Class War is Foolish for Dems

Any business owner who bases hiring, firing, expanding, contracting on his annual personal income tax, is not going to be in business long. A smart business owner will not refuse to hire people or cut workers if it decreases his productivity. And he will not hire people out of charity. You need to grow up Dixie, you live in an ideological fantasy world.

Since his personal annual income tax return is precisely where he claims his business income, it is most certainly going to have a bearing on how he conducts his business. If it doesn't, he isn't going to be in business long. A smart business owner will do exactly as smart business owners have been doing the past 6-7 years now... letting attrition naturally happen, not replace the personnel, and require the rest of the staff to absorb the workload, and maintain productivity. Even if they DO lose some productivity, it's not the end of the world in a broke economy. So what, it's one less worker standing around with their finger in their nose, waiting for a customer! A SMART business man, will find ways to maintain their business and their lifestyles, and cope with whatever the socialist Marxists burden them with, because they really don't have a choice...but they won't hire people... create jobs... expand and prosper. Why the fuck would they? Why the fuck haven't they?
 
Since his personal annual income tax return is precisely where he claims his business income, it is most certainly going to have a bearing on how he conducts his business. If it doesn't, he isn't going to be in business long. A smart business owner will do exactly as smart business owners have been doing the past 6-7 years now... letting attrition naturally happen, not replace the personnel, and require the rest of the staff to absorb the workload, and maintain productivity. Even if they DO lose some productivity, it's not the end of the world in a broke economy. So what, it's one less worker standing around with their finger in their nose, waiting for a customer! A SMART business man, will find ways to maintain their business and their lifestyles, and cope with whatever the socialist Marxists burden them with, because they really don't have a choice...but they won't hire people... create jobs... expand and prosper. Why the fuck would they? Why the fuck haven't they?

No businessman considers his income tax when making business decisions. If they are smart business people, they will run their business to achieve the best bottom line...PERIOD. To do otherwise would be foolish. They are not going to pay people to stand around with their finger in their nose. They will hire or fire based on the marketplace and their bottom line. They will not hire people out of charity. You are such an ass suck for your beloved elite Dixie. You project your own insecurities and childish beliefs on them. You're saying they will undermine their own success and have a tantrum if they don't get their tax cuts.

BTW, they have had them for a decade...WHERE are the fucking jobs Einstein?
 
You need to go out more. The wealthy have never needed motivation. That's why they are wealthy. Neither do they need encouragement for the same reason. It is the 'not wealthy' (notice I did not say 'poor') who need the motivation and encouragement. And that could be achieved - in part - by closing tax loopholes and preventing corporate greed and corruption.
It is ordinary people who are suffering now, not the wealthy. Help them. Shop at their shops, have your car serviced at their garages.

you've obviously missed the point of the thread......the people who own shops and garages are the people Obama wants to tax......the people who are suffering now are the people who used to work for them, the people living in cardboard boxes in the alley behind the garage, because the government is stifling economic growth with threats of higher taxes, more regulation (read health care reform requirements of providing insurance for employees).........
 
I think I clearly differentiated between motivation and encouragement by saying the wealthy need neither. I am bound to agree that they do not need discouragement either but you have only now introduced that.
Similarly I neither said nor suggested that tax loopholes were synonymous with corruption. I suggested that each should be addressed. (I did NOT say taxes should be increased)
Yes, of course there will always be corruption, but 'corporate' corruption is something that governments most certainly can clamp down on. (I did say 'corporate greed and corruption, I think) We are witnessing such a thing with News Corp and we watched as the banks made a laughing stock out of everyone, not to mention the 'non tendered' contracts in Iraq under bush.
Whether Obama and the democrats wish to raise taxes has nothing at all to do with this discussion. Frankly I don't give a shit.

motivation and the wealthy.......you seem to think that the motivation is simply to make them feel better about themselves.......motivation is about an intended result......here, the intended result is to start businesses, hire employees, put money to work growing the economy......of course the wealthy need motivation.......if you're talking about greed, the simplest solution is to invest in gold.....watch it climb in value.......we want the wealthy to do something particular with their money, so we want to motivate that action......

this is the same problem involved in all the hoopla about "tax cuts for the rich" or "welfare for corporations"........yes, there are tax regulations that permit deductions for things like corporate jets......do people really think those regulations were put in place because we want the wealthy to have jets?.....or was it to stimulate the jet production industry.......we have tax regulations that permit deductions for things like development of new oil reserves.......yet some people seem to think we have those regulations because we want oil companies to pay less taxes.......

what is the purpose behind the motivation, what are we trying to accomplish with it........unlike what some on the left would have us believe, it isn't that we want the rich to be richer........
 
No businessman considers his income tax when making business decisions. If they are smart business people, they will run their business to achieve the best bottom line...PERIOD. To do otherwise would be foolish. They are not going to pay people to stand around with their finger in their nose. They will hire or fire based on the marketplace and their bottom line. They will not hire people out of charity. You are such an ass suck for your beloved elite Dixie. You project your own insecurities and childish beliefs on them. You're saying they will undermine their own success and have a tantrum if they don't get their tax cuts.

BTW, they have had them for a decade...WHERE are the fucking jobs Einstein?

?????.....I don't know if you've ever run a business, but if you look at your income tax return at the end of the year and you see it isn't worth continuing in business and you don't act accordingly, then you've got big problems......
 
Notice dixtard was silent on the issue, he is a lemming from the right.

BFGED taxes are subtracted before you get to the bottom line ya dropout.
 
I think I said that "motivation" might not be the right word, did you not read where I said it? "I don't know if "motivate" is the right word..." Yep...that's what I said! And encouragement is a completely different thing... they do need encouragement, or to put it an even better way, lack of discouragement.

You can't "prevent corporate greed and corruption" by raising tax rates or closing loopholes. There will still be greedy people and corrupt people, your loopholes notwithstanding. Now you finish up by saying "ordinary people, help them, shop at their shops..." but those are the small businesses Obama and Democrats want to raise taxes on, because they have been defined as "the rich" because their tax return happens to reflect their business income. You can "help them out" more if you understand it hurts them to be raising their tax rates at this time.

Nonsense! As Lowaicue made clear the wealthy do not require motivation and what's this craziness about "business income"? If the owner pays salary out of that income or buys equipment or gets his roof fixed it's all deducted. He's only taxed on what he puts in his pocket.
 
Don't you believe, if it were something doable, we would have already addressed greed and corruption? Is there some level of greed and corruption currently being tolerated and condoned, that I am unaware of?

Were you aware of the financial scams that were happening a few years ago? Brooksley Born told Greenspan about them years and years ago and Greenspan's reply was to let that invisible hand look after it. How did that work out?

What is it going to take for you to realize unfettered capitalism is what brought the world to the edge of financial collapse. Yet, you keep going on and on about how the rich need encouragement or how we have to coddle them in order for them to invest their money.

And your lunatic idea about how the rich won't earn money and just spend what they have.

You're nuts, Dixie. Completely nuts!

////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Nope, you clearly DIDN'T differentiate between motivation and encouragement when you said the wealthy need neither for the same reason. That is pretty much lumping both in together and NOT differentiating. You conclude by contradicting yourself, when you state that they do not need discouragement... the opposite of that would be to encourage. If you aren't discouraging one thing, you are effectively encouraging something else, and visa versa.

Similarly, you were a dumbass here too. Don't you believe, if it were something doable, we would have already addressed greed and corruption? Is there some level of greed and corruption currently being tolerated and condoned, that I am unaware of? When you say we need to do something about greed and corruption, what are you talking about? Do we not already do things about that? Are we ignoring the problem? And whatever it is we can do, will it completely end all greed and corruption? If so, please tell me what we need to do, because it would be wonderful to live in a world without it! The way I see it, we can't do much about greedy and corrupt people, they are out there... we will have to deal with them on a one-by-one basis. You seemed to indicate closing loopholes would somehow end greed and corruption, and I fail to see where that is the case.

And governments already DO clamp down on corporate corruption! You are saying we need to do something that we already do! Again, is there corruption happening that we are ignoring or condoning and allowing to continue to happen because we don't have a policy in place to address it? If you have some examples, please discuss them. You mention NewsCorp, and I don't know any of the details on this, or whether you are accurately depicting a corporate corruption case or not, but even with that example, isn't something already being done about it? So what are you proposing we add to what we're already doing? Anything in particular?

Yes, it has everything to do with the thread topic and ergo, this discussion. Regardless of how much shit you give, it does matter to a great many people here. My OP merely points out that it's detrimental to the objectives of the Democrats to continue promoting this 'class war' idea. You can hate and loathe rich people all you like, but the bottom line is, we need rich people to spend their damn money, and make even MORE money, if we ever hope to pay the bills. You're not going to ever collect much tax from people on food stamps, it is the people who have money, who make large sums of money, who ultimately pay the taxes to keep everything paid for, and without them, there isn't a way back to economic prosperity.
 
?????.....I don't know if you've ever run a business, but if you look at your income tax return at the end of the year and you see it isn't worth continuing in business and you don't act accordingly, then you've got big problems......

If you make $250,001, and they raise taxes 5% on people who make over $250K, then you will have to pay 5 cents more. Five cents. F.I.V.E. C.E.N.T.S. That is what people are so upset about. 5 cents.

If it is 5% a person making $260K might pay an additional $500. That's right, the proposed tax increase is approx. $42 a month on people making $260K, about $21,600 a month. Forty-four dollars out of twenty-one thousand. THIS is what all the right-wingers are screaming about. THIS is what all the Ayn Rand cultists are threatening to stop working over. THAT is how tax brackets work.
 
everytime dems act like it doesn't cost much to raise taxes please see alt min tax scam.
It always cost way more

will they index the 250,00? No
in two decades 250,000 will be like half in real dollars
 
Here's an idea...let's lower their income taxes, and instead charge them user fees for roadways people wear out driving to their business, public transportation people use getting to their place of business, police protection for their business property, fire protection for their business property...
 
I'm sure there are many moderate democrats out there, who still don't comprehend their party has been taken over by radicals and special interests. I'm sure you just want to be democrats as democrats were in the old days, representing the little guy, the working man. You had high hopes for Obama, here was a fine articulate man who spoke so beautifully, and it seemed as if he had a vision similar to your own, and could make a difference, so you voted for him. And as things have gone south with the economy, you've continued to find ways to excuse it, blame it on the previous administration, give Obama every benefit of the doubt, and remain loyal to your democrat philosophy.

Considering you have an emotional tie to your philosophy, it's important to understand how you became caught up in the middle of this Class War, being perpetrated by the radicals of your party. It begins with having you accept a few misnomers, and you eagerly do so, because you are desperately searching for a way to justify remaining a democrat loyalist. The first misnomer is, that people who happen to report a high income on their tax returns, are "rich" or "the wealthy." In some cases, this may be very true, but it is hardly the case all the time. You are asked to accept it is synonymous... high income reported = the rich.

In the US, to be considered a "small business" you have to do two things... 1) you have to employ less than 500 people. And 2) You must report all income on an individual or joint tax return. So, all of these small companies you see out and about, with 30-40 employees... 50-60 employees... 100-250 employees.... hell, 300...400... up to 500 employees... those are ALL small businesses, according to the Federal Government, and MUST file income on a single or joint US income tax return. When we speak of earned income over $200k, this includes all of the large-scale small businesses.

Now... Small business is responsible for most all the jobs created in the private sector. Each one of these jobs created, represents a certain amount of tax revenue, at the much lower middle class rates, of course, but multiplied by 10.. 150.. 499... how many ever employees are hired by the small business. So there is that money, which doesn't get generated if the small business doesn't hire or lays people off. Increasing the small businesses tax rates are not going to encourage them to hire, especially when you couple the tax increase with the uncertainty over cost of health care, which has yet to hit them fully. This can't even be estimated at this time, because the insurance carriers are still adjusting premiums to account for the provisions required. People don't know what it will cost to employ Worker X next year or the year after, a LOT depends on this Obamacare mess, and if it gets repealed.

I've kind of gotten away from the point a bit, but I wanted to clarify just where we are in terms of the actual argument, and now it's time to explain why this is foolish for Democrats. Obama and Company invested a lot of capital (read: stimulus) into a Keynesian approach to policy, and whether you believe in Keynesian policy or not, the results are dismal at best. In order to turn the economy around, you need capitalism from capitalists. There simply isn't another way, Government can't possibly find enough money to spend, to turn around the economic conditions, and the more they try, the further in debt we will go, with nothing to show for it. The ONLY way out of the hole we are in, is through the expansion, and ultimate prosperity, of capitalists! The "rich" have to get richer! That is the ONLY way out of this. As much as it may break your heart, there has to be more disparity between the haves and have nots, because the people with money can't be hobbled to make life fair for the poor, they need to spend that money on becoming prosperous. Rich Greedy Corporations... they need to get richer too... the more rich the better, because the more tax revenues we get. This notion that we can "punish" the rich or the corporations, is counter-intuitive to what you need to accomplish here. If you want to have more money coming in to the coffers, you have to encourage generation of wealth, (i.e. income earning) don't you? If you "punish" a corporation by taking away their profits, how much tax revenue can you gain? In order to increase revenues, they have to make MORE money, not LESS!

Jesus fucking christ Dixie. Show me one god damned moderate Republican. Just one! They (and I include myself) were all run out of the Republican party by right wing extremist who now own the Republican party.

It's just fucking plain hypocracy that Republicans spend billions lobbying legislation that advantages them economically at the expense of others and when others lobby to protect their economic interests then you cry baby's start whining about "class warfare.". Cry me a fucking river!
 
Class warfare is brilliant for dems and republicans. Class warfare is the oldest and most real war there is.

and that, my strange little friend, is spot on... nearly. However, the US prides itself (or did) on the fact that it is a classless society. Indeed one could say it lacks class completely!
 
and that, my strange little friend, is spot on... nearly. However, the US prides itself (or did) on the fact that it is a classless society. Indeed one could say it lacks class completely!

Observed by a brilliant Irish writer and poet over 100 years ago...

America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between.
Oscar Wilde
 
motivation and the wealthy.......you seem to think that the motivation is simply to make them feel better about themselves.......motivation is about an intended result......here, the intended result is to start businesses, hire employees, put money to work growing the economy......of course the wealthy need motivation.......if you're talking about greed, the simplest solution is to invest in gold.....watch it climb in value.......we want the wealthy to do something particular with their money, so we want to motivate that action......

this is the same problem involved in all the hoopla about "tax cuts for the rich" or "welfare for corporations"........yes, there are tax regulations that permit deductions for things like corporate jets......do people really think those regulations were put in place because we want the wealthy to have jets?.....or was it to stimulate the jet production industry.......we have tax regulations that permit deductions for things like development of new oil reserves.......yet some people seem to think we have those regulations because we want oil companies to pay less taxes.......

what is the purpose behind the motivation, what are we trying to accomplish with it........unlike what some on the left would have us believe, it isn't that we want the rich to be richer........

Did you genuinely not understand what I said or are you just looking for a fight. If the latter you can keep on looking.
Let me say this slowly because I suspect that you can only read slowly.
The wealthy who start businesses do so ... now the hard bit ... because they are motivated to do so. If one is NOT motivated one would not think of starting a business. Indeed they are so motivated that at some point in their development many will resort to corruption and even criminal activity. That often occurs when they change from loving money to loving the power that it brings. It is easier to relinquish money than it is to relinquish power.
I notice from a quick skim of the ret of your post that you are wittering on about personal jets. Witter on, my friend, witter on.
 
If you make $250,001, and they raise taxes 5% on people who make over $250K, then you will have to pay 5 cents more. Five cents. F.I.V.E. C.E.N.T.S. That is what people are so upset about. 5 cents.

If it is 5% a person making $260K might pay an additional $500. That's right, the proposed tax increase is approx. $42 a month on people making $260K, about $21,600 a month. Forty-four dollars out of twenty-one thousand. THIS is what all the right-wingers are screaming about. THIS is what all the Ayn Rand cultists are threatening to stop working over. THAT is how tax brackets work.

silly argument......what's at issue is, if your running a business and the profits you make aren't worth the effort you put in, you sell your assets, send your employees home and get a job......
 
Here's an idea...let's lower their income taxes, and instead charge them user fees for roadways people wear out driving to their business, public transportation people use getting to their place of business, police protection for their business property, fire protection for their business property...

because obviously, people who don't run businesses don't use roads, buses, police or fire protection......
 
:)
Observed by a brilliant Irish writer and poet over 100 years ago...

America is the only country that went from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between.
Oscar Wilde

Thank you for reminding me. Did he actually quote me? Well, had he been alive I am sure he would have!
 
Back
Top