Good article from Forbes: Tax cuts DO NOT create jobs

Rune

Mjölner
http://www.forbes.com/sites/petercohan/2011/05/03/do-tax-cuts-create-jobs/


Do Tax Cuts Create Jobs?


It’s a mainstay of conservative orthodoxy that tax cuts create jobs. In fact, the complexity of the tax code does create jobs for high-priced tax attorneys and accountants. But do tax cuts create “real” jobs?
The answer appears to be no for companies big and small. After all, U.S. public companies pay well-below the official 35% tax rate while 13.5 million American workers search unsuccessfully for jobs And start ups tell me that tax cuts don’t affect whether they’ll create new jobs. In short, the tax cut rhetoric, while effective politics, is lousy economics.
George H. W. Bush wisely pointed out in his 1980 debate with Ronald Reagan that expecting to balance the budget with tax cuts and defense spending increases was “voodoo economics.” But along with Reagan’s ascendancy came the rise of huge budget deficits — that Bush wisely helped end when he agreed to raise taxes in 1990.
Despite $858 billion in December 2010 tax cuts, companies still complain that they pay too much in tax. General Electric (GE) has become famous for paying no taxes on its $5.1 billion in 2010 U.S. profits while keeping a big staff of lawyers on hand to make sure it pays as few of them as possible. Meanwhile, the New York Times reports that GE is not alone and that the prevailing estimate for the actual U.S. corporate tax rate is 25% — costing the U.S. about $100 billion in lost revenue.
But corporations have absolutely no reason to complain about taxes. After all, they earned record 2010 profits of $1.68 trillion and 85% of them are beating their first quarter 2011 earnings estimates as 70% are growing revenue faster than expected while their operating margins stand at a near record 19.8%.
And companies are achieving that record profitability by squeezing workers. After all, 2010 productivity rose 3.9% while unit labor costs fell 1.5%. To get more work out of the same number of workers while paying them less, it helps to have 13.5 million people out of work and the easy ability to hire part-time labor and outsource to countries that pay much lower wages.
So tax cuts have not spurred big companies to create jobs. But what about start ups? Based on my October 2010 interviews with 17 start up CEOs, my conclusion is that not a single one of them would create a job based on tax cuts. All of them told me that their decision to create a new job would be based on whether the long-term cost of that new job would be offset by higher revenues and profits.

More at link.
 
the article ignores history which prove tax cuts have created jobs. not all the time, but it is simply untrue to claim tax cuts do not create jobs. the author also ignore tax cuts to individuals. put more money in our pockets and most spend more money, which spurs the economy and as a result, more often than not, jobs.

further, do you not realize that the stimulus included tax cuts. if you believe the author, then obama and the dems are idiots and just wasted hundreds of millions of dollars, but you blame republicans. if you believe the author, then the dems and obama are at fault for including hundreds of millions of dollars in tax cuts. are you now going to stop being a partisan shill and hold obama and the dems responsible for "NOT" creating jobs?
 
the article ignores history which prove tax cuts have created jobs. not all the time, but it is simply untrue to claim tax cuts do not create jobs. the author also ignore tax cuts to individuals. put more money in our pockets and most spend more money, which spurs the economy and as a result, more often than not, jobs.

further, do you not realize that the stimulus included tax cuts. if you believe the author, then obama and the dems are idiots and just wasted hundreds of millions of dollars, but you blame republicans. if you believe the author, then the dems and obama are at fault for including hundreds of millions of dollars in tax cuts. are you now going to stop being a partisan shill and hold obama and the dems responsible for "NOT" creating jobs?

I agree with some of what you said, in some instances tax cuts do create jobs, not in the current situation. We currently have the lowest federal taxes in over 50 years. The major problem with the economy is future uncertanty and incredibly low interest rates causing the rich and banks to not feel its worth it to lend any money. the fear of a debt that cant be serviced by the already low taxes and the call for even lower taxes prevents investment as well. So no, in the present situation even lower taxes will not spur the economy in general. It is possable that a cut in payroll taxes or some other very specific surgical cuts would help. It is also true that surgical increases in taxes that make it less profitable to "park" money on the sidelines would help create jobs. An increase in the tax income making the debt seem less insurmountable will help in the current situation, as long as it is done in a healthy way.

The rich are parking there money because they do not have to invest to survive, they are waiting it out. The middle class has to invest to survive, especally when the rich are not investing (creating jobs). So by taxing the rich and decreasing taxes on the middle class, the middle class will drive us out of this mess.
 
I agree with some of what you said, in some instances tax cuts do create jobs, not in the current situation. We currently have the lowest federal taxes in over 50 years. The major problem with the economy is future uncertanty and incredibly low interest rates causing the rich and banks to not feel its worth it to lend any money. the fear of a debt that cant be serviced by the already low taxes and the call for even lower taxes prevents investment as well. So no, in the present situation even lower taxes will not spur the economy in general. It is possable that a cut in payroll taxes or some other very specific surgical cuts would help. It is also true that surgical increases in taxes that make it less profitable to "park" money on the sidelines would help create jobs. An increase in the tax income making the debt seem less insurmountable will help in the current situation, as long as it is done in a healthy way.

The rich are parking there money because they do not have to invest to survive, they are waiting it out. The middle class has to invest to survive, especally when the rich are not investing (creating jobs). So by taxing the rich and decreasing taxes on the middle class, the middle class will drive us out of this mess.

The "rich" are parking their money and waiting it out...???

Yeah, jarhead, THAT MONEY is called venture capital....the Forbes article mentioned it more than once.....now consider.....

If the government confiscated that money in taxes, when would venture capital come from ? There would be none. As you point out, the VC isn't being put to use now and that is a problem....the same as if the gov.'s black hole sucked it out of existence....
 
the article ignores history which prove tax cuts have created jobs. not all the time, but it is simply untrue to claim tax cuts do not create jobs. the author also ignore tax cuts to individuals. put more money in our pockets and most spend more money, which spurs the economy and as a result, more often than not, jobs.

The data just doesn't show that tax levels have an effect on unemployment any greater than random noise.

further, do you not realize that the stimulus included tax cuts. if you believe the author, then obama and the dems are idiots and just wasted hundreds of millions of dollars, but you blame republicans. if you believe the author, then the dems and obama are at fault for including hundreds of millions of dollars in tax cuts. are you now going to stop being a partisan shill and hold obama and the dems responsible for "NOT" creating jobs?

One of the things I criticized the stimulus for was its heavy reliance on tax cuts, which aren't an effective Keynesian stimulus. If you believe that Keynesianism is correct, do it right. If you don't, don't do anything. What was even the point of the stimulus?
 
Obama stopped them with the EPA and other regulations and forced them overseas....didn't you know that?

Poor AssWipe.....just doesn't get it....
 
That's not what the CEO of JetBlue says.



This past summer, when the money didn't come through, the FAA was forced to furlough 4,000 workers.


JetBlue CEO David Barger says businesses don't hire when there's that kind of uncertainty.

David Barger: Take a look in the airline industry - the FAA being partially shut down. I mean that's criminal.

Scott Pelley: What do you mean that's criminal?

Barger: When I use the word criminal, our elected officials are really, they're in office working on behalf of the citizens of our country. And so I just use this micro example within our industry - don't shut us down. Help support us, help fund us. Don't put 4,000 jobs on the unemployment line. Work together.

Pelley: When you saw the country teetering on the edge of defaulting on its debts, what did you think?

Barger: What a shame. Embarrassed. That's not who we are.

Pelley: How do you create jobs in this country?

Barger: We've gotta have people out of Washington that are willing to work together and talk with each other as opposed to not crossing the aisles. So I think that's the No. 1 issue that's really holding us back at this point in time.

Pelley: How do you get us off 9.1 percent unemployment?

Barger: As we build a budget, you have to balance the budget. You have to spend that which is within your limits.

Pelley: The Republicans want to do it with cuts, the Democrats want to have tax increases. What's the answer?
Barger: I think there can be a combination, I truly do. I don't think it has to be a win-lose situation.

Pelley: That seems to be what they think in Washington. That it has to be one or the other.

Barger: That's absolutely right. I don't think it has to be that way. I really don't. We could disagree, but let's at least meet. And it can't be a hostage situation. It can't be win-lose. It has to be win-win.

Pelley: What's the solution?

Barger: In the airline industry, new airplanes? They're going to China, India, and the Middle East. They're not coming to the United States.

Pelley: What does that tell you?

Barger: The real growth, the jobs that are being created - they're offshore. They're not happening here - and so we have to change that.

Pelley: Unemployment has been at 9 percent and above for right about two years now.

Barger: Right.

Pelley: Where are things going?

Barger: I think we're in a little bit of a holding pattern right now because we're back into this election cycle.


http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/...20113617.shtml


Poor Blabo.​
 
Obama stopped them with the EPA and other regulations and forced them overseas....didn't you know that?

Poor AssWipe.....just doesn't get it....

So Obama created the EPA, and a host of other Regs,
Then went back in time, and had your Hero, Nixon enact them,
Then, while he was there, forced Nixon to open China for business with the U.S.
Then changed the tax code to enable factories all over America to close and ship their jobs to China?
 
Apparently Yurt thinks Forbes has a leftwing bias.

are you drunk already? where did i say that? and you realize it is just an opinion piece. forbes, overall, is conservative. but thanks for proving you're wrong that i only agree with conservatives or conservative media.

good job little dune.
 
Forbes didn't write the article, they just ran it because, unlike left wingers, they respect free speech...

Have you ever even heard of Forbes before?

You are saying that a self described "Capitalist Tool" wouldn't use any editorial influence at all?
 
=Watermarx;877471]The data just doesn't show that tax levels have an effect on unemployment any greater than random noise.

sure it does.

One of the things I criticized the stimulus for was its heavy reliance on tax cuts, which aren't an effective Keynesian stimulus. If you believe that Keynesianism is correct, do it right. If you don't, don't do anything. What was even the point of the stimulus?

that's fine, but dune only blames the republicans. i have a hunch dune will hide behind other's skirts and avoid actually addressing my post. he will likely just flit in and out with random insults. i assume you do not speak for dune, is this correct? SF speaks for dune.
 
But aren’t business people complaining about the burden of taxes and regulations? Yes, but no more than usual.

Mr. Mishel points out that the National Federation of Independent Business has been surveying small businesses for almost 40 years, asking them to name their most important problem.

Taxes and regulations always rank high on the list, but what stands out now is a surge in the number of businesses citing poor sales — which strongly suggests that lack of demand, not fear of government, is holding business back.

So Republican assertions about what ails the economy are pure fantasy, at odds with all the evidence. Should we be surprised?

At one level, of course not. Politicians who always cater to wealthy business interests say that economic recovery requires catering to wealthy business interests.

Who could have imagined it?


http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/30/opinion/krugman-phony-fear-factor.html?_r=1
 
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0285370/bio

The Communist press of the Soviet Union and the People's Republic of China both derided Forbes as "a tool of the capitalists". He would later promote his magazine as a "Capitalist Tool", name his private 747 "Capitalist Tool", and form a motorcycle club called "The Capitalist Tools".


[h=5]Personal Quotes[/h]"I made my money the old fashioned way. I was very nice to a wealthy relative right before he died."

Considering the source, I find it highly unlikely that the editorial staff of Forbes doesn't agree with the content of the article.
 
Political parties have often coalesced around dubious economic ideas — remember the Laffer curve? — but I can’t think of a time when a party’s economic doctrine has been so completely divorced from reality.


And I’m also struck by the extent to which Republican-leaning economists — who have to know better — have been willing to lend their credibility to the party’s official delusions.


Partly, no doubt, this reflects the party’s broader slide into its own insular intellectual universe.


Large segments of the G.O.P. reject climate science and even the theory of evolution, so why expect evidence to matter for the party’s economic views?


This also, of course, reflects the political need of the right to make everything bad in America President Obama’s fault.


Never mind the fact that the housing bubble, the debt explosion and the financial crisis took place on the watch of a conservative, free-market-praising president; it’s that Democrat in the White House now who gets the blame.


But good politics can be very bad policy.


The truth is that we’re in this mess because we had too little regulation, not too much, and now one of our two major parties is determined to double down on the mistakes that caused the disaster.






http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/30/opinion/krugman-phony-fear-factor.html?_r=1
 
http://www.forbes.com/sites/petercohan/2011/05/03/do-tax-cuts-create-jobs/


Do Tax Cuts Create Jobs?


It’s a mainstay of conservative orthodoxy that tax cuts create jobs. In fact, the complexity of the tax code does create jobs for high-priced tax attorneys and accountants. But do tax cuts create “real” jobs?
The answer appears to be no for companies big and small. After all, U.S. public companies pay well-below the official 35% tax rate while 13.5 million American workers search unsuccessfully for jobs And start ups tell me that tax cuts don’t affect whether they’ll create new jobs. In short, the tax cut rhetoric, while effective politics, is lousy economics.
George H. W. Bush wisely pointed out in his 1980 debate with Ronald Reagan that expecting to balance the budget with tax cuts and defense spending increases was “voodoo economics.” But along with Reagan’s ascendancy came the rise of huge budget deficits — that Bush wisely helped end when he agreed to raise taxes in 1990.
Despite $858 billion in December 2010 tax cuts, companies still complain that they pay too much in tax. General Electric (GE) has become famous for paying no taxes on its $5.1 billion in 2010 U.S. profits while keeping a big staff of lawyers on hand to make sure it pays as few of them as possible. Meanwhile, the New York Times reports that GE is not alone and that the prevailing estimate for the actual U.S. corporate tax rate is 25% — costing the U.S. about $100 billion in lost revenue.
But corporations have absolutely no reason to complain about taxes. After all, they earned record 2010 profits of $1.68 trillion and 85% of them are beating their first quarter 2011 earnings estimates as 70% are growing revenue faster than expected while their operating margins stand at a near record 19.8%.
And companies are achieving that record profitability by squeezing workers. After all, 2010 productivity rose 3.9% while unit labor costs fell 1.5%. To get more work out of the same number of workers while paying them less, it helps to have 13.5 million people out of work and the easy ability to hire part-time labor and outsource to countries that pay much lower wages.
So tax cuts have not spurred big companies to create jobs. But what about start ups? Based on my October 2010 interviews with 17 start up CEOs, my conclusion is that not a single one of them would create a job based on tax cuts. All of them told me that their decision to create a new job would be based on whether the long-term cost of that new job would be offset by higher revenues and profits.

More at link.
I saw a episode of O'Liely when he had Ben Stein on and Stein essentially said the same thing. Even told Pappa Bear he'd eat his own shoe if he was wrong.
 
The Bush tax cuts have been in continuous effect for a decade. Where are the jobs?
Yea, no shit. There's been a steady decline in the # of jobs ever since they were implemented. Tax rates have very little to do with creating jobs. Profitability does. Hiring only occurs when it generates sustained and/or increased profits.
 
Yea, no shit. There's been a steady decline in the # of jobs ever since they were implemented. Tax rates have very little to do with creating jobs. Profitability does. Hiring only occurs when it generates sustained and/or increased profits.

How do increased govt regulations help increase profits?
 
Obama stopped them with the EPA and other regulations and forced them overseas....didn't you know that?

Poor AssWipe.....just doesn't get it....
Hey Pavo. I have a proposition for you. If we get rid of EPA can I buy the property adjoining yours, dig a hole, and dump this 55 gal drum of methyl ethyl ketone I have into it?
 
Back
Top