The Right is Absolutely Correct - - The Class Warfare is in Full Swing

I understand, but these are the people in that "Top 1%" that so many love to hate.
My boss is a small businessman is every sense of the definition but he is a millionaire and those of us who work for him are very well compensated. Now, when the tax extensions were being debated, he was one of those wealthy people who was vilified but now you seem to say a fellow like this is the sort of small business owner who would be the engine of change.

 

I've never vilified any small business owner. I think the perception is that if you are on the Left and you are upset to whatever degree with the way large corporations operate, it is often translated by the Right as "You are against all businesses". It is not unusual that what is said and what is heard in many political discussions begins the misunderstanding.

 

You, personally, may not have vilified the small business owners per se but you have advocated taking from the wealthy. These small business owners are the very people most on the left think of when they talk about the "wealthy".
I'm just saying that your trickle up plan is no different than any trickle down plan....the same folks are the main recipients they are just given different labels and the poor who you cited in your OP are still left to hope something comes down to them.

 

I'm talking about corporations like any corporation in Ohio that pay zero in state income taxes because their Republican buddies thought they needed corporate welfare. The same Republicans are now blaming the states debt on unions and stripping the workers of their collective bargaining rights. Does that seem right to you? If so, why?

 

I think the Repub view is one where everyone can win, contrary to the zero sum gain advanced by the left. Think about it, if the enticement needed to keep an employer in the area is a tax abatement (which both parties tend to typically support) it's a small price to pay if everyone benefits by having the jobs and the money and the expanded tax base. I can cite many instances locally where the tax issue has been the deciding factor of where a company builds, if they choose to expand, etc.
It seems, regardless of the topic, it always gets back to taxes doesn't it?

 

Who needs companies that don't pay taxes and who do not create jobs? You live under that fallacy that giving tax breaks to wealthy corporations creates jobs. The oil industry for example, received about 440 billion dollars in tax breaks over the last decade while pulling in a trillion dollars in profits. They have less people working for them today than they did in 2004 by several thousand. George Bush gave two massive tax cuts in 2001 and 2004 and managed to create a total of 1,000,000 jobs in 8 years and they were mostly low paying service sector jobs. You really need to get over the fallacy that tax breaks create jobs. It simply isn't true and is the leading factor in the increase of the national debt. The proof is all around you if you ever choose to look for it.

 

I think we need companies that supply us what we need in order to survive. Take oil companies for example, until BO delivers on his promise to find alternatives, we have to have the fuel oil companies provide. The reason new jobs aren't being created? These companies are handcuffed & expansion is prohibited. Let's drill in ANWR and see how many jobs are created immediately.
It goes back to mutual benefits vs a zero sum gain. Just because the oil companies (or any company) are profitable doesn't automatically make it at the expense of others. A lot of people benefit when a company is profitable. Think about it.

 

David simple question for you Moen says that the Bank of America paid no tax do you think that is right? I personaly think that Tax avoidence is wrong as I have allways paid mine as I am sure you have yours (we might not enjoy doing it LOL but we do) so why if we the little people and the small buisnesses all pay are large multi nationals etc allowed to get away with paying at most a minimum and at worst nothing?

 

I guess that I don't know what you mean when you say, "zero sum gain advanced by the Left." Given that, the concept of a zero-sum game was developed first in game theory: what one side gains the other loses. When applied to economics it is often contrasted with a “win-win” situation in which both sides can make gains without anyone losing. People who are unaware of the phrase’s origins often mistakenly substitute “gain” for “game.” If what you are referring to when you say, "zero sum gain advanced by the Left" is that the Left believes that any gains by corporations translates into losses for people like you and I, you only have to look at Wisconsin right now and see exactly that dynamic going on in very real terms.

It just seems like our elected officials are tripping over themselves to give away the store so that these corporations can then fund these same politicians with campaign donations so that they can keep their jobs and even if they lose their jobs the corporations hire them so that they can exploit their contacts in the government. Meanwhile, the store that they are giving away belongs to you and me. Both parties certainly participate in the practice but only the Republican Party is a wholly owned subsidiary of corporate America, and they aren’t even shy about it. This incestuous relationship undermines “We the People” and strengthens “We the Corporations” and I for one have no intention of watching my democracy devolve into an corporate oligarchy.