GOP Rep. Hultgren Won't Explain How Bush Tax Cuts Created Jobs - Polidicks

Video source: [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hI_UYAWY6kU[/media] A couple days old, but I didn't see it posted.

That's because A. Cutting income taxes for the rich doesn't magically make them take a pay cut and put the money into hiring new workers, and B. The GOP is fucking retarded.

Tax cuts create jobs in the same way blow jobs do.

[quote]Tax cuts create jobs in the same way blow jobs do.[/quote] At least blow jobs don't destroy jobs, which income tax cuts do.

[QUOTE=Key_in_skillee;31949680]At least blow jobs don't destroy jobs, which income tax cuts do.[/QUOTE] yeah I guess the metaphor doesn't quite work [editline]26th August 2011[/editline] maybe anal sex Tax cuts create jobs in the same way anal sex does.

[QUOTE=Lambeth;31949710]maybe anal sex Tax cuts create jobs in the same way anal sex does.[/QUOTE] you forget rim jobs

haha I had to google that and the first thing that came up was RIM(the dudes who make blackberry gizmos)

[QUOTE=Lambeth;31949952]haha I had to google that and the first thing that came up was RIM(the dudes who make blackberry gizmos)[/QUOTE] blackberries have a lot to do with asses but let's stay on topic here

I'm going to give my blackberry a rimjob now.

Oh god the puns in a GOP thread are always priceless.

[QUOTE=amute;31950044]I'm going to give my blackberry a rimjob now.[/QUOTE] let me see it's resume, I have experience in the tech industry and I can probably beef it up, make it look good

It's resume? It worked at a poundland than as a prostitute for a while. Oh god the smells. [editline]26th August 2011[/editline] oh god

and you put that thing next to your face?

Well, their logic is that less taxes for the rich means more private sector business, hence more employees, whilst on the left the logic is more taxes creates a larger revenue for government jobs such as doctors and bus-drivers. Two completely different but both logical philosophies.

That's because they didn't create jobs, they made the wealthy wealthier.

[QUOTE=mac338;31951578]Two completely different but both logical philosophies.[/QUOTE] Except that less taxes on the rich don't create jobs.

[QUOTE=Megafanx13;31952887]Except that less taxes on the rich don't create jobs.[/QUOTE] It created some jobs, but not enough to keep up with the amount of jobs lost

[QUOTE=mac338;31951578]Well, their logic is that less taxes for the rich means more private sector business, hence more employees, whilst on the left the logic is more taxes creates a larger revenue for government jobs such as doctors and bus-drivers. Two completely different but both logical philosophies.[/QUOTE] income tax cuts for the rich are largely ineffective because by the time it gets to individual income, the business has already spent its money. this is largely unrelated to jobs, and more related to rich people getting an extra couple thousand dollars in their paycheck. however the tax cuts can really indirectly help jobs because most of these rich folk put most of their money into investments to create more wealth. more investment will create more jobs if there is demand in the market. corporate tax cuts are the ones that create jobs. if you believe that the government has a place stimulating and regulating the economy its generally accepted corporate tax cuts and low income tax cuts are effective for stimulating the economy, among other measures(that are no less important).

Oh hey, this guy is the representative of Illinois's 14th district. I went to school in that district, and I currently live there. That dude is a prick.

[QUOTE=yawmwen;31956152]income tax cuts for the rich are largely ineffective because by the time it gets to individual income, the business has already spent its money. this is largely unrelated to jobs, and more related to rich people getting an extra couple thousand dollars in their paycheck. however the tax cuts can really indirectly help jobs because most of these rich folk put most of their money into investments to create more wealth. more investment will create more jobs if there is demand in the market. corporate tax cuts are the ones that create jobs. if you believe that the government has a place stimulating and regulating the economy its generally accepted corporate tax cuts and low income tax cuts are effective for stimulating the economy, among other measures(that are no less important).[/QUOTE] That's the logical, but it's very difficult to find conclusive evidence supporting that.

Trickle-down theory was bullshit in the '80s, and it's bullshit now. If you cut rich people's taxes, they get richer. Period. None of them will decide "Hey, I've got more money, so I'll spend it on giving more people jobs." Instead, every time, they just decide to pocket the money and maybe donate more to the RNC. And just as individual tax cuts don't create jobs, corporate tax cuts don't create jobs. There is no reason to waste money hiring more people than necessary when the alternative is simply pocketing the extra money. If businesses hire more people, it's because their production and services can no longer keep up with demand. We could abolish corporate taxes tomorrow, but as long as the current employees are meeting demand, they won't waste money hiring more workers. Corporations exist to make money for their owners. Period. The people running them do not give a shit about jobs and will not create more just for the sake of doing so.

[QUOTE=Used Car Salesman;31965576]Trickle-down theory was bullshit in the '80s, and it's bullshit now. If you cut rich people's taxes, they get richer. Period. None of them will decide "Hey, I've got more money, so I'll spend it on giving more people jobs." Instead, every time, they just decide to pocket the money and maybe donate more to the RNC. And just as individual tax cuts don't create jobs, corporate tax cuts don't create jobs. There is no reason to waste money hiring more people than necessary when the alternative is simply pocketing the extra money.[/QUOTE] Do you have some sort of background in economics to substantiate your bold claims? Herf derf economic expansion is a lie steal rich people's money, all of it

It's like out of a movie.

[QUOTE=s0beit;31966145]Do you have some sort of background in economics to substantiate your bold claims? Herf derf economic expansion is a lie steal rich people's money, all of it[/QUOTE]amazing rebuttal, will read again. keep blindly defending your failing economic system, sobeit

[QUOTE=amute;31966261]amazing rebuttal, will read again. keep blindly defending your failing economic system, sobeit[/QUOTE] I'm not defending this economic system, retarded people such as yourself have destroyed it. I am however defending yawmwen's point about taxes. First, brass tax, does a show of hands: Does anyone have any idea how a business is run? Anybody? Does anyone know the function of a corporation on a day-to-day basis? They don't just twist their mustaches and wear monocles, they provide jobs. There is no getting around this, there is no denying it. It's like no single person should dare to walk into the news section of facepunch and declare some 'facts' in the face of your leftist religious dogma. You're wrong, get over it. I'm going to explain why. Corporate taxes directly impact workers and jobs - they don't impact the corporation's bottom line whatsoever. Corporations have to answer to shareholders, they're not just going to take a loss because some guy on the internet named amute commanded them to do so. They'll scale back operations - even just slightly so that people might not notice - sure, you hear about corporations laying off tens of thousands of people when they're suffering from losses but you don't see or hear about the people who's wages were cut or who were never hired at all, or yes, even those who are fired in small amounts. On to the anti-CEO rhetoric which will inevitably result - yes, CEOs gain large amounts of money. You can say, you know 'they'll just give themselves more raises if we don't take the money from their company'. CEO salaries are controlled by the same mechanism which negatively impacts the economy when corporate taxes are hiked - they're still accountable to shareholders. A CEO can't say, "You know we've had a pretty good year, why don't I take a 2000% bonus equal to half the earnings this year" - it will hurt their company. Obviously, that was just to make a point, nobody will give themselves a 2000% bonus but you can understand why, using the same logic, the same old line of "CEO RAISES" is foolish. It's controlled internally, CEOs can't just demand money when they please and for any amount they desire. That leads me to the next phase, reinvestment. Corporations reinvest the money they make so that they can become larger to compete with one another, those who don't reinvest or horde all the money for themselves and remain stagnant will crash and burn. Corporations are always expanding, to deny this means to deny all societal progress of the last 100 years, if one company reinvests all of it's funds and the other is hording it in a bank vault holding gold coins they regularly swim in guess who's going to see gains and guess who's going to see losses. It doesn't take a rocket scientist. Finally, the most important part because this is relevant to your interests - anti-rich people rhetoric, accounting for your goals the best method of raising taxation on the rich would be income or capital gains taxes, those inhibit job growth too by kneecapping future investment but at least you'll be attacking the people you are intending to attack. A corporation != a CEO, a corporation reinvests it's funds, pays existing employees and provides us with things we need. Once again, not pro-fascism rhetoric but fact. Some of the most liberal economists don't even advise raising corporate taxes - that's because they have an education in a field you clearly don't understand. Hating corporations is not a basis for a debate, it's just blind anti-intellectual rhetoric. Good day.

[QUOTE=s0beit;31966493]It's like no single person should dare to walk into the news section of facepunch and declare some 'facts' in the face of your leftist religious dogma. You're wrong, get over it. I'm going to explain why.[/QUOTE] Kind of arrogant, don't you think?

[QUOTE=Megafanx13;31966519]Kind of arrogant, don't you think?[/QUOTE] Why bother being nice when people don't pay me the same courtesy.

[QUOTE=s0beit;31966493]Some of the most liberal economists don't even advise raising corporate taxes - that's because they have an education in a field you clearly don't understand. Hating corporations is not a basis for a debate, it's just blind anti-intellectual rhetoric.[/QUOTE] Also, if you do know of a big Progressive economist who came out and said "nah I don't think taxes are a good idea right now", I'd like to see it.

I don't really think there is a dogma here [editline]27th August 2011[/editline] it's fucking facepunch

[QUOTE=s0beit;31966540]Why bother being nice when people don't pay me the same courtesy.[/QUOTE] Amute's not the most polite guy, but generally I try to keep a modicum of level-headedness.