So, tax cuts to the non-wealthy, who vastly outnumber the wealthy and are more likely to spend it immediately on things that will stimulate the economy, is better? That doesn’t sound right.
Congressional Republicans and their party’s presidential nominee have both pushed plans to cut taxes on the wealthiest Americans in hopes that such a move would stimulate the economy and aid the recovery from the Great Recession. A new study, however, indicates that tax cuts for the wealthiest earners fail to generate economic growth at the same pace as tax cuts aimed at low- and middle-income earners.
The study, conducted by Owen M. Zidar, a former staff economist on President Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers and a graduate student at California-Berkeley, examined economic growth in the states with the most high-income earners. Zidar reasoned that “states with a large share of high income taxpayers should grow faster following a tax cut for high income earners” if the tax cuts had the economic effect conservatives claim.
What he found, though, is that the effect of tax cuts for the rich was “insignificant statistically,” as Reuters’ David Cay Johnston reported:
The rich do create jobs. No poor person ever gave me a job. Under Bobbo’s theories, I should just hand my resume to the nearest homeless person and ask him to give me a job.
Instead, I will continue to apply to companies that are owned by people who are rich enough to pay me a five figure salary.
Sea Lawyer is right about basic economics. Read an economics textbook and learn a thing or two, Bobbo. Also learn about Friedrich August von Hayek, a brilliant economist who disagreed with Keynes.
Supply-Side University
http://polyconomics.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=section&id=8&Itemid=3
Note the term supply-side shows up decades after the use of trickle-down by Democrats to attack Republican policies. Almost a hundred years ago, their losing presidential candidate proclaimed Are we to be the party only of people who have nothing?
Benajmin, as much, as you desperately want to tell the world the beautiful virtues of the rich & famous; again, “The rich do NOT create jobs”!!!!
I wiLL Dumb this DOwn, as Much aS humanly Possible for you!!!!
REVENUES & PROFITS CREATE JOBs.
READ YOUr STUPID ECONOMIC TEXT BOOKs!!!!!!!x10^100000
Do RICH people create REVENUE?…nO…No…NO!
How are REVENUE created???? REVENUE are created by the exchange of Money for Goods or SERVICEs…..
AGAIN READ YOU stupid ECONOMIcs TEXT BOOKs.
So DOES one exchange event, Money for GOODs or SERVICes CREATE JObs?…..Maybe, but that is NOT HOW our ECONOMy WORKs.
As DALLas …..wisely …..POINTED OUT
“Sorry to butt in but today we have a consumption problem. Sheeple wanna buy a new fridge but they got no money. Businesses are sitting on trillions of dollars in capital waiting for the buyers to buy shit so they can build new fridge factories.”
Benjamin has one correct Statement, his first one; the REST is Benjamin brand Pigeon SHIT!!!!
Benjamin’s one correct Statement: “No poor person ever gave me a job.” I will assume that he does indeed have a job (although, if I interviewed him, for any of my high tech positions, I would likely quickly learn, I would have to HAND FEED him the knowledge he needs to do his JOB, all day LONG, because he lacks a fundamental CRITICAL thinking ABILITY. I dON’t Hire DUMB ASSes for a 120k/yr job!!!!!!!)
It’s WHAT creates the wealth, that creates Jobs. Wealth alone does not create JOBs, which is what SUPPLY SIDE EconOmIcs believes (it’s a religion and like any religion, it has it’s bible, that they insist you READ and obey).
Markets create the opportunity for RICH people (ecoNomic boOks calls this CapItal) to ExPloit.
Capital is spent to create a System that can generate a control mechanism for the exchange of Money for Goods or SERVICEs…..
What Is that ContrOl mecHanIsM??? TyPicaly it’s a Corporation, a collection of JoBs!!!!!!!
and What does that ContrOl mecHanIsM Do??? It Exploits, again and again, the Market. It can’t Exploit, again and again, IF THERE is NOOOOOOOO Market!!!!
WHat is a MaRkeT????? A MaRkeT is a Collection, accumulation, aggregation, mass, heap, pile, hoard, store of Customers!!!!!!!!!!
CUSTOMERS is what hired poor & ignorant Benjamin. The poor dimwit thinks, because he shook the hand of the “rich” person, smiled, dressed nicely, shaved…and… he got the Job!
Good luck in you job hunt Benjamin!!!!!!
In short, the customer writes your paycheck, Benjamin.
Unless you have owned and operated a business, you will miss a few fundamental concepts of business.
You have apparently missed the concept that many businesses pay taxes as individuals.
DUllass wise? As if you didn’t have a losing streak with that stupid “reasoning” you had to say that to swing an out-of-the-park foul ball
People who create jobs are rich. Not all rich create jobs.
Use a another paint brush.
Everyone– media especially, seems to be missing the point! Successfully bamboozled by trickle-down “Don’t Tax the Job Creators” nonsense!
This is misdirection and doublespeak at its finest. See, when you “tax” a billionaire “job creator”, you’re not taxing the dollars used to build a business, pay wages, or buy materials or supplies. You’re taxing the dollars that *weren’t* used for any of these things– the profit that the “job creator” took out of the business. These profits often result from the hard work of people earning minimum wage– profits which the “job creator” kept for him or herself. You know, to buy yachts and mansions and politicians, and to do what they can to pull the ladder up after themselves.
Taxing these take-home profits at a higher rate actually incentivizes the “job creator” to create more jobs and/or pay their employees higher wages– the impact on after-tax income is proportionately less. (Of course, it also incentivizes them to seek tax shelters and hire lobbyists, but that’s a separate problem.)
That said, I’m all for generally lower taxes on everyone (and lower government spending)– but this rationale for why “We Can’t Tax the Job Creators” is entirely bogus.
Two things, tax cuts for anyone does not help the economy. The rich don’t spend it on jobs or employee’s and the rest of us don’t get that much all at once to justify increased spending. The only time you see tax money being spent is when people get big tax refund checks. Those are tangible and relevant and people perceive them differently. If you want to increase spending you have to either get more people working and reduce the unemployment. Or you have to get those working making a lot more money to raise their standard of living.
Businesses only make their profits which are taxed, after first spending on employees and other things, and later hoping they make back more money than they spent. The lower tax rate encourages more such business attempts.
Tax cuts for the wealthy means tax cuts for wealthy individuals, not businesses.
Oh wait a minute … that’s right … a corporation is a person!
A corporation is a person that has eternal life and multinational citizenship and limited liability!
A Super Person! A Wealthy Politically-Connected Super Person that secretly donates to both political parties!
Maybe that is what the Repukes mean when they say “Tax cuts for the wealthy.”
It is all so confusing.
As usual this leftist/Communist-leaning study was designed to throw a wrench into the tax debate. Removing the wrench, it leaves a simple argument: Who will spend my money more wisely, Me or the Government? I vote for Me.
It’s obvious, All studies you disagree with are “Left”
The Idiot (yes, in capitals) nobrain forgot to close the bold tag, what a dolt!
For the next time, you close the tag by using /b, not b /
When do you spend your money for the national defense and other efforts for the general commonweal?
Many small businesses pay taxes as an SCorp, where each owner pays business taxes as regular income taxes.
Did the people who are supposed to be posting links all die, go on vacation, or just decide to abandon the site?
Where’s your link?
http://l.curry.com/14K At least Adam has a point.
This one is a longer read: http://washingtonpost.com/opinions/charles-krauthammer-the-abandonment/2012/09/13/96b88174-fde3-11e1-b153-218509a954e1_story.html
John should have posted this: http://l.curry.com/14K
Sorry I messed up on the last link and its a repeat: http://443.nashownotes.com/
If John and Adam actually think H.Clinton and Barry are in any way shape or fashion in control they are clue less. I think Clinton did have some sort of sloppy plan but Barry was letting her do what she wanted while he ran for office. She was supposed to make sure nothing happened to cause him problems. Most likely Barry is not very happy with her.
The plan is Islamist and at least part of it is to get the international community to outlaw all criticism of Islam. A second part of the plan is to test the US and so far we have failed the test with flying colors. That means they should keep pushing.
I see the comments have gone from all italics to BOLD.
What’s next, rainbow colors?
Some dolt did not use the close tag on his bold statement.
oops, My Bad, me sry
This is case in point.
Yes I screwed up. Ok, I know it!
HOWEVER, if DU would give an ~120sec edit window to correct one’s typo’s, that would be special!
After all, this site is hosted by one of the world most premiere computer geeks, so it should be possible?
Post again with an open plain text command?
open plaintext Doesn’t seem to work
/b
So Obama’s senior adviser Harold Koh has been promoting using international law to weaken the First Amendment protections, particularly with outlawing of hate speech.
/b
Benjamin says:
9/14/2012 at 2:01 am
The rich do create jobs. /// I agree, they do but about 9 times fewer than the non-rich==all as defined. That comes from studies showing how many times a dollar will circulate depending on where it is injected into an economy. Not exactly the same thing as a job. Benji–another Puke talking point is that its the small business man that creates the most jobs. Now, a small business man is not the RICH, again though he is not the RICH either. The problem with your terminology is that half truths or 10% truths are presented as the entire truth.
No poor person ever gave me a job. /// Anecdotal and confused. Are you RICH or poor Benji? Ever buy a hamburger? Shop for food? You provided other poor people (workers) jobs. I am a poor person. I hired a guy just last week to lay linoleum in my kitchen. The poor do create jobs.
Under Bobbo’s theories, I should just hand my resume to the nearest homeless person and ask him to give me a job. // Wouldn’t work would it. Its all about words and rhetoric confusing/conflating work with jobs with money with wealth. Tease thru all these word games and objective observable reality may be seen. Rather than wrestle with some of these tough issues, you have given up and chosen to just cling to one position, in this case that the rich create jobs. Only too few do. So–when you Lower the Capital Gains Tax by 500 Million a year, how many jobs are created?==as stated, how many RICH people go out and start a business, or buy another car, OR–do they invest that money in a credit default swap reinsurance product, or do they buy gold, or Swiss Francs? Some will say all those activities also creates jobs. If you like, anything creates jobs because everything is connected to everything else. But how close to the flame are you really standing. Close enough to extinguish the flame with your buggy whip?
Instead, I will continue to apply to companies that are owned by people who are rich enough to pay me a five figure salary. /// Costco is owned by its employees. Microsoft is owned by stockholders. Facedbook used to be owned by a few people–employing very few people. What RICH person do you want to work for? Bet you can’t name one.
Sea Lawyer is right about basic economics. /// Yes, thats why I had to look up Say.
Read an economics textbook and learn a thing or two, Bobbo. Also learn about Friedrich August von Hayek, a brilliant economist who disagreed with Keynes. /// Again Benji, take the blinders off. Its this recent Great Recession and how different countries using stimulus or austerity have fared that have most economists concluding Keynes is correct. All we have to do is actually follow Keynes. Everyone is willing to spend, no one is willing to pay back. Keynes works—no one follows it.
Benji–I come to these issues NOT with a philosophy to apply regardless of the fit but rather looking to what pragmatically works. Just look at my name.
Uncle Dave, John Dvorak, can you please moderate your blog?!?!?
Yes, I screwed up. Yes, I made a mistake. Yes, call me what you will, but can you fix this relentless bolding???
Your blog is enough to drive the sane, insane!!
Can you give us an ~120sec edit window to correct one’s typo’s?
For the love of everything holy, can you help us? Knock, Knock; are you there?
Tax fairly – flat tax. Federal tax is 10% on everyone regardless of income. No loopholes, no credits, no nothing. People with kids pay the same as people without, etc. That’s fair.
Also, we need a constitutional amendment requiring all comments to be in bold type.
Sir Supreme Ultrahuman, you attained honor in thy eyes, you shall have your wish. Your wish shall here in this blog only, shall be henceforth.
Henceforth, in this here blog ”
Tax Cuts For Wealthy Help Economy? Not So Much.”, all your and other comments shall be in Bold.
I have commanded this, and so my man servant Dvorak shall make it so!!!
If you tax something more you get less of it. If you tax something less, you get more of it.
Woodrow Wilson saw that under his wartime tax increases, half the taxable income disappeared. It wasn’t because people were poorer.
The idea that we can take one fiscal data point in an economy and say that proves the value or worthlessness of a specific policy is idiotic.
But, I could just as easily point to the the Bush I & Clinton presidencies, where government spending was moderating (and actually sometimes being reduced), and show the economic value of reductions in government spending. I could also then show that spending not only increased but greatly accelerated under first GWB & now Obama to prove that government spending is indeed the culprit to worsening economic conditions.