Do you think the Rich class need a tax cut like Republicans claim?
it will only put us more in debt, or do you think under 250 thousand a year should get one, or should we all just do away with tax cuts untail we get American on solid ground again, out of debt.
- justgetitrightLv 710 years agoFavorite Answer
I would postpone ending the Bush tax cuts.
There are only two segments that can spend in todays economy, the rich and the government. If the tax cuts are not extended for the rich you take money out of the economy and put it into the hands of the government.
This may not sound like a bad idea but so far nothing the government has done has worked. The $860 billion spent on the jobs stimulus has not done squat. Depending upon which numbers you believe, either 1 million or 3 million then each job cost between $246,000 to more than $600,000 each.
Obama says that ending the tax cuts on those making more than $250,000 each year would add $700 billion over 10 years, this is only $70 billion each year and is still less than the $860 billion wasted so far.
The traded off here is that the tax cut extension can be looked at each year, or just extended for 2 years. If our economy has recovered after 2 years then ending the cuts will not be so bad.
There are many democrats that are now doubting that they should end the tax cuts on only the rich.
- 10 years ago
No, they should not. Doing so only hurts the economy, as history has shown again and again. Many european countries tax the rich more and use this money to help poor people. A country is most successful when there is the least amount of disparity between the rich and the poor. Research shows that poverty is the biggest influence on a child's academic success as well, and about 25% of children live in poverty. Taxing their parents only makes their situation more dire. If we invest in these children by taking taxes from the rich then they will be more successful and in the future so will our country. But republicans do not care about the poor so of course none of this matters. They need to give big tax breaks to their rich friends and start wars so that their weapon producing friends can make money.
- 10 years ago
The tax cuts that republicans want extended for the wealthiest 2% will add almost a trillion dollars to the deficit. Your not confused as @ Mr. Sarcasm, would like you to believe.He knows your on the right track to the truth.Here this is what republicans want to do, they want to extend the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest 2% of Americans which will add almost a trillion dollars to the deficit where they all voted no to extend unemployment benefits to hurting Americans laid off from work saying it would add to the deficit.So see your on the right track which @ Mr. Sarcasm , knows the republicans have lost another sucker to their motives. Now why would they say yes to the wealthiest 2% and no0 to hurting Americans? Because they are for corporate friends not ordinary Americans like you me and the millions of people unemployed.
- AndrewMLv 710 years ago
No. While the conservatives love to make certain claims about tax cuts for the wealthiest, most are complete fallacies:
1) Cutting taxes on the wealthiest will hurt small businesses and middle class folks - nonsense. Keep in mind that raising the top tax rate on folks making over $200K means that their taxes only go up on each and every dollar made over and above $200K, not on the whole kitty. Also, as far as small businesses go, the tax hike would be on PROFITS a small-business owner makes, again, over and above $200K. So, if I have a business that does $2M in revenue, the tax hike probably doesn't touch any of that, because that's gross receipts, not profits.
Jeffrey J above shows that he knows nothing about business. No, Jeff, you don't get taxed as if you made $1M, because you write off the cost of creating product, paying employees, paying their benefits, etc. If you make $50K in profit, you get taxed for making $50K. If you think otherwise, you need to get educated. If you doubt me, go take a look at the business schedules on a tax return. It's not income unless it's profit.
2) Paying a few percent more on capital gains or on income over $200K will stop the rich from hiring - also nonsense. If the rich create jobs, as the conservatives claim, it's because there is enough demand that, if I increase my production, there will be demand to reward that increase in production. The rich hire workers because any worker hired is expected, under any decent business model, to produce at least five times their compensation in revenue for my business. So, if I have less spending money, I'm not going to not hire someone if hiring that someone means I get to make more money.
3) Hiking taxes on the rich will hurt the economy - more nonsense. The current problem started back with Reagan and his famous "voodoo" supply-side economics. Until then, if productivity doubled, the gains from that productivity were pretty much split between the owners and labor, which meant that both supply and demand would increase together, in balance, which is a healthy formula. By dumping cash on the supply side, while attacking the unions and middle class, that meant there was no demand to match the supply side increase. To make up for that, they made credit/debt very cheap and easy to obtain, to artificially inflate that side of the economic scale. Now that the credit bubble has burst, and wages have been stagnant, the main economic problem we face is a DEMAND side deficiency. Giving tax cuts to the rich does not stimulate demand. Lower and middle classes are more likely to spend that money and circulate it. In terms of economic sense, it makes sense to get more money to the lower brackets, to stimulate demand, but since there's no value to be gained from doing the same for the rich, it doesn't make sense to increase the debt by that much more with no benefit.
Finally, if the rest of the economy does well, that will bode for better results for businesses, their owners and investors.
Cutting taxes to the lower 97% makes economic sense. Retaining those cuts for the top 2 or 3% does not, plain and simple.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- Anonymous10 years ago
You are repeating the misleading talking points language. When you increase the tax rate from what it has been for the last 10 years it is a tax increase. Only if you believe, and you might, that it is the government's money, can you call a failure to increase the tax rate a tax cut.
- 10 years ago
90% of all companies are sole proprietorships, most companies make more then 250 thousand a year. Companies who are sole proprietorships have company income reflect onto its owners income.
Lets say I have a company, I bought a 900 thousand dollar widget, I sell it for 1 million. my company makes 100 thousand, 50 thousand of it goes to company expenses, i get 50 thousand. I pay taxes like I make 1 million dollars a year because my company made 1 million dollars.
- Mr. SarcasmLv 610 years ago
You're confused. There is no tax cut. It's Obama trying to raise taxes by terminating the Bush tax cuts. It's a sure way to slow an economy.
- oxpuzliooLv 510 years ago
To get out of debt, as you have put it here, we must stop spending and we must at the same time increase our revenue. This administration is on steroids when it comes to spending. When it comes to generating revenue, they're going after those who, using their "riches", are turning the economic wheels in this country--small business owners.
Your multi-millionaires are responsible for building hospitals, libraries, parks; making huge donations to numerous charities; supporting the fine arts (museums, theaters, etc.); and paying their fair share of taxes.
- Bonkers!Lv 710 years ago
What tax cut is being proposed and who is proposing it, and if so, why are they keeping it a secret?
- Anonymous10 years ago
We should cut Government and spending...