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.
A better question would be, explain how giving that money to the most wasteful most in debt institution in the world (the Federal Government) leads to any more jobs.
You are reading to many American Socialist Party talking points.
If Denny Crane is reading too many American Socialist Party talking points, does that mean you're reading too many American Capitalist Party talking points given your opposition to his argument?
Quote:
Originally Posted by nicet4
The unemployment rate was 6.1% when the Bush tax cuts were enacted (May, 2003) and a year later it was 5.6% and a year after that it was 5.1% and a year after that it was 4.6%. Seems like it worked to me.
Seems like it worked, but do you have proof that the decline in U/E is a direct result of these tax cuts? I mean, you're only looking at a data set of three years. In every study I've ever looked at, that's just not enough data to make a sound conclusion.
A better question would be, explain how giving that money to the most wasteful most in debt institution in the world (the Federal Government) leads to any more jobs.
The government creates jobs by spending money that might otherwise be stashed away in some overseas account.
Here's an idea to remedy this. Don't buy their ****, especially if you don't have the money. Everyday I see people in debt or who make less than I do playing around with expensive smart phones, driving around in luxury sedans/SUVs, buying video game consoles, buying large homes they can't afford, etc. The elites may be parasites, but we're allowing them to suck us dry by buying all their stupid, useless ****.
No question about it. You have to give them this much- their advertising machine that convinces people they need a bunch of crap that they really don't is very brilliant and very effective. Peer pressure works just as much on adults as it does on teenagers.
It doesn't matter what side of the argument you are on with this I think we can agree that ship has already sailed. Also keep in mind the tax cuts wouldn't only hit the large companies. 250K would also impact much smaller businesses. They would find it much harder to absorb the costs.
Actually it does matter. The ship hasn't sailed because we'll be right back to this same debate the next time businesses demand a tax cut. The people pushing this trickle-down argument have yet to provide any convincing evidence to support their theory. And who says you have to tax small businesses along with big ones? Why not increase taxes on individuals making 250K, but exempt small businesses?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mb919
I know- if the wealthy don't get to keep their tax cuts, they might do things like cut payroll expenses by sending thousands and thousands of jobs overseas, or just eliminating other jobs altogether. We can't have that now, can we?
They'd do that even if you cut taxes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mb919
To answer the OP's question- they don't. Trickle-down economics is one of the biggest scams ever perpetrated on the people of this country. Our elite wealthy class are nothing but parasites who take, take, and take some more while giving back nothing, and the whole "creating jobs" canard is just one of the ways they justify stealing other people's money. We've been doing this "tax cuts" thing for 30 years and in that time the middle class has been decimated (while the wealthiest have made out like the bandits they are). Those two things are not coincidental.
I agree. And I think a big reason why so many non-wealthy people have bought into it is because Americans believe that if you work hard, you too could someday be rich. That's why they don't want to tax the rich. They're worried they may join the club someday and they don't want to pay higher taxes if and when they get there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nicet4
You are reading to many American Socialist Party talking points.
It's been my experience that the people who throw out the Socialist label can't actually define socialism. It's just a word they've heard on Fox News and use it to scare people into thinking liberals are going to turn the U.S. into the Soviet Union.[/quote]
Quote:
Originally Posted by nicet4
But it did happen. It has happened every single time it's been tried.
The unemployment rate was 6.1% when the Bush tax cuts were enacted (May, 2003) and a year later it was 5.6% and a year after that it was 5.1% and a year after that it was 4.6%. Seems like it worked to me.
If it worked so well, then why did the unemployment rate rise? I'll tell you why. Because the economy was built on a house of cards thanks to his deregulation of the banking industry. Once that house came crashing down, the jobs went with it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nicet4
My company earns $2 million in profit and I decide to build a new 50,000 sq. ft. manufacturing building hiring 20 new workers using that $2 million. Do you really think I won't be taxed on that $2 million? Yes, I will be, it is NOT a write off so instead of having $2 million to build I'll have to make do with $1 million and not build so big and hire so many.
The point is that you're putting it back into your business which either directly or indirectly leads to job creation. Now imagine if you took that $2 million and bought yourself another mansion. How does that create jobs? Maybe for the people who mow the lawn and work in your garden. Then again, you might do what a lot of wealthy people do and hire illegals so you can pay them less while pretending not to know they're illegals.
I know- if the wealthy don't get to keep their tax cuts, they might do things like cut payroll expenses by sending thousands and thousands of jobs overseas, or just eliminating other jobs altogether. We can't have that now, can we?
All I'm saying is if the tax cut expires don't be surprised by how businesses deals with it.
But it did happen. It has happened every single time it's been tried.
The unemployment rate was 6.1% when the Bush tax cuts were enacted (May, 2003) and a year later it was 5.6% and a year after that it was 5.1% and a year after that it was 4.6%. Seems like it worked to me.
But then this according to the democrats running against Bush in 2004, was the worst economy in American history.
Let's here what President Kennedy thought about tax cuts.
Oh, and Kennedy's tax cuts worked too taking the unemployment rate from 7.1% in May, 1961 to 5.5% just a year later.
Let's take a look at history.
During World War I, the top marginal tax rate got up to 73%. In 1922, the rates were reduced to 56%, 46%, and finally down to 25% in 1925. The stock market took off. We had a boom, a bubble, and then the crash of 1929, The Great Depression and bank failures.
Between 1936 to 1982, the top marginal tax rate was between 70 and 92%. Then Reagan cut it down to 50%. That was followed by a recession. Of course, Reagan supporters said it was all Carter's fault. Funny how they can blame Carter for stuff that happens during Reagan's term, but when Obama supporters blames Bush, they say whatever happens during his term is his fault, not his predecessor's. Then in 1987, the top rate went down to 38.5%. Another boom, another bubble, and in October 1987 a crash. Black Monday. Oh and the bubble was in real estate. Imagine that. Then we had bank failures, the S&L crisis, and a bailout. Stop me if this sounds familiar.
George W. Bush comes into office and cuts the top marginal rate down to 35%. He also cuts capital gains taxes and inheritance taxes. Eventually, the economy begins to grow. But employment didn't grow much, median income went down, the stock market was flat. In fact, there was only one sector that did grow? The financial sector, which should have made it obvious that we had another bubble. And then what happened? A crash, bank failures, and a bailout.
Do you see a pattern emerging? Tax cuts, boom, bubble and then crash.
Now let's talk about when times were actually good and the economy was booming.
FDR's first two terms, WWII, the post war period up through Eisenhower, and the Clinton years.
When FDR came into office, he raised the top tax rate to 79%. Oh and before you say the recovery started under Hoover, keep in mind that Hoover raised the rate from 25 to 63%. The economy grew 58% from the time FDR took office til the start of the war.
During WWII, the top tax rate was between 88 and 94%.
During the post-war period from Truman and Eisenhower, the rate was between 81 and 92%.
When Clinton took office, he raised the top rate from 31 to 37% and then to 39%. People also say the Clinton boom started under Bush 41. But didn't Bush 41 raise taxes? Hmm.
Do you notice the pattern this time? 3 out of 4 of America's highest growth periods were preceded by big tax hikes.
Now since you brought up JFK, let me address that. JFK started the idea of cutting taxes, although it was actually LBJ who enacted it. The top rate was cut from 91% to 77% and then down to 70%. And it stayed at that level all the way through Carter's term. During that time, the Dow Jones ended pretty much where it started and median personal income stayed about the same.
So some interesting facts emerge from all of this.
1. Large income tax cuts are followed by a bubble and then a crash.
2. High income taxes correlate with economic growth.
3. Income tax increases are followed by economic growth.
4. Moderate income tax cuts are followed by a flat economy.
And yet despite having nearly a century's worth of evidence to show that tax cuts don't help the economy in the long run, we still have people arguing in favor of them.
And yet despite having nearly a century's worth of evidence to show that tax cuts don't help the economy in the long run, we still have people arguing in favor of them.
That's because those short attention span Americans are concerned about one thing: How can I get rich quick?!?!
BTW, very interesting post. I will go over again to see if there's anything to question, but it looks pretty well researched.
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.
