If I was a democrat...I'd shut my mouth about the tax plan. Period. I'd keep it closed. Because when people begin seeing bigger paychecks, etc. they're gonna remember the politicians that whined about this, told them it was bad, told them they'd get crumbs, etc.
But they won't learn. They never do. They did the same thing with net neutrality. It's all doom and gloom, and here we are months later and the earth still spins.
Originally posted by Eternal Idol
The problem there is the assumption that the wealthy will create jobs simply because they have more money, when it's consumer demand that drives businesses to either cut or create jobs.When the middle and working classes have less to spend, and primarily spend what they do have on necessities, demand for other goods and services goes down. Businesses then tend to cut jobs and downsize to minimize the hit to their bottom line.
When they middle and working classes have more to spend, businesses are forced to hire more help and restock more often to keep up with the demand. Sometimes that increase in demand results in company expansion.
Regardless of how profitable these businesses are, they're going to continue to try and cut costs anywhere they can, even if that means replacing jobs at with technology or foreign cheap labor. So with that in mind, why support tax reform that caters to big business and the wealthy, instead of the middle class and the poor?
I understand and agrees. But at the same time, human beings are selfish creatures. No matter how good is the economy, if a business owner is not making a profit, you need to give them an incentive to want to either keep the business, or not move it somewhere else where they’ll definitely make a profit.
Originally posted by Surtur
If I was a democrat...I'd shut my mouth about the tax plan. Period. I'd keep it closed. Because when people begin seeing bigger paychecks, etc. they're gonna remember the politicians that whined about this, told them it was bad, told them they'd get crumbs, etc.But they won't learn. They never do. They did the same thing with net neutrality. It's all doom and gloom, and here we are months later and the earth still spins.
No, it is a valid point. If someone got to keep an extra $1000 after-tax throughout the year, that's only an extra $19.23 per week they're saving. If they're one of the few who got a one-time bonus of a $1,000, they'll only get to keep just over half of that after taxes.
It's not nothing, and it does help them a bit, but it does very little to alleviate their financial hardships in the long-term like increased wages and lower taxes would. In a few years, they'll benefit even less because their taxes will get raised, while the wealthy's taxes stay the same.
Originally posted by Eternal Idol
No, it is a valid point. If someone got to keep an extra $1000 after-tax throughout the year, that's only an extra $19.23 per week they're saving. If they're one of the few who got a one-time bonus of a $1,000, they'll only get to keep just over half of that after taxes.It's not nothing, and it does help them a bit, but it does very little to alleviate their financial hardships in the long-term like increased wages and lower taxes would. In a few years, they'll benefit even less because their taxes will get raised, while the wealthy's taxes stay the same.
^ Bingo
Originally posted by Eternal Idol
No, it is a valid point. If someone got to keep an extra $1000 after-tax throughout the year, that's only an extra $19.23 per week they're saving. If they're one of the few who got a one-time bonus of a $1,000, they'll only get to keep just over half of that after taxes.It's not nothing, and it does help them a bit, but it does very little to alleviate their financial hardships in the long-term like increased wages and lower taxes would. In a few years, they'll benefit even less because their taxes will get raised, while the wealthy's taxes stay the same.
No, it's not a valid point when the person calling it crumbs, in the past, celebrated a tax plan that would have saved $40 a year.
Originally posted by SquallX
I understand and agrees. But at the same time, human beings are selfish creatures. No matter how good is the economy, if a business owner is not making a profit, you need to give them an incentive to want to either keep the business, or not move it somewhere else where they’ll definitely make a profit.
I would agree with you if they weren't making actually making a profit, but they are. Many companies are even reporting record profits, and they're cutting jobs anyhow, and they're refusing to significantly raise wages. It's cheaper to give a full-time employee a one-time $1,000 bonus than it is to give that person an extra dollar per hour worked for a year ($2080 per year), by more than half...and it's cheaper to give only workers who meet certain criteria the full bonus amount and everyone else even less.
So why support a tax reform that benefits them much more than the majority of Americans? Businesses would benefit from it anyhow, but they would have to work harder to compete amongst each other for the resuliting increase in consumer demand.
Originally posted by Surtur
No, it's not a valid point when the person calling it crumbs, in the past, celebrated a tax plan that would have saved $40 a year.
Yes, it is a valid point. Most Americans won't benefit much from such a slight and temporary increase.
Pelosi's comments about a tax plan saving Americans $40 a year don't change anything. Both plans blow, and don't help most Americans enough to get them out of their financial hardships.