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.

 

Marxists still going on about trickle up economics

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 12:46 AM
link   
Tax cuts deal approved in DC, including the presidents deal with the Republicans. Obama is proving that he has accepted reality in making a deal with the Republicans who want nothing less than to promote the economy. Democrats fortunately accepted it, however knowing how unreliable the Democrats can be, I'd wonder how long before their failed tax and spend scheme is back in place:


WASHINGTON -- As President Obama signed into law Friday the massive bipartisan tax package that delighted most Republicans but divided his own party, the debate over its implications raged on.
Obama found himself surrounded by Democrats and Republicans eager to take advantage of a photo opportunity that illustrates their effort to prevent a big New Year's Day tax hike for millions of Americans.

Obama called the deal "real money that's going to make a real difference in people's lives."


www.foxnews.com...

I figured we may have learned? This way of cutting taxes from the top has made a difference to the economy since Reagan made his historical cuts in the 80's. What follows is a significant rise in debt and a continuation of jobs being shifted overseas due to the democratic congress and their distribution of wealth policy. I cannot believe people still buy it? I can understand why the Republicans are pushing for it, they have their lobbyist buddies to look out for the rest us, otherwise we suffer. I believe that tax cuts are necessary to the middle and lower classes, to small businesses and even large businesses that keep the jobs here. But tax cuts all around for mostly the wealthy small businesses, all of the wealthy that invest in business (jobs)?

In 1981-82 Reagan dramatically decreased the corporate tax rates to historical lows, what followed was our tax revenue being tripled by the end of Reagans administration and doubled by Bush senior. Real income also increased under Reagan and unemployment averaged dropped compared to the 70's. People were able to point to the 1982 GDP growth at a record high but this was a temporary, and what followed Clinton who was a real negative for this country. Bush junior? Spent nearly $1 trillion on tax cuts at the beginning and what followed was one of slowest GDP averages of any presidency. Bush junior was obviously a democrat in republican clothing since he pushed for the patriot act which is really a big brother act - a real win for the democrats.

What has trickle up tax increases done for us? Nothing really, aside from benefitting the lazy and our jobs steadily being shifted off overseas due to companies (the wealthy) avoiding tax increases. People are still deluded enough to think these tax increases are bringing or keeping jobs here, they are not. I believe that tax cuts can be effective, I believe that in a relatively stable economy tax cuts for the middle class and lower classes, for small businesses can actually stimulate the economy further and benefit. But this idea of cutting taxes for only those who are burdens on society and insisting time and time again it will do one thing when it doesnt, I cannot for the life of me understand.

(Having fun with Southern Guardian of the KGB)




posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 12:54 AM
link   
They are called micro-loans, and they have an incredibly positive track record.

Marxists don't believe in trickle anywhere economics... seriously... where did you learn about marxism?



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 12:55 AM
link   
large corporations and the rich are generally useless for the american economy now due to outsourcing.

The only meat and potatos America has is small businesses.

The biggest growth in the economy since...hell, the 50s was with Bill Clinton..and that was from a ton of .com small businesses blowing up and the services that rippled from them.

now its back to the norm.

I have no clue why the republicans demand the richest 2% get another tax break extension...its retarded
the more incentive they have to cash out, the more they will..a business that has a higher tax rate will simply not cash out, but rather reinvest and grow the business so they don't pay the extra cost in profits.

grr...



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 01:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by SaturnFX
large corporations and the rich are generally useless for the american economy now due to outsourcing.

The only meat and potatos America has is small businesses.

The biggest growth in the economy since...hell, the 50s was with Bill Clinton..and that was from a ton of .com small businesses blowing up and the services that rippled from them.

now its back to the norm.

I have no clue why the republicans demand the richest 2% get another tax break extension...its retarded
the more incentive they have to cash out, the more they will..a business that has a higher tax rate will simply not cash out, but rather reinvest and grow the business so they don't pay the extra cost in profits.

grr...


Tell me please, what has paying income taxes ever done for you?

Leftists have this Idea that paying taxes somehow stimuluates an economy, so I'd like to know, how exactly paying income taxes helps you keep a "decent" job.



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 01:14 AM
link   
reply to post by dbriefed
 


Fix your quote.

It looks like you wrote the 2nd half of that post.
Giving millionaire tax cuts is not stimulative. And it's not good for the economy. It drives up national debt.


The only logical argument that can be made is a Rand-like chant, it's my money and I don't have to give you any !

Acting like tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires helps the economy is tomfoolery.


Originally posted by pirhanna
Marxists don't believe in trickle anywhere economics... seriously... where did you learn about marxism?


Beck, Limbaugh or Hannity is my guess.
edit on 19-12-2010 by Schaden because: reply to pirhanna



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 01:22 AM
link   
Well OP you ask: "What has trickle up tax increases done for us?"

Do you not believe Nancy Pelosi when she tells you that unemployment benefits are the best job creator that can ever be: www.youtube.com...

Do you dare not believe Ms Nancy when she says that for every dollar spent on food stamps there is a $1.79 return : politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...

How dare you think that you know more than Obama and Nancy. So I will leave you with the words of a true Democrat. The good stuff starts at 3:45... www.youtube.com...



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 01:37 AM
link   
The changes described above are happening all over the western world. In summary these are:

1-Move the welfare system away from individuals on to corporate recipients.
2-Get the masses to pay the tax.

1-Move the welfare system away from individuals on to corporate recipients. Corporate welfare takes the form of:
. tax incentives
. tax deducations
. Goverment (tax payer) grants
. depreciation allowences
. free water and or other utilities
. free or subsidied infrastructure such as ports, railways, roads etc

2-The masses pay the most tax, (because its easier to get it from them.) eg, in Australia we have 17% Goods and Services Tax (GST) This tax us not paid by the corporate sector but low and behold the business lobby is calling for an increase in the GST rate.

We are facing shortages of water in my city but 80% of the cities water is used by users who do not even pay for it (business) but this is gneerally kept quiet by the media, goverment and the goverment instrumentaly that controlls water.

Call it what you like but things like fees, licences, fines of various sorts, charges, leveys etc, are just TAX. Granted business also pay some of these but then they are tax deductable at the end of the tax year.

I could go on but I think we can all see this trend happening one way or in our own countries.

I'll leave the arguements justifying this trend to others but I will say how any person on or near the bottom of the socio-economic ladder can support these changes and this long term trend I just do not understand

One last note. The fact that this trend is occuring is a strong indicator that our countries are not goverened by we the people because if it were it would not happen.

cheers



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 02:28 AM
link   
reply to post by dbriefed
 


There is actually very little evidence to suggest cutting taxes increases economic output.. usually what follows is inflationary growth due to the Government having to then print or sell the money to cover the cost that would otherwise be covered by taxes.. For the most part, except for the poor, money cut on taxes goes into savings, retirement, or paying off debts.. the poor usually blow it at Walmart. Just look at the Bush tax credits, it went two ways, into walmart or walmart type stores, or paying off debts.

Raising taxes has the opposite effect and can cause a cut back in spending, but rarely is this because the tax increase was sooo significant they had no choice.. frankly, if an extra 2-6% tax causes your company to fail, it had problems to begin with.

The two biggest side effects from taxation is FEELING .. lower taxes makes people happy.. they spend more even if they don't have it.. but the euphoria only last a minimal amount of time.. for instance the bush tax cuts no longer have an effect on the economy because it's be written in so to speak.. no one sees a difference or notices a change and their budgets reflect accordingly.. that's why tax cuts are meant for 1-2 years at a time.

So considering this, I'd say it's safe to assume that politicians use tax cuts solely for the sake of political gain and corporate ass kissing.. nothing more, nothing less..



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 02:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by aravoth

Originally posted by SaturnFX
large corporations and the rich are generally useless for the american economy now due to outsourcing.

The only meat and potatos America has is small businesses.

The biggest growth in the economy since...hell, the 50s was with Bill Clinton..and that was from a ton of .com small businesses blowing up and the services that rippled from them.

now its back to the norm.

I have no clue why the republicans demand the richest 2% get another tax break extension...its retarded
the more incentive they have to cash out, the more they will..a business that has a higher tax rate will simply not cash out, but rather reinvest and grow the business so they don't pay the extra cost in profits.

grr...


Tell me please, what has paying income taxes ever done for you?

Leftists have this Idea that paying taxes somehow stimuluates an economy, so I'd like to know, how exactly paying income taxes helps you keep a "decent" job.


it paves the roads to get to work


Rightists tend to think that roadworks, military, and other infrustructure simply pops out of the ground naturally.

-sighs-



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 02:37 AM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


Vast majority of roads and bridges are constructed off gasoline taxes and DMV fees and fines........



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 02:52 AM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 


Sorry to be the one to have to tell you, but no. Just get a calculator, and do the math. More then 95% of your taxes are being used to pay the interest on the Federal deficit. No schools are being built, no jibs being created, no roads, no nothing...just paying interest on loans.



posted on Dec, 19 2010 @ 04:47 AM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 



large corporations and the rich are generally useless for the american economy now due to outsourcing.


You couldn't afford domestically produced goods. The pair of jeans you buy was made for about $2.00 or so in Taiwan or some place. Textile distributors (like Penny's) only make about a 3-5% profit margin. That means the extra $30 tacked on is the price of labor and operation in the U.S. You would easily be paying 120+% for most of your products made here in America.

I'm sure those working minimum wage would appreciate this.


The only meat and potatos America has is small businesses.


And America makes it as difficult as possible to start up a new business.


The biggest growth in the economy since...hell, the 50s was with Bill Clinton..and that was from a ton of .com small businesses blowing up and the services that rippled from them.


What has changed since then?

You have to think on large time scales - beyond the context of your own life-span. I'm young - this is very normal for me to do, it's a context I am used to thinking in. It is not, however, very common outside of those under 25. Everything is either going to happen when I am older, or happened before I was born.

This perspective is a general advantage when thinking in terms of the economy. For starters - the dollar is no longer backed by anything other than central bank notes. It used to be that we had silver and other precious metals backing our currency. It also used to be that our central bank mandated all banks have, for all loaned assets, a certain amount reserved in their vaults. This was a hard control on Fractional Reserve Banking. Now, there is none. The ways to solve this go with removing the central bank, or instating a control again. Either will be better than what is going on, now. The entire lending crisis would simply never have happened.

We also pay over 50% of all tax revenue into welfare programs. This value needs to shrink. Yesterday. Preferably - it would be left to the state level, and the federal government forever banned from setting foot in the realm of welfare without an explicit constitutional amendment.

Today's economy is a product of very poor long-term economic decisions being made to resolve short-term economic problems. Resorting to more knee-jerk reactions (such as tax and spend) will not do us any favors in the long run.

It wouldn't hurt the American people to start thinking as far ahead as next year. My short-term starts at five years. Long-term extends well past my projected natural life.


now its back to the norm.


See above.


I have no clue why the republicans demand the richest 2% get another tax break extension...its retarded


What is retarded is spending close to 500 billion dollars into the red each year. The bureaucrats are going to spend whatever they want to, whether they collect it in taxes, or not. This is the primary problem with navigating away from backed currency. We've lost all concepts of metrics. Minimum wage can be expanded arbitrarily, money can be printed arbitrarily, and taxes can be raised arbitrarily.

That, my friend, is retarded. And, yes - it's been done under every administration.

You know why? Because it's what the people demand. The people demand that which is impractical and the bureaucrats provide even though it is assured an eventual economic suicide. It gets them re-elected in a few years' time, and that's as far as they need to worry about it.


the more incentive they have to cash out, the more they will..a business that has a higher tax rate will simply not cash out, but rather reinvest and grow the business so they don't pay the extra cost in profits.


This makes no sense whatsoever.

First - the tax is on individuals - which is only a business issue if you're dealing with sole proprietorships. Second, it's completely separate of corporate gains tax.

As for the whole "a higher tax rate will promote reinvestment" is simply not supported by any market research. Markets that have gotten rid of their progressive tax systems that excessively tax wealthy earners and businesses have seen a lot of market growth and activity - beyond that of progressive systems in virtually every year since.

The reason for this is that an expansion may cost $500,000 (talking in the case of a sole-proprietor, so personal and business earnings are identical). Let's say I make furniture and want to expand the workshop and bring on a couple apprentices (or additional employees). I may even wish to make the jump to incorporate. In either case - I need to come up with $500,000. Average profit margins are between 2-5%. To come out $300K ahead, I need to be pulling about $6M in volume. In all reality - I've probably already got a few employees to pull that off, and probably getting closer to 10-20% profit, because business is not steady and you don't want a bad month to clear your savings. Anyway - I'm paying 35% of that into taxes. Wages are also not factored into profit - so wages come out of profit, as well.

Presuming I'm just over that $250K mark - I'm paying 35% into federal taxes. About 5% to state income tax. An average of 10% sales tax on anything and everything - so we're up to a nice 50% of that goes straight into taxes. That leaves me with $150K effective purchasing power. Subtract bills, and I'm easily down to $50K. If I'm smarter and a little more meager, I am banking that up - and probably only spending about $50K on bills, rather than $100K. I'm fairly frugal and would live out of a trailer for a few years so that I could put a massive down-payment on a construction loan for my dream-home (and after my kids are grown and gone so they don't become a reason we can't have nice things).

In either case - expanding my business as a form of tax-write-off is not, at all, an option. Most deductions available are only partial deductions (not total deduction of price). While repairs and replacements of machinery are deductible - purchasing new and expanding are considerably different matters. I have to save up, considerably, to hit the costs of expanding. I may want to get into laser-engraving and some better controlled environment shops, as well as some newer saws that expand the options I can offer to customers. I may even need to send a few of my employees off to a college, trade school, or industrial seminar to learn how to properly use this equipment and maintain it.

The prospect of investing in your business for tax-write-offs is pretty naive. While a lot of private practices rank in the 10+% profit-margins, they are also known for having years of not even making their overhead costs. It is also very rare to see those businesses pulling that kind of volume (by that time, they are usually incorporated, even if all of the stock is privately held). However, the principle remains - a business wishing to expand must invest well over 100% of their annual profit into expanding. This means that raising taxes and claiming it will promote investing through tax-write-offs is just silly, as no business is making the kinds of profits to expand without the need of saving for at least one fiscal cycle.

The only companies that could even dream of it are beverage (namely, soda) manufacturers, that have something like 30% profit margins. Compare that to health insurance companies at about 3% average profit margin. Hmm.


grr...


My sentiments, exactly.



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join