Friday, June 08, 2007

Taxing Us to Economic Death

Taxes… Democrat Style

Democrats Seek Formula To Blunt AMT

One Plan Would Impose Surtax Of 4.3% on Richest Households

By Lori Montgomery

Washington Post Staff Writer

Friday, June 8, 2007; D01

House Democrats looking to spare millions of middle-class families from the expensive bite of the alternative minimum tax are considering adding a surcharge of 4 percent or more to the tax bills of the nation's wealthiest households.

Under one version of the proposal, about 1 million families would be hit with a 4.3 percent surtax on income over $500,000, which would raise enough money to permit Congress to abolish the alternative minimum tax for millions of households earning less than $250,000 a year, according to Democratic aides and others familiar with the plan….

Washington Post Article

This would be a terrible move by the democrats. Just as when they threaten to raise corporate taxes, the Democrats have no understanding of economic issues whatsoever! The top earners are the business owner’s who own restaurants, salons, newspaper/magazine stores, liquor stores, computer stores, and the like. Not to mention the earners above them who invest money in businesses, have large shares in companies; buy yachts and homes, which all create jobs and wealth for people like me.

These people do not keep their money in their mattress or in a wall safe… they invest this money, they do R&D with it. They put it into the real-estate, the luxury items, which all give people jobs.

What happened when they (Democrats) put a luxury tax on stuff years ago was that a lot of people who make yachts went unemployed. And when the Democrats tax corporations, all the corporations do is raise the price of the item involved, so the cost then is transferred to the consumer. If the corporation doesn’t do that, often times they will move offshore or have a mass firing. All of this hurts the common family and the United States economy.

Do the Democrats really believe that CEO will cut his 4-million dollar a year bonus if the taxes are raised? If they do, they are nuts! This corporation will move to another country, period. I don’t like the corporate ethic; they would sell their own kids if they were given a chance. But this has no bearing on keeping these businesses on our soil.

Do you understand that:

the Internal Revenue Service released data on tax year 2003. The data show that the top 1 percent of taxpayers, ranked by adjusted gross income, paid 34.3 percent of all federal income taxes that year. The top 5 percent paid 54.4 percent, the top 10 percent paid 65.8 percent, and the top 25 percent paid 83.9 percent.

NRO Article

What do you think is going to happen to the markets, real-estate, luxury items, and the like if these people tighten-up their purse strings? Do you think more or less business loans will go out to people in disadvantaged neighborhoods? Do you think that boat company down at L.A. Harbor is going to hire more people? Do you think that small company is going to raise it 401k matching?

I was listening to radio the other day and a business owner called in and made the point that when the Democrats put the “luxury excise tax” into the mix, he stopped matching 50% of his employees 401k investing and dropped it to 20%. AGAIN! DO YOU THINK THESE BUSINESSES WILL NOT PASS ON THE COST TO EITHER THE CONSUMER OR EMPLOYEE? This is why the democrats cannot get into office. When Bush lowered the corporate taxes the immediate drop in corporations and businesses either moving offshore or shutting down stopped.

The oil companies make about 8-to-10 cents profit on a gallon of gas. Between the federal gov. and state govs. There is a 50-to-60 cent tax on it. And the democrats want to raise taxes on gas even more? That is crazy! Maybe these liberal law makers stop the 18-plus different gasoline formulas that are mandated by states thinking they are somehow “saving the environment.” That one fact alone, e.g. – having the same formula for the whole country, would almost cover the federal and state taxes in cost.

The democrats have no idea what they are doing… unless they are really as socialist as Hillary says she is and the ultimate goal is to hurt the corporate and mom-and-pop businesses in order to legislate more left leaning agendas.

Hillary has said she want to leave the family unit and go to the proverbial “village” unit! It didn’t work in Jamestown, it won’t work now. I don’t care how many 20-year old college students say it would.

So the question becomes: "How much should we tax the rich? What is too much? 30%? 40%? Why not 50%. Ooops we already are... so let's up it 70%? 90%? What is too much? Does this have a positive or deleterious effect on our economy?"