Jobs and the Big Bush Tax Cut Bamboozle

Jobs and the Big Bush Tax Cut Bamboozle
Letting some of the Bush tax cuts slide won't hurt small businesses

According to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a nonpartisan think tank in Washington, fewer than 2 percent of small businesses make enough to file in the top two income tax brackets. Far more, 14 percent, claim the Earned Income Tax Credit, which is only available to low-income workers. In fact, less than 3 percent of people with any business income at all—from an enterprise large or small—would be affected if the rates on the top two tax brackets increase, according to the Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation.

Republicans also are fond of claiming that 50 percent of small business income claimed on personal tax returns is subject to the top two tax rates. Says Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky anytime he gets the chance: "What they propose to do is raise taxes on the top two rates, which would capture about 50 percent of small business income."

Not only is this untrue, it is largely beside the point. While half of all net business income claimed on personal returns is subjected to the top two tax rates, this includes an array of money that in no way resembles earnings from a small business. Counting it all as small business income is to suggest that every partner in a law firm, everyone earning money from a hedge fund investment, and every passive investor in an oil or gas venture is an individual small business. Making money from investing in real estate or a trust fund? Congratulations--to a Republican, you're a small business!

The fact is, exceedingly few small businesses are subject to the highest tax rates. Plus, at the end of the day, the income tax is levied on just that—income, not profits—so small business owners taking home $1 million per year ought to be taxed like anybody else making that much if they chose to report their small business earnings as income.

In the end, claims that Republicans make to bolster their support for extending the Bush tax cuts for the rich show they either don't understand the data that's available or they're banking on a few super-rich small businesses and many more very wealthy investors to take their tax cuts and trickle the effect down onto the rest of the economy. That's not an efficient method for creating jobs or boosting the lackluster economic recovery—as we experienced during the jobless recovery after the Bush tax cuts were first enacted.

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/ ... -bamboozle


Insert charts from HeritageFoundation and ClubrForGrowth here: ______________ But it doesn't change the fact that removing the Bush tax-cuts on the top 2% will have VIRTUALLY NO EFFECT on job-creation...

If removing the Bush tax cuts won't hurt the economy, why did Barack Obama sign on to 2 more years of tax cuts? He is supposed to be a brilliant man and he owned both Congress and the Senate but he realized that he needed the tax cuts to prevent even worse unemployment than the current 9.2%.

If I remember correctly, the Senate Republicans threatened a filibuster if he did not extend the Bush tax cuts.

I finally figured out what this insane belief in cutting taxes as a means to "creating jobs" reminds me of.

"Well, tax cuts didn't work so well last time to create jobs, but it's probably because we weren't pure enough and didn't push them hard enough and have more faith in the process. And don't forget we had those evil liberals mucking things up."

Doesn't sound a heck of a lot different to me than....

"Jesus didn't come back to rapture us THIS TIME, but if we just keep believing and praying pretty soon He WILL. And don't forget that Satan is out there mucking things up...."

... Or like, yes a Democrat majority didn't give us health care the last time, but it's probably because we weren't pure enough and din't push them hard enough and have more faith in the process. And don't forget, we had evil conservatives mucking thing up.


Come on people, wake up and smell the espresso. They aren't working for us anymore.

chickaree wrote: ... Or like, yes a Democrat majority didn't give us health care the last time, but it's probably because we weren't pure enough and din't push them hard enough and have more faith in the process. And don't forget, we had evil conservatives mucking thing up.


Come on people, wake up and smell the espresso. They aren't working for us anymore.

I agree with your second paragraph, but I don't see a counterpart to the "faith-like" belief in a single-minded ideology on the left. In fact, the problem with the left is they don't seem to be able to have single-minded support for much of anything. Kind of like herding cats.

AspenValley wrote: I finally figured out what this insane belief in cutting taxes as a means to "creating jobs" reminds me of.

"Well, tax cuts didn't work so well last time to create jobs, but it's probably because we weren't pure enough and didn't push them hard enough and have more faith in the process. And don't forget we had those evil liberals mucking things up."

Doesn't sound a heck of a lot different to me than....

"Jesus didn't come back to rapture us THIS TIME, but if we just keep believing and praying pretty soon He WILL. And don't forget that Satan is out there mucking things up...."

Check out Paul Krugman: He thinks we didn't spend enough on stimulus. I remember him writing back in Rolling Stone when unemployment was 4% under Clinton that we needed to spend more money to achieve 0% unemployment.
Sounds pretty irrational to me. 4% is about as good as it gets.

Scary thought, will 9% unemployment and 20% underemployment be the new norm? Southern Europe would love to see 10% unemployment again.

AspenValley wrote:

chickaree wrote: ... Or like, yes a Democrat majority didn't give us health care the last time, but it's probably because we weren't pure enough and din't push them hard enough and have more faith in the process. And don't forget, we had evil conservatives mucking thing up.


Come on people, wake up and smell the espresso. They aren't working for us anymore.

I agree with your second paragraph, but I don't see a counterpart to the "faith-like" belief in a single-minded ideology on the left. In fact, the problem with the left is they don't seem to be able to have single-minded support for much of anything. Kind of like herding cats.

So basically what we have in Washington is a bunch of cats running in circles trying to move a bunch of recalcitrant elephants.

Kate wrote: If I remember correctly, the Senate Republicans threatened a filibuster if he did not extend the Bush tax cuts.

rofllol rofllol So you are saying that Obama has no balls and is not a leader! Glad you finally admitted it!

SS109 wrote:

AspenValley wrote: I finally figured out what this insane belief in cutting taxes as a means to "creating jobs" reminds me of.

"Well, tax cuts didn't work so well last time to create jobs, but it's probably because we weren't pure enough and didn't push them hard enough and have more faith in the process. And don't forget we had those evil liberals mucking things up."

Doesn't sound a heck of a lot different to me than....

"Jesus didn't come back to rapture us THIS TIME, but if we just keep believing and praying pretty soon He WILL. And don't forget that Satan is out there mucking things up...."

Check out Paul Krugman: He thinks we didn't spend enough on stimulus. I remember him writing back in Rolling Stone when unemployment was 4% under Clinton that we needed to spend more money to achieve 0% unemployment.
Sounds pretty irrational to me. 4% is about as good as it gets.

Scary thought, will 9% unemployment and 20% underemployment be the new norm? Southern Europe would love to see 10% unemployment again.

It wasn't for 11 years when the Republicans controlled at least half or all of congress. They kept it at or around 5% even with 9/11.