Sorry, Pal, You're Rich

Here is what I am not getting! Individual business owners making over $250k per year are small in comparison to the rest of the small business owner. As mentioned overhead cost can eat away at profits making the want-to-be 250k-business owner bring in way less than 250k. Does not that overhead cost come out of (a) the business expense account? (b) out of what that business owner would be paying themselves?

Next trickle down economy does not work. Business these days would rather make their present employees "work smarter" or longer hours or heap on more responsibility to existing employees rather than hire new ones. American has tried trickle down since Regan and where has that gotten us. Why not try trickle up. Give average Americans more money and guess what, they will spend it. That spending will in turn cause business owner to have to hire new employees to keep up with demand of free market.

Lastly, eliminating the tax cut that Bush gave the small upper income individuals is a tax increase, but only on the affected people. The rest of us (majority of us) would not loose a thing and in fact because we don???t have golden parachutes and/or make over $250k a year would then actually see a tax decrease.

I agree with the previous poster regarding small business income. My small business is here to make money for the owners. As a result of our efforts to make a profit we get to feel good about providing good jobs for 50 employees. However if the government decreases our incentive to make a profit by increasing the tax on that profit then at some point we simply say it isn't worth the heartache and risk and the paychecks stop along with the company.

One thing that is being over looked is that most of these incomes that make 250k-500k are also small business owners that give people jobs. For a small business it is not uncommon at all to have over head at over a million a year. So really how much is 250k gonna help in times of trouble when you are giving almost a third away in taxes. As a business owner higher taxes for 250k now only hurts small business but it also reduces jobs.

I basically agree with this article, but I find it ironic that it's published in "Newsweek" of all places. I don't know about the domestic version, but the international edition of "Newsweek" contains a 3-page segment each week entitled "The Good Life" that is devoted to highlighting luxuries that only the super-rich can afford: $10,000 handbags, hotel suites that rent at $25,000 per night, etc. I would guess that even people making as much as $250,000 a year would balk at those prices; certainly the rest of us do. When a major news magazine devotes 5% of its space to such extravagances, it's easy to see how even people who are rich start to feel a bit poorer. If Mr. Gross is serious about wanting people to appreciate their wealth, a good first step would be to convince the editors of "Newsweek" to replace this fluff with something more relevant to the other 98%+ percent of us.

I don't feel "rich". I feel like I can just barely take care of my family, save a little for retirement, and save for the kids college. We work, very hard, volunteer our time and donate to charity. We don't live excessively, vacations, purchases, etc. Yet, we still have debt. This on a net income of about $200k in the suburbs of Atlanta. "Rich" would seem to me that I could have whatever I wanted whenever I wanted with no consequences. The scariest thing to me is the politicos who want to tax what I've worked hard to earn, because I make more than I certain percentage of the population. . I'm not "rich" but I feel there should be a more fair tax system in the US. The land of uncertain opportunity.

Arguments of this kind are usually so overridden with assumed fallacies and deliberate misrepresentations that they are hardly worth the time. No one is proposing that money be taken away from the rich and given to the poor. In the first place the Democrat proposals are for true investment spending that will bring real returns to the tax coffers even within the first four years of the Presidency. Secondly, no one is proposing that the middle class pay NO taxes, just LESS taxes. The changes in spending the Democrats are proposing are not like the simplistic gifts of money that the Conservatives just handed out to taxpayers in the certain knowledge that that money would be returned to prime the pump of the suppliers within weeks. I don't know if the Conservatives are that dumb or that they simply think that the electorate are that dumb. What the Democrats are proposing are changes in the economic structure. The USA is the LAST of the developed countries of the world to put these changes in place and we are paying the price for it, right now! That we have allowed mean-spirited selfish interest to neglect these fundamental requirements of ALL modern economies is PRECISELY the reason why we are now borrowing money from China to buy oil from Saudi Arabia and Venezuela etc... Don't they love our stupidity, but unfortunately they don't love us! We've been here before, the USA lapsed into the developmental doldrums after WWII until the Soviets shocked us into awareness of the real perils of misplaced self-congratulatory assumptions of superiority, by launching Sputnik over our heads. Kennedy was the president who sounded the clarion call that kick-started a resurgence of American technological superiority. Unsurprisingly, it was EDUCATION which was seen as the starting point for this resurgence. Now, we are falling behind the world again, and by George if it isn't EDUCATION which hasn't fallen behind again. We are NOT going to start exporting more than we import again until we get our tertiary educational program for ALL, including technical programs for the non-college material students. This is what the tax money is needed for. Ironically, the main beneficiaries of these government initiatives will be the suppliers, in spite of their present day protestations. Let's make no bones about it, if you're earning $250,000 a year you are a consuming the cream off the coffee, you are a part of the supply mechanism in some way, and being paid for it. You are right in believing that you are contributing more to the economy than you are taking from it. That part of the supply side argument is true. But your income is the direct result of the consumption needs of the rest of the "hungry masses." What you have to be forced to acknowledge is that the better you take care of the sheep, the better you will eat in spite of your present protestations. How do I know all this?. I've lived it, and seen it all before, elsewhere.

As I've read through some of these messages, I only get more irritated! Politicians get lower middle and the poverty vote by saying they are going to take from Upper Middle and the rich to give us more opportunities. IT NEVER HAPPENS!! We as Americans ought to be sick of the advertisements, the slam ads against the candidates, the who should pay more than who with taxes. No matter the angle to tax the rich or upper middle class, they always create a new loop hole to avoid the tax that satisfied the voters. Take a look at the book for tax laws! Had they not put everything into a step by step procedure on a disk, no accountant today would be able to do taxes with out computer asssistance. Once again, here I say it; FLAT TAX!!! If we go to this it will eliminate half the false ads politicians use to get our vote. We shouldn't care what our neighbor makes or how they live their life's, but thanks to politicians we have seperation in every form, not just race, height, weight, hair color, and what we pay in taxes. Give me a break, my daddy is bigger than your daddy, but he pays less in taxes because he is poor, white, bald, short, fat, and on social security and is part of the baby boom generation (another class).

As I've read through some of these messages, I only get more irritated! Politicians get lower middle and the poverty vote by saying they are going to take from Upper Middle and the rich to give us more opportunities. IT NEVER HAPPENS!! We as Americans ought to be sick of the advertisements, the slam ads against the candidates, the who should pay more than who with taxes. No matter the angle to tax the rich or upper middle class, they always create a new loop hole to avoid the tax that satisfied the voters. Take a look at the book for tax laws! Had they not put everything into a step by step procedure on a disk, no accountant today would be able to do taxes with out computer asssistance. Once again, here I say it; FLAT TAX!!! If we go to this it will eliminate half the false ads politicians use to get our vote. We shouldn't care what our neighbor makes or how they live their life's, but thanks to politicians we have seperation in every form, not just race, height, weight, hair color, and what we pay in taxes. Give me a break, my daddy is bigger than your daddy, but he pays less in taxes because he is poor, white, bald, short, fat, and on social security and is part of the baby boom generation (another class).