Do tax cuts help create Jobs?

Obama has never said he wanted to raise taxes, that is just the Republican propaganda just to create problems for Obama. What Obama said he wants tax breaks for anybody making less then 250K dollars per year and to give tax breaks to small businesses which create 75% of all jobs in this country.
He never said he wanted to raise the tax rate for big business, what he said is they should pay their fair share of taxes.

 

So what does he mean when he says those who earn a lot aren't paying their "fair share"?

So that meant they are paying too much and he wants to lower their taxes?

 

We all hear about tax cuts ... sounds good ,, I'm all for that ...

but is seems to me we're on a roller coaster of possibilities . here . . .

Given the State of the Union , here in the USA , and all nations globally inter-twined in the global marketplace : : : :::

it seems to me a matter of choice for the super-wealthy of the World...

people like me and you that drive our own kids to school every day without security guards , ,, go to the grocery store , without security guards , , , or just go anywhere without security guards , , , that's just one example of the vast gulf between the powers that be and me and you , US , the 'un-washed masses' ,, as we are so mockingly refered to ...

and I take great exception to that ,,, it makes me realize that some things are not going to change , , , unless the super-wealthy decide to invest in the USA , and I just don't see that happening anytime soon...

What's the mantra of the rich ? Oh yes ,

I GOT MINE , , , SCREW YOU . . .

 

It does not matter what he said.

The former CEO of AIG said on Lou Dobbs that Business wants stability and they THINK Obama wants to raise taxes.

So they are punishing America with 9% unemployment forever until you bow down to the aristocracy and let their spawn Charles St. Evrémonde inherit the vineyard free and clear of all income taxes. While you pay consumption taxes on tea and wine, and a flat tax on any income you make from sweat and invention, while the demon spawn of Evrémonde who never dropped a bead of sweat to inherit the self-sustaining landed estate drinks to his heart's content free of all taxes and any sweat.

Now if you want a real fair share of taxes or a flat tax, just say every time you want to tax net worth flatly, and give everyone fairly the same deduction for the average principle residence so it is a simple tax code, so that the poor are not paying 4.75% of their net worth in taxes when three multi-millionaires are paying far less than that. Remember to pass that along to the huddled masses you see, a flat net worth tax solves the stability problem that the wealthy are afraid of; it does not let them sit on their wealth to punish the people for voting for the "N"; it taxes flatly and a fair share for everyone; everyone pays taxes flatly on what they want the government to protect from barbarians wont to rape, pillage, and plunder their wealth, and everyone fairly has the exact same deduction so it is simple; it cuts taxes, and everyone pays the exact same flat fair tax with the exact same deduction, so it creates jobs.

******

If enough Republicans in Congress who are not up for election in 2012 fell on their sword and voted for his bill "as is," giving Obama exactly what he wants, would it be that bad?

If it works, it works, and people have jobs; we know then what works and what does not. If his bill does not work enough, and it just contributes to the deficit, he is certainly toast with no wiggle room.

I think the rich believe they can wait him out, that he cannot do anything he wants.

But, if Obama does not get what he feels will work, and all we have is the stability of the Bush tax cuts since I thought they would give us this deficit, but voted for him anyway, why should I blame Obama for the Economy?

 

Obama is including tax cuts because that would be the only way it could possibly get past the Republican HOR.

But I've disagreed with Obama on this point since before the election.

 

Tax cuts should be given to businesses that expand and create jobs in the U.S.

But tax cuts with the "jobs promise" is insane. Everyone should know that doesn't work.

We have to make it too expensive to move overseas. And too expensive to bring goods in.

In other words it has to make economic sense to provide jobs here.

 

Letting businesses and their customers keep/spend more of their own money will never work.......we need government to tax everyone at 100%....thats how jobs are created.

So we need to adopt North Korea's economic policy......
.
.
.

 

Temporary very targeted tax cuts which will do little if anything. His main proposal is going to be tax rate increases which the Dem congress rejected last time he tried it.

 

We have to make it more attractive to stay here.

 

Why didn't the Bush tax cuts expand and create jobs?

How have we done that?

 

Funny then that the Republicans demanded all those hundreds of billions in wasteful temporary tax cuts.

I agree the stimulus would have been and would be much more effective with spending instead.

 

Tax cuts do create jobs but only if they are accompanied by spending cuts to maintain a balanced or surplus budget by government. When taxes are cut and spending is not reduced then the long term effects are future unemployment.

 

Since that has to my knowledge never happened in the history of the US, upon what basis do you make that assertion of fact?

 

taxing job creators or the rich helps them create jobs by blackmail.

if they have high taxes then the government can influence their decision making whenever we see fit such as using cleaner energy or hiring more workers by offering tax incentives...

as of right now they have the lowest taxes so there is no way for the government to control them or force them to hire workers, they are sitting on 2 trillion dollars they can certainly create jobs if they want but no one is forcing them to because they have republican protection.

 

The LIE really is, of course, that we have been living with the Bush tax cuts for 10 years now and, best I can tell, they haven't created Job #1. The unemployment rate was substantially lower BEFORE the tax cuts. I report, you decide.

 

That is correct! If tax cuts to the super rich would create jobs, I want to know why the Bush tax cuts have not created jobs? There was eight years under the Bush administration and two years carried through the Obama administration and they are still not creating jobs in this country.

C'MON! Don't be so naive why the Bush tax cuts have not created jobs. It is because big corporations are constantly finding a way on how to make billions and the over seas labor is so much cheaper they are investing their tax breaks overseas.
Our politicians will have to stop these companies by making it hard for them to invest overseas and make it so rough for them that they will invest in bringing those jobs back to this country and create jobs. Apply some high tariffs on imports so that we can compete with the cheap products that are being sold in this country. Make it feasible for companies to manufacture here and still make a good profit.
We want products made in the U.S.A. not China or the rest of those communist countries. Our wealth is all being shipped overseas.

The Republicans will make this country a third world country if they are elected to control both houses. They have no solution to creating jobs. They want to keep the Bush tax cuts because those companies are the one's putting millions of dollars in their pockets so that they can protect those millionaires.

After watching the Republican debate they just had in Florida, about the only one that has any kinds of brains is Huntsman, but even him would not make a good president. The rest are a joke!

 

Generally speaking government taxes and spending reduces the amount of investment capital. The loss of investment capital results in less enterprise and less enterprise results in fewer jobs.

As to the specifics of why deficit spending reduces enterprise and jobs it's simple. The CBO projected that if the "Stimulus" borrowing was not repaid that it would reduce GDP growth by 1/3rd in 10 years if it was not repaid. A reduction in GDP growth by 1/3rd represents over 400,000 jobs that won't be created in year ten alone and every year that number of lost jobs compounds. In year 10 it will be 400,000 jobs not created and in year 11 it will be another 400,000 plus jobs that won't be created. In ten years it equals more than 4 million jobs. In 20 years it equates to about 10 million jobs that won't exist in the United States.

We need only remember that about 30% of the interest on the national debt is paid to foreign investors. That literally takes money out of the US economy and it does so every year.

One problem with the original OP is that it provided graphs of unemployment and did not reflect "jobs" per se. We need to remember that there are about 200,000 entrants to the job market every month and they are not counted in unemployment figures. If we're not growing the ecomony by 200,000 jobs per month the actual number of unemployed increases. At no point (to my memory) after the "Stimulus" package have we seen employment that exceeded the number of new entrants into the job market and unemployment basically continued to rise. The Stimulus was basically a financially and political failure. The fact that President Obama is calling for Stimulus II is reflective of that.

The government cannot spend the United States out of the recession and it merely intervening which makes the recession last longer. The government isn't even addressing the fundamental problem which remains the new construction home industry where there are about 2 million excess homes on the market due to prior government interventionism in the home industry.

 

Baseless, opinionated conclusion based on conservative propaganda.

 

The thing you need to understand about Liberalism.....its a complete lie and utter fraud....

Unemployment Rate After The Bush Tax Cuts



Federal Tax Revenue After The Bush Tax Cuts


Employment Level After The Bush Tax Cuts

.
.
.

 

Your charts are missing a bunch of years. Here are the complete charts:

Unemployment with Bush tax cuts:



Total revenue with Bush tax cuts:



Thanks more accurate now.

Did you say something about a fraud?

 

Yes thanks for showing what happened after the Democrats took over.

 

Where not and are not the Bush tax cuts still in place?

Or do tax cuts only work magic when Republicans control the government?

 

Perhaps worth noting although it doesn't relate to federal taxes is that many states offer tax incentives (i.e. lower taxes) to lure industry to their state. Often this relates to property tax exemptions or reduced rates for new enterprises moving to the state. It does work which is why businesses take advantage of it whenever they can.

It can also be noted that when a state imposes high taxes, such as the case of the State of Washington, that businesses move out. Boeing, for example, relocated it's headquarters and much of it's production out of Washington because of extremely high taxes being imposed by the state.

There are certainly other considerations related to where a company chooses to do business but taxes are one of the major considerations. The same can be said at the federal level. Higher taxes in the United States are a primary cause for manufacturing to be out-sourced to other countries.

 

We had 52 months of FULL EMPLOYMENT after those tax rate cuts and revenues increased 44%.

 

Sure and then came the Democrats and the threats to revoke them and failure to successfully deal with the economic downturn by the Democrats. Your graphs demonstrate that beyond dispute.