Quantcast

Do tax cuts for the rich create jobs?

ϟMopederϟ 2012/04/08 23:12:46
no
yes
You!
Add Photos & Videos
Romney Richie Rich

Read More: http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/SodaHead-Pro...

Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • ϟMopederϟ 2012/04/08 23:45:01 (edited)
    no
    ϟMopederϟ
    +8
    The Republicans want people to think giving tax cuts to the rich really works, but it doesn't.

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • Brosia 2012/05/06 22:47:47
    no
    Brosia
    It has never worked before, why should it now?
  • Freedom4 2012/04/13 11:39:47
    yes
    Freedom4
    Of course it does. Can anyone even logically explain how stealing from job creators and investors helps to create jobs?


    I think it is time to stop allowing politicians to buy votes by stealing from one group and promising it to thieves. Time to treat every American fairly with a flat tax.


    Should the democrats just officially change their name to the Jealous Thieves party? It is clear that is all they amount to. Has Ovama ever had 1 speech where he was not vilifying the successful and promising free stuff stolen from others to his thief minions?
  • tom Freedom4 2012/05/25 13:39:44
    tom
    +1
    It creates some jobs, but not as much as tax cuts to the middle class do and not enough to justify the cost, it's been proven that the middle class spends more of a tax cut while the wealthy tend to save it, through all of this the rich have gotten richer but they sure as heck have not been producing more jobs so why do we need to give them more of a tax break?? can you logically explain that??

    promising it to thieves?? you are classifying the entire middle class and the poor as thieves?? considering you are obviously a conservative republican I am going to make a leap and assume that you are a Christian as well, the Bible is pretty clear about taking care of the poor (not that I think we should do it for this reason as there should be a separation of church and state) so for you to call them thieves probably flies in the face of everything you claim to believe
  • Freedom4 tom 2012/06/03 23:01:06
    Freedom4
    The problem with your nonsense is that the middle classs spend it primarily on imported crap that does nothing for the economy. it is the wealthy that keep their money moving by creating jobs and investing. That is a far greater driver of the ecoonomy. AGAIN, can you even expplain how taking money from those that invest and create jobs helps them to invest and create jobs?

    As far as thieves go, yes, if you are using mob rule to steal from others to steal things for yourself, then they are freaking thieves. look at how you democrats cried about even paying for your own social security. You do not give a damn about anyone, just stealing for yourself. You have clearly shown that youa re willing to destroy the coountry, the economy, burry our children in debt, and all so you can get hand outs. That clearly classifies you as a freaking theif.
  • JoshuaB... Freedom4 2012/08/29 11:46:14
    JoshuaBHolmes
    +1
    You cannot seriously be insinuating that wealthier people buy American haha - I've heard it all now.
  • Freedom4 JoshuaB... 2012/09/19 19:09:14
    Freedom4
    Moreso than the poor and they actually buy the more expensive goods required to sustain our economy. I also noticed that your inability to even try to come up with a rational argument for any of the other MAJOR holes in your failed ideology.
  • tom Freedom4 2012/05/25 13:45:59
    tom
    +2
    Bloomberg’s Al Hunt asked Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI) — who represented the GOP on the fiscal supercommittee that failed to craft a deficit reduction package — to explain this viewpoint, considering that more jobs were created under the Clinton administration and its higher taxes on the rich than were created following the Bush tax cuts. Upton admitted that “I don’t know specifically the answer to that question,” nonsensically pointing to Friday’s jobs report instead of trying to argue the premise of Hunt’s question:

    HUNT: Why under those pre-Bush tax cut tax rates did the economy do so well in the ‘90s? And why under the Bush tax rates, less for the wealthy, to do so poorly in this decade?

    UPTON: Well, a couple things. One, spending went up, Al, the wars. I mean, that’s trillions of dollars. And also there was no change in the entitlements. And we also know -

    HUNT: But that shouldn’t hurt the economy. That shouldn’t hurt economic growth.

    UPTON: Yeah, but that impacts the debt and the deficit.

    HUNT: But I’m asking, why did the economy grow a lot? Why were more jobs created in the previous decade under higher taxes than in this decade under lower taxes?

    UPTON: I don’t know specifically the answer to that question. I can – I can maybe merit a guess. But, I mean, in ...
    Bloomberg’s Al Hunt asked Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI) — who represented the GOP on the fiscal supercommittee that failed to craft a deficit reduction package — to explain this viewpoint, considering that more jobs were created under the Clinton administration and its higher taxes on the rich than were created following the Bush tax cuts. Upton admitted that “I don’t know specifically the answer to that question,” nonsensically pointing to Friday’s jobs report instead of trying to argue the premise of Hunt’s question:

    HUNT: Why under those pre-Bush tax cut tax rates did the economy do so well in the ‘90s? And why under the Bush tax rates, less for the wealthy, to do so poorly in this decade?

    UPTON: Well, a couple things. One, spending went up, Al, the wars. I mean, that’s trillions of dollars. And also there was no change in the entitlements. And we also know -

    HUNT: But that shouldn’t hurt the economy. That shouldn’t hurt economic growth.

    UPTON: Yeah, but that impacts the debt and the deficit.

    HUNT: But I’m asking, why did the economy grow a lot? Why were more jobs created in the previous decade under higher taxes than in this decade under lower taxes?

    UPTON: I don’t know specifically the answer to that question. I can – I can maybe merit a guess. But, I mean, in large part is because our job – we lost jobs. I mean, look at the jobs report that came out this last week, three-hundred- some-thousand people actually stopped looking for jobs.
    (more)
  • Freedom4 tom 2012/09/20 00:31:30
    Freedom4
    You are nonsensically assuming that tax cuts are the only factor that does affect the economy and giving Clinton all the credit for the Internet and tech boom. This is simpleton thinking. Here is the MAJOR FLAW in the Democrat’s economic philosophy. When you break it down to the simplest form that anyone can understand, it makes no sense at all. Can you even begin to explain how higher taxes, higher regulations, higher health care costs, having to pay employers far more than their skill set dictates, having insane unions that require 4 “skilled tradesmen to change a light bulb,” overpowerful trial lawyers, massive pensions and early retirements where workers make more in retirement than they ever did working, or any other horrible democrat policy helps companies to invest in research and development (The future of our economy), better able to compete abroad on pricing (Expand the economic pie), able to hire more people, grow and expand, have additional cash reserves to weather recessions, or in any way helps the economy? You can’t can you?  

    The democrats only real argument is that it is ok to destroy the economy so that perfectly able bodied people can get petty hand outs like cell phones and birth control. Nobody is proposing not helping the handicap, the mentally incapable...
    You are nonsensically assuming that tax cuts are the only factor that does affect the economy and giving Clinton all the credit for the Internet and tech boom. This is simpleton thinking. Here is the MAJOR FLAW in the Democrat’s economic philosophy. When you break it down to the simplest form that anyone can understand, it makes no sense at all. Can you even begin to explain how higher taxes, higher regulations, higher health care costs, having to pay employers far more than their skill set dictates, having insane unions that require 4 “skilled tradesmen to change a light bulb,” overpowerful trial lawyers, massive pensions and early retirements where workers make more in retirement than they ever did working, or any other horrible democrat policy helps companies to invest in research and development (The future of our economy), better able to compete abroad on pricing (Expand the economic pie), able to hire more people, grow and expand, have additional cash reserves to weather recessions, or in any way helps the economy? You can’t can you?  

    The democrats only real argument is that it is ok to destroy the economy so that perfectly able bodied people can get petty hand outs like cell phones and birth control. Nobody is proposing not helping the handicap, the mentally incapable, the elderly or even children. So let’s take that lie off the table. Let’s debate the real political argument on the merits of it, and determine how much it is acceptable to steal from other hard working and equal Americans and destroy the economy to help able bodied people out that could easily help themselves as millions of others, worse off than them, do each and every day.
    (more)
  • C-ZAR™, Emperor of the PHÆT 2012/04/12 13:02:57
    no
    C-ZAR™, Emperor of the PHÆT
    +1
    No, just shovels more money into the pockets of the rich, if it did there would've been jobs during the Bush admin
  • DavidK C-ZAR™,... 2012/04/13 13:51:05
    DavidK
    hey, it takes money to make money! Shovel it to the poor and where do you think its going to go? Got to make good investment choices!!!
  • C-ZAR™,... DavidK 2012/04/13 15:11:04
  • DavidK C-ZAR™,... 2012/04/13 15:17:05
    DavidK
    +1
    wow!!!!!!! He should have run for President!!!!! He's soooooo smart! Maybe Obama should have him in his cabinet!!!! The libtards need him to reinforce their libtard agenda!
  • C-ZAR™,... DavidK 2012/04/13 15:18:49
    C-ZAR™, Emperor of the PHÆT
    I thought so, lol
  • DavidK C-ZAR™,... 2012/04/13 15:20:26
    DavidK
    +1
    what are you doing up so early anyways?!?!?! ;)
  • C-ZAR™,... DavidK 2012/04/13 15:23:42
    C-ZAR™, Emperor of the PHÆT
    +1
    Early?--It's 10:23 am here, lol
  • DavidK C-ZAR™,... 2012/05/26 05:54:58
    DavidK
    I'm just getting up at that time!
  • tom DavidK 2012/05/25 13:32:09
    tom
    +2
    that's comical, worried about investment choices when the poor are just worried about putting food on the table, when you give it to the poor it tends to go back into the economy to buy goods that they need, when you give it to the rich it tends to get saved at a higher level, if tax cuts to the rich were the answer we should be growing jobs at a faster pace than we are
  • DavidK tom 2012/05/26 05:58:29 (edited)
    DavidK
    when you give it to the poor, I goes for food or drugs! You know that as well as I do! Either way, it doesn't go back into the economy to benefit us. Romney will see to it the tax cuts go back to those that earned it! Businesses and Corps, so that America can start hiring again! Obviously, Obamas ways don't work!
  • DavidK 2012/04/12 12:51:22
    yes
    DavidK
    +1
    Those that say no have never owned a business. Common sense......... something the "left" lacks.
  • JoshuaB... DavidK 2012/08/29 11:48:32
    JoshuaBHolmes
    +3
    Do you own a business? I own several, and I promise I would not use 2% to hire more people. Matter of fact that business would have to be NET'ing close to 2 million a year for the tax break to even amount to 1 new employee's salary + benefits. This is a joke, I've asked so many other CEO's I know they all laugh at the concept of tax breaks creating jobs... What it IS creating, is more wealth
  • sardonicist BN-0 2012/04/12 04:55:31
    no
    sardonicist BN-0
    There will always be a few illusive examples of a job whose inception was owed to a tax cut in some way or another.

    But it is irrelevant, because you could have also used that revenue to directly create many more jobs.

    To say that a tax cut would create jobs is disingenuous because it ignores the alternatives.
  • Guru_T_Firefly 2012/04/10 04:00:40
    no
    Guru_T_Firefly
    Never have, never will.
  • Steve 2012/04/09 19:42:13
    no
    Steve
    +2
    Our economy has plenty of investment money available (as PROVEN by low interest rates and a booming stock market). All that is needed is more consumer demand -- which you get when middle class and lower-income people have more money.
  • BlueRep... Steve 2012/04/10 16:21:36
    BlueRepublican
    Hey Steve. Poor people have money, but they often have debt as well. I believe that this easy-credit consumerism mentality is the real problem and can be solved by going back to grandpa's approach of living within your means, sticking to a budget and saving for that rainy day.
  • MW121 2012/04/09 18:03:22
    yes
    MW121
    +1
    How many poor people create jobs.. It's ridiculous that you have to keep paying more and more when you reach "Success" Everytime my business is hit with more costs, taxes, higher premiums, it all gets past down to the customers in higher prices, employees with less hours, less wages, fewer employs, higher costs for healthcare, etc... It's a business... It's all about profit..
  • sbtbill MW121 2012/04/09 19:33:01
    sbtbill
    +2
    How many of your customers are rich? The pass on only works when your customers are willing and able to pay more. No customers no profits no business. Right now we have high unemployment so it is easy (if training expensive) to pass costs to employees. If you had a union or unemployment was low that would be hard. Again no employees no business for many companies.

    The bottom line is that customers create jobs and not rich people. Rich people just have the money to more easily take advantage of the demand customers create. There are more poor people then rich people therefore poor people create more jobs then rich people.
  • elijahin24 MW121 2012/04/12 15:57:56
    elijahin24
    People who own a business, will hire and lay off, as the business dictates. If there is demand, they are hiring, if there isn't, they're laying people off.That's pretty simple. Taxes don't come into this equation.
  • MW121 elijahin24 2012/04/12 19:47:45
    MW121
    Increased taxes, healthcare costs, etc.. all hit profits.. Employees are a huge expense and obviously business is growing hire, business isn't growing lay people off, but these other costs are also added into the mix and it does determine outcomes of hiring, benefits, pay, etc...
  • elijahin24 MW121 2012/04/12 20:35:26
    elijahin24
    Employees are a huge expense no matter what. which is why employers won't hire them, unless there is enough demand for the product to justify hiring them. Taxes still don't come into play. Demand = need for supply = need for workers to meet demand = profit
    No demand = no need for supply = layoffs in order to cut costs until demand increases.
  • Angi 2012/04/09 16:48:41
    no
    Angi
    +1
    No, they just feed resentment.
  • jdemme 2012/04/09 16:04:01
    no
    jdemme
    +1
    Voodoo economics have never worked. Even George H.W. Bush knew that.
  • R. 2012/04/09 13:33:12
    yes
    R.
    December 2007 Marks Record 52nd Consecutive Month OfJob Growth.
    Publication: Business Wire

    Friday, January 4 2008


    More Than 8.3 Million Jobs Created Since August 2003 In Longest Continuous Run Of Job Growth On Record
    WASHINGTON -- Today, the Bureau of Labor Statistics released new jobs figures - 18,000 jobs created in December. Since August 2003, more than 8.3 million jobs have been created, with more than 1.3 million jobs created throughout 2007. Our economy has now added jobs for 52 straight months - the longest period of uninterrupted job growth on record. The unemployment rate remains low at 5 percent. The U.S. economy benefits from a solid foundation, but we cannot take economic growth for granted and economic indicators have become increasingly mixed. President Bush will continue working with Congress to address the challenges our economy faces and help facilitate long-term economic growth, job growth, and better standards of living for all Americans.
    The U.S. Economy Benefits From A Solid Foundation
    * Real GDP grew at a strong 4.9 percent annual rate in the third quarter of 2007. The economy has now experienced six years of uninterrupted growth, averaging 2.8 percent a year since 2001.
    * Real after-tax per capita personal income has risen by 11.7 percent - an av...













    December 2007 Marks Record 52nd Consecutive Month OfJob Growth.
    Publication: Business Wire

    Friday, January 4 2008


    More Than 8.3 Million Jobs Created Since August 2003 In Longest Continuous Run Of Job Growth On Record
    WASHINGTON -- Today, the Bureau of Labor Statistics released new jobs figures - 18,000 jobs created in December. Since August 2003, more than 8.3 million jobs have been created, with more than 1.3 million jobs created throughout 2007. Our economy has now added jobs for 52 straight months - the longest period of uninterrupted job growth on record. The unemployment rate remains low at 5 percent. The U.S. economy benefits from a solid foundation, but we cannot take economic growth for granted and economic indicators have become increasingly mixed. President Bush will continue working with Congress to address the challenges our economy faces and help facilitate long-term economic growth, job growth, and better standards of living for all Americans.
    The U.S. Economy Benefits From A Solid Foundation
    * Real GDP grew at a strong 4.9 percent annual rate in the third quarter of 2007. The economy has now experienced six years of uninterrupted growth, averaging 2.8 percent a year since 2001.
    * Real after-tax per capita personal income has risen by 11.7 percent - an average of more than $3,550 per person - since President Bush took office.
    * Over the course of this Administration, productivity growth has averaged 2.6 percent per year. This growth is well above average productivity growth in the 1990s, 1980s, and 1970s.
    Unemployment Numbers
    2001 4.2 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.3 4.5 ...
    2002 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.9 5.8 5.8 ...
    2003 5.8 5.9 5.9 6.0 6.1 6.3 ...
    2004 5.7 5.6 5.8 5.6 5.6 5.6 ...
    2005 5.3 5.4 5.2 5.2 5.1 5.0 ...
    2006 4.7 4.8 4.7 4.7 4.6 4.6 ...
    2007 4.6 4.5 4.4 4.5 4.4 4.6 ...
    2008 5.0 4.8 5.1 4.9 5.4 5.6 ...
    2009 7.8 8.2 8.6 8.9 9.4 9.5 ...
    2010 9.7 9.7 9.7 9.8 9.6 9.5 ...
    2011 9.0 8.9 8.8 9.0 9.1 9.2
    Sorry all you naysayers.
    (more)
  • Kern R. 2012/04/09 15:28:49
    Kern
    +1
    Thanks for pointing out the lowest job growth of any president, including the president Republicans hat the most, Jimmy Carter.

    Did the taxes pay for themseleves like the Republicans said they would? No. Did Reagan's tax cut pay for themselves? Nope and we're still paying off the debt Reagan ran up.

    If the tax cuts worked, why aren't they working now?

    How many jobs has Romeny created with his tax cuts?
  • R. Kern 2012/04/09 16:45:09
    R.
    Mopeder asked a question and I answered it with facts and figures to prove
    my point. Your obvious disappointment to the facts are to ask your own
    questions and obfuscate. Sorry to ruin it for you , sour ( grapes ) puss.
  • Kern R. 2012/04/09 16:52:26
    Kern
    +1
    If you keep the scope of your question very narrow, did the Bush tax cuts create jobs, then yes, you are are correct, the Bush tax cuts created jobs. However, you can say the same abou Reagan. Did Reagan's tax cuts create jobs? Yes, However, the real question is at what cost. Reagan trippeled the national debt. He also HAD to raise taxes to off set the exploding deficit.

    The problem with tax cuts for rich is that study after study shows that tax cuts are the worst way to create jobs.

    Before you go crazy, I am not saying that raising taxes creates more jobs; rather, there is a happy medium, If cutting taxes was the cure we should eliminate them all. Why tax anyone if taxes hurt the economy?

    The answer isn't simply to cut taxes every time the economy gets in trouble. Putting in the right regulations helps like regulating banks, and oil, and every industry we come to rely on.

    Since you posted your stats, I thought it would be honest to point out that though they were positive, they were very low.
  • R. Kern 2012/04/09 17:06:37 (edited)
    R.
    Very low but very sustained. Before this administration finishes it's four
    years , we will have a new leader in the aforementioned category. They
    are currently attempting to cook the books ( numbers ) in order to
    aid in a re-election bid but those that are really looking for work know
    all too well the ugly truth that exists in our current job(less) market.
    p.s. I don't go crazy over things I can't control.
  • Kern R. 2012/04/09 17:20:09
    Kern
    +1
    I see, low and sustained growth is good for Republicans but bad for Demorcrats. Got ti. President Obama had a much, much worse recession than did Bush. He turned it aqrround without the Republicans working with him. Bush on the other hand had a congress, when it switched sides, that was wiliing to work with him.

    President Obama has an oposition party that is unwilling to comprise. I can see why you would want to Replace President Obama, Democrats are willing to work with the other side while Republican are not. No matter how bad the Republicans make the political environment, the Democrats are willing to work with them, unlike the revese situation.
  • R. Kern 2012/04/09 17:52:49 (edited)
    R.
    He had a bad recession but he made it worse based on his ineptitude
    and and a bulletproof congress that had an agenda based on
    revenge. The people spoke in a large way in the mid term election
    but the oh so bi partisan dimocrats you speak of still hold the senate
    and that is where the buck stops. Good try though.It is your duty as
    a talking points ambASSador to tote that party line.
  • Kern R. 2012/04/09 18:05:07
    Kern
    +2
    How many filibusters did the Republican perform? I believe it was RECORD setting.


    filibusters republican perform record setting

    Yeah, the Republicans were willing to work with the Democrats.

    And what about the job bills that he mid-term Republicans promised? Where are they?

    http://www.washingtonpost.com...

    Face it, Republicans have one agenda, to make President Obama a one term president. They said this even before he got into office. Knowing this, how can we believe that the Republicans have any interest in make the country better over getting Obama out of office.

    If the tables were turned and the Democrats blocked every thing that Bush tried to do, would feel the same way?
  • R. Kern 2012/04/09 19:26:36
    R.
    The facts are that the house makes the bills and sends them to the senate. If the senate doesn't pass them that comes back on the
    republicans how exactly? Where is a budget ? The republcans
    have made two attempts at one in a years time and the dims have
    produced how many in 3 1/2 years ? I'm not really interested in a pissing contest because the fasct is that both sides are responsible
    for little getting passed through but after the way the bulletproof
    dim congress conducted themselves in the first two years of this
    administration , I think this is what should be expected.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 8 Next » Last »

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/08/29 01:39:02

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals