Ohio’s unemployment rate is 7.2%. I can’t remember when it was as low or lower than the national average-perhaps not even in my lifetime. So, can someone please explain to me how Senator Obama’s plan to increase taxes on businesses making more than a 5% profit (Democrats call such success a windfall profit) will make that business want to hire more people? It seems like if the cost of business goes up by being taxed, the business would pass that increased expense on to its customers, perhaps let more people go, and thus both increase inflation and unemployment.

Additionally, more than half the people in this nation are employed by small businesses, and most small business owners earn more than $250k a year (though many will surely tell you that money goes right back into their businesses). If Senator Obama and Democrats want to raise taxes on people making more than $250,000 a year, than how will that encourage those small business owners to hire more people and spend more money on their businesses if they have less money to spend?

Look, I hate it when CEO’s get $20million a year and another $50mil in stock options and bonuses while they’re letting people go, and I’d like that curbed, but at the same time I cannot understand why the government should EVER take more than 50% of a person’s paycheck (state, local, fed, sales combined). All that does is encourage people to try and stash their money overseas, or invest overseas, or to find loopholes. What is a person’s “fair share” of the tax burden? How much profit margin is a business allowed to get? Lastly, Ohio is key to this election, and every 4 years we’re swamped with politicians promising to revive Ohio. 7.2% unemployment, higher than average inflation, and a continuing downward economic trend…when will a politician actually do something for Ohio?

  • Share/Bookmark
Print This Post Print This Post
This entry was posted on Tuesday, September 9th, 2008 at 5:11 am and is filed under Barack Obama, Politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Trackbacks

9 comments so far

 1Reply to this comment  

I’m from Michigan and we have an unemployment of 7.7% so I know how you feel. Governor Granholm has given General Motors tax BREAK after tax break and GM still continues to layoff workers. So how is a tax increase going to help? None what so ever. Democrats don’t understand this basic principle of economics; the more money you take from the people the less they have to put back into the economy, the more money you let the people keep the more money they have to put back into the economy.

And what is with 5%. Since when is 5% a windfall? On a small business 5% is not much of a profit. A tax on profit is a penalty for running a successful business. As Scott stated, how is a profit tax an incentive for employers to hire more people or give raises? Oh wait, I know this answer! By hiring more people and giving more raises the employer will make less profit thereby finding a loophole to get out of that profit tax bracket. Make 5% or less profit, pay less taxes! What a concept.

Unbelievable.

September 9th, 2008 at 6:51 am
marinetbryant
 2Reply to this comment  

Then you have the unions demanding more money and benefits for less work. Unions served a purpose. Now they are an albatross around the neck of the economy.

Tom

September 9th, 2008 at 7:01 am
jainphx
 3Reply to this comment  

When have the policies of the Democrapic party ever made fiscal sense. Try explaining to adherents that the government has no money except it take it from us through taxes, and you get a blank stare. The public school system should teach economics, and maybe then– nah wishful thinking.

September 9th, 2008 at 7:06 am
Thomas B.
 4Reply to this comment  

Senator Obama’s plan to increase taxes on businesses making more than a 5% profit (Democrats call such success a windfall profit)

I wonder if that tax will apply to law firms. I doubt it. I like how the left complains about “windfall” profits, while turning a blind eye to the unearned fees that trial lawyers make. 33% of a person’s award no matter how little work the lawyer does… a perfect scam. Maybe Obama should tax any amount lawyers make over $100/hour. That would be a good place to start with taxes.

September 9th, 2008 at 9:04 am
Thomas B.
 5Reply to this comment  

Well… speak of the devil.

From Bloomberg: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aakdO2wIq9xU&refer=worldwide

Lawyers reap $688 Million in fees.

The lawyers rationalize that they spent $45 million on experts and worked 280,000 hours. Hmm… let’s work this out. $688M – $45M = $643M; $643M / 280,000 hrs = about $2,200/hour. Talk about excessive profits. Hey, Obama… how about taxing your friends in law firms.

September 9th, 2008 at 9:24 am
suek
 6Reply to this comment  

When my husband retired, he started looking for a small business to buy. He looked at quite a number over the period of a year…but found the “annual statements for the last three years” pretty confusing. The numbers frequently showed 0 profit, 0 profit, 25% profit.(fake numbers). The agent who was offering these businesses basically said that some businesses report only credit card and check transactions – those that can be traced. Cash transactions “don’t exist”. One business was run by a professional accountant…his inventory numbers were weird.

In other words, if they try to tax over 5%, that money is going to disappear – one way or another.

September 9th, 2008 at 9:39 am
BarbaraS
 7Reply to this comment  

Thomas B

It is worse than that. The $45 million expenses were taken out before the $688 million fees were issued so $688 million is it.

September 9th, 2008 at 4:13 pm
luva the scissors
 8Reply to this comment  

makes a person want to quit their job and go on welfare. freakin tax and spend bs. i work way to hard to let them take it so some hooch on welfare can pop out her fifth kid. and why are the welfare qomen so rpoud of how they reproduce? crap dogs do it and ususally take better care of their offspring.

September 9th, 2008 at 6:52 pm
Radio Chief
 9Reply to this comment  

Well my wife and I make $104K gross combined last year, and it cost us $24K in taxes. My stimulous was $1,240.86 what the hell the 86 cents was for go figure. This is WITH tax cuts. When those are removed I’m going to be CRUSHED.

P.S. Gas is at $2.23 now here in TX, and even lower in other parts of the country want to bet prices of milk and other things like energy that went up under the excuse of high transportation costs WON’T come down anytime soon.

Are we any better off with a Congress and Senate controlled by Democrats for the last 2 years???

After all they control the purse strings and of course campaign contributions by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac whose CEO’s are good buds with Obama.

Another falacy and you can look this up at FactCheck.Org…

Obama voted 97% of the time with democrats, the other 3% he was not present or did not vote.
How is that Bi-Partisan and reaching across the isle???/
And he and the media are lying about McCain, because he only voted with the Republicans 81% of the time.

GET A BRAIN
VOTE MCCAIN

October 28th, 2008 at 9:55 am

Leave a reply

Name (*)
Mail (will not be published) (*)
URI
Comment

If your comments get caught in spam a lot please log into your registered account before trying to comment again. You can email me if your comment is caught in spam

 

Identity Verification: If you wish to verify your commenter identity, so no one can steal it, click the below button: