facebooktwitterRSS
- Advertisement -
  • Most Commentedmost commented up
  • Most Emailedmost emailed up
  • Popularmost popular up
- Advertisement -
 

« News Home

Fat cats don’t create jobs



Published: Tue, July 26, 2011 @ 12:00 a.m.

Fat cats don’t create jobs

Please tell me what I’m miss- ing here: The Republicans are taking a hard stand against the presidents’s effort to rescind tax breaks to certain individuals and corporations by President Bush in 2001.

Their reason? These people are the “job creators,” and hitting them with more taxes will prevent new jobs from being created What did they do with the almost $4 trillion extra they were able to keep?

Where are the jobs they created? If they haven’t produced the jobs in the 10 years they’ve had to do it, letting them keep more money year after year only continues to reduce revenue and increase the deficit.

And if these folks who received the tax breaks are so important as “job creators,” why do Republicans continue to blame this administration for not creating jobs? It seems they’ve made it pretty clear that job creation is the responsibility of those individuals and corporations that they don’t want to overburden with too much taxation. I guess it depends on which face they’re talking out of, because it seems they have two of them. You can’t have it both ways, boys.

I think it’s obvious now that the tax break was given to the wrong “class” of people. If the government gave the “middle class” $100, I pretty much guarantee they’d spend it so fast it would make your head spin. And it would go right back into the economy to generate more spending.

But give a wealthy person $100, and what does he do with it (besides not creating jobs)? It goes right in his pocket, or in some investment to grow more wealth for himself. There’s a reason wealthy people are wealthy. After all, it’s not because they spend their money making jobs.

Tom Brent, Struthers


Comments

1author50(1121 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

Mr Brent - did you ever get a job from a poor person or do you work for a government or non -profit entity?

Suggest removal:

2grand4dad(196 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

Mr. Brent,
Thanks for a great letter. I couldn't agree with you more. This "job creator" argument is one of the most ridiculous I have ever heard. It's just one more sorry excuse for why the rich keep getting richer while the rest of us struggle to get by.

Suggest removal:

3RustOnMyBelt(114 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

Amen. Concise and to the point.What is left of the "middle class" has continued to be taxed to death to pay for infrastructure improvements and has been left with no money TO invest in any small business ventures. They have been methodically squeezed out of the mix and offer zero competition to the wealthy who are only about "right sizing" and the elimination of a livable wage with benefits.

Suggest removal:

4Stan(9923 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

Neither a poor man nor government has ever given me a job . After the productive have been taxed into the pauper zone where will government get their tax monies ? All that the masses on welfare have been capable of is destroying the cities into oblivion . At some point mass starvation will be the end result .

RENEWABLE AND SUSTAINABLE LIVING IS COMING . ..

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_O3niSKklDTI...

Suggest removal:

5cambridge(3010 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

The rich have a long history of creating jobs. From the 1940's through the 1960's the north eastern part of the United States was the manufacturing hub of the world.

That slowly started to change in the 1950's when Japan and Germany retooled after WWII. Our factories were much older and out of date. The only way to keep up was to build new and modern plants.

They left generations of workers and created new jobs in the south where they could pay lower wages and less benefits and make more profit.

Fast forward to the last administration and it's tax breaks for companies that were moving those jobs in the south to China and India. Again they created more jobs and more profit.

When they got to China and India they couldn't believe their luck. They soon figured out that if they hired children instead of their parents they could make even more profit while creating more jobs.

So you see the rich do create jobs and we Americans are the winners. We can buy products much cheaper now due to child labor and the lack of regulations in these countries.

We can now buy lead covered toys for our children, poison dog food for Fido, poison baby formula for our infants and poison toothpaste for ourselves. Anyone who has ever used a tool made in those countries soon discovers that they have a duel purpose. After two or three times of use they are worn out but can be used as paper weights.

There is also so the savings we get buying knockoff and counterfeit copies of products of iconic American and European countries made in China or India. The $300 Gibson Les Paul even says "MADE in USA" on it just like the $2000 one from Nashville. The fact that their isn't a truss rod in the neck and the thing will never play properly is no big deal, look how cheap it is. You can buy a $50 dollar Rolex, hey you cab always ask someone what time it is.

In fact.....what time is it?

Suggest removal:

6cambridge(3010 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

Oh, and I forgot, since big business and the rich did all this for us it's only right that we pay their share of the taxes.

Suggest removal:

7Education_Voter(858 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

You know what powers much of the capital in this country through the stock market?
Pension Funds and Mutual Funds.
Yep. They own about 70% of blue chip stocks, and have invested in real estate and start-ups.

So the little guys' money is a major job creator.
Now a hedge fund manager may help the fund decide where to invest. Incredibly, as an employee, he is taxed not on his income as the people who actually provide the money, but on capital gains at 15%.

Who's really the job creator here?

Suggest removal:

8cambridge(3010 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

LOL! Man my fingers are full of typo's.

Suggest removal:

9redvert(2064 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

You can try to spin it all you want with the long drawn out dissertations like we have above but the bottom line is that the majority of jobs in this country are provided by small business owners. These "fat cats" as referred to in the article are the people making the 250K plus who in many cases mortgaged their future to start a business. They are also the same people that pay the majority of the taxes that obowser wants to increase. I myself will get a chuckle if obowser does get his way and raises the 35% tax rate they pay now. Why will I chuckle, because unemployment will increase. These small business owners will make up the difference with less employees.

ps: The majority of those that will get the ax are the ones with the obowser stickers on their bumpers. Anyone done a survey on what group got the most layoffs in the last few years?

Do I know of a small business owner that will eliminate a few obowser fans?
No comment. Hee Hee!!!

Suggest removal:

10ladiesrule(17 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

Just seems too simple to me....put Congress on SS and Medicare with the rest of us, raise the threshold on SS to the first $200,000 of earned income, reduce foreign aide, reduced fraud and waste in SS & Medicare, change Federal Income Tax to a flat 10% of income, no loop holes, everyone pays. Save America.

Suggest removal:

11Education_Voter(858 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

Funny Rocky!
What does "mortgaged their future" mean? That they started their business with other people's money?
A loan?
To a corporation, no doubt.
If it goes bankrupt, so what?

Of course, workers like teachers who took out a mortgage to finance their education didn't take a similar chance because....because...uh
Because "entreprenuers" always have the moral high ground!

Suggest removal:

12Stan(9923 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

A twenty five percent national sales tax would generate enough money to keep the fat cats in DC happy for a couple of years . Their goal is to tax all productivity out of existence .

Suggest removal:

13cambridge(3010 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

A sales tax is a terrible idea. People in the middle class need to spend everything they make just to survive. That means they are paying taxes on 100% of their income.

The ultra rich making millions and in some case's billions a year can live very well on a fraction of their income and invest the rest. That means they pay taxes on a fraction of their incomes. Nothing changes.

A flat tax where everyone pays the same on personal income with no loop holes or tax breaks would be great but that will never happen. That would mean everyone paying their fair share and those people making millions and billions would be paying much more than they do now. Not a chance.

Business should have right offs and tax credits for expansion in the form of new facilities, new American made equipment and other legitimate outlays of capital that improve an American business.

I believe a business should receive a tax break for hiring new employees and it should be based on the taxes that the new hire would pay. If an employer hired a new employee and that employee's income tax was, say 15 thousand dollars a year I say give the employer a $7,500 tax credit for a year or two. Everyone wins. Someone gets a new job, the employer gets a new employee at a cut rate and the government gets more revenue in the form of taxes from the new employee and in reality it didn't cost the government a dime.

Sometimes I even surprise myself.

Suggest removal:

14Education_Voter(858 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

I agree a sales tax is a terrible idea. At least with an income tax, you can predict and budget what you will pay in taxes.
With the sales tax, that will fluctuate with prices. What if your car or your refrigerator gives out? Suddenly you have a big problem.

Suggest removal:

15VINDYAK(1799 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

The loss of jobs to overseas workers is the result of our demand for less costly goods. We are obsessed with it, we demand it, and we brag about it.

Observations from a fatherly figure:

Retail shoppers today are obnoxious, demanding and absolutely inconsiderate to employees over prices offered by local retailers. Within 6 months of a retailer opening a new store in a community, the honeymoon is over and shoppers begin their abusive and often foul rapore with the store. This is insane! What more can a store give? Hire more 4 year olds for that assembly line in China? Move production to Somalia? Eliminate 2 more employees from the floor?

Common folks...wake up and listen to what you have become and what you have done to our country! Prices have bottomed out. The quality of the goods you buy are at rock bottom. You cannot possibly see any lower prices than we have now, yet you ask for less! Now increases will be forthcoming and meanwhile all our jobs are gone!

Do you know the number one objection by new employees who fill out job applications?

They do not want to work in customer service. They absolutely hate working with the public. The objection isn't the wage, its the customer. What have we sown?

Suggest removal:

16candystriper(575 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

dailyjobcuts.com

the CEO of the Cleveland Clinic told Fox Business he will need to layoff due to cuts coming from federal and state reimbursements...very concerned about how they will fund residency programs.

Suggest removal:

17redvert(2064 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

If we all paid taxes we would all be equal!

As stated earlier, a flat tax would be the best solution but will never happen.

Suggest removal:

18Education_Voter(858 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

How does that work, Redvert?

Is it something like the old feudal method in Merry Old England? Say a $10,000 tax that is half the yearly wages of a "peasant". (With social programs cut, I guess the sick and starving will take to the roads to die, as they did in the 1850s in Ireland. They were trying to get somewhere they could find food, but it was convenient for the death wagons to pick up bodies too.)
Meanwhile, the Lord gets a tax cut. He can afford to give the starving loans, and his interest starts to build exponentially (especially since this is already true of our current super-wealthy), building more principal.

Pretty soon all of the wealth is in a few hands, with the non-wealthy dependent on them.
Sounds like a recipe for freedom to me, all right.

Suggest removal:

19cambridge(3010 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

Education_Voter....I usually agree with a lot of your post but the last one confuses me.

I may have the wrong idea of what the definition of a flat tax is so I wont use the term but I'll describe what I believe is fair.

First of all it relates to personal income only. Business's are not included for reasons I stated in an earlier post.

What I would like to see on personal income is zero write offs except for a modest deduction for each child because they are the future and a deduction from your federally taxed income any state income tax taken from your paycheck. That's it. No tax free investment on personal income, no roll over, no offshore accounts, no mortgage deductions, nothing.

As far as who should pay I believe it should be everyone. If you get a welfare check it should be taxed at the same rate as a CEO. I truly believe that if every dime of personal income in this country were taxed equally and assuming the government were fiscally responsible (which I believe people from both party's want) that 97% of the people in this country would be overjoyed because their taxes would drop. Just my opinion.

No chance of it ever happening.

Suggest removal:

20Education_Voter(858 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

So the tax would still remain progressive?

Suggest removal:

21cambridge(3010 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

EV....I don't know what you mean by progressive. I feel everyone should pay the same percentage.

It is obviously more complicated then I can comprehend because I'm not a tax expert. My post is meant to be a generalization of what I believe is fair for everyone. When I say 97% would be happy I mean the 97% of current tax payers. The other 3% would lose all their loop holes and have to pay more. Those 25 hedge fund managers that divert their 22 billion a year in personal income and pay only 15% would have to pay the same as the rest of us taxpayers. They would be in the group of the unhappy ones.

There are people in this country getting public assistance that pay no taxes. I believe they should pay the same rate. If everyone paid their fair share I believe that the government would have more revenue and, people that legitimately need help would actually get more help and the whole country would be better off.

We are all Americans and we should all share in the good fortune of living in this country but we should all share in the responsibility in paying for it.

I'm against anyone getting welfare that doesn't deserve it and the biggest offenders are those collecting trillions in corporate welfare and contributing the least proportionately. I'm really tired of hearing how those people should pay little or no taxes because they are the job creators because that is total BS. Ten years of those tax breaks have been the biggest redistribution of wealth this country has probably ever seen and the top 3% were the beneficiaries and I've never seen anyone point to the jobs that corporate welfare created..

That's my very simple view of a very complex problem.

Like I said, never going to happen.

Suggest removal:

22Education_Voter(858 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

I think you are right about closing loopholes -- maybe not the mortgage deduction on one home, though.

If you study taxes more, you will see why we have the progressive tax we do.
Some of my students' parents make $20,000 working two hard jobs (health care aides, for example).
If the tax were 20%, that would leave them only $16,000. for the family to live on.
My siblings' incomes are $200,000. and more. 20% of $200,000 is $40,000., a hefty contribution for sure, but it leaves them with $160,000, covering the needs of 3 children just fine.
Do they feel that they are not motivated to work anymore? No!

One group representing more than 700 wealthy Americans pledged to donate members' 2010 tax cuts while lobbying for the cuts to be eliminated next year. Another released a report showing that Americans with incomes above $250,000 have reaped $700 billion in tax cuts in the past decade.

"This is going to be a tough fight," said Jeffrey Hollender, a self-made millionaire from Vermont. The goal is to show that "there are significant numbers of wealthy people who, in fact, support rolling back this tax cut."
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washingt...

Suggest removal:

23cambridge(3010 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

EV....Some very good points. Believe me the "cambridge tax code" comes strictly from the voices in my head. I have no doubt that a tax expert could show me flaws in my plan and a better and more fair way.

As far as there being ultra wealthy that give many times their share, I see it every day. I live in the SF Bay Area. In fact one of the Valley's own falls into that category. Eddie DeBartolo was not only the best and most loved sports team owner in the past forty years I believe he was even more loved for his time and money he freely gave to the community and he couldn't have been more humble about it. Made me very proud. And I'm a Raiders fan.

The thing that makes me crazy are people like UnionForever an dodge and the other dirt poor knuckleheads that are outraged at raising the tax rate 4% on the top 3%. The people protecting the top are insisting on cutting their social security and medicare to pay for those tax cut and they blame Obama and the Democrats that are trying to save their handout. They scream about Obama wanting to raise the debt ceiling but say nothing about reagon and the two bush's raising it 29 times in 20 years while Clinton and Obama only raised 6 times in 10 1/2 years.

Suggest removal:

24Education_Voter(858 comments)posted 3 years, 1 month ago

Some people are clueless.

And sadly, the less money they have, the less opportunity to travel out of the valley and see how much wealth there still is in this country.

Not everyone views scenic old barns or rusty abandoned manufacturing plants every day.

Suggest removal:


News
Opinion
Entertainment
Sports
Marketplace
Classifieds
Records
Discussions
Community
Help
Forms
Neighbors

HomeTerms of UsePrivacy StatementAdvertiseStaff DirectoryHelp
© 2014 Vindy.com. All rights reserved. A service of The Vindicator.
107 Vindicator Square. Youngstown, OH 44503

Phone Main: 330.747.1471 • Interactive Advertising: 330.740.2955 • Classified Advertising: 330.746.6565
Sponsored Links: Vindy Wheels | Vindy Jobs | Vindy Homes | Pittsburgh International Airport