Bush Says Kerry Tax Plan a Threat to Workers

[Sinistrous]

http://abcnews.go.com/wire/US/reuters20040905_229.html

Sept. 5, 2004 — By David Morgan

PARKERSBURG, W.Va. (Reuters)

<snip>

"Raising taxes will stifle job creation," Bush told thousands of cheering supporters at a high school football stadium in Parkersburg, a steel and manufacturing city near the important swing states of Pennsylvania and Ohio.

<snip>

"His plan to raise taxes on those at the top end of the income-tax scale will raise taxes ... for the 900,000 small businesses and entrepreneurs who pay at the individual rate and who are creating most of the new jobs in our changing economy," Bush said.

The Kerry campaign quickly hit back, accusing Bush of using a misleading definition of small business that would include both himself and Vice President Dick Cheney. Bush, Cheney and Kerry are all millionaires.

<snip>

* fighting wth all he's got: lies, distortions and half-truths.

[still_one]

1. a threat to who Mr. bush? Not to the middle class worker

[mbperrin]

2. Funny how all that growth of the 50s and 60s was done with a

70% top tax rate, ain't it?

Maybe if we don't let people horde up huge stacks of cash doing nothing that it can be used, for, oh, jobs for instance.

But what the hell do I know? It's just history, after all. They have FANTASY on their side!

[TahitiNut]

13. Wrongo. The top marginal FIT rate in the 50's and early 60's was 91%!

But that was on earned income and dividends, not capital gains. The greatest income equity in the US was achieved in the 70's when the top marginal FIT rate on capital gains was 30%-40%, on dividends was 70%, and on earned income was 50%. That top rate on earned income only affected people with the top 1% of income. For brief time, federal taxation policies were close to sane. So was the minimum wage (see below).

[MichiganVote]

3. HA! Tough! Even if it were, which I doubt, I still want that SOB out!

[noahmijo]

4. Small business owners are taxed the same as we are

in the sense of income tax The owner is taxed by his/her own individual income or revenue that the small business generates. HOWEVER Kerry knows this and for that reason has addressed that business owners won't be dealing with the same tax code that individuals who just earn in the top 2% deal with.


Next misleading statement please.

[NMDemDist2]

9. i am a small business owner and I pay close to 40% on profits

after you figure in my personal income, SS and disability etc

all that FICA stuff you see on your payroll deductions, your boss pays half of them for you, if you ARE the boss you pay all of it on your self

it's pretty harsh IMO when I am only making around 50K a year. what's interesting is once you get above $75k a year, no more SS or FICA deductions on self employment income

[noahmijo]

10. to my understand your revenues get taxed not your profits

Is this the case?

[NMDemDist2]

12. explain the difference please

revenues are the net profits after I pay all my business expenses

[noahmijo]

16. Revenue is simply what you pull in

it's what you earn without taking into account operating cost or taxes.

For example you buy a widget for $5 you sell it for $10

The $10 is your revenue.

$5 is what your profit is because it cost you $5 to buy it.

To my knowledge typically small business owners pull in revenues of $200k +.

But that's not what they actually get to keep after operating costs, taxes, ect.

Bush is trying to say that Kerry's tax rollbacks will hit those business owners pulling in revenues of over $200k since small business owners are taxed the same way joe citizen is.

BUT what I am wondering is if that's before or after profits that they get hit with that tax, and also I know that Kerry is NOT looking to give small business owners the same tax code that just regular earners have.

[NMDemDist2]

23. my revenues are in the $400k range n/t

[sally343434]

17. Payroll tax is the key

Yes, that's the kicker. The FICA/SS bite (AKA the 'payroll tax') is where the real inequality lies, and it affects only the first $75K on income. Someone making $100 million pays the same amount (not percentage, but amount) as someone making $75K: $11,250. And the fund this money goes into is supposedly set aside for SS, yet it is being robbed to finance the entire federal budget. Hence the so-called "SS budget crisis." It's a great scam for the plutocrats. They pay nothing and get everything, while those earning under $75,000 pay everything and get nothing, since the fund is supposedly going bankrupt.

[sally343434]

5. Media manipulation, as usual

They left out an important detail:

"Raising taxes will stifle job creation," Bush told thousands of cheering supporters (who had been either paid to attend or willingly signed a loyalty oath prior to being admitted)

[Old and In the Way]

6. Republican taxcuts have proven over and over again that

they don't stimulate jobs. The wrong people get the taxcuts. Lower/middle class taxcuts add discretionary income that is reinvested in the immediate economy. The Bush taxcuts for the top 5% were reinvested in high return markets (offshore).

[The_Casual_Observer]

7. will raise taxes ... for the 900,000 small businesses and entrepreneurs

This is patently absurd. So, the guy making more than 200K personally
in a "small business" isn't going to hire an employee because his personal income is taxed at a higher rate? No wonder chimp is reluctant to debate these issues and would rather talk shit and posture.

[gratuitous]

8. The statement doesn't even make sense on its own

Ignore the FACT that George W. Bush will be the first president since Herbert Hoover to see a net LOSS of jobs during his term.

And raising taxes "on those at the top end of the income-tax scale" won't make the slightest bit of difference to 900,000 small businesses and entrepreneurs. For example, how many small businessmen and businesswomen here at DU have seen the first dime of investment from, let's just say Dick Cheney? He pulled an extra $90K or so thanks to the tax cut he voted himself back in 2001. Has he "invested" in any small businesses? Anyone? Bueller?

Well, I'm sure our faithful bulldogs in the network and cable media immediately called bullshit on Stupidhead's pronouncement. Right?

[ramapo]

11. What a load of crap

Taxes don't even come into the equation for a small business. My company is a partnership set up as an S-corp.

That means the profits are distributed and taxed as ordinary personal income and you pay taxes at the individual rates. So the taxes are a personal expense and what makes it difficult is that you pay whether you took the money out of the business or left it in. You usually can't take it all since you need money to run the business.

The taxes I pay have absolutely NOTHING to do with how we run the business.

Now if he wants to talk about premiums we pay for covering our workers' health benefits maybe I'd listen. Premiums are up nearly 50% for less coverage since 2000. Now THAT hurts the business.

[area51]

14. "Bush Says Kerry Tax Plan a Threat to Workers"

And I say Bush being in office is a threat to workers! Look what he's done to the economy & the lack of job creation, for starters.

[randr]

15. More advice from the FRIGHTWING PARTY

[mhr]

18. Read Perfectly Legal By David Cay Johnston - He Debunks This Canard

eom

[BadGimp]

19. Bush and his Labor Dept cut workers Wages Directly!!

Check out this piece from Greg Palast:

THE GRINCH THAT STOLE LABOR DAY FROM VETERANS

by Greg Palast
An update of our report from last Labor Day.

Monday, September 6, 2004 - In celebration of the working person's holiday, Secretary of Labor Elaine Chao has announced the Bush Administration's plan to end the 60-year-old law which requires employers to pay time-and-a-half for overtime.

I'm sure you already knew that -- if you happened to have run across page 15,576 of last year's Federal Register.

According to the Register, where the Bush Administration likes to place its little gifts to major campaign donors, 2.7 million workers will lose their overtime pay for a "benefit" of $1.53 billion. I put "benefit" in quotes because, in the official cost-benefit analysis issued by Bush's Labor Department, the amount employers will now be able to slice out of workers' pockets is tallied on the plus side of the rules change.

President Bush announced in his convention acceptance speech in New York this week that he was changing overtime rules to give workers "comp time" off, instead of pay. He forgot to mention that a couple of days before, on August 23, his Labor Department had already put in half the plan -- eliminating overtime pay for millions -- while failing to put into the regs one word about comp time. In the pre-September 11 days, we used to call what the President said, "lying."

Nevertheless, workers getting their pay snipped shouldn't complain, because they will all be receiving promotions. These employees will be re-classified as managers exempt from the law. The change is promoted by the National Council of Chain Restaurants. You've met these 'managers' - they're the ones in the beanies and aprons whose management decisions are, "Hold the lettuce on that."

NO OVERTIME IN BAGHDAD

My favorite of Chao's little amendments would re-classify as "exempt professionals" anyone who learned their skill in the military. In other words, thousands of veterans will now lose overtime pay. I just can't understand why Bush didn't announce that one when he landed on the aircraft carrier.

Now I should say that, according to Chao's press office, the changes will actually extend overtime benefits to 1.3 million burger flippin' managers. How does that square with the billion dollar "benefit" to business owners? Simple: The Chao hounds at the Labor Department suggest that employers CUT WAGES so that, added to the new "overtime" pay, the employees won't actually take home a dime more.

I can hear the moaners and bleeding hearts saying this sounds like the Labor Department is telling Big Business how to evade the law. Yep, that's what the Department is doing. Right there on page 15,576 of the Federal Register it says,

"Affected employers would have four choices concerning potential payroll costs: ... (#4) converting salaried employees' basis of pay to an hourly rate that result in virtually no changes to the total compensation paid those workers."

And in case some employer is dense as a president and doesn't get the hint, Comrade Chao repeats, "The fourth choice above results in virtually no (or only a minimal) increase in labor costs."

condt...................

http://www.gregpalast.com/index.cfm

This is the kind of thing the Kerry camp should be throttle the Bush folks with...but not even a wimper...makes me wonder.

[K. F. Gibbons]

20. Bush's existence threatens world

His smirk makes my eyes bleed.

[Thor_MN]

21. It's a funnel, not a pyramid

They want you to think that there is some sort of "gravity" that will make the "Trickle Down" theory work. Supposedly, if you give money to the rich, people they MAY spend it, thus stimulating the economy. In other words, horsecrap. Anytime you are writting a check, look to see who it's going to - How often do the majority of people write a check to someone who has less money than them?

The economy is a funnel and we are sitting up at the top. When we pay bills the money is generally headed down into the funnel. Some of it swirls around and maintains it's level, but * is causing large amounts to head down the drain to the elite few at the bottom of the funnel.

So with this in mind, how do you stimulate the economy? You inject money at the TOP of the funnel, not at the bottom where the rich people are. The people who don't have a lot WILL spend what they have, boosting the economy and creating jobs by increasing demand - increasing supply has never created a job and never will.

[flordehinojos]

22. bush is so full of hot air!

:nuke: :scared: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :grr: :grr:

[Catfight]

24. Bush is talking about the 900,000 small business in CHINA that have

taken our jobs from America. Notice Bush doesn't mention these are American jobs because THEY DON'T EXIST!