[southernmissouri2007]

Expenses mean the company does not pay taxes on that money, The expense can be salaries (jobs) or equipment or real estate or other things. Outside firms cost is for example consultants for safety or efficiency or hiring people from an accounting firm to do payroll.
Companies want to keep payroll low because each employee is a liability, they could get hurt, say they are harrassed and sue, or many other things. They must take the man hours to train each employeee, that cost can be quite high, plus employees cost much more than their salary there are the employers payroll taxes, unemployment insurance, health insurance etc.

[Meta777]

So companies will always try to limit the number of people they have to hire no matter what?
Well OK, but what does that have to do with taxes?

-Meta

[southernmissouri2007]

What does Keynesian Economics call for the Government to spend money on to reduce unemployment ? I know Keynesian Economics calls for spending by the Government to put money in people's pockets than the people will create demand and than spend the money how does this work ?

A REVIEW OF KEYNESIAN THEORY

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/Keynesianism.htm

[Meta777]

I'm not an expert on Keynesian Economics,
but if you're asking me what the government should spend money on in order to reduce unemployment,
then it seems to me that the most logical course of action would be to reduce it directly by spending on useful jobs.
Infrastructure spending seems like a good place to start.
I also wouldn't mind some housing projects.

-Meta

[southernmissouri2007]

I just think higher income taxes kills the Incentive to create Jobs Business Owners need tax breaks.

[Meta777]

Why?

How much do you think businesses should be taxed?

-Meta

[southernmissouri2007]

I am for a Flat Tax Democrats are Socialists and I think the Rich have the right to their money.

[Meta777]

How does that answer my question? O_o

Why do you think higher income taxes kills the incentive to create Jobs?
Why do you think business owners need tax breaks?
What do you think is the appropriate tax rate for businesses and business owners to be taxed at?
And how have you determined this appropriate rate?

-Meta

[southernmissouri2007]

Not every business owner is going to invest in his company to avoid higher income taxes high taxes kills the incentive to create Jobs since he wants to maintain his lifestyle. Also the business owner can just pass the higher taxes on to the consumer though higher prices for his products do you deny this ?

Who Is Really Hurt When We Tax the “Rich”

June 8, 2008 Posted in: Other with 21 comments
Written by: Casey

Yah, But Only the Rich Pay That Much, and They Can Afford It
Please, don’t ever say that in my presence. There are too many things to say about this to fit in this entry. Let me put it to you this way: How on earth do you think the not-so-rich get their money? See if you can follow this logic:

Tom is a wealthy man who owns a successful business. He wants it to grow. He also needs to support his family. He needs to take home a certain amount of money to do that. Beyond that, the money that he earns will be invested back into the business so that he can make even more money. He knows that as his business grows to certain points he will need to hire more help because he just can’t do it all himself. That is okay with Tom because he plans to make more money by growing the business than it costs him to hire someone (otherwise he wouldn’t do it). Now, with more help Tom is able to make even more money. He takes some of the extra home, but also reinvests the rest of it into the business in order to grow even more. In the process he is providing more jobs.

Next comes along a new President and Congress. They increase Tom’s taxes by 15% (because he’s “rich”). Now Tom has a choice. He can do the same amount of work and watch his income decrease by 15%, or maintain his lifestyle and lay off some of his employees? Remember – Tom’s a selfish rich guy. So, he fires some people.

Who got hurt by the increase in taxes? Who can afford a tax increase, or more importantly, who can’t afford one?

http://www.youneedabudget.com/2008/w...-tax-the-rich/

[southernmissouri2007]

Do you agree with the Democrats that Keynesian Government Spending on tax rebates welfare food stamps unemployment insurance creates consumer demand I don't understand how and why this because welfare checks or tax rebates for example is not a lot of money for one person or if you expand the money supply there will be more money for the Government to spend on welfare tax rebates and or unemployment insurance which will put bills in people's hands ?

The cure for this, Keynes said, was for the central bank to expand the money supply. By putting more bills in people's hands, consumer confidence would return, people would spend, and the circular flow of money would be reestablished. Just that simple! Too simple, in fact, for the policy-makers of that time.

http://www.huppi.com/kangaroo/Keynesianism.htm

[Modernjan]

Not every business owner is going to invest in his company to avoid higher income taxes high taxes kills the incentive to create Jobs since he wants to maintain his lifestyle. Also the business owner can just pass the higher taxes on to the consumer though higher prices for his products do you deny this ?

If prices could go up without a loss of revenue, then why don't the business owners increase the prices even without a tax increase? It's business, not charity that's being discussed here.

[grainbelt]

I agree with meta, he seems to have a very good understanding of this. The claim is also only plausible for a private business, where all of the profits are in the hands of the owner/operator. They can decide how much their income is, based on what their personal and business goals are. Some people here are over-thinking this part. That owner/operator can definitely sit down and create some what-if scenarios to predict whether more combined present value dollars can be taken home after a tax hike NEXT YEAR than any forgone income and personal investment due to a tax hike and subsequent re-investment THIS YEAR. These calculations can be executed and are fairly accurate as long as income tax rates or business climate don't continue to unexpectedly swing.

To debunk the claim you would obviously have to prove that income tax rate changes DON'T affect reinvestment decisions for a private firm owner. Simply saying that a higher personal income tax reduces the incentive to reinvest is not good enough. Generally speaking, reinvesting equals jobs.

I don't think this claim holds true for public firms. The business decision to change reinvestment rates doesn't really affect the operators income.

A thought just came to mind. If a business owner new about a pattern of tax swings, they could increase their reinvestment during high tax years and collect the profits as income during low tax years. Following that premise, the ideal time to collect profits as income is when income tax breaks are passed and the ideal time to reinvest is when income tax hikes are passed. If there is no forecasted increase in demand, though, reinvestment would bloat the firm and could be considered a loss.

[Meta777]

...the business owner can just pass the higher taxes on to the consumer though higher prices for his products do you deny this ?

They can only do this if there is no competition.

What do you think is the appropriate tax rate for businesses and business owners to be taxed at?
And how have you determined this appropriate rate?

[southernmissouri2007]

I have a question why do you believe higher personal income taxes somehow creates jobs that the rich/wealthy will reinvest in their company to avoid higher income taxes when the wealthy can just use tax loopholes and or tax shelters and other ways to avoid higher income taxes ?

[Meta777]

Answer my questions, and I'll answer yours.

[southernmissouri2007]

Ok I will higher taxes kills incentive because the business owners will have less money to hire business owners needs tax breaks to create jobs i think the right tax rate should be 18% flat tax i have came to this rate from talking to Republicans.



Why do you think higher income taxes kills the incentive to create Jobs?
Why do you think business owners need tax breaks?
What do you think is the appropriate tax rate for businesses and business owners to be taxed at?
And how have you determined this appropriate rate?

[southernmissouri2007]

I would like to know how Infrastructure Spending would help our Economy and create Jobs and create Consumer Demand for new Jobs do you agree with this article below ?

President Obama’s $787 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act — “the stimulus” — originally offered nearly $400 billion for infrastructure projects until the republithugs threw another tantrum and hijacked $260 billion of it for tax cuts. That’s one third of the entire stimulus package. No wonder it hasn’t worked as well as it could have. Now they’re whining that the stimulus didn’t create enough jobs. Well, duh. That’s because tax cuts don’t create jobs. Only consumer demand for products and services does that.


Those things are new and repaired roads, bridges, dams, harbors, levees, tunnels, buildings, schools, parking garages, subways, railways, parks, sewers, stadiums, airports, and other public facilities. That spending creates jobs for construction companies and workers. Those projects create demand for the supplies, equipment, tools, and other materials that they need for those projects. It creates demand for the trucking companies to ship them and the warehouses to store them. That creates jobs in all of those industries. If the companies supplying the construction industry have enough work, they can spend some of their revenue to hire more employees or to upgrade their own facilities. See, more demand, more jobs.

Then all of those workers have paychecks that they can spend on groceries, clothing, furniture, cars, houses, utilities, entertainment, appliances, restaurants, vacations, and all sorts of things. That creates demand in those industries. And that creates jobs. If those companies have enough work, they can spend some of their revenue to hire more employees or to upgrade their own facilities. See, more demand, more jobs. And government gets its new stuff built and its old stuff fixed. See. Everybody wins.

http://patomalley.wordpress.com/2011/06 ... e-economy/

[Meta777]

Ok I will higher taxes kills incentive because the business owners will have less money to hire business owners needs tax breaks to create jobs i think the right tax rate should be 18% flat tax i have came to this rate from talking to Republicans.

In 2006 the average effective individual income tax rate was 9.1%.
The corporate income effective tax rate was only 3.4%.
and I believe those numbers have decreased since then.

Some people paid more and some paid less than that,
however, I don't believe any business was taxed at or higher than 18%,
and only handful of individuals were taxed more than 18%.

An 18% effective flat would raise taxes on some businesses, actually, it would raise taxes on most business,
perhaps even all business if you're talking only corporate tax rate.

http://www.cbo.gov/publications/collect ... tables.pdf

What reason did republicans give you for an 18% flat?

I would like to know how Infrastructure Spending would help our Economy and create Jobs and create Consumer Demand for new Jobs do you agree with this article below ?

It seems very reasonable.

...do you believe higher personal income taxes somehow creates jobs that the rich/wealthy will reinvest in their company to avoid higher income taxes when the wealthy can just use tax loopholes and or tax shelters and other ways to avoid higher income taxes ?

If taxes can and are avoided completely, then such taxes will have no effect one way or the other.

-Meta

[southernmissouri2007]

Meta777 may I ask you to explain this answer thanks ?


If taxes can and are avoided completely, then such taxes will have no effect one way or the other.

-Meta

[Meta777]

I'm saying that if the rich don't have to pay the taxes, then the taxes will have no effect on the rich's incentive to invest.

-Meta