Well, that and the fact that they have been the major benefinicaires of tax and govement policies in the past 20-30 years and they should be contrubitng more in this time of fiscal trouble.
Why? I would be better for everybody if the Government first cuts costs. That would be the best way out of this problem. You don't cut cost then you can tax the top 1% of tax payers 100% and it would be only a drop in the bucket. We need to fix spending first and foremost. This is the only way our fiscal troubles will get fixed. Taxation will only magnify the problem.
The false equivlence in this argument is now and has always been this:
Small business owners are by and large not upper middle class.
I didn't say they are. What I said is that there are many small business owners who are in the $250,000 tax bracket and it will not help them or their business nor will it help them to justify the hiring of new people. The way LLCs work is that all profit and losses of the business are viewed by the IRS as a personal income of the owner(s). Increase the taxes upon these owners will take more money out of their companies which will restrict the capability of the owner(s) to expand their businesses and hire more people or give higher wages, etc.
Which, though it may seem counter intuitvie, higher taxes would help (SEE the above post)
Who will it help? Tell me that. Who will it help. Like I said you can take every dime of the wealthy and it won't make any significant impact on the deficit we are currently running.
Um, no, and this displays a real misunderstanding of how small busineses run. Also, as a small business guy, you couldn't get a loan right now if you need one. Banks haven't been loaning money since we bailed them out.
Its one of the reasons we can't get the economy restarted. Everyone who understands what going on in the USA agrees with this
(except maybe FOX news)
This isn't necessarily true. Yes it is harder to get a loan today but not impossible. As I well know as a small business owner. Many small business owners are getting line of credits for just in case situations instead of going after loans. Loans are used not for normal expenditures but for big capital expenditures, i.e. business expansion, buying new equipment, building expansion, relocations, franchising, etc. The main problem is most are too uncertain of the economy and what Washington is going to do step out there and do any big capital expenditures.
I would like to know, exactly, where 250,000 a year would be too little for a middle class lifesyle.
Exactly, where. I mean down the to ZIP code.
I would say New York City for one. I live in Shreveport, LA and between myself and my wife we make about $100,000.00 per year. To live in New York City at the same level it would require us to make over $190,000 per year! I would consider myself as middle class and am not living high on the hog per se. Heck between my mortgage ($650.00/month), groceries ($250.00/week two boys), two vehicles ($900.00/month) which we need because we don't have public transportation, $200.00 of gasoline/week, and lets don't forget taxes, we don't have a whole heck a lot left over for much else.
By the way Nantucket and Honolulu would be two others that are pretty high.
Can you rewrite this sentence please ?
May want to throw some hate toward your party since they helped get us in this bind and now holding us in it. (Is that better?)
I would like to take a poll: Who REALLY beleives this ?
Let me know.
You see that is the problem. No body pays attention to fact do they? Was or was not the Democrats in charge of this country for 2009 and 2010? The Republicans could do absolutely nothing to stop the Democrats from passing anything and everything they wanted. Nothing. No filobuster, nothing. And yet the party who is for the little man did what for the little man during that time? What have they done? What did they do? Heck they didn't even pass a federal budget during this time. Not one. After two years of complete control by the Democrats do you really feel better off today than you did in 2006?
As opposed to the GOP who only support the rich and powerful ?
Really? Who believes this? Anybody? What a joke. You know the big accusation by Obama that Republicans are for the rich people is the private airplane joke. You know what the tax break for the private airplane industry was passed by the Democrats in the stimulas bill that they passed. Only one republican voted for it. And yet Obama is blaming the Republicans? And yet no body researches this stuff in the media and calls him out on it.
When Pres Bush and the Republicans passed the Bush tax cuts, the Dems were running around calling them tax cuts for the rich only. Well why did Obama and many Dems, when the tax cuts were due to expire wanted them only to expire just for the people making $250,000 or more if there was no tax cuts for those below $250,000? If there was no tax cuts given by Bush to those below $250,000 then what was the gripe? They should have just let them expire no harm no foul right? Oh that is right they have been lieing about the Bush's tax cuts from the beginning and letting these tax cuts to expire would have hurt not just the upper class but the middle class as well. If I remember correctly the difference in my taxes was about $1400/year under Bush's tax cuts.
Read some history - Unions are reason the middle class exist(ed) in the country. Without them we would all be working class and poor at the tender mercies of corporations.
Yes unions were very important in establishing a balance between labor and employers and for that I thank them as well as we should. But as Pope Leo XIII said in his encyclical
Rerum Novarum there must be balance between the Employee and Employer and the unions did do this. But the Pope also warned against the Employee having too much power as well and I think this is where the Unions are at at this moment and the balance must be reestablished. As Pope Leo says: "
20. Of these duties, the following bind the proletarian and the worker: fully and faithfully to perform the work which has been freely and equitably agreed upon; never to injure the property, nor to outrage the person, of an employer; never to resort to violence in defending their own cause, nor to engage in riot or disorder; and to have nothing to do with men of evil principles, who work upon the people with artful promises of great results, and excite foolish hopes which usually end in useless regrets and grievous loss." I would think this great pope would not look upon what happened in Wisconsin recently as a moral good.
