Republicans Don't Care About Middle Class

[Truthseeker]

Don't forget changing the 48% that don't pay taxes.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Truthseeker

Don't forget changing the 48% that don't pay taxes.

As jobs are generated because the Middle Class has more spending power... the 48% have more opportunities. Joblessness drops and fewer people are on welfare and on unemployment.

It's feeding the machine at the cash register... instead of giving away billions to the top 1% - 2% in tax cuts and rebates immediately... only to watch them invest most of it overseas. And as a result have the Middle Class tighten their belts to shoulder the tax burden now shifted to them.

[Truthseeker]

I'm referring to 48% should be paying taxes too. Everybody working should pay something.

[NotforSale]

Originally Posted by Dedicated Mind

republicans are saying they don't want to raise taxes on rich even though obama campaigned and won on that very issue. they are willing to go off the cliff and raise taxes for everyone, hurting the economy just to protect the wealthy. i say, "OFF THE CLIFF"!!!!! 2014 is not far away to blast those idiots.

DM, when this thing goes over the edge, if anyone will still be working, it will be the Republicans! The lazy, dependent, waiting for the check in the mail Democrats are about to face the MUSIC!

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by Aquila

It's really all about proper distribution of tax burden and targetted tax cuts. Close the loopholes and tax shelters that the rich use to legally evade paying their fair share in taxes (increase taxes if needed)... and... cut taxes for the Middle Class. That will stimulate the economy.

Here's how it works...

There are far more people in the Middle Class than in that Upper Class 1%-2% of Americans. When you relieve the tax burden on the Middle Class... MORE people have MORE money to SPEND. And where do they spend it??? In the market place. What does that do??? That stimulates the economy. Now, if you continue to have the Middle Class carry the majority of the tax burden, you have MORE people with LESS money. They tighten the belt and spend less. When MORE people spend LESS in the market place... the economy slows down.

Republican policies generally distribute the majority of the tax burden on the Middle Class and relieve only the top 1% - 2% of Americans. The theory (the story they sell us) is that some how this money will trickle down to you and me in the promise of more and better paying jobs. But it doesn't seem to work that way when put into motion. Under these Republican policies this 1% - 2% of Americans (the Upper Class) accumulates more wealth. But here's the kicker... they put more of this saved money into overseas investments than efforts that start jobs here at home. Besides, even if they dumped a considerable amount of resources into starting jobs... the Middle Class is shouldering more of the cost of our government. That means they have less buying power. So they spend less. With Middle Class consumers spending less, companies have to trim the fat to survive. That means... job cuts... including those jobs that the tax cuts for the rich supposedly created. Now people get laid off. With more people laid off... there is even FEWER Americans who have the money to spend freely in the market place. So companies need to trim the fat a little more... meaning even more layoffs. So a downward spiral begins.

So, to stimulate the economy you close the tax shelters and loopholes that the wealthy use to dodge paying their fair share (the government does need revenues), and then you cut taxes on the Middle Class to stimulate spending. YES, tax cuts work. But you have to cut taxes for the largest group with spending power... the Middle Class... not just the top 1% or 2% of Americans.

So let's all cheer for tax cuts for the Middle Class... that's you and me.

It's a no brainer really.

Here's where your theory is flawed...

Nearly FORTY PERCENT of all Federal INCOME tax collected comes from the top ONE PERCENT of income earners already. The bottom fifty percent of income earners only contribute THREE percent of all the income tax collected.

Our economic failures are clearly not due to the super rich not "paying their fair share" and I'm surprised that someone who cries out for libertarianism does not see this.

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by Aquila

As jobs are generated because the Middle Class has more spending power... the 48% have more opportunities. Joblessness drops and fewer people are on welfare and on unemployment.

It's feeding the machine at the cash register... instead of giving away billions to the top 1% - 2% in tax cuts and rebates immediately... only to watch them invest most of it overseas. And as a result have the Middle Class tighten their belts to shoulder the tax burden now shifted to them.

So how do you give a "tax cut" to these bottom 50% who already don't pay income tax?

[deacon blues]

Originally Posted by Originalist

Here's where your theory is flawed...

Nearly FORTY PERCENT of all Federal INCOME tax collected comes from the top ONE PERCENT of income earners already. The bottom fifty percent of income earners only contribute THREE percent of all the income tax collected.

Our economic failures are clearly not due to the super rich not "paying their fair share" and I'm surprised that someone who cries out for libertarianism does not see this.

Here's another problem. All those goods the middle class buys and spurs economic growth? They have to be manufactured by someone. Who would that be? Maybe businesses that are owned by wealthy entrepreneurs and investors and business folks. Have you ever been employed by a poor man or a middle class guy? Also, the premise that the tax cuts given to the middle class is what fuels the economy is flawed---yes a tax cut helps the middle class have more money to spend, but what the middle class really needs are GOOD PAYING JOBS. Guess who will provide that? government? A tax cut? NO! A wealthy business owner and job creator will!!!

Trickle down does work in spite of the negative press it gets and the mischaracterizations. Where do you think the money comes from? It doesn't come from the poor. The middle class gets it's money from their employer. Some wealthy may just selfishly use their money, but most of them invest in America because it's still the best bang for the buck, or they reinvest in their business, or the invest in research and development. Take too much money from the wealthy (and they pay MORE than their fair share) and they just won't hire, they won't grow the business, they won't give raises

[J4Truth]

Originally Posted by deacon blues

Here's another problem. All those goods the middle class buys and spurs economic growth? They have to be manufactured by someone. Who would that be? Maybe businesses that are owned by wealthy entrepreneurs and investors and business folks. Have you ever been employed by a poor man or a middle class guy? Also, the premise that the tax cuts given to the middle class is what fuels the economy is flawed---yes a tax cut helps the middle class have more money to spend, but what the middle class really needs are GOOD PAYING JOBS. Guess who will provide that? government? A tax cut? NO! A wealthy business owner and job creator will!!!

Trickle down does work in spite of the negative press it gets and the mischaracterizations. Where do you think the money comes from? It doesn't come from the poor. The middle class gets it's money from their employer. Some wealthy may just selfishly use their money, but most of them invest in America because it's still the best bang for the buck, or they reinvest in their business, or the invest in research and development. Take too much money from the wealthy (and they pay MORE than their fair share) and they just won't hire, they won't grow the business, they won't give raises

I understand what you're saying but don't it cut both ways? No matter how much money the wealthy business owner have extra because of tax cuts to create new jobs why would they spend it to create a job if theoretically people are spending less so similar jobs are laying off to compensate. That seems like a recipe or incentive to invest elsewhere with you extra money so it can grow. Investing in creating jobs seems only feasible if money is to be made, but if the reverse is happening it would make sense for the wealthy to put their money elsewhere instead of investing in a failing job market because of a lack of consumerism.

Of course there's a lot of other factors to consider but just saying, looking at it objectively, it cuts both ways. So from what Aquila is saying if a spending is up then jobs and companies and yes the rich makes more money and they'll probably be more likely to expand if spending and demand dictates they'll make more money to do so.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Truthseeker

I'm referring to 48% should be paying taxes too. Everybody working should pay something.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Originalist

Here's where your theory is flawed...

Nearly FORTY PERCENT of all Federal INCOME tax collected comes from the top ONE PERCENT of income earners already. The bottom fifty percent of income earners only contribute THREE percent of all the income tax collected.

Our economic failures are clearly not due to the super rich not "paying their fair share" and I'm surprised that someone who cries out for libertarianism does not see this.

And that's why government (and nearly everyone else) goes broke under Republicans.