It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Tax breaks for the rich create new jobs? How?

page: 5
12
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 12:09 PM
link   
reply to post by thewholepicture
 


ask obama.




posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by 46ACE

Originally posted by Flatfish
reply to post by 46ACE
 


Apparently you've had a radically different experience, as an employee or business owner, than the one I lived through.

As a union longshoreman, working around the clock was just part of the job as the ships had schedules to meet and the loading/unloading process was usually expedited to accommodate them. During the rapid deployment stages of "Iraqi Freedom" I personally worked 24/7 for three and a half months supervising the hiring and placement of over 600 longshoremen per day. It nearly killed me. During that time we sent three fully loaded RO/RO vessels on their way to Iraq every 30 hrs. while simultaneously receiving inbound cargo by rail, truck and air from every military base involved in the rapid deployment.

As usual, the owners of the stevedoring companies employing our longshoremen went home every night, played golf twice a week and even had time to go to church on Sundays. Maybe all the stress wore them out so they needed the extra R & R.

You sound to me like someone who has never really had to "Work" for a living.


24/7 for 3 months straight....b.s.& goodnight.


Hate to disappoint you but I have the check stubs to prove it. Actually, my biggest check was for 220 hrs. in one week which some would say is impossible seeing how there are only168 hrs. in a week. Well, due to the fact that we were completing vessels and starting new ones at such a rapid rate, I was entitled, by union contract, to some overlapping guarantees which ended up giving me more hrs. than actually existed.

To be perfectly honest, I had no sleep for the first seven days but I probably averaged 3 hrs. per day, usually in half hr. increments, for the remainder of the deployment. What little sleep I got was taken in the seat of my truck and my wife would bring my clean laundry to the job.

My job was to simultaneously oversee the 24/7 loading of 3 vessels located on opposite sides of our ship channel while also coordinating and supervising the hiring of all longshoremen 4 times a day. Unless they were required to work through a meal hr. to complete a vessel, most labor actually worked 20 hrs. per day because we had 4 meal hours daily, or one every 5 hrs. Those 4 hrs. gave me time to perform some of the other task assigned to me such as; I also had to coordinate the new security codes for each work shift with the military personnel and port security daily, then distribute the code patches to the newly hired labor at every work call. This was after 9-11 and security codes changed daily. Every Friday it took over 20 hrs. nonstop, to pass out a weekly payroll exceeding $1,200,000.00 and that was with the assistance of two additional payroll clerks and three off duty police officers hired by the union. There were I-9 Forms to complete and documentation to record on every new hire.

I cannot adequately describe what took place during this time without writing a book on the subject but I can tell you that the work load in my port went up over 3000% overnight. We had over 1000 people standing outside our union hiring hall looking for a job every morning at 5 a.m. and every evening at 5 p.m., come rain or shine.

In my personal opinion, this is what happened; After a great deal of lobbying efforts put forth by our port authority, our port had just received designation as a "Rapid Deployment" port and it was said that many in the military didn't believe that we could handle military movements this large and this fast. When Iraqi Freedom came to fruition, the military decided to put us to the test.

When it was all said and done, no other U.S. port worked this rapid deployment 24/7 other than us. More military cargo was loaded out for the Iraqi Freedom deployment through my port than through all others combined. We loaded Blackhawks, Apache Longbows, M1A1 Abrams tanks, mobile howitzers, humvees, hovercraft, ammunition including Patriot missiles and everything in between.

I'm retired now and during my 32 yrs., I worked some really big projects like shipping the hospitals and schools to the Sinai desert as part of the Kissinger agreement in the 70's where we worked 16 hr. days for months on end. Ore ships work 24/7 without fail, but we usually finish one in 7 or 8 days max, although we often work 2 of them simultaneously and/or back-to-back as we had two ore handling piers. Like I said, long hrs. were part of the job, but nothing could ever compare to the Iraqi Freedom deployment.

Whether you believe it or not, this is what happened. The point is, that I never slept in my bed the whole time while company owners, (you know, the ones under all the stress) slept comfortably in theirs every single night. I know for a fact that they played golf every week because I often had to contact them, while they were actually playing, to inform them of various issues that would arise. So unless you were there, please don't tell me or any of the other people who were, that it didn't happen.

I know that you probably think that us "union folks" never do anything but complain and whine but, I can tell you that we do a little work too. Like I said before, Sounds like you never "worked" a day in your life. That's probably why our perspective sounds so alien to you.
edit on 11-12-2010 by Flatfish because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 12:23 PM
link   
The trickle down economic doesn't work anymore and we the people was made into paying to keep the weathiest in the nation from losing the wealth.

Is now reverse trickle people.



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 12:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by aching_knuckles
The Bush tax cuts on the wealthy have been in effect for nearly 10 years. How many net jobs do we have over that period?


There have been tons of jobs created by American companies over the last 10 year!! Haven't you noticed how the economies of China, India, etc have really taken off in the last 10 years?! American companies have been hiring like mad over there!!

Ohhhh... wait...

Maybe you meant jobs here in the US? Ummmm...yeah.. well.. that's another story.



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 12:30 PM
link   
reply to post by Flatfish
 


Don't feed into these brown-nosing trolls...They think if they keep kissing the A -- --- of the Elite, that maybe someday they will be one of them.

As if, but then again, they do say it's not What you kno, it's WHO you know, which imo, has been shown time and time again to be true. I mean what kind of imbecile needs trillions of dollars to be bailed out because of their ineptitude? Not the general citizens of this country, that's for sure!!!!!



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 12:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
The trickle down economic doesn't work anymore and we the people was made into paying to keep the weathiest in the nation from losing the wealth.

Is now reverse trickle people.

It never did, it's just gotten worse by far.



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 12:35 PM
link   
reply to post by thewholepicture
 



Well I completely agree with you on your op. Why don't we sacrifice our children to Mammon whilst we are at it?
The problem with rich people is that most of them are innordinately mean, as well as mean spirited. So how many jobs have been created? Suppose if Bush created the tax breaks for his own upper class scumbags?

Sheesh

And people wonder why I dislike capitalism!!



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 02:33 PM
link   
If a business has it's taxes jacked up it's going to accomplish a couple of things.

1) They will pass on that loss of revenue onto you, the consumer. This is unquestionable. They have to make that loss up somewhere. Prepare to pay more for your goods and services and then bitch about how prices are out of control.

2) They won't be hiring as many people. The company has to make due with less revenue. That jack in tax rates could have hired another employee, or five, or ten. Now the company, although it could use some more workers, will make due with the staff on hand.

3) They will downsize to recover revenue. This means people going from working to the unemployment line.

Now by no means do I think corporations should be tax exempt!

But the government is looking for additional sources of revenue, it's not always in everyones interest to go after big business for massive tax increases.

Yes the government will get more money, but that money is going to have to be made up somewhere. Unless you are in good with Obama, then your business may be ripe for a bailout...



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 02:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Flatfish

Originally posted by 46ACE

Originally posted by Flatfish
reply to post by 46ACE
 


Apparently you've had a radically different experience, as an employee or business owner, than the one I lived through.

As a union longshoreman, working around the clock was just part of the job as the ships had schedules to meet and the loading/unloading process was usually expedited to accommodate them. During the rapid deployment stages of "Iraqi Freedom" I personally worked 24/7 for three and a half months supervising the hiring and placement of over 600 longshoremen per day. It nearly killed me. During that time we sent three fully loaded RO/RO vessels on their way to Iraq every 30 hrs. while simultaneously receiving inbound cargo by rail, truck and air from every military base involved in the rapid deployment.

As usual, the owners of the stevedoring companies employing our longshoremen went home every night, played golf twice a week and even had time to go to church on Sundays. Maybe all the stress wore them out so they needed the extra R & R.

You sound to me like someone who has never really had to "Work" for a living.


24/7 for 3 months straight....b.s.& goodnight.


Hate to disappoint you but I have the check stubs to prove it. Actually, my biggest check was for 220 hrs. in one week which some would say is impossible seeing how there are only168 hrs. in a week. Well, due to the fact that we were completing vessels and starting new ones at such a rapid rate, I was entitled, by union contract, to some overlapping guarantees which ended up giving me more hrs. than actually existed.

To be perfectly honest, I had no sleep for the first seven days but I probably averaged 3 hrs. per day, usually in half hr. increments, for the remainder of the deployment. What little sleep I got was taken in the seat of my truck and my wife would bring my clean laundry to the job.

My job was to simultaneously oversee the 24/7 loading of 3 vessels located on opposite sides of our ship channel while also coordinating and supervising the hiring of all longshoremen 4 times a day. Unless they were required to work through a meal hr. to complete a vessel, most labor actually worked 20 hrs. per day because we had 4 meal hours daily, or one every 5 hrs. Those 4 hrs. gave me time to perform some of the other task assigned to me such as; I also had to coordinate the new security codes for each work shift with the military personnel and port security daily, then distribute the code patches to the newly hired labor at every work call. This was after 9-11 and security codes changed daily. Every Friday it took over 20 hrs. nonstop, to pass out a weekly payroll exceeding $1,200,000.00 and that was with the assistance of two additional payroll clerks and three off duty police officers hired by the union. There were I-9 Forms to complete and documentation to record on every new hire.

I cannot adequately describe what took place during this time without writing a book on the subject but I can tell you that the work load in my port went up over 3000% overnight. We had over 1000 people standing outside our union hiring hall looking for a job every morning at 5 a.m. and every evening at 5 p.m., come rain or shine.

In my personal opinion, this is what happened; After a great deal of lobbying efforts put forth by our port authority, our port had just received designation as a "Rapid Deployment" port and it was said that many in the military didn't believe that we could handle military movements this large and this fast. When Iraqi Freedom came to fruition, the military decided to put us to the test.

When it was all said and done, no other U.S. port worked this rapid deployment 24/7 other than us. More military cargo was loaded out for the Iraqi Freedom deployment through my port than through all others combined. We loaded Blackhawks, Apache Longbows, M1A1 Abrams tanks, mobile howitzers, humvees, hovercraft, ammunition including Patriot missiles and everything in between.

I'm retired now and during my 32 yrs., I worked some really big projects like shipping the hospitals and schools to the Sinai desert as part of the Kissinger agreement in the 70's where we worked 16 hr. days for months on end. Ore ships work 24/7 without fail, but we usually finish one in 7 or 8 days max, although we often work 2 of them simultaneously and/or back-to-back as we had two ore handling piers. Like I said, long hrs. were part of the job, but nothing could ever compare to the Iraqi Freedom deployment.

Whether you believe it or not, this is what happened. The point is, that I never slept in my bed the whole time while company owners, (you know, the ones under all the stress) slept comfortably in theirs every single night. I know for a fact that they played golf every week because I often had to contact them, while they were actually playing, to inform them of various issues that would arise. So unless you were there, please don't tell me or any of the other people who were, that it didn't happen.

I know that you probably think that us "union folks" never do anything but complain and whine but, I can tell you that we do a little work too. Like I said before, Sounds like you never "worked" a day in your life. That's probably why our perspective sounds so alien to you.
edit on 11-12-2010 by Flatfish because: (no reason given)


I wasn't there; Sounds like you were taken advantage of...
I don't care what it sounds like to you.You can "keep" your derogatory comments. The end.



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 02:58 PM
link   
For everyone here arguing against tax cuts for the "rich",

What exactly is your definition of "rich"???

How much do you have to make a year (salary wise) in order to be "rich"???

I would like to get a response from one of you guys.



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 03:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Steam
 


Pretty sure your going to get differing wealth brackets with this question ..... and not that my opionin counts in the grans scheme of things ...

This is (income) not overall wealth or assets

-$20K DIRT POOR
-$100K is poor and working poor

+$100K- $1Mill middle class

+$5Mill - $100Mill wealthy middle class

+$100Mil is Rich

over that it is then into lower class rich and so on......



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 03:47 PM
link   
I would point out that the very idea of high taxation on anyone isn't just a bad idea. Essentially it's a sin. I would refer you to 1Samuel Chapter 8 from the bible. Government wasn't supposed to take more than 10 percent. And charity which is what today's welfare and unemployment is today was supposed to be ran through the religious authority. Another 10 percent. Assuming a reasonable exceptions for times of war and how society has changed really the government shouldn't be taking more the 20% tops.

The problem here is the concept of taxes. It's simply taking away a measure of your value to run the government. And trying to tax the wealthy out of existence simply kills a society. Look at where it succeeded. Cuba, Zimbabwe. The former communist bloc of the USSR. They are and were not very nice places to live.

As far as the tax cuts being used for job creation in China and other places in the world well for that I would have to blame Congress. The simple way to fix that would be to say to the rest of the world is this.

You can come over and sell what ever you want for however much profit you can generate. But you either have to pay 30 to 50 percent in income tax or purchase American products tax free for export.

Problem solved.



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 03:54 PM
link   
reply to post by thewholepicture
 


i dont see how any tax cuts would create jobs there tryin to act like there saving us a bunch of money so we can create the jobs ourselves they dont actually know its going to create jobs they just say that to get away with the cut



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 04:10 PM
link   
This is a damn easy question to answer. The rich run buisnesses; poor people don't. The Bush tax cuts were probably the only good thing that monster did and saying they only benefit the rich is ridiculous. Obama's original plan to keep taxes low for everyone making under 200,000 and making huge tax hikes for those above made no sense. Not only would that make it harder to run a buisness, it would keep people from transitioning past that income bracket. Because of regulations like that, that punish those dirty greedy rich people, old school American entrepenuership is nearly impossible. Keeping the income taxes low will make it easier for people to succeed financially. Tax hikes at high incomes won't do much to those already rich, because "they can afford it" but will keep people from becoming rich. So basically, the rich stay rich and the poor stay poor, which is actually how most socialist and post-communist countries (i.e. China, which is actually fascist now) work.
edit on 11-12-2010 by kallisti36 because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-12-2010 by kallisti36 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 04:40 PM
link   
It's amazing how Obama is extending Tax Cuts and yet, the Republicans will still give him crap. Shows you these people really are immature crybabies.

Obama needs to STAND UP against the Righties and show who's boss.

Oh and tax breaks for the rich doesn't create jobs. Once again...the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
edit on 11-12-2010 by SeventhSeal because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 05:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by lpowell0627
When is the last time a poor person offered you employment?

Taxing the rich does not take away from their income, nor lower their standard of living as some would hope. Rather, it tends to take away from the amount they invest in companies, start-ups, expansions, etc. The last three items being job-creators. Obviously this is a generality and as always there are exceptions.


At present, interest rates are exceptionally low, private equity funds are bulging with excess cash, and corporate treasuries are stuffed with cash.

There is plenty of money for investment---the businesses are not doing so because they don't see anything but low aggregate demand in the USA. And that's because the bulk of the population doesn't have any more money and isn't getting any soon. In contrast in Asia, the middle class is growing in size and wealth and the companies are expanding their jobs and capacity to satisfy them.

So, taxing rich less will do very little as opposed to taxing middle or lower income people less---and as everybody owes the debt, it is definitely a trade-off.

And yes, poor and middle class people with MORE money will certainly offer you employment.
That's how it worked in the USA from 1945 to 1980, and how it's working in Asia.


edit on 11-12-2010 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by lpowell0627We need to put the money in the hands of those most likely to spend it. That would be the rich.


You surely don't believe that. Rich people don't get rich by spending money they don't need to spend.

Yes, the rich are the ones who hire those with less than they have. HOWEVER, they only hire people when the workers they already have can't keep up with the demand for their products or services. They don't hire simply because they have more money and decide to do someone a favor and give them a job. To create jobs, you must increase consumer spending. The only way to increase consumer spending is to put money in the hands of people who NEED it, because they need to spend it.

Give a rich man $3,000. How much of it will he spend? Not much of it, if any at all, because that money doesn't even make a noticeable difference to him. He puts it in the bank or in the market to let it make him more money.

Give a person who struggles financially $1,000. How much will he spend? $1,000. Maybe he puts the new tires on his car that he's been needing. Maybe he gets his propane tank filled to heat his home for the winter. Maybe he replaces the ten-year-old television in his living room. Whatever he does, he spends that money because he needs to.

The rich person's lifestyle is less affected in the down economy than those who struggle to get by.When the less fortunate have money, they have to spend it. Their spending creates a surge in the economy, because it increases consumer demand.

Over the past 3 years, in the industrial sector, there was a sharp reversal of policy concerning stored products. Companies, just four years ago, were keeping finished goods inventory on-hand so they could fill orders at a moments notice. As the economy declined, those same companies started stressing JIT, or just-in-time, production. They now want to have the order placed before they create the part, and they want the finished good to roll off the assembly line and go directly onto the transportation vehicle to the distributor. They want to sit on no inventory whatsoever, basically because they fear being stuck holding the bag if and when the distributor goes under. What that means is rather than needing your workers to turn out all the products they can over the course of their shift, the companies now want them to turn out just enough to fill that day's orders. Once they get that day's orders filled, the companies need them to stop, which frees them up to do another job- which means the company needs fewer workers. Additionally, it means no warehouse workers, because you don't need a warehouse when you don't keep any inventory on hand.


Edit to add: If you look at many of the arguments in favor of taxing the rich, it boils down to jealously. Would I love to have millions at my disposal? Sure. But I don't. I also don't begrudge those that have attained wealth and are in control of the marketplace and the direction in which businesses head.


Some people may be jealous, but that doesn't describe most. The rich own the most of the wealth, and their tax burdens- all loopholes considered- don't match up with the amount of the country's wealth they own.


People are quick to say "he/she has too much money, it's not fair". But they don't take the time to see where that money goes and how it does benefit those of us with less.


I've never seen or heard anyone say it's not fair for someone to have whatever amount of money they have. What I see people saying is "if you own 90% of the wealth, then you owe 90% of the tax burden". That's not jealousy, that's common sense.


Again, poor people can not offer you employment


Not directly. Indirectly, however, it's the poor and middle class having to spend what money they have that creates the need for jobs, and jobs are only created when there's a need for them.



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 05:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by illuminnaughty
Well the rich will be able to hire more butlers and gardeners. They could also hire a new cook and even splash out on a hooker or two...


LOL........and I do believe you have your answer....case closed.

(second line)



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 05:55 PM
link   
The saddest thing is that the system gives the rich tax cuts anyway. The more money you have the more you can avoid paying tax anyway. There is so much tax avoidance (legal) there is no need for evasion (illegal) so Obama gives them even more breaks on top of breaks!
edit on 11-12-2010 by tiger5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 11 2010 @ 05:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Steam
 


OK I will bit.... Millionaires. try that for size. Why are you asking such a question? Are you perhaps a lawyer. Do you not know the rich when you see them... Here try this one . The rich are the people 20% of the population that own 80% of the wealth.

So go ahead and make your point..

If you had one that is
edit on 11-12-2010 by tiger5 because: Add a sentence



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join