The REAL Job Creators -

[Urbane]

Where does that consumer get his money?

From the money tree gramma!

[grammafreddy]

Where does that consumer get his money?

From the money tree gramma!

I want one of those.

[NAB]

Hey gramma, stop trying to think beyond the fundamentals of the topic... you (and others) are missing the real point IMO.

Nab

[grammafreddy]

Am I doing that?

I just want to know where all this money comes from that all the low and middle income people are supposed to have. If it isn't from working for a capitalistic entrepreneur, then from where?

If people want jobs and paycheques, who are they gonna work for?

If the point is that by reducing low and middle income taxes and such gives them more spending power, then first they have to have wages to tax in order to lower those taxes.

[flamingfingers]

Hey gramma, stop trying to think beyond the fundamentals of the topic... you (and others) are missing the real point IMO.

Nab

Nab.... There really is no hope here. They just do not see it. Over and out.

[Urbane]

Am I doing that?

I just want to know where all this money comes from that all the low and middle income people are supposed to have. If it isn't from working for a capitalistic entrepreneur, then from where?

If people want jobs and paycheques, who are they gonna work for?

If the point is that by reducing low and middle income taxes and such gives them more spending power, then first they have to have wages to tax in order to lower those taxes.

I agree. When taxes are raised on businesses they tend to pass along those increases to the consumer. If they decide to cut costs laying off workers is one of the first things they do. Some people just have this notion that we can raise business taxes with no negative consequences but it just doesn't work that way.

[steven lloyd]

Nothing trickles down

The basic argument for their policy is if you give tax breaks to the rich, that money will eventually "trickle down" to the middle and lower class. It doesn't. It never has. All you need to know to discount this theory is simple logic (economics 101). Wealthy people already have spending cash. Any additional sums they get will not likely increase their spending by much. On the other hand, give cash to the lower classes and they will probably spend it all. If you want to revive an economy, get money into the hands of the poorer people, not the richer ones. Trickle Up. Now that's a plan - and proven too.

As to the notion that corporations will hire more people when given special tax treatment, the amount of hiring is not dependent on tax breaks, it's dependent on how well the business is doing. If their business is booming, Exxon will increase spending whether or not they get tax breaks. On the other hand, if they get tax breaks and the oil business is on the rocks, they'll just stuff that cash in their CEO's mattress.

In other words, while providing tax cuts to big business and the wealthy does nothing to stimulate the economy, providing tax relief to the lower and middle income earners helps both business and the economy.

How do you get to the point of "give cash to the lower classes and they will probably spend it all. If you want to revive an economy, get money into the hands of the poorer people, not the richer ones"? Just hand them a mittfull of taxpayers money and say, "Go spend this"?

:137: Like wow. Could you please reread my post and show me where I even came close to suggesting that what we do is “Just hand them a mittfull of taxpayers money and say, "Go spend this"? Do you see what I mean by ideologically blinded? You didn’t even try to understand what I posted before coming back with some "you must be socialist" tripe or whatever. Sheesh.

[Corneliousrooster]

Some people just have this notion that we can raise business taxes with no negative consequences but it just doesn't work that way.

Yeah - we hear the same thing EVERYTIME they try to raise the min. wage (yet once it happens the sky never falls)

[Urbane]

Steven, did you see the article I posted yesterday on the "trickle down" theory? The term was first used by American humourist Will Rogers in referring to poor people during the Great Depression but the so-called "trickle down" theory is nothing of the sort. The article is certainly worth a read if you get a chance.

I think the problem is that some businesses do very well and make a lot of money. That really bothers some people because they somehow feel that businesses have an obligation to throw the profit (or much of it) back into the economy in some way. Many do, of course, by hiring more workers, purchasing new equipment, expanding to new locations or whatever. But profits may still be high. Risk is high too though. Not a day goes by, even in good economic times, when businesses don't go under. I remember during the HST debate when some people were just against doing anything that would help business. That kind of thinking is really short-sighted.

[logicalview]

You. Just. Do. Not. "GET" it. And. probably. NEVER. Will.

You are very rude.

[Urbane]

Yeah - we hear the same thing EVERYTIME they try to raise the min. wage (yet once it happens the sky never falls)

Yup. I was in favour of the minimum wage being raised but I hesitate to mention that since it was the Liberals that did it and so supporting what the Liberals did just makes me a Liberal lapdog.

[Corneliousrooster]

Yup. I was in favour of the minimum wage being raised but I hesitate to mention that since it was the Liberals that did it and so supporting what the Liberals did just makes me a Liberal lapdog.

Being EVERY public sector union keeps harping about their "entitled" cost o living increase, it was very kind of the liberals to increase the pittance to the lowest paid workers you can legally employ after 10 years, despite the" massive numbers of jobs that will be lost and the massive increases that are being forced upon the consumer" - :spinball:

Thanks liberals :sunshine:

[goatboy]

Yup. I was in favour of the minimum wage being raised but I hesitate to mention that since it was the Liberals that did it and so supporting what the Liberals did just makes me a Liberal lapdog.

As you can see from the post above, you just can't win with some people Urbane. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

That my friend would be a classic NDP lapdog. :cheerleader: :cheerleader:

[Corneliousrooster]

As you can see from the post above, you just can't win with some people Urbane. Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

That my friend would be a classic NDP lapdog

Sorry that I can see through Miss Clarke's kind gesture as her first order of business to try and gain favour from the electorate of BC .

NDP have never had a single one of my votes so I musn't be a very good lap dog :spinball:

You do realize that When the liberals first came in with gordie we had the HIGHEST min wage in the entire country and after 10 years we had the lowest? Why do they deserve a pat for doing what they should have done years ago or at least attempt to keep pace with the middle ground?

[Captain Awesome]

From the money tree gramma!

I think Greek people shaken the tree dry. It was a fun party where everybody worked for the govt. And then it ended.