ok, i have been really busy so no time to produce a really well documented post but here goes:
Quote:
|
The economy is consistently better under Democrats. And one goal of Republican lawmakers is to allow businesses to pay lower wages and benefits.
|
historically the markets have a 1% difference in performance between democrat and republican presidents. you are right though, the D's get the extra 1%. economic cycles and the coincidence of politics have as much to do with that as anything else. none of these guys are really working FOR us, remember?
Minimum wage? i'm open for the discussion, but if we raise minimum wage for an unskilled, entry level job by X%, what should we do for the pay of the people who are a little more trained and thus more valuable? and right up the line for you computer gurus, teachers, etc... when someone on the bottom gets a payraise, that invariably must move up the chain. so the bottom level moves up, but so do the top levels - and we are still exactly where we started - with a great big gap in incomes with some people on the bottom barely getting by. if you can figure out a way around that, let me know. i think it would be cool to make 5 or 10% more next year even if i can't really buy anything more with it.
taxes? higher taxes do discourage production. i spend 5 hours today with a CPA, Attorney, and our mutual client. this guy just crossed over making $135,000 for the year. (yes, i know that is obscene) they looked at his tax situation and told him that he has to either A) lower his production and relax for the rest of the year, or B) incorporate so they can shelter his income from taxes. So he incorporated so that he can continue at his current pace and make even more obscene money and now pay effectively $0 in taxes. if his tax bracket was 15% then he would pay @ $40,500 in taxes. - oh yeah, that is federal only. because his tax bracket is above 35% - instead of that $40K he will walk away paying @$5,000. sure he has to pay the CPA and attorney, so that is good for the economy - but would $40,000 have been better than $0? or does it feel good knowing we have a "progressive" tax system?
tax dodges piss me off, but why should someone who works 60 hour work weeks after finding a career that hurts no one have to payout more than 1/3 of their income? because they are financially more successful than someone who works 60 hour work weeks to make $40,000? this stupid effing progressive system designed to get more out of the rich only encourages the rich to not pay anything, so that the burden goes back on the middle class.
and FYI - the rich do in fact pay 80% of the taxes received by the federal gov't, even after setting up their shelters.