Democrats vote to raise ALL of our taxes......

If people want to keep asserting that somehow, magically, increasing the tax-rate from 36% to 39.6% (ONLY on the income OVER $250,000), is going to stop "job-creation", I will keep pointing out that historically, it's not true, and the numbers over the past 16 years prove it. As much as I know the conservatives like to cry about "bringing Bush and/or Clinton into it", historically the facts cannot be ignored, and I will continue to point out the FACTS. People in the top 2% income brackets do not "create jobs" with their extra 3.6% of income, or we would have seen more than 3 million jobs during the 8 years of Bush's tax-cuts.

RenegadeCJ wrote:

pineinthegrass wrote:
My point was about the $700 billion deficit. Are you OK with that to keep tax cuts for the top 3%.

Of course Democrats have shown they weren't concerned about the deficit when they passed the stimulus. At least they are trying to cut it down by $700 billion now.

So why are you against cutting the deficit $700 billion? I thought that's what conservatives are all about!

Raising the tax rates won't raise that $700 billion. Not even close. By increasing tax rates you will change the way people act, and they won't do the economic activity to raise that $$.

Tax rates have no direct correlation to tax revenue to the treasury. Cutting taxes has raised additional revenue to the treasury many times in our past. The intention is to increase economic activity, not stifle it.

OK, the head of the CBO just reported on this. He sees a short term economy boost, but borrowing to pay for that $700 billion (also a CBO projection) less revenue will make things worse...

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-09-28/budget-scorekeeper-says-tax-cut-extension-would-hurt-economy.html

A permanent extension of Bush-era tax cuts would provide a temporary boost to the U.S. economy and then become a drag on growth by pushing up interest rates, the head of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said.

Douglas Elmendorf said extending breaks due to expire at year’s end would increase demand in the next few years by putting more money in consumers’ pockets.

Over the long term, he said, the tax cuts would hurt the economy because the government would have to borrow so much money to finance them that it would begin competing with private companies seeking loans. That, in turn, would drive up interest rates, Elmendorf said.

“The problem is that if those tax cuts are not accompanied by other changes in the government budget and are simply funded through borrowing,” the borrowing “crowds out other private investment in productive capital -- in the sorts of equipment, the computers, the machinery, the buildings -- that are the source of long-term economy growth,” Elmendorf told the Senate Budget Committee today.

First of all, $$ doesn't belong to the treasury first, it belongs to those who own it. What makes you think those "rich" won't spend that $$, giving us more jobs, more tax revenue, etc. Rich people spend $$ on things...that is what makes them different than us.

Okay, lets try to get a few definitions straight. Since so many (including Obama) see a household or individual making $250,000 or more annually as wealthy or rich (the top 3%), then that makes those above the poverty line the middle class. So how many middle class people can either directly or with a leveraged loan open a small business and how many will this truely small business employ?

Obviously, quite a few, (since many get loans from banks, the SBA, etc.), and apparently less than 3% fall into the over $250,000 tax-bracket.

Edited to add:

Obama defended his tax plan against McCain's charge that "Obama's secret that you don't know is that his tax increases will increase taxes on 50 percent of small business revenue." Obama responded that "only a few percent of small businesses make more than $250,000 a year. So, the vast majority of small businesses would get a tax cut under my plan." TRUE...AND TRUE: Only 4.3 percent of the total U.S. businesses are small businesses that make more than $250,000 a year, according to tax data. It's also possible that a majority of "small business revenue" comes from these firms. Obama is referring to the number of firms, McCain is referring to the concentration of revenue at the top end of the small business food chain. Both managed to make the facts work for their arguments.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008 ... 914&page=2

Scruffy wrote: Where were the Repubs weeks and months ago when this should have come to the floor? Why are they all the sudden in heat for this bill NOW?

Politics. Pure and simple.

What you are forgetting there Scruffy is that the Pelosi wanted to extend most, not all of the tax cuts. For the Republicans and many Democrats, they wanted all of the tax cuts extended and wouldn't go along with only extending only some of the cuts. Pelosi and her band of merry progressives wanted to pick the winners and losers of the tax cut extensions, which should be an affront to every citizen, not just the ones that Pelosi and her pied piper in the Oval Office decided they wished to punish with the federal tax code.

I'm looking for real insight here. Figure at least minimum wage, 2,080 hours for full time employees, leased space, utilities, start up costs, etc. Now consider that though mortgage rates are near all-time lows, not many can re-finance without at least a very good credit rating. Is a small business loan so much easier, or are we going to set up the next wave of bankruptcy?

The majority of the Democrats, and most of the people were against adding even further to the tune of $1.1 trillion dollars to the deficit by providing unfunded tax cuts to those having incomes above $250,000 as it has been shown that tax cuts to those individuals would not spur the economy, while tax cuts to those below that income would be more likely to enter the economy.

HEARTLESS wrote: I'm looking for real insight here. Figure at least minimum wage, 2,080 hours for full time employees, leased space, utilities, start up costs, etc. Now consider that though mortgage rates are near all-time lows, not many can re-finance without at least a very good credit rating. Is a small business loan so much easier, or are we going to set up the next wave of bankruptcy?

And that has what to do with the fact that "Only 4.3 percent of the total U.S. businesses are small businesses that make more than $250,000 a year"?

http://www.census.gov/epcd/www/smallbus.html

out of ~25 Million small businesses

19.5 Million have no employees, and an additional 4.5 million have between 1 & 9 employees.

The non-employee businesses average $40,000 in receipts gross revenue

Here, let me make this easier. From the post above from LJ, most small businesses make less than $250,000/yr. Do you, readers making less than that, feel confident in putting it all on the line considering what it takes to run a successful business? I certainly don't, so I don't know how the middle class is supposed to drag the nation out of a recession.