When republican politicians use words like 'tax cuts' most of the poor, uneducated republicans, think they mean tax cuts for them. There blind and the pied piper is playing his flute. They are playing word games. Republican politicians are misleading them by not adding in the last part, tax cuts 'for the rich.'.. Since when in the history of America has a republican successfully created millions of jobs? Never. It has always been the hard working middle to upper class business owners that create the most jobs. Over the next ten years, republicans plan to give billions of dollars in tax cuts to rich corporations, who already have more then enough money to create jobs in America. Creating jobs in Shanghai or Mumbai is what these corporations will do with the Bush tax cuts. These countries are developing at huge rates, and they want in on the game. In America, it's every man for himself and that is the same mentality that these corporations are using instead of giving back what they owe to American tax payers, for making them rich in the first place. Look at what corporations did to Detroit. The whole city is for sale. Corporations do not benefit the American economy. They take away from it. They crash it. They toy with it. Like a cat playing with it's food. Pretty soon corporations will be run like the TSA and every employee will be required to have a rectal exam before they start their day of work. Pretty soon republican corporations will be putting the 'for sale' sign on America. If we do not stop them! Republican politicians do not care about the economy. The only thing they care about is their pocket books and how popular they are. The only way to save America is to quit letting foreign countries sell their cheap shit here. After that we need to stop letting our technology be duplicated. If they want the new Ipod or Ipad, foreigners need to pay the cost for it. That's how it works in other countries. Do you actually think the Chinese buy massive amounts of our products? How could they? We do not have any factories. If the rich bring all the factories back then maybe we can compromise on their tax cuts. We need to have more jobs available then actual employees to fill them. We also need to create stricter privacy laws that do not allow companies, insurance agencies, or corporations to piss test at random because they want to know if you drank a beer the day before or smoked a joint in the past month. Jobs should need the employees, employees should not need jobs. That would create a market for the need of employees. Companies would start bidding for employees. The average job pay would be higher, then ever before. The economy would be a monster within itself. What do you think?
Read more on what I'm talking about!
Robert Creamer: Economic History Shows Clearly That Tax Cuts for Rich Hurt the Economy
Just because you repeat something over and over doesn't make it true. In fact, there is a body of empirical, historical evidence that proves clearly that tax cuts for the rich not only do nothing to spur economic growth -- they actually do substantial damage to the prospects for economic growth. For eight years, George Bush and the Republicans lowered taxes for the wealthy and cut back the regulation of big corporations and Wall Street -- all based on the premise that these two policies would benefit the economy. Now look at the huge mess we are in. George Bush and the Republicans in Congress passed two massive tax cuts, we saw a massive, secular decline in the creation of private sector jobs. Economists tell us that the economy must create 150,000 new jobs each month just to stay even with population growth. In fact, there is absolutely no evidence in the economic history of the last century that tax cuts for the rich increase economic growth. But there is evidence that they actually hurt prospects for economic growth -- both in the short and long run. In the last century, marginal tax rates on the rich were their highest during World War II -- when the wealthy were called upon to help finance the war effort. During World War II, the tax bite on wealthy Americans was close to punitive (the highest bracket was 91 percent). But that didn't hurt the economy; far from it. By war's end, Americans were rolling in cash. The average weekly pay rose 83 percent between 1940 and 1945. Many families had their first discretionary income. In 1993, President Bill Clinton proposed a budget that raised taxes on the rich. Republicans predicted that its passage would lead to economic doom. They argued that the Clinton tax increase on the rich would lead to economic stagnation and unemployment. Instead, of course, the Clinton administration created 22.5 million jobs, of which 20.7 million -- or 92 percent -- were in the private sector. His economic policy eliminated the federal deficit and left his successor -- George Bush -- with budget surpluses projected as far as the eye could see.
Read the whole thing: http://www.youaskabout.com/news/2010/11/22/robert-creamer-economic-history-shows-clearly-that-tax-cuts-for-rich-hurt-the-economy/
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment