding in decades past.
Would you mind providing the data, or links, please?
"I just don't see though how raising taxes on small businesses"
Only 2% of small business owners make more than $250,000 per year.
"requiring all businesses to provide healthcare,"
All business are NOT required to provide health insurance
The Affordable Care Act (ACA) does not require employers to offer insurance coverage to their employees, but it imposes a penalty on businesses that fail to insure their employees in certain circumstances. Small employers with fewer than 50 employees are exempt from any penalties. Beginning January 1, 2014, large employers can be assessed a free rider penalty if their workers receive premium subsidies through the Exchanges.
In addition, an employer with more than 200 employees who offers at least one health plan must automatically enroll employees into one of the plans offered, though employees may opt out. This approach to enrolling in employer-sponsored coverage is expected to increase employee participation.
imposing strict environmental regulations on corporations is going to create jobs.
Well you got me there, allowing companies to pollute water and the air will produce far more jobs in the healthcare industry than having clean air and water.
How would eliminating strict environmental regulations benefit the country?
Would you like a Love Canal in your backyard?
An unscrubbed coal fired powerplant upwind of your house?
Tap water with tasty little traces of benzene, aresenic, and dozens of other 'enes' and 'ics'. ?
I remember how poorly autos ran when smog controls were first mandated but I also know how superior they are today in both efficiency and longevity. And I have no reason to believe the manufactureres would've have done it voluntarily if they could put another nickel per unit in their coffers instead.
Well, if we have no health or safety standards, then the halthcare industry will boom. And that's just it... in the US, it's a for-profit industry. Cha-ching!! Breathe in diesel fumes and drink arsenic... for AMERICA.
Quote:
As far as I'm concerned this idea that all REGULATION! is evil is just wrong.
Or would you enjoy taking say a pain pill and having no idea what odd side effects it might create?
It's a bit late to wake up to the consequences of raising taxes on small businesses. No wonder his base has been so badly misled by all the noise about how little impact higher taxes would have on "so few small businesses". Dems and the media must think that all "small businesses" are mom and pop operations.
You'll see layoffs mushroom in the small business sector if taxes are raised.
...that four more years of Obama's policies will bring back 5% unemployment. I just don't see though how raising taxes on small businesses and individuals making more than $250,000/yr, requiring all businesses to provide healthcare, and imposing strict environmental regulations on corporations is going to create jobs. How liberals will it create jobs? I haven't heard an answer for that.
They won't. Unemployment is up under obama if you count those who never found work after graduating from college or those who gave up looking. The funny thing about doing the same thing is you did before get the same results and obama has no results to speak of. Nothing obama has done has helped this country one iota.
Raising taxes on small businesses will increase unemployment. So will obamacare as small businesses try to stay small enough not to be forced to pay the penalty tax or for benefits. Another option for businesses is to cut hours for workers because they won't have to pay for part time workers benefits or pay a penalty tax. I have no idea why anyone thinks this is a good thing.
I've never gotten democratic math. There are too few people making over $250,000 to make a difference by raising their taxes. With only 3% of Americans at this income level, how much money can you raise? The real problem with our tax structure is the 50% of Americans who pay no taxes. A small tax on them would raise a lot of money but dems don't seem to be able to do the math here. A flat tax would raise more money because everyone would be paying into the system. The problem with our taxes is that the top half pays the way for the bottom half. Taxing the top 3% won't fix that.
The problem with taxing the rich to pay for the poor is there aren't enough rich for this to work. What will happen is the tax increase will be pulled down to the middle class. The middle class pays the most taxes because there are more of them.
Several Bush tax breaks are scheduled to expire next year. Take the marriage penalty. That one costs my dh and I about $4k per year. We're talking about divorcing for tax purposes now that he's old enough to be on medicare and doesn't need my medical insurance. Tax wise, it's cheaper for us to be single.
I haven't heard any answers from the liberals on creating jobs either. (the only thing I hear is "Ha, ha, we won" but WHAT did they win???) Without job creation, the tax situation is even more dire. Right now, 19% of the under 30 crowd is unemployed (many don't count in the official numbers because they never found a job so they never drew unemployment benefits.). IMO, THAT number is way more important than the 3% making $250K or more. How much taxes would those 19% pay compared to the top 3% if they had jobs? How much less UIC would be paid out? How much less welfare? How much less medicaid? Someone posted in another thread about how, under obama, we have record numbers of people on assistance. You can't fix this if you take all of the income of the top 3%. However, it makes the liberals feel good to steal from others...and somehow, they think this will work.
Last edited by Ivorytickler; 11-09-2012 at 07:38 PM..
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.