There’s a simple way of looking at the debate over the Bush tax cuts. The White House and most Democrats say they want to extend them for the vast majority of the population, but keep higher rates in place for families making over $250,000 a year. Republicans seem to know that “Keep Taxes Rates Low for the Rich!”isn’t a winner, politically speaking. So they argue that these tax increases are really going to punish “small businesses.”
There’s ample evidence that this is mostly untrue–the number of “small businesses” that would affected is somewhere between 2 percent and 5 percent, depending on how you define the term. But some media outlets seem unwilling to render judgment on the GOP’s talking point–see the New York Times today (9/13/10):
Many Senate Republicans have said that letting the Bush cuts expire for high earners amounts to raising taxes on small-business owners, some of whom fall into those rates because they report their business earnings as personal income.
Or last week (9/9/10):
Mr. Boehner got out ahead of Mr. Obama’s speech. Appearing on ABC-TV‘s Good Morning America, he said that extending the top Bush tax rates would benefit small businesses; Democrats argue that few small businesses pay taxes at the top rates.
Journalism should tell us more than what politicians say about this or any other issue. How something will work in the real world is vastly more important than what John Boehner thinks, or what “Democrats argue” in response to what Boehner says. Oddly enough, you had to read a Times editorial on the same day (9/9/10) to get a meaningful sense of what was going on:
Mr. Boehner’s much professed concern for small businesses is misdirection. The tax cuts that Mr. Obama would let expire would affect very few owners of small businesses–how many do you know who make more than $250,000 a year?–by any common-sense definition of that term.
How would the debate over tax cuts change if more reporters were willing to let reality intervene in this debate?
the orange crush was on face the nation yesterday
bob schieffer, after referencing a recent report by the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation finding that three percent of small businesses would be effected by the top rate cuts ending…asked ” Do you quarrel with that figure? Is that a right figure or a wrong figure?”
boehner answered, “Well, it may be three percent, but it’s half of small business income. Because, obviously, the top three percent have half of the gross income for those companies that we would term small businesses.”
greg sargent notes: Boehner’s camp will argue that this isn’t a concession at all. After all, he reiterated the claim that half of small business income will be impacted, creating a drag on investment and innovation in a weak economy, but Democrats will counter that this only proves their point — most of the small business income that would be impacted by ending the tax cuts for the rich is concentrated in the hands of a tiny group of people.
Wow, that Boner–complete nonsense, as usual. Yet as the story points out, complete nonsense is completely O.K. Expect You Know Who any minute to defend the indefensible with more utter nonsense, and a good old grade-school try at making the insane and murdersous seem normal and good.
Don’t editors ask reporters to clear up mysteries any more? If I read this stuff when I was a magazine editor, I would ask the writer something like, which is it? Do the facts support the Boehner view or the Dems? And basically it would be because I wanted to know. Maybe editors know everything now and their curiosity is stifled. But such vast knowledge is a disservice to readers. You’re supposed to ask yourself if the reader would get it. Even on a daily, surely….
Even NPR news repeated this same “hurt small business” talking point, even though the 2% of “small businesses” that are affected include some really large ones, like Bechtel, the largest engineering company in the U.S., which just happens to be a privately owned S corp, which makes it a “small business” for tax purposes, I guess.
It would be nice to have SOME facts with our “news.”
Even the blog article doesn’t mention that the 250k figure is for net taxable income, or pure profit, not gross!.
So, with all the deductions available to small business and the rich, income may be in the millions before it hits that 250k figure. If that were honestly reported and explained – with some examples of huge incomes barely affected by the tax (or not at all) – it would entirely change the tenor of the debate.
But that would require some actual reporting, wouldn’t it?
Conservatives know tax hikes anywhere hurt the economy.Dems feel you can still squeeze more out of the rich without impacting the economy in any negative way.The argument is in itself disingenuous.Because the majority of people are not effected directly……yet!To have a real opinion usually means having skin in the game.If everyone in this country had to pay 17%.The poor,the middle and upper income earners of what ever they take in-you would see quite a reaction if the rates went up 5%.Then government would answer.But as long as it is the so-called rich, many just hit the snooze button.The only way Obama and comp seem to be able to raise revenue is by taxation and class warfare.That is the limits of their imagination.And if you look at the numbers you will see that taxing everyone on every cent accomplishes nothing to pay down this monster.Only through making this the most hospitable place on earth for business to flourish and wealth to be created will we have a ghost of a chance.Obama’s policies have put pressure on those who control the fuel to ignite this economy.He felt those who work 14 hours a day would just add another hour.He felt his choke hold would hurt for a time but in time people would adjust.I think the climate in business is one of “just hold on till he is gone”.What we need is damn the torpedoes and full speed ahead.BAM is miles away from being able to deliver that.Small business and big business and even the unfree press all hold the same truth.Obama sucks for business.He has since day one.And he will on his last day at the end of his first term.No surprises here
Watching michael e struggle with basic economics and tax policy is like watching a starfish working with a can opener.
Q: Won’t small businesses be affected?
A: The simplest answer is that most wouldn’t be. It’s not so simple, though.
“The data we have are about taxpayers and not about business per se,” cautioned Joseph Rosenberg, a researcher at the center, which is run jointly by The Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute, both center-left policy research centers.
Business income filed on individual tax returns is a challenge to interpret. What tax experts know for sure is this_ only about 765,000 of the 153 million tax units report positive business income on either a Schedule E or Schedule C tax form. They’d fall within the top two tax brackets under Obama’s proposal.
This small group accounts for about 45 percent to 50 percent of the business income reported. Since business income is what’s called pass-through income, it becomes part of an individual filer’s total income, and is more susceptible to changes in tax brackets.
Q: What’s that mean for job creation? Would it help or hurt jobs?
A: No one can say with certainty. Available tax data don’t say whether these individual filers reporting business income are rich hedge fund managers with three employees, a law practice, a medical partnership or a small factory with 20 employees. It’s also hard to distinguish between a wholly owned business and one that reports income that’s claimed on several tax returns by several partners.
“We know nothing about employment” from the tax filings,” said Roberton Williams, a senior fellow at the center.
Q: Is there reason to believe they aren’t job creators?
A: Claims that small businesses would be hurt if tax cuts for the wealthy aren’t extended are “substantially overblown,” said William Gale, the center’s co-director.
Gale notes that while tax brackets can change, what matters is the effective rate of taxation â┚¬” the actual rate that businesses pay after deductions for wage income, expensing of equipment and depreciation of assets.
“Raising the tax rate doesn’t increase the tax rate on investment” by small businesses if they can write off that investment for tax purposes, he said.
Read more: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/09/17/100775/qa-fact-and-fiction-in-debate.html#ixzz0zuoiuCQh
In the end there are endless computations that would prove that raising taxes will raise capital to pay down the dept( a dept exploding as this government outspends its wildest dreams of taxation vs spending)….and just as many that would say it will hurt the economy.We need to look at promises made and promises kept for a moment to see how realistic is the current administrations grasp on economics.So far we have in a broad sense spent all the money in the bank… plus all it will ever have…. plus everything else in our little universe for us and our future kin.It is arguably a complete failure.So The idea seems to be how to spread the pain with the least political blowback.But there is another way….Stop government spending now. On a Massive scale and without mercy to a government red ink spill gone insane.WE have a tax code that is thicker than the Bible -and those who wrote it, admit they don’t understand it. That it is too complicated.Obama’s inner core is replete with tax cheats.Some used the excuse of ignorance.My God man!To say any raise in taxes for any level earning class will be well absorbed by the afflicted is simply mindless.Can he get away with it?Sure.He could get away with taxing those who make over a million at 98% and people would cheer.But there is the one thing he must do that he can not do with this thought process….Be business friendly on a scale never seen before.Has he done that one thing in every action he takes?From his first waking thought to his last breath before sleep?I would say absolutely not.And that is a failing we can not withstand.May I borrow Jacques oft used joke quote?”Watching Barrack H Obama struggle with basic economics and tax policy is like watching a starfish work with a can opener”.He truly does not get it.Yet I will say as he steps back even a little I feel he is at least realizing that much of what he believed going in- is simply non sustainable.That is always a good thing. But Fundamentally he proves every day that he does not understand the driving profit motive of capitalism.He demonizes anyone who starts a business and incorporates and succeeds(those evil corporations).He says blitheringly stupid things like “when is enough enough”?His wife says turn from those big money jobs to work simply in the community sector.Yet HE IS A MILLIONASS many times over. So As he and his wife live a dream life…. I must say it takes balls.He has never given to charity yet believes he can take from others in his own Warped form of it.He has protected his money using legal tax methods always spurned by the left.His land deals alone are infamous.His children I promise you will school at the best schools. Inherit great wealth and work in jobs that will afford them more of same.And like their father they will protect that great wealth from government encroachments.By playing the system.This is your guide?It is almost too funny.
Of course this will all be academic in two years.There will be a new cop in town then.Working night and day to tear this regimes work apart.THen we can see if the economy responds to them.And gaurd Against their excesses.
Michael e is the only black mark on these postings. Where were all of these fiscal conservatives when George W. Bush was doubling the national debt? The top tax rate does not kick in until after a filer has over $385,000 in taxable income. How is a small increase of 4.6% going to do economic damage to a person or family that has to pay more on each marginal dollar about that amount.
I will make a deal with anyone in the top tax bracket, I will trade you my income and my marginal tax rate for your money and your higher rate of taxes. Guess who will be far better off of the two of us. Idiots, those who defend the rich are idiots.
Michael e do you live in the real world? We’ve been giving the rich money for more than thirty years and at the expense of the poor and working class. All we’ve gotten from it were years of stagnant wages during Wall Street’s most prosperous period in US history leading to the greatest economic turmoil in history. Today wages are drastically down as are any benefits. Many people are out of work and have lost their homes. I dare say, we the people have plenty of flesh in this game, a game that has virtually destroyed the middle class since Reagan. We have bailed out the wealthiest crooks in the nation who are once again profiting, but won’t hire and aren’t lending any money to create jobs or help small businesses. The Bush tax cuts(TO THE RICH) put us into 4 trillions dollars worth of debt. Debt that you no doubt expect poor and working class people to pay!
Gene thank god I am the only black mark.Up with affirmative action on FAIR i say even if I be the only recipient.Gene the rich are us!Sorry to tell you but when you send your child to a good school and hope for their ultimate success there is no tag on that sentence that end with”so the government can tax them at 99% to feed those who did not do as well”.(Before you numbers crunchers jump on my 99% remember the number is irrelevant.)Once you designate the rich as a class to be milked for the collective good you are on a very different road than the American dream.And class warfare and the hysteria that springs from those who have done better than you is not even a hop skip and a jump from the racism and hatred shown to groups like the Jews.It is below the Liberal base to act in such a manner or even foster the thought process.
Michael s take the time to read of Fanny and Freddy.I remember giving talks on the insanity of it all.I was told by Schumman and Dodd,Maxine Waters,Barney Franks that all was well.People in those crowds screamed at me that I did not care for the poor.I promised them I cared more than they.The road to hell is littered with liberal good intentions.I asked if when this came tumbling down creating a great hole to drag us all down if they would give me a ring and say holy shit you were right and those knuckleheads were nuts.Well actually A few have contacted me.. so some do get it.Point is no one has ever worked for a poor man.And if you do well in life you are not evil.Most people rich or poor are good people.We are a charitable country that still affords its people amazing opportunity though that is now shrinking.
.Bush is not the cause.Obama is not.Wall street or even Fan and Fred.And certainly not those who pay the majority of the taxes.They all played a part.Your understanding of our problems …..It is a very simple look at a very complex problem.But I can get even “simpler”.Your government has done a lousy job on your behalf.And is now doing as bad as it gets. Obama is up to bat.He gets the cheers and the jeers.He can not have a jobless recovery as he believed.He cannot tax his way out of this as he believed.He can blame it on the rich….know it is a blatant lie ,but get re elected.Thanx but no thanx.
Anyone I know in the medical profession would beg their kids not to enter the field.It simply is not worth the sacrifice. So we tear the guts out of the upwardly mobile American.Reconfigure the American dream.Does it work?No but we all feel better….more equal..No more doctors going off to their country clubs in their nice cars(Im laughing here sorry).Living in fine houses.And you need your baby delivered.Who do you call?what government job(postman)gonna handle that?Another “rich”man bites the dust yippie.I can spin these yarns outside of my field and into any spectrum you can name.Come on man.Think.Buck up.Is this were we will set the bar?
It’s best not to bother with You Know Who here, Gene W and Michael S. Calling him a black mark is not really apt. He’s more like a stain, or a dropping, or a foul skid mark. Reading a little (very little) of his lunatic gibberish can be fun, just for the sheer inanity of it. (Just read the first paragraph of the above post to get the full flavor of what this nincompoop is all about, all the time.) It literally makes no sense, yet somehow our boy has convinced himself that he’s on the ramparts, battling the evil libs and their master, the mighty Obama, with his “free speech.”
A couple of weeks ago, m.e. went apeshit over some harmless invective I hurled at his beloved Baggers and one of their more odious leaders, the class-less money-grubber “Big” Dick Armey. M. e. screeched that my remarks should be placed on a bumper sticker as proof of the general amorality and unkindness and perfidy of the Lib. So, in the same spirit that caused me to flay the Baggers last time, I have a suggestion for a new bumper sticker: “Tea-Baggers: The Skidmarks in the Underwear of Democracy.” Semper Fi!
I’ve only recently found FAIR and begun reading their reporting on the inaccuracies in the mainstream media’s coverage of the news. I’ve been receiving their “best of the blog” newsleter because I responded to something in the recent past and they got my email address. I read the responses to the article I read about the shift in the nature of the NOVA’s articles on PBS (indicative of all PBS programming as a result of it’s commercialization and Corporitization at the hands of the conservative caretakers in recent years). There I came in contact with Michael E. As difficult to read and disjointed as his efforts at reason were, I felt I had to try to persuade him that Science has actually taken more than just “baby-steps forward in offering a universal view to compete with his 6,000 year-old creationist one. Now I am here and realize that his views on all other matters inclluding Tax Fairness and general economics are just about as well researched and thought out as those on the Universe. This observation aside I’m finding that FAIR’s reporting of the Corporate funded media’s coverage of news in general pretty well destroys the myth (perpetrated by Fixed Noise and elswhere) that the media has a liberal bias. I’ve been interested in and watching the news since before I could watch it (remember radio?) and if reporting on the union negotiations from both sides, both locally and nationally is now considered left wing propaganda, and having our president tell school children to excell in their studies is also leftist propaganda (except that it was Dwight Eisenhour) I confess it must have been liberally biased. For fun, check out M. E.’s comments about the NOVA article and my responses (which will be my final ones to him). https://fair.org/blog/2010/09/14/pbs-ombuds-trust-in-nova-only-goes-so-far/comment-page-1/#comment-42187
I cant believe you guys are rudely bagging on someone because they’re opinion of how the economy works. I’m not an economist (a class of people who don’t seem to know much for certian anyway) but I know what I see around me and I don’t know where to stand on taxation. Take these examples.
I have been a Registered Nurse for about 13 months now and can’t get a job. I live with my parents and get fed and caffinated by my fiance (who I met in nursing school and has been lucky enough to have family contacts that got her a job.)
A good friend of mine has been an enginener for tech companies, air force, NASA etc for about 30 years. He’s worked hard, raised 3 girls, and recently bought a house in Silicone Valley based on existing laws that made it smarter to own than rent. he makes about $300,000, but is barely keeping in the black. his house is worth less than he owes, and he’ll have to move out and put his 3 college girls on the street if the tax break expires.
Will his money get me a job? will a highly experienced engineer leaving silicone valley help the national debt? I don’t really understand these complicated issues.
I guess my point is that I get the most out of consertive posters that I tend to disagree with than I do from people shouting “yea! F the people we’re against cuz I agree with this article. I couldn’t respect myself if I formed all my opinions based on general assumptions. I want to hear dissent!
Carter, Let me take a crack at your delemma. I’m sorry for your difficulty in finding employment but that’s not part of the present discussion unless you think that eliminating the existing tax break on those who make over $250,000 is going to make it even more unlikely that you will find employment in the future. In so far as your friend who makes about $300,000 a year is concerned, his additional tax burdon should be one percent extra on the ammount above $250,000 or about $500 per year. If he has put himself and his family in that precarious a position by living that close to his financial demise, may I suggest that he cut down minimally on his Latte expenses for a while.
Carter first how dare you dissent.How dare you? if you want to get involved understand that the above gentlemen believe Obama is doing a smashing job and we/you are going to be just fine under his rule.And if not….. it is Bushes fault.Nuff said.all comments come down to that.FAIR is simply a forum for twisting all stories grabbed from the info sphere into lib speak.And fools giggling like Beevis and Butthead repeating yeah yeah yeah over and over again..Im simply a voice saying you are about to be voted out guys.I dont think Im on their xmas card list anymore.Now your off.Good luck in the job search(watch me piss their tree hugging atheist asses off) I will say a prayer for you!
Right you are Naturaldave; it seems unlikely that the $300,000 man is going to suddenly go broke, with his girls suddenly “in the street.” But tell us something, Carter: are you giving us the whole story here? You say he recently bought a house ” . . . in Silicone Valley based on existing laws that made it smarter to own than rent.” Does this mean the man who makes $300.000 a year actually thought about renting, and worse, that he perhaps had a house that he sold around the time the housing bubble burst? Finally, anybody making 300K a year for decades on end and is “barely keeping in the black” is doing something wrong. Very wrong.
You write, “Will his money get me a job?” What on earth are you talking about? His wealth isn’t transferred to you through taxation. (Although taxes are indeed a transfer–you pay taxes, and when you surrender your money to the government, they take the money and use it myriad ways. Virtually everyone agrees that taxes are necessary; it’s how they are collected, at what rate, and most importantly, from whom.) Taxation is not a zero-sum game. That’s not even remotely how these things work, though I’ll give you credit for admitting that you don’t really understand these “complicated issues.” Those “conservative” posters who I lay into are the people giving you bad information, or outright lying to you so that you’ll vote or decide things based on that information. They are not on your side; indeed, they and the people they coddle are your enemies. If you want to understand some of what’s going on, I would urge you to get Joe Bageant’s “Deer Hunting with Jesus.” Read that book, and you may see yourself in there, in the struggles of the working poor, and how they too often side with the very people who are keeping them down.
P.S.: I put “conservative” in quotes above because many, if not most, of the people who call themselves conservative are not that at all. They are either Libertarians (like Rand Paul), or Radical Statists (think Dick Cheney, George W. Bush, etc.), or Reactionaries and Right-wingers. There is at least one self-styled reactionary/libertarian here, at this space. In any case, they are all beneath contempt, and I say . . . well, you know what I say . . . .
Told ya so.See there is no idea of redistribution of wealth. Tim says so.And all that government spending… why its ok. Tax n spend is be good!Just lose your eyes and relax.And taxes are necessary.Why the constitution says so.But then it mentions something about man shall not be taxed on his wage or some such rot.You almost get the impression they saw you lot coming.No matter we are all gonna be Ok.Tim what she is saying is she is not buying this idea that things will get better under this regime.What cant you understand in that?Read the Heritage foundation Tim.You wont go blind
Carter: You just don’t get it.
That 300k your friend makes is his gross income. Taxes are not calculated on gross income. They are calculated on net after deductions. With a big interest deduction (for the annual interest he pays on his outrageously expensive house) and numerous and numerous others available to him, it is more than likely that his net is well below 250k. So his taxes probably won’t go up at all.
If they do, it won’t be by as much as you seem to think.
Let’s say, for the sake of argument, that his net is above 250k. Let’s say it’s 260k. He will than have to pay 1% extra only on the 10k that is in excess of 250k. That’s 100 bucks. If he did have to pay the extra 1% on the whole 50k (between 250k and 300k) which is an impossibility, because everyone has deductions, his tax bill would be 500 bucks more than he is paying now.
If he is making 300k a year and can’t save $500. He’s a bloomin idiot – especially since the Obama tax cut in the stimulus was $800 for joint returns – $400 for single filers.
You have no case.
Carter you do get it.It is harder for everyone.On every level and there are thousands of costs to deal with.All heading north.To believe once Obama waves his magic wand that no-one ,no- how is gonna be hurt is bull.To state that all in all taxes are not going up at all is a lie.You heard me a lie.uneasy ones idea is that anyone making that much should be cruising and that is smallminded nonsense.IT takes nothing into account as to his life.IT in effect answers Obamas question ‘when is enough enough?He told us….At the magic thresh hold of 250 thou.I always ask libs a question they NEVER Answer.So I will ask it again.How high should the government be allowed to go in taxing the rich ?What a boost this all is for our economy.
Uneasy one……..Did you really just say that someone in his tax bracket has so many shelters open to him that his taxes probably wont go up at all?And did you really mark his house expenses as outrageously expensive?You are far off of even BAMs talking points.Simma down simma down(Rob Emanual speaking there)How about all those making 250thou-300 thou just write Obama a 100-500 dollar check and we will call it a day.No changes.NO frigging chance
michael e: I am talking facts and reason, you are discussing your religious belief that in a time when taxes are lowest since the days of Truman, the rich have a greater proportion of the national wealth since before the Great Depression and the tax burden has been massively shifted to the lower classes, the rich are overtaxed. That has no basis in reality.
Of course, that doesn’t particularly bother a religious fanatic like yourself.
Im not religious(not sure how or if i gave that impression) and if you believe the lower classes are paying the majority of taxes i would simply say you are wrong.We live in a country where 50% or near abouts have no skin in the game because they pay nothing.2% taxes for those who pay nothing would be a huge revenue enhancement.Never happen -so it is not totally about money.It is also about class warfare for ideology and political gain.I have no real problem with a redistribution of wealth if honestly done.Lets say at the point of a gun.If taxes are so low today that it is a negligible point to most people as you say it is..it is do to no small fault that the republican party has forced it so(And i aint a Repo man).Dems have no ability to really cut taxes.It simply is not in their DNA.I still love my idea.No-one here has commented yet on it.
1)you receive a color coded card that denotes the level of wealth you are painted with.Salary….land ect.then when you buy something..anything you are charged accordingly.I pay 10 bucks for a pack of gum.You pay 50 cents.Honest.Upfront.Unfair thievery.I FRIGGING LOVE IT.What would be wrong with that?And of course you could configure a math computation to make it equal to what we now pay in taxes.Just now -the class separation is open and honest and complete for all to see.And the burden is easy to see.Maybe the guy paying 50 cents for the gum can tell the guy paying 20 bucks …hey man thanks for your service.
Virtually everything that the poor buy is taxed. In fact, they probably pay a much higher proportion of their incomes in taxes than you do. This is due to the concerted and successful attempts by the rich to shift the tax burden down.
And your idea is ridiculous and unenforceable, of course.
PS: Your beliefs about taxes are religious because they are not amenable to facts and reason. It is a matter of faith with you that the rich are overtaxed.
UN easy one
Nothing is unenforceable- if the fed deems it so.As it is now they take our money at any level they choose…spend it like drunken sailors.Print more when needed.Hand out IOU’s in the trillions.REfuse to allow us to look at the books to see what has become of our moneyThe point is is not the logistics…… IT is how would it make people feel.THat is the exercise here.Think how happy the shopkeeper(lib) would feel being able to charge his DR more for a loaf of bread than the Dr. charges for a visit.It is in the end after all no different if the numbers match -how the government confiscates and redistributes wealth.Being nice about it or writing a script so people accept the inequity of it is a farce.I do wish the government would raise it and simply take it at gunpoint(in a way I suppose they do).And should the poor get that card that eliminates tax on everything they buy in America?A total free ride.Same for the middle class.How about only the filthy rich pay tax on goods and service?
I am glad you arrived finally where I began.That the tax hike is not all there is to taxes.THat seems to be many bloggers logic as they throw numbers about to explain Obamas real grasp on the plight of every American.
“And you said my belief the rich are overtaxed”I simply do not believe success should be milked to subsidize others.It is fundamentally marxist.And you seem to not understand that a man worth a million will always buy that loaf of bread and spend less percentage wise of his gross than a poor man.HE HAS MORE THAN YOU!Good for him Get over it.One last question asked 12 times now by me in these blogs and still left unanswered.What would you place as the ultimate ceiling on the highest tax bracket of the highest earners?
Me? I favor a wealth tax.
That is honest.It is a starting point.