Dems' tax philosophy hurts middle class

  • Follow Letters

The Democrats persist in their efforts to raise taxes on big corporations and the wealthy, when anyone with average intelligence knows this is a myth.

If you tax businesses or corporations that produce products or services for public consumption, they just absorb the tax by raising prices to the consumer. Democrats claim they are helping the middle class, but they are causing us to pay higher prices for everything we buy.

President Obama claims that he wants to take money from the rich and use it to help the poor, but the Democrats are among the wealthiest politicians in the country -- and what has he done for the poor? Fifty percent of minority teenagers are unemployed.

Until we get rid of the uncertainty of higher taxes and the high cost of Obamacare, businesses are not going to expand. The only people Democrats are helping are the union members who donate millions to their campaigns.

Comments (16) Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
willie7
955
Points
willie7 08/03/11 - 11:24 pm
0
0
Mr. Lamb is repeating
Unpublished

Mr. Lamb is repeating Limbaugh word for word!!!!!

faithson
5156
Points
faithson 08/04/11 - 01:42 am
0
0
plenty of 'ditto heads' in

plenty of 'ditto heads' in these parts..

shrimp for breakfast
5450
Points
shrimp for breakfast 08/04/11 - 03:12 am
0
0
There is no such thing as a

There is no such thing as a middle class anymore.

southernguy08
499
Points
southernguy08 08/04/11 - 07:38 am
0
0
Whammy Obammy had a "birthday
Unpublished

Whammy Obammy had a "birthday dinner" in Chicago last night. It cost $30,000 a plate to attend. So much for the Democratic Party representing the "poor and needy." Yeah, I'm laughing.

seenitB4
86577
Points
seenitB4 08/04/11 - 08:35 am
0
0
Yeh shrimp....what middle

Yeh shrimp....what middle class?

Jane18
12332
Points
Jane18 08/04/11 - 08:35 am
0
0
I agree with shrimp and

I agree with shrimp and seenit! Where are they????????????????

harley_52
23152
Points
harley_52 08/04/11 - 08:56 am
0
0
Before you can define the

Before you can define the "middle class," you must first define "the rich" and "the poor."

RogerDavis
11
Points
RogerDavis 08/04/11 - 10:04 am
0
0
Right on Mr. Lamb. All the

Right on Mr. Lamb. All the Dems do is create more grand vote buying schemes paid for by those of us who actually work. Most Dem voters I know are either on the dole or have such an intense hatred of the wealthy, they simply refuse to see that the left , and Mr. Obama in particular are hell-bent on destroying capitalism in this country. And right now it seems as if they are doing a pretty good job of it.

dichotomy
32672
Points
dichotomy 08/04/11 - 10:09 am
0
0
No sane businessman will be

No sane businessman will be hiring, expanding, or reinvesting in his business as long as Obama and his left wing appointees are running this government, Obamacare is hanging over their heads, and the Democrats are in charge of the Senate. It's just a fact. One or all of those situations have to change before the economy will start getting better but it may already be too late. The socialist nanny staters (of all flavors including some RINOs) have killed the goose that laid the golden egg. And their only answer is to raise taxes on the people who's incomes are already down, who's business is down, and who are still trying to figure the impact of Obamacare. Oh yeh, that will spur the economy. I don't care how often you cry about the "wealthy", the point is that they have it and you don't and if they don't make more you ain't going to get any of it. Even if you raise their rates, if they don't make as much you are going to get less. The more you tax them, the more they raise their prices, the less they sell. Net tax gain zero and more people unemployed.

Chillen
17
Points
Chillen 08/04/11 - 10:44 am
0
0
We have a spending problem

We have a spending problem not a revenue problem!!!! Wake up liberals!!

Chillen
17
Points
Chillen 08/04/11 - 11:08 am
0
0
Case in Point: The obama

Case in Point: The obama administration added $9.5 Billion in Red Tape in July. 379 Regulations were put in place by this inept administration - just in July.

This loser is increasing spending instead of cutting it. What the heck?!!!!

Techfan
6461
Points
Techfan 08/04/11 - 11:51 am
0
0
From 1979-2009, productivity

From 1979-2009, productivity in the US increased 80% while the hourly wage of the median worker has only gone up by 10.1 percent.
In 1980 the average CEO made 42 times the average worker's pay.In 2007, it was 344.1x (down from 531x in 2000). Us corporations have discovered they can ship jobs overseas for cheap labor, make American workers work harder for less, and take the excess profits (which are at an all time record) and stuff them in their pockets instead of creating more American jobs.

Techfan
6461
Points
Techfan 08/04/11 - 12:07 pm
0
0
From the Senate Rebublican

From the Senate Rebublican Conference, a totally unbiased source. What we need is total laissez-faire capitalism. Let banks go unregulated (it's worked out great so far), let industry dump toxins at will, let companies pay $1.00 an hour (according to Bachmann, we could "virtually wipe out unemployment.") Everyone knows US corporations are so honest and decent they wouldn't try to pull anything over on people.

RogerDavis
11
Points
RogerDavis 08/04/11 - 12:08 pm
0
0
Who owns corporations?

Who owns corporations? Stockholders. Who are stockholders? Average people like me with a 401K to worry about. Hating corporations, therefore can be equated to hating average people. Sad sad sad.

Chillen
17
Points
Chillen 08/04/11 - 02:19 pm
0
0
If average Joe's wages have

If average Joe's wages have only gone up 10% in the last decade or two (which I doubt), he has several folks to blame.

1. Himself - for not working hard enough & therefore not getting promoted.
2. Unions - union demands are driving benefits up, so corporations are moving jobs out of the USA - where they don't have to deal with them
3. The stockholders who vote for the board of directors who hire the CEO who appoints the managers who determine pay. Hmmmm. Who is to blame here?
4. Lawsuit happy American citizens & the leeching lawyers who line up to sue corporations. Robbing them of cash. Cash that could be used to....pay employees more.
5. Last, and certainly the MOST. The Government. Increasing regulations & rules are costing businesses more & more money (see my 11:08 post). The more money corporations give to the govt, the less they can give to "Joe".

john.q.publius
0
Points
john.q.publius 08/04/11 - 03:04 pm
0
0
Techfan, the productivity

Techfan, the productivity gains are due to increased capital investment. It would not make any sense to invest in capital (automation) and then take your savings and use it to pay your workers more...then why invest in the capital? You make capital improvements in order to make higher profits to return to your stockholders. Those same employees whose hourly wage has gone up 10% have also been the beneficiaries of health benefits that now cost many, many times what they did in 1979. They also own stock in those companies whose productivity has gone through the roof--either directly in IRA and 401k accounts, or indirectly in their pension funds, savings accounts, CDs or money market accounts--meaning that their return on their investment is higher than it would have been. The only reason we have any mfgr jobs at all in the U.S. is because the U.S. worker's productivity is the highest in the world. That is the result of capital improvements, and the people who make those investments reap the rewards. However, I'm certain that if you want to take all of the gains in your retirement accounts and all of the income from any other investments you have, and contribute those funds to the U.S. Treasury. You might even get a thank-you note.

john.q.publius
0
Points
john.q.publius 08/04/11 - 03:28 pm
0
0
Beck Tears, you are playing

Beck Tears, you are playing games with numbers. I'll give you credit for trying hard, but you can't finesse reality when the difference between your story and reality is so enormous.

In the first place, simply by limiting the FSA contributions taxpayers are allowed to make, Congress passed and President Obama signed into a law a huge tax hike that has certainly hit my family pretty hard--to the tune of a couple thousand dollars just this year. That's not even mentioning the tanning tax, cigarette tax, you name it, nor even venturing into the costs imposed by increased federal regulations.

Leaving ALL of that aside, however, you are left with the fact that the Democrat Congress and President have gone far beyond the already-execrable standards of Washington politics when it comes to borrowing and spending. You can't blame the economy and debt on Bush; he didn't create or expand Fannie and Freddie, nor did Congress and Bush borrow more than about $4.4Billion over 8 years. Bush and his Congresses did nothing but make an already-bad situation even worse. Washington has been on a spending run for decades, with little or nothing to stand in the way of increased debt and increased intrusion by Washington into our lives. Reagan took the tax now / cut later deal and regretted it to his dying day. Bush pledged no new taxes and broke his word. Bush Jr. talked about maybe thinking about discussing changes in entitlements and did not have the fortitude of a Paul Ryan when he was accused of wanting to kill grandma. And those are the fiscal "conservatives," not exactly helped by their respective congresses, naturally.

In any case, we are now in a position in which the debt--which was $10.2T the day President Obama took office--is over $14.5T and Congress has authority to borrow up to just about $17T by 2012. So, our gov't has already borrowed more in 30 months than it did during the 8 years that are alleged to be the cause of our problems, but the debt MUST double from the 2008 level well before 2014, when health care "reform" kicks in and REALLY starts the meter spinning. This is structural--the most optimistic projections of high growth (not happening), decreased unemployment (not happening) and maintaining a AAA rating (soon not happening) put us at $20T by then, and of course Congress could not pass, and the President would not sign, a bill cutting any spending at all, even with the threat of refusing to increase the debt limit being held over their heads. The vicious, granny-slaughtering, cold-hearted, throw-our-children-under-the-repossessed-schoolbus Boehner plan cuts somewhere between $0 and $20Billion from the nonexistent 2012 budget (and also relieves Congress of the need to pass that budget), depending on whom you believe.

$20 Billion

Not four or five days' worth of spending. Four or five days' worth of deficit spending. What courage that took...

Back to Top

Top headlines

DaVitte slaying suspect still in Florida

A month after the slaying of 55-year-old Bill DaVitte, suspect Daniel Nelson Robinson, 21, remains in a Jacksonville, Fla., detention facility.
Search Augusta jobs