View Single Post
Old 02-16-2006, 04:03 PM   #17 (permalink)
shakran
Tone.
 
shakran's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by aceventura3
I am a small business owner. When Bush got congress to agree to tax cuts, I received a check for $600. I used the money to help buy a new copy machine in my office. With my old machine I had an employee spending about 15 to 20 hours per week using the copier. With the new machine the time is about 7 hours. I paid the employee $10/hr. With the extra time we trained him to handle some higher value customer service duties. After he proved he could handle the new responsibilities I gave him a $2/hr. raise.

Because of the Bush tax cut that employee is making about $4,000 more per year. I have a more productive employee and I am providing better service to my customers. With better service his job and income is more secure as is mine. Thanks to Bush's tax cut.

If you multiply my experience buy all of the other small business owners who invested tax cuts back into their business, you can clearly see how those cuts were good for the economy, good for working people and good for increasing federal tax revenues.

If you raise taxes my business may not grow, with no growth I cut costs, payroll is my biggest controllable cost, I would have to let people go or cut their hours. I loose, my employees loose, the government looses.

To those who normally don't think this stuff through, including those in Washington, please think about it. try talking to some small business owners. Please understand that small business is the driver of our economy.

This is all well and good as long as the world only lasts a decade or so. But since the earth will presumably not be destroyed in the next 5 years, we need to think long term. And long term, irresponsible tax cuts, ESPECIALLY when paired with huge spending increases, are not sustainable. The economy will suffer. The value of the dollar will go down. And then that extra $4000 your employee is earning won't get him any farther economically than he was when he was earning $4,000 less.

Plus, your customers will no longer have as much disposable income to spend on whatever it is that you sell. Your income will go down, possibly to the point where you'll be forced out of business.

Then we have to take into account the fact that, eventually, one day, we'll get someone responsible in the white house, and they'll realize that the economy's in a deep dark hole and will do what is necessary to correct that. Namely, they'll raise taxes.

With increased taxes, you'll be paying more money trying to help the government pay off the staggering debt its accumulated over the last (then) ten years or so. So not only do you deal with income losses on the customer side, but you deal with expense increases on the business side. You're bleeding money into the government, and you're not replacing it fast enough with customer cash.

Not to mention that your employee, with his $4,000 raise (which btw you may have to cut to make ends meet when income goes down and costs go up) (remember that sentence. It's important in a minute) will also be paying more in taxes, and this in an environment when his dollar doesn't go as far as it used to anyway. So he's REALLY hurting.

Now, remember the part about you possibly having to cut your employee's wages (btw you might have to fire him but let's not take the worst case scenario just yet)? The reason you'd have to cut his wages is because your income would go down at the same time that your expenses would go up.

Does that situation sound familiar? To me it sounds like the situation the government's in right now. They've cut taxes (income) and increased spending (expenses). Now if YOU have to tighten the belt when your expenses go up and your income goes down, and I have to tighten my belt when my expenses go up and my income goes down, how is it logical that the GOVERNMENT gets more healthy when its expenses go up and its income goes down?

It simply doesn't make sense.

You're correct that tax cuts will stimulate the economy. They will ALWAYS stimulate the economy, *short term*. But when you look *long term* you have to be careful about those tax cuts. I'm not saying they're always a bad idea, but they're a terrible idea when you simply can't afford it.
shakran is offline  
 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360