Tax cuts for the rich?

[HasRob]

Great idea republicans!

http://vagabondscholar.blogspot.com/...-revenues.html

[Infoproliferati]

Understanding economics requires a significant amount of liberal thinking and the willingness to adjust to changing times. Unfortunately, the majority of the Republican base today doesn't understand economics and doesn't want to learn. All they can see is the singular benefit of tax cuts. How tax cuts will make government smaller or lead to a boost in the economy during present day economic conditions is beyond comprehension.

The average man, as it is, is fearful of spending the dollar he has, since he is unsure of how long the crisis will last. The Republicans want to have us believe that the well to do will be even more willing to spend when they get tax cuts? Yeah right!!! What they'll do is invest in foreign markets that are less volatile or stash the cash in Switzerland or the Caymans. Even corporations are buying back their own stock instead of hiring new blood. Companies that can afford to hire but would rather save should be telling of how unreliable the private sector can be with regards to boosting the economy. So who's left to stimulate the economy? The GOVERNMENT. It always has been and always will be. The government always leads in spending not just to stimulate the economy by creating more jobs but also to encourage the private sector to spend. How can the government afford to energize the economy by giving tax cuts to the wealthy? When smart folks suggest a 3% increase in taxes for the rich, the shortsighted conservative runs around with his hands on his head crying foul and a socialist government agenda. Taking MY money to give to whom? The middle class conservative is also indoctrinated into believing "Hey! Listen. If they could raise taxes for the wealthy, imagine what the government will do to you."

The most ballsy thing Obama can do right now is to not extend the current tax rates when they expire next year. Dare I say, the economy may actually perform better with a higher tax rate. But Obama will probably extend the current rates so as not to alienate everyone.

As humans we think of ourselves first. It's only natural. However, ignoring sacrifice during such times won't do us any good.

[HasRob]

Well Clinton raised taxes and it got the whole economy going. The rest of what you said makes perfect sense and I've read similar elsewhere. I'm 40, from a union town, out of work for a year and theres zero light ahead. I have 2 job offers in colorado for the spring for not even half my normal pay and no benefits. Trying to survive the winter and in a way, praying for an asteroid!

[Infoproliferati]

How would you feel if you discovered that the folks looking to hire you for the spring can afford to pay you more?

[stock_post]

I don't know the rest of the economy but for sure the salary difference between private sector and public sector is a concern.

The way it is used to be private sector salaries are higher and riskier than public sector jobs.
Now public sector employees get pay more + they are secure as well.

Which will be counter productive, if you don't see the reward for risk - that would be very bad.
(Not sure if I am correct - like to look at other peoples opinions )

With more taxes they pay more to the public sector employees..
(I better be looking for a government job now)

[Acro]

Bad economy? Or simply bad politicians?

[Mark Talbot]

Now public sector employees get pay more + they are secure as well.
....

With more taxes they pay more to the public sector employees..
(I better be looking for a government job now)

You might want to hold off on making the switch to public sector jobs just yet.

If you recall, during the high-inflation period of the Carter administration, the public sector went through a pretty significant wage freezes for quite awhile.

I think some old-school government employees refer this as the "lost years", where the private sector eventually started getting wage increases to offset the inflationary damage on the dollar, and government employees were stuck not reaping the same increases in their toils.


The interesting thing to note currently, with low inflation, and the fed rate already so low that it leaves the fed unable to attack lack of growth by making money more available with bank rate reductions, the fed can only effect change by buying government bonds to make money flow.

Unfortunatly this does significant damage to the dollar, but more importantly, as being seen right now with the new promise to buy $600B of g-bonds, opened the floodgates of major corporations and fund managers holding tons of these bonds, allowing them to essentially dump them on the market where there were no buyers before. Companies and fund managers were in a difficult position holding the bonds that they couldnt sell and pay little interest, as otherwise the bond market would fail with such large liquidations.

But now they have a big buyer.

And the net result is going to be very inflationary in the end.

So when the government is covered in rising expenses and costs in medicare, SS, military, administration, etc, one thing they can do to hold down a little bit of defecit growth,.... is freeze government wages.


Oh, and close a couple departments and offices too.

[fab]

Here's a nice one relating to welfare - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2GklCBvS-eI

[HasRob]

How would you feel if you discovered that the folks looking to hire you for the spring can afford to pay you more?

I'd feel good because what they are offering is not enough to live by, especially in Colorado and the cost of living near Estes Park. I'd be working to go to work, eat, and barely keep a roof over my head. Everything else like healthcare, savings, retirement, forget about it. I blame noone but myself though for my cituation.

[Fearless]

I could use a tax cut.

[Area52]

You might want to hold off on making the switch to public sector jobs just yet.

If you recall, during the high-inflation period of the Carter administration, the public sector went through a pretty significant wage freezes for quite awhile.

I think some old-school government employees refer this as the "lost years", where the private sector eventually started getting wage increases to offset the inflationary damage on the dollar, and government employees were stuck not reaping the same increases in their toils.


The interesting thing to note currently, with low inflation, and the fed rate already so low that it leaves the fed unable to attack lack of growth by making money more available with bank rate reductions, the fed can only effect change by buying government bonds to make money flow.

Unfortunatly this does significant damage to the dollar, but more importantly, as being seen right now with the new promise to buy $600B of g-bonds, opened the floodgates of major corporations and fund managers holding tons of these bonds, allowing them to essentially dump them on the market where there were no buyers before. Companies and fund managers were in a difficult position holding the bonds that they couldnt sell and pay little interest, as otherwise the bond market would fail with such large liquidations.

But now they have a big buyer.

And the net result is going to be very inflationary in the end.

So when the government is covered in rising expenses and costs in medicare, SS, military, administration, etc, one thing they can do to hold down a little bit of defecit growth,.... is freeze government wages.


Oh, and close a couple departments and offices too.

There should be alot of competition for any government job right now. I wouldn't worry about a freeze. Local government still has to provide services, no matter what. Most likely wouldn't affect benefits like retirement much. For example, if you work for a county close to where I live, county employees get the works, paid health and dental insurance, paid vacation, sick days, holidays, etc. With the main retirement plan, employees contribute 7% of their pay per month, county contributes almost 10% (from taxpayers) additional per month. Then they invest that money. You can collect retirement pay after 8 years (vested). When you retire the county currently contributes an additional lump sum of 225% (from taxpayers) of the balance in you account. If you had $100,000, you now have a $225,000 balance after the lump sum contribution. That total balance determines your retirement payment which I beleive can be as much as 90% of your salary at retirement. Insurance is paid for the employee until they can receive medicaid benefits.

I'm aware of some companies suspending their 401k match in the last couple of years, which blows a big hole in your retirement plans. That's less likely to happen working for the local government, unless the economy really falters. Imo, the unemployment rate will have to be well into double digits for that to even be considered. It depends on your location, also.

To bad we all don't get a deal like that. Actually, why don't we?

[Mark Talbot]

I agree about the 401k matching being suspended, I have seen that in some places. Ironically, the company I work for brought their matching up to 100% to a limit of course. But it is now 4x more than before. Yes I was surprised.

But yes, for personal reasons, I do believe we are soon to be headed for some double digit inflation.

[Raider]

What's so wrong with giving tax breaks to big business to promote job growth in the private sector?

It's the Democrats approach to taxing and regulating big businesses that's mostly to blame for the rise in the unemployment rate.

And if the Bush tax cuts are not renewed in January, more jobs will be lost as a result.

---------- Post added at 10:45 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:43 PM ----------

But yes, for personal reasons, I do believe we are soon to be headed for some double digit inflation.

I happen to believe this as well.

I don't see any reason out there that convinces me it wont happen.

[HasRob]

Raider you obviously DO NOT read well. It's a proven fact TAX CUTS FOR THE RICH do not increase revenue and only create debt for everyone and even if they got the cuts (they have them now yes?) Wheres all the ****ing jobs THEIR (THE RICH) supposed to create? The RICH are sitting on trillions of dollars and investing overseas.

75% of the forclosures today (theres 18 million EMPTY homes in america right now btw) but 75% of the foreclosures are due to lack of jobs since 2007, not the housing crisis. Why? Because of mass layoffs under Bush and outsourcing. That is a fact my friend! Your republicans ****ed up this country bigtime and sadly, I dont see no way out of it. Maybe if millions riot in the street for a revolution but thats unlikely!

---------- Post added at 05:21 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:06 PM ----------

Heres your tax cuts for the RICH in action, yeah Raider, just tons of job growth huh? You may now take your head out of your ass America is doomed



---------- Post added at 05:40 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:21 PM ----------

A Deloitte Research survey found one-third of all major financial institutions are already sending work offshore, with 75 percent reporting they would do so within the next 24 months. A U.C. Berkeley study found 25,000 to 30,000 new outsourcing-related jobs advertised in India by U.S. firms in just one month in 2003.

One service sector hard hit by job losses is information technology, especially software. The pro-outsourcing consulting firm Global Insight estimates we lost 104,000 information technology jobs to offshore outsourcing between 2000 and 2003, more than a quarter of the 372,000 jobs lost in the sector overall during the period. The Economic Policy Institute found employment in U.S. software-producing industries fell by 128,000 jobs from 2000 to early 2004, while about 100,000 new jobs producing software for export to the U.S. were created in India over the same period of time.

I love this part LOL....


States are outsourcing public sector jobs as well, though most state governments do not know exactly how many. At least forty states contract out administration of electronic benefit cards for the food stamps program offshore.

In one audit, the state of Washington found 36 out of 41 agencies were contracting out work overseas. A recent study by INPUT Research projects outsourcing of state and local government technology contracts will grow from $10 billion last year to $23 billion in 2008.

[Raider]

Excuse me assrub, but how many times do I have to tell you that I DONT support the outsourcing of jobs?

Why are you and your band of idiots so quick to assume I support everything that Bush did? I DONT... Which is in far contrast to you ass sniffing Obama supporters who support him on every issue.

It's a proven fact TAX CUTS FOR THE RICH do not increase revenue and only create debt for everyone and even if they got the cuts (they have them now yes?) Wheres all the ****ing jobs THEIR (THE RICH) supposed to create? The RICH are sitting on trillions of dollars and investing overseas.

Gee, wasn't it Bill Clinton who created over 20 Million jobs and left a budget surplus?

That sure didn't happen in his first 2 years when Clinton nearly doubled the Capital Gains tax.

Job creation and income to the Government began when Republicans took control of congress and LOWERED the capital Gain tax to what is was under Reagan... And they CUT spending, which would of NEVER happened under a Democratically congress.

[H2FC]

Now even many of the very wealthy are urging the gov to end the tax breaks for the rich. Thank God for these Patriotic Millionaires! It proves that a person can be rich without being GREEDY rich. http://www.fiscalstrength.com/

Some excerpts from the Millionaires Site.....

Only 375,000 Americans have incomes of over $1,000,000

Between 1979 and 2007, incomes for the wealthiest 1% of Americans rose by 281%

During the Great Depression, millionaires had a top marginal rate of 68%

In 1963, millionaires had a top marginal tax rate of 91%

In 1976, millionaires had a top marginal tax rate of 70%

Today, millionaires have a top marginal tax rate of 35% ( this is what I'm against)

Reducing the income tax on top earners is one of the most inefficient ways to grow the economy according to the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office

44% of Congress people are millionaires (this is why its so hard to end the tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans)

The tax cuts were never meant to be permanent

Letting tax cuts for the top 2% expire as schedule would pay down the debt by $700 billion over the next 10 years (this is why we must end the tax breaks for the wealthy)

[DomainsInc]

tax cuts won't save jobs. tax cuts for the rich seem to be all the republicans ever suggest which makes me think they really don't know what to do. the only thing that will ever bring american back to its former standing is to do something to bring jobs back to the US. And don't tell me unions are the problem. Sure, they are part of the problem if they were gone, nothing else would change. People need to earn a certain wage to live a decent lifestyle and I don't feel people should have to accept substandard wages to compete in the global market.

[Gerry]

tax cuts won't save jobs. tax cuts for the rich

Precisely. The rich are not spending but they are getting into a hording mode and a "hold" mentality. They are not spending, the banks aren't spending, the banks aren't even loaning.[/QUOTE]

the only thing that will ever bring american back to its former standing is to do something to bring jobs back to the US.

Time for a wake up call; those jobs lost? they are never coming back. They are gone. They are lost. The nation needs to catch up with the rest of the world markets who are altering the way companies do business and business itself. All those hundreds of thousands of jobs lost in NC, VA, SC that were former textile companies - those jobs are gone and are never coming back. Retooling and re-training are the key to america's future workforce. Emphasis needs to be placed on new technologies and the creation of a workforce to meet that demand.

I keep thinking back to the solar panel industry...less than 10 years ago, the US and China were neck and neck in production of solar panels. Alternative energy sources was not a priority with the US as there was too much of a stranglehold on the government and consumer by the Big 3 auto makers and Oil Cos. There was no incentive to change the mentality (let alone the good ol' boy business model). Today, China makes and supplies 60% of the solar panels used worldwide. That is technology and jobs that should have been here is the US but there was no push to change the status quo. The most sickening example I can think of is the recent piece about Rutgers University just spending $250 million dollars for the installation of solar panels and the tech running the system - all made in and supplied by China. What is more depressing is if state or federal money was used as in incentive to install these panels. And what do alumni and board of trustees think about that university and perhaps its endowment being spent on this solar system, made in China?

And don't tell me unions are the problem. Sure, they are part of the problem if they were gone, nothing else would change.

I think GM is perhaps the model of this. Before GM filed for bankruptcy, they went to all of their suppliers and the UAW for concessions. The Unions did not budge and held firm. The end result was if GM is out of business, all those down-the-line suppliers and supply chain are also out of business - makers like Delco (electronics) and others are idol.

The upside to GM's bankruptcy was forcing the unions back to the table to negotiate in earnest and anew. GM has taken their old school mentality and way of doing business and let it die along with their old school executives. The end result is a leaner and more efficient GM making products people want and (more importantly) products people want to buy.

So unions were and are part of the problem. But now unions are part of the solution going forward.

Personally, I hate seeing Pontiac die as I am a big Classic/Antique car buff and Pontiac made cars the stuff of legends (and songs) are made of - GTO, Firebird, Bonneville, and more.

GM has retooled and refocused its attention on the future rather than remain in the 20th century.

[H2FC]

Good post Doc. When I read the part about the solar industry, or lack of it in America, I couldn't help but think of it as the "Raider mentality". It wasn't long ago she was "LOL" (as she so often likes to do when making an ass of herself), about the prospect of solar and wind jobs here in this country ever being an important industry.

Those like her in political office will soon be looking for other jobs themselves....and rightfully so. I say The Sooner The Better!

[HasRob]

Doc, I have to disagree with you on the union part. Thats just another score for corporate america taking away from the middle class. God forbid americans make a decent salary with benefits. GM deals in and earns in the billions. Now their employees make half their pay they used to make. If GM exported more cars into other countries then we import, there would be zero problems, we need better trade laws.

If the republicans and corporate america had it all their way, we'd all be making less then minimum wage with no benefits and it looks like they are winning. Slowly but surely, we are loosing everything.