Tax cuts for the rich

Will the tax cuts for the top2-3% actually create jobs

  • I believe it will create lots of jobs, please explain

    Votes: 5 29.4%
  • I seriously doubt it will any effect on Job creation

    Votes: 12 70.6%

  • Total voters
    17

medicineman

New Member
Here's my question: Do you think giving the top 2-3% of the population an average 80,000 dollar tax cut is the right thing to do?. Righties say this will create jobs. We must remember that while the economy was going into the shitter and shedding jobs like a dog shaking off fleas, the infamous "Bush" tax cuts were in place the whole while, they're still in place with no miraculous job creation. I believe it will have no effect at all except to fatten the already fat cats bank accounts. What say you all?
 

NoDrama

Well-Known Member
How long will it take for the Dollar to lose all its purchasing power? You could be a Billionaire and be unable to buy Breakfast at McDonalds. Giving the rich more money won't help anyone, what they need to do is get rid of the Dollar and usher in a Commodity money that will hold its value.
 

medicineman

New Member
How long will it take for the Dollar to lose all its purchasing power? You could be a Billionaire and be unable to buy Breakfast at McDonalds. Giving the rich more money won't help anyone, what they need to do is get rid of the Dollar and usher in a Commodity money that will hold its value.
My God man, we finally agree on one thing, giving the rich more money will not help anyone but them, Kudos for having some common sense. I don't argue here from some giant base of wisdom, just a little common (At least I think it pretty common) sense. Giving the already rich more money to add 800 Billion to the already burgeoning debt seems very un-helpful. That money could be used to rebuild the infrastructure. My commonn sense theory about the debt is this: declare bankruptcy and start over, fuck China and all the rest that hold us captive. I realize that's a pretty drastic solution and will probably never be implemented, but if not before, then after we go broke, for we are really close. When the interest on the debt becomes more than the GNP, were toast. Of course I'm no economist, but spending more than you make seems like the American way and we're headed for trouble.
 

redivider

Well-Known Member
unfortunately, the answers are loaded.

when doing a poll, the questions are neutral, the results may be skewed.

you start with skewed questions your gonna get skewed answers.
 

poonjoon

Well-Known Member
Tax cuts for the rich won't "create jobs." I believe there should be tax cuts for the entire population as a whole, not just the rich - and $250,000 a year is not rich.

Unemployment levels will decrease once the time preferences are back in shape. Continuing to keep interest rates at nearly 0% skews the time preferences and entrepreneurs are unable properly estimate present and future costs and prices (Interest rates a premium - since people always prefer money today than money tomorrow, present goods always command a premium in the market over the future). This artificial hampering with interest rates (intervention) sends out wrong signals for businessmen. They begin to invest in capital and producers' goods; previously unprofitable investments now look profitable, even time-consuming projects. Entrepreneurs begin to act as if savings genuinely increased, though all that has happened was the artificial lowering of time preference. Businesses ramp up borrowing from the newly created bank money and invest in capital goods, which then leads to higher wages because of artificially increased business demand (which seems to be no problem at the time because of the artificially low interest rates). When these higher labor rates are paid out to the workers, they begin to spend it on consumer goods because time preferences of the general public have not actually changed to the downside - they don't want to save more. This is an attempt by acting individuals (persons in an economy) to readjust the consumer/savings proportions (time preferences).

So, the money goes to the consumer goods industries and the capital and producers' goods are left hanging. This is when depressions (or if you're a Keynesian, recession, downturn - whatever name you want to put on it) set in after the artificial boom. A depression is when an economy tries to readjust itself and rid itself of all the malinvestments, which in this case is the overinvestment in capital goods. This is when the newly created money, not genuine savings, filters through the economy and businesses realize that the savings were not real and they have made a gross malinvestment. The artificial, inflationary boom caused by government intervention in interest rates causes price distortion and production system perversion. Prices of labor and capital goods have been pushed higher to unsustainable and unprofitable levels. The depression is a necessary phase in economic cycles to flush out malinvestments and return back to natural consumer/savings rates, time preferences.

Tax cuts mean nothing when it comes to unemployment and continuing to artificially contain interest rates at 0% levels will only make the next adjustment (depression) worse.
 

tranquility

Active Member
all i got to say is....this is a creative post man!!! nice
and.....who the fuck knows where that money goes.the president probably even doesnt
 

Parker

Well-Known Member
Here's my question: Do you think giving the top 2-3% of the population an average 80,000 dollar tax cut is the right thing to do?. Righties say this will create jobs. We must remember that while the economy was going into the shitter and shedding jobs like a dog shaking off fleas, the infamous "Bush" tax cuts were in place the whole while, they're still in place with no miraculous job creation. I believe it will have no effect at all except to fatten the already fat cats bank accounts. What say you all?
The reasons for no jobs are not the fault of the tax cuts. Without those tax cuts we would be worse off. It's simple economics.

The top 5 percent of the rich account for 37 percent of the spending.
When they spend their money, who do you think makes their toys? The working man does and for a fair price because that's what the free market tells us. Take that money and give it to the government and those exact same jobs, including benefits pay those same workers almost twice as much.
Who pays for the government workers jobs? the working man does

The top 5 percent of the rich account for 37 percent of the spending, which is the same as bottom 80 percent spend.
 

MexicanWarlord420

Active Member
Cutting taxes on the personal income tax of rich people does not create jobs. Cutting corporate taxes may create a few jobs, but that's it.
 

newatit2010

Well-Known Member
Not just no but hell no. To get people back to work is get the government out of the privite sector. Take their money away so they can,t spend it close the all borders quit importing every thing we need Ford, GM, if you build overseas you sell that shit overseas. Damn those china made levis. QUIT supporting the DAMN world most of the bastards hate America any ways. Put Americans in office the damn politicians are after a life time positions. I think if you had Americans running the country they would know what needs to be done. The muslim we have in office now is not helping matters at all.
 
Cutting taxes on the personal income tax of rich people does not create jobs. Cutting corporate taxes may create a few jobs, but that's it.
I highly doubt that would work either, there is no need for more to be manufactured, so why would you create the extra job. I believe it is just looked upon as free money. If there is no extra demand, then there is no need for extra supply. Personal tax cuts will also not create jobs. If you have the money (wich I am pretty sure that the top 2-3% that the OP was talking about do) then they will buy what they want regardless of that tax cut, so long as it is a good investment. I believe if you want to stimulate the economy then you should lower the taxes on the middle and low income earners. Also tax the heck out of stuff coming in from other nations so it is equivaliant in price to American made goods, I believe that would be the best bet to create jobs. But either way, tax cuts do not create jobs.
 

Total Head

Well-Known Member
The reasons for no jobs are not the fault of the tax cuts. Without those tax cuts we would be worse off. It's simple economics.

The top 5 percent of the rich account for 37 percent of the spending.
When they spend their money, who do you think makes their toys? The working man does and for a fair price because that's what the free market tells us. Take that money and give it to the government and those exact same jobs, including benefits pay those same workers almost twice as much.
Who pays for the government workers jobs? the working man does

The top 5 percent of the rich account for 37 percent of the spending, which is the same as bottom 80 percent spend.
that about sums it up right there. that being said, i don't think it will stimulate the kind of job growth its supporters claim. when the top 3% spend their money, it doesn't always go towards what they claim it does. you don't get to be on top and stay there by being honest and forthcoming.
 

medicineman

New Member
unfortunately, the answers are loaded.

when doing a poll, the questions are neutral, the results may be skewed.

you start with skewed questions your gonna get skewed answers.
It was pretty simple, would it create jobs or not. Righties say it will, show me how, especially since the cuts have been in place since 2003 and we've lost somewhere around 6 million jobs in that time span. Rich people will just bank the money, taking it out of circulation, like they've done for the last seven years. Now maybe you can see why there are no fucking jobs, that money has gone in the vaults of the rich, or been invested overseas, but job creation here in the good old USA has not been created by the rich with tax cuts, and continuing them will not result in any more jobs. It is like the old addage, continuing to carry on with the same old ways, time after time, then expecting different results, is INSANE.
 
Top