Click to see the beacon journal online
Homes   Jobs   Cars   Shopping
All Da King's Men -- Community Blog

Previous post:

Next post:

Obama The Business Killer

by Da King on October 22, 2008

in Uncategorized

As we all know, our economy is in recession. Our businesses are being threatened due to a credit freeze, and unemployment is rising. Our government is spending trillions of dollars it doesn't have, which devalues the dollar. Banks teeter on the edge of collapse. Our automakers are losing money. The airline industry is barely surviving. Jobs are moving overseas. We have lost millions of jobs. The picture is pretty bleak.

John McCain's response is to cut the business income tax rate from 35% to 25%, to make our businesses more competitive. Reasonable. This is a job creating measure. After all, without jobs, it doesn't much matter what other financial steps our government takes, because without jobs, wealth and revenue will not be generated. Without jobs, Americans will have nothing. Without jobs, poverty will rise. Without jobs, the government itself will not be funded at adequate levels. Without jobs, we fail as a society.

The Obama campaign has responded to McCain's business tax cuts by calling them a giveaway to the richest and most powerful, and a giveaway to the oil companies, even though McCain's tax cuts are across the board. Such anti-business rhetoric coming from Obama and other Democrats, especially during such harsh economic times, is a sure sign that an Obama presidency will not be friendly to business, which in turn means an Obama presidency will not be conducive to job creation. There are many examples of this found in Obama's own policy prescriptions for business.

Obama will increase the cost of doing business in America in many ways. Always remember, when the costs of doing business rise, the negative consequences ripple thoughout our society. Increased business costs cause either higher consumer prices, reduced business profits, or job losses. That is a simple economic reality. All three of those negative consequences affect not just Wall Street, but Main Street as well. In fact, they affect those lowest on the economic ladder the most. The millionaires will survive the hard economic times. It's the rest of us that will be harmed

Here are a few specifics (though not nearly an exhaustive list) on how Obama The Business Killer will kill business.

Obama says he wants to cut taxes for 95% of Americans, but Obama's net tax policy is for a huge tax increase. That means the other 5% of Americans, those evil rich people, will get large tax increases from Barack Obama and friends. Obama originally defined rich as anyone making over $250,000, but that was only for married people filing jointly. Single taxpayers have a "rich" threshhold of either $150,000 or $200,000, depending on which figure Obama ultimately chooses. So, who are these evil rich people ? They are the business owners of America. That's who Obama will be taxing. This includes millions of small business owners who file their taxes thru the personal income tax system, who will all be taxed at higher rates. Obama will punish business at a time in American history when business is struggling. That is not wise, but to Obama, it is an issue of "fairness." In addition, Obama will lift the Social Security payroll tax cap, which means businesses will pay an additional 7% in payroll taxes for any employee earning over $90,000. That's more business burden. Obama also wants to increase the capital gains tax rate, which will stifle business investment exactly at a time when America is dying for business capital. That goes beyond unwise and into the realm of stupidity. When ABC's Charles Gibson pointed out to Obama that capital gains tax revenues actually rose when the rate was cut, Obama brushed it aside and said capital gains increases were also a matter of "fairness."

The Small Business Association recently reported that 80% of all new American jobs are coming from small businesses. The Obama campaign says that most small businesses do not make more than the $250,000 (or $150,000-$200,000) threshhold, and therefore will not be taxed more. That is correct, most don't make that much. ONLY THE MOST SUCCESSFUL BUSINESSES MAKE THAT MUCH. And it's the most successful businesses that hire the most employees, that create the most jobs. Those are the ones Obama would punish. In other words, if your business is struggling along, barely making it, Obama's tax policy won't hurt you. Only when you succeed, expand, and start creating jobs for others will Obama's tax policy hurt you. Not exactly a brilliant economic growth strategy there, Barack. The Senate Finance Committee reports that of those who file income taxes in the highest two tax brackets, three out of four are the small business owners Obama wants to tax.

The Wall Street Journal has reported that the National Federation of Independent Business says only 10% of small businesses with one to nine employees will be hit by Obama’s tax increase. However, almost 20% of the small businesses that employ from 10 to 19 people will get nailed, and 50% of small businesses with over 20 employees get punished. The more people you employ, the harder you will be hit by Obama's tax increases. That may be "fairness" in Obama's world, but it's anti-business and anti-growth in mine. And did I mention we are in a recession, teetering on economic collapse ? Duh, Obama.

John McCain said we shouldn't raise taxes on ANYONE in an economic slowdown. That's the smart move. We have history to tell us how right that idea is. Herbert Hoover raised taxes and erected import tariffs just before the Great Depression. Hoover is widely blamed for making the depression far worse. FDR raised taxes in the midst of the Great Depression, and created a second "depression within a depression" in 1937 and 1938. History teaches us this lesson. Barack Obama wants to ignore it, all in the name of "fairness", or "spreading the wealth around", as he calls it. Wrong, wrong, wrong.

Obama's health care plan would also mandate that business cover it's employees, or pay a fine to the government. Some small businesses would be excluded, but the rest wouldn't. This adds yet more burden on the business community.

Next up on Obama's business killer agenda is the Employee Free Choice Act, which will remove the secret ballot provision from union voting. This will allow unions to bully and intimidate their way into unionizing shops that otherwise would remain non-union. With unionization comes higher wages, which is good for the employees, but higher wages is another burden on business, that will inhibit job creation and make it harder for the union business to compete in the global market (see: American automakers). Calling the removal of the secret ballot, a founding democratic principle, "free choice" is like calling burglary a "charitable donation." Removing the secret ballot is anti-free choice. And let's not forget that the unions are among Obama's biggest contributors. Looks like they'll get their money's worth.

Change We Can Believe In ? Not to me. Not to business. Not for America. Most of all, NOT NOW.

  • roysoldboy

    King, I got out of bed this morning feeling pretty good considering that I was up till after 2:00 watching a severe thunder storm that really wasn't so bad since the wind was never over 45 mph and then I read your latest offering and don't feel so good anymore. It is very depressing to consider what Obama seems to be promising us and any reminder is hard to read and ponder.

    He hasn't offered anything to us that has swayed me vote toward him and every time CNN lets me hear Palin's words I get more convinced that she is a much faster learner than he is. She carries on a pretty good discussion with "reporters" (I will send you by e-mail the best thing I have read lately about our present "reporters" and sounds at least as intelligent as Obama. I was really falling off my chair in mirth yesterday when she described him as Barack the Wealth Spreader. Doesn't your post suggest that he is just that?

    Yesterday I heard the Wealth Spreader say that the money he intends to pay that 40% of non-income tax payers money to pay for payroll taxes, property taxes, and sales taxes. All of a sudden I realized I get to help some poor person pay his state taxes like property and sales. Who helps me pay that kind of taxes? That would be my question if I could talk to him on TV like Joe the Plumber did. I say that the man indicated complete ignorance about taxes with that statement because he doesn't even seem to know that the US doesn't charge property taxes or sales taxes. Somehow his advisors have to get him up to par in understanding how taxes work in some way other than wealth distribution.

    I was talking to a very small business man the other day, a body shop owner who employs one man. He said he hopes Obama doesn't make it because having to provide health insurance for that one man, or pay a fine in an amount he doesn't know about yet, would hurt him bad.

    I guess when you have come up from big city machine politics and don't need to
    know a lot about taxes other than you may be able to "buy" some votes if you talk a good game is where the Wealth Spreader finds himself. He hasn't offered me any of that wealth so I guess I will continue to say that I am voting for Sarah and that guy who is running with her.

    I had to stop back there a way to listen to Sarah Palin speaking at Findlay, Ohio since I never fail to listen to anything about her that CNN comes up with. She may be the toughest of the bunch campaigning so hard now since the media has ignored the Dems in order to try to discredit her all these weeks.

  • The Reverend

    This sentence is quite remarkable…

    "Obama says he wants to cut taxes for 95% of Americans, but Obama's net tax policy is for a huge tax increase."

    "net tax policy"…..

    Here's my interpretation of what you're saying….If 5% of the working population have to pay more tax and 95% of the working population get a tax cut…..that equates to a "net" of "a huge tax increase."

    Only my opinion King….but that sounds kind of ridiculous.

    I agree with you that small business creates most of the jobs in America. However, you haven't convinced me that small business will be hampered by an Obama administration. Quite the contrary.

    2% of small business owners make over $250 K. That's not very many.

    In addition, Obama has plans to reduce small business capital gains taxes.

    You're gonna' love what I type next….

    There's no question that in the situation Bush-Cheney has left Obama, federal stimulus, public works programs and higher taxes for the richest are EXACTLY what's required to see our nation through this period.

    Contrary to the thrust of your post here….spending and taxing now are essential to our recovery.

  • The Reverend

    roy: What would you call the massive tax cuts to, primarily, wealthy folks….during W's administration?

    Didn't W. spread the wealth….redistribute the wealth….for the sake of the wealthiest?

  • rockinrick

    the only change we'll see is a change of face

  • Da King

    Roy,
    The only thing I'm wondering is if Obama really will cut taxes once he's in office, or if he's pulling a Bill Clinton by promising tax cuts on the campaign trail that he'll never deliver. That's an old Dem trick. Obama used the trick of promising tax cuts during his Illinois senate run, and then once he was elected he forgot all about them.

  • Da King

    Rev,
    More outer space posts from you.

    If you don't know that Obama is calling for overall tax INCREASES, then I don't know what to tell you. Maybe you should study up a little on the candidate you support, because you don't even know him.

    Rev says "Didn't W. spread the wealth….redistribute the wealth….for the sake of the wealthiest [with his tax cuts]?"

    Spoken like a true big government hack. NO, Dubya didn't redistribute wealth with his tax cuts. It's not redistribution of wealth when you LET PEOPLE KEEP THEIR OWN MONEY, as Bush did. Duh.

    And for the millionth time, Bush cut income taxes for everyone, not just the rich. You need to go to a deprogramming facility.

  • Da King

    Rev says "spending and taxing now are essential to our recovery."

    Right. And a 400lb man should go on a 12,000 calorie per day diet to lose weight.

    So, tell me, is there ever a time when a liberal thinks spending and taxing ISN'T essential ? I haven't seen one yet in my lifetime. Government spending and taxation keep spiraling out of control, we can't generate enough revenue for all the existing promises, and you think the answer is MORE, MORE, MORE. I guess you could be right, provided your ultimate goal is for the USA to become a communist country. Does any reality ever slip inside that head of yours, or do DailyKos and Olby completely control your mind now ?

  • http://politics.ohio.com/ ben keeler

    Well if Obama does win it will be a great history lesson for people like me; born during the Carter Era but not old enough to remember it. I may get to live it.

  • Andrea

    And two to one economists support Obama ..gee whiz I wonder why ? Because McCain cant budget the economy let alone anyones check book. Did you take in to account the deficit ? nope
    The deficit would rise dramatically under McCain . So think where that woudl put us ??? THINK who we will have to borrow money from ..think what the dollar will be worth ?

  • Tom

    Princeton Professor Paul Krugman did an an analysis of tax cuts and determined that the Republican-styled tax cuts would only produce an increase in the GDP of about 3% … over a thirty year period.

    3% / 30 years => .1% / year

    That's almost too small to measure. A hurricane could have a bigger effect on the GDP than that.

    I expect the Republicans on this forum to stick their fingers in their ears and yell: "La la la, Krugman is a Democrat so I don't have to listen to you, la la la la la".

    Bush is a pathetic idiot who barely cares about fiscal policy. This whole tax agenda is something that he stole from Steve Forbes during the 2000 primary. Go ahead and defend it, John McBush.

    What the bush tax cuts for the wealthy have done is created a deficit that has flushed the value of the dollar. We have lost half of our buying power. That shows up in the price of gasoline at the pump.

    Tom

  • averagejoe5

    "Republican-styled tax cuts would only produce an increase in the GDP of about 3% … over a thirty year period."

    Like our only hope for gas price reduction was 4 cents in 10 years if we drilled? All it took was a threat to get the ball rolling and to reel in the speculators. The Democrats offer such hope and inspiration for the future. When I read stuff like this it makes me feel like sticking a fork in my eye.

    Do they want to keep us depressed? If John McCain is elected president we will be out of this economic slump by spring. It is already showing the signs of a turn around. No matter what the Eyorites at CNBC and MSNBC say. If Obama wins it will be 4 years of hell, the sell off and cash preservation strategies have begun. The unsteadiness in the stock market coincides with Obama's poll ratings.

    Ben, you will live the Carter era if Obama wins, how lucky.

  • Da King

    Ben,
    I'm old enough to have lived thru the Carter era. Be careful what you ask for, we don't want that again.

    However, I'm pretty sure the Obama era will be much worse. There was still some sense of responsibility alive during the Carter years. That is mostly gone now.

  • Da King

    Andrea,
    Try again. McCain is the only one of the two candidates who said he would balance the budget. Obama said he wouldn't even try to do that. He has too many things he wants to spend money on.

  • Da King

    Tom,
    "Princeton professor Paul Krugman"

    That would be the same Paul Krugman who is the liberal NY Times writer. Funny how Krugman didn't do an analysis of how Obama's increased taxes on business would DEPRESS GDP. You got anything on that ?

    And Bush isn't running for president. If he was, I wouldn't vote for him, but he isn't.

  • Tom

    [Da King Says: ]
    …That would be the same Paul Krugman who is the liberal NY Times writer.

    Funny how Krugman didn't do an analysis of how Obama's increased taxes on business would DEPRESS GDP. You got anything on that ?
    [/king]

    It's the same thing, King. Cannot you understand that the issue is whether the government should remove the Bush tax cuts? One would expect about a .1% difference in the GDP/year.

    Obtuse is not in vogue.

  • averagejoe5

    In case no one is noticing, there is a huge profit taking in the market right now. Now MSNBC or CNN or CNBC won't say it, but this sell off is due to Obama's tax plans and his lead in the polls. Does anyone remember what happened when Clinton raise the capital gains tax and made his taxes retroactive to the beginning of the 1993. Crap hit the fan. He soon found himself lowering the tax. Does Obama think they will willingly accept the tax increase this time because his name is Barrack Obama? LOL, audacity of hope.

Previous post:

Next post:

 

© The Akron Beacon Journal • 44 E. Exchange Street, Akron, Ohio 44308

Powered by WordPress
Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS).