Special Report on Republican's "Small Businesses" They include Bechtel, Chicago Trib

[Joe234]

Special Report on Republican's "Small Businesses" They include Bechtel, The Chicago Tribune
Special Report on "Small Businesses" Part 1

Special Report on "Small Businesses" Part 2

[sgreger1]

Its going to raise taxes on those evil rich. You know, the ones that make $170,000 or more a year. This includes small business. I find it highly suspect that they claim only 3% of small businesses make that much. 170,000 from a business when filed with your personal income taxes (since they are not incorporated) isn't that much if you ask me, at least not in california. And 3% may sound small, but were talking "small businesses", who employ something like 80% of all americans. The larger companies who fall into this 3% are likely the ones creating the most (if not the majority) of jobs in america. Doesnt sound like a good idea to increase taxes on the sector creating the most jobs in the middle of a recession if you ask me.



Edit: I just think the definition of rich is too low. In california, one must make nearly $200k a year to be able to afford a nice house, a car, and send your kids to a school that will give them a good education, and maybe be able to take a vacation every once in a while. We used to call this the middle class, but it has now been redifined by the democrats as the evil rich. I dont have a problem raising taxes on people earning several million a year, but i think to say $170,000 is "rich" is not realistic, especially in places like new york or california.

[Joe234]

Edit: I just think the definition of rich is too low. In california, one must make nearly $200k a year to be able to afford a nice house, a car, and send your kids to a school that will give them a good education, and maybe be able to take a vacation every once in a while. We used to call this the middle class, but it has now been redifined by the democrats as the evil rich. I dont have a problem raising taxes on people earning several million a year, but i think to say $170,000 is "rich" is not realistic, especially in places like new york or california.

That may be.

Where is the money going to come from to fix our infrastructure?
The roads are crumbling where I live. The only stimulus repair I see
being done is piecemeal and not complete. Just a patch job.

[sgreger1]

That may be.

Where is the money going to come from to fix our infrastructure?
The roads are crumbling where I live. The only stimulus repair I see
being done is piecemeal and not complete. Just a patch job.

Weve squandered an enormous amount of money over the past 2 decades, dozens of trillions of dollars, with little to show for it. Do you truly believe that if they raise taxes and collect more money that they will actually invest it in infrastructure? Wasnt the stimulis supposed to do some of that? We decided to give money to the banks and big corps instead of doing what fdr did and using it to build a good infrastructure. This is why there is no money on the street, its all stuck at the top. The rich are holding onto their money.


Joe, honestly, you cant believe that if we give the gov more money they will suddenly become responsible and use it to our benefit do you? The nations total assets are roughly 60-70 trillion. Our debt and unfunded liabilities eclipses that. Even if we stole every dollar and every piece of property or investment from every man woman and child in america, we would still not be able to pay off our debt. I highly doubt a few percent increase in taxes on a quarter of the nation is going to get your roads fixed unfortunately.

[Joe234]

Weve squandered an enormous amount of money over the past 2 decades, dozens of trillions of dollars, with little to show for it. Do you truly believe that if they raise taxes and collect more money that they will actually invest it in infrastructure? Wasnt the stimulis supposed to do some of that? We decided to give money to the banks and big corps instead of doing what fdr did and using it to build a good infrastructure. This is why there is no money on the street, its all stuck at the top. The rich are holding onto their money.


Joe, honestly, you cant believe that if we give the gov more money they will suddenly become responsible and use it to our benefit do you? The nations total assets are roughly 60-70 trillion. Our debt and unfunded liabilities eclipses that. Even if we stole every dollar and every piece of property or investment from every man woman and child in america, we would still not be able to pay off our debt. I highly doubt a few percent increase in taxes on a quarter of the nation is going to get your roads fixed unfortunately.

Retire the tax cuts for the top 3%.

What I don't get is how the Tea Party would fund our roads and services
with less government. Are they going to have private corporations start
a voluntary charity fund for our highways and other federal services?
Will they inspect our eggs for salmonella on the honor system?

[WickedKitchen]

In my town there was stimulus money used to tear out and rebuild sidewalks that weren't truly needed. It cost millions.

I'm of the opinion that the system needs to change, not the amount of money going into it.

[CoderGuy]

Retire the tax cuts for the top 3%.

What I don't get is how the Tea Party would fund our roads and services
with less government. Are they going to have private corporations start
a voluntary charity fund for our highways and other federal services?
Will they inspect our eggs for salmonella on the honor system?

Yeah, corporations "rarely" do anything out of the kindness of their hearts. They will "fund" these things as long as they get subsidized, which means more government bureaucracy to manage the subsidizing and companies competing for the contracts to do it etc etc... hmm sounds familiar but can't place why.

[GoVegan]

In my town there was stimulus money used to tear out and rebuild sidewalks that weren't truly needed. It cost millions.

I'm of the opinion that the system needs to change, not the amount of money going into it.

Good point! Where I live they keep working on the same stretches of state highway whether it needs work or not while local roads continue to decay and crumble. The government could accomplish a lot more if the feds starting prioritizing projects with the local governments input.

[truthwolf1]

Retire the tax cuts for the top 3%.

What I don't get is how the Tea Party would fund our roads and services
with less government. Are they going to have private corporations start
a voluntary charity fund for our highways and other federal services?
Will they inspect our eggs for salmonella on the honor system?

Well, not sure about anything with the current Tea Party but Ron Paul would of been a great auditor.
If the government bank roll was actually accounted for I am sure there would be plenty left for those services while also slashing all kinds of taxes.

[sgreger1]

Retire the tax cuts for the top 3%.

What I don't get is how the Tea Party would fund our roads and services
with less government. Are they going to have private corporations start
a voluntary charity fund for our highways and other federal services?
Will they inspect our eggs for salmonella on the honor system?

I can't speak for the tea party because I have no clue what they want or what their plan is. But speaking for myself, my answer is this:


The government already recieves money, and has been recieving money, for repair of roads, bridges etc for decades. Explain to me why that money is not being used to fix roads. And then explain to me why giving them more money will somehow result in them spending it appropriately THIS time. The government has been getting richer for a long time, they have raised property taxes, raised fees for things like registering your car, they recieve extra money to fix roads since gasoline consumption is up from a decade ago, they raise the tolls on bridges etc etc. None of these extra streams of revenue have yielded the results you are seeking, so explain to me why taxing the most productive segment of society that employs 8 out of 10 Americans is somehow going to show positive results?



I don't think the tea party is calling for "no" government, but rather less government. More than likely they have no plan though. Their movement serves 1 purpose: To show gov that we are pissed at them wasting our money. I don't think electing tea party candidates will fix anything though since I don't see that they have a plan. It's like a town hall meeting, you can voice your complaints but you may not have a plan yourself.






EDIT: Also, the tax increase will be too small to matter. The increased taxes, BEST CASE SCENARIO, assuming that raising taxes will have no negative effects on jobs or growth, the tax cuts will only provide enough money to cover the deficit for 9 days. Not really that big a gain considering you run the risk of slowing down the recovery.


I just don't get why people don't understand the fact that for a recovery to happen, the private sector needs to get back to work making money. Just throwing more money at government will not somehow make the nation recover. It never has and never will. Just like the depression, FDR's new deal did little, the real recovery came when america became the manufacturing capitol of the world during the war.

[raptor]

I just don't get why people don't understand the fact that for a recovery to happen, the private sector needs to get back to work making money. Just throwing more money at government will not somehow make the nation recover. It never has and never will. Just like the depression, FDR's new deal did little, the real recovery came when america became the manufacturing capitol of the world during the war.

I agree with what you're saying. Obviously the system isn't working and we're just throwing money into a black hole thinking it's going to improve our domestic programs (education, infrastructure, etc). I'm not as keen on tax cuts for the top 3%, though. Even if they were done, I really doubt they'd lead to job creation in this economic environment; the top 3% would be hesitant to invest/spend and would rather store it away for better times, perhaps.

[sgreger1]

I agree with what you're saying. Obviously the system isn't working and we're just throwing money into a black hole thinking it's going to improve our domestic programs (education, infrastructure, etc). I'm not as keen on tax cuts for the top 3%, though. Even if they were done, I really doubt they'd lead to job creation in this economic environment; the top 3% would be hesitant to invest/spend and would rather store it away for better times, perhaps.

But even if they save it and invest it has a benefit to the economy. Investment income plays a big role in the economy. I agree with the notion that the rich are being stingy right now, but it is really important to understand the context of what is meant by the top %3 in this situation. People making over a million or so a year and filing on their personal taxes will be fine, i'm not really worried about them. But companies making $170,000 are not rich people. We really need to think about our definition of rich. First of all, I don't believe for a second that only %3 of people/businesses make 170k or more. I think that is crazy and there has to be some explanation behind that number. But people in this income bracket (on the lower end, near 170k) are the ones that will create jobs. Giving the moeny to government will not change anything. Like I said, it's only enough money to pay for our deficit for 9 days, it is not going to be some huge chunk of money. It is better left in the private sector, because at least they *may* create jobs. If the gov gets it than there is no possibility that the money will be used to create jobs.


I don't have a problem with raising taxes on those who are truly rich, but small businesses making 170k are NOT rich. Our small business makes in that area and we live in the absolute ghetto of san francisco. They won't even deliver a pizza to where I live. The owner (my mother in-law), drives a beat-up Rav-4 from nearly 10 years ago (when she bought it new and has been driving ever since), and we own a van for when we do catering (a beat up ex-rental van). All that money went to private school for my wife and to college expenses. I cannot believe that we would be catagorized as the evil rich that "isn't paying their fair share" and needs to be destroyed via taxes. We are as middle class as absolutely possible. We have no debt, but don't live lavishly, and have a little in savings for retirement and some money for the occasional weekend vacation. That is middle class as far as I am concerned, and I am tired of being considered some kind of burden on America.

Someday some of you may own a business of your own or get a good high-paying job and then you will see how much they take in taxes. You will see how unfair it feels that the whole nation sees you as some player in a penthouse driving ferraris, when you are just a small family trying to live a decent life in America. On this day you will understand the "pro-business, anti-tax" position that some people come from.

[sgreger1]

@ Joe223's signature:

I notice a lot of the liberals out there trying to make the T partiers look bad. Lets take a trip down memory lane

[sgreger1]

Barack Obama says capitalism is key to alleviating poverty. Wait, he wants to alleviate poverty? Socialist


Here's where your money will go

A survey by California lawmakers determines the corruption in Bell, California was an isolated incident. Just kidding, there are over 20 communities where city managers make over $300,000

Complaint alleges Senator David Vitter spent taxpayer money on staff member's personal legal defense

You think it will got to roads? How about an unconstitutional pay-the-insurance-companies-or-else healthcare mandate:

Turns out key provisions the healthcare bill are blatantly unconstitutional. If only there had been a group of lawyers, or perhaps a constitutional law professor, who could have reviewed the bill before it was enacted

So vote republican, right?

Wrong: To the amazement of absolutely no one, the GOP "pledge for America" was put together by one of the nation's most powerful lobbyists



And just for giggles:


Margaret Carlson: If I break down on the side of the road, I hope a Republican stops -- he'll fix my flat and offer me a drink. A Democrat will get busy forming a Committee to Protect Women Who Own Vulnerable Cars