Page 2 of 11 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 218

Thread: Obama's run-in with a plumber/small business owner

  1. #21
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Not bababooey and I resent the implication
    Posts
    21,029
    [QUOTE=nuu faaola;2805606]I thought he was talking about the govt's tax revenue --which is derived from the company's earnings-- in that instance. Didn't that come up in the context of the flat tax question?[/QUOTE]

    Ahh good point...

    Couple of question for the naysayers..

    If a small business is claiming more then 250k in earnings they are probably earning 2x that and not paying there fair share of taxes anyway. How do you address this or are you ok with it?

    Secondly, wouldn't a possible outcome of this be more busniess reinvestment/economic spending? In other words, if I earned 300k at my small business and didn't want tot pay the higher tax rate, I could upgrade my systems, or higher an employee, do some marketing, etc.. Would that be a bad outcome from a macro perspective?

  2. #22
    [QUOTE=CTM;2805636]Ahh good point...

    Couple of question for the naysayers..

    If a small business is claiming more then 250k in earnings they are probably earning 2x that and not paying there fair share of taxes anyway. How do you address this or are you ok with it?
    [/QUOTE]


    Or, if they are honest (imagine that!), Obama's tax plan might just encourage this kind of fraud.

  3. #23
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Not bababooey and I resent the implication
    Posts
    21,029
    [QUOTE=pauliec;2805640]Or, if they are honest (imagine that!), Obama's tax plan might just encourage this kind of fraud.[/QUOTE]

    I've done parts of DD on well over 100 businesses in the last 2 years, and not a single one of them claims anywhere near what they say they earn.

    If I had to guess, I'd say no more then 10% are honest frankly.

  4. #24
    [QUOTE=CTM;2805649]I've done parts of DD on well over 100 businesses in the last 2 years, and not a single one of them claims anywhere near what they say they earn.

    If I had to guess, I'd say no more then 10% are honest frankly.[/QUOTE]

    And if I had to guess, Obama's tax plan won't exactly prevent this from happening.

  5. #25
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    22,105
    The thing is, I was originally confused about the $250,000 tax cutoff because I wasn't sure if it was gross of net (to use layperson's term). Seeing that it's net, as CTM mentioned, there is a way to reinvest part of the $250,000 into the business and not be able to be taxed at the higher rate.

    Good point in bringing that up, CTM. So if a business is bringing in $250,000 net and are worried about getting taxed, higher someone for $30,000 (plus the benefits package) and don't be taxed higher and, guess what? one less person is unemployed.

  6. #26
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Not bababooey and I resent the implication
    Posts
    21,029
    [QUOTE=pauliec;2805654]And if I had to guess, Obama's tax plan won't exactly prevent this from happening.[/QUOTE]

    That wasn't really my point. Although, if you tax them higher on what they do claim, it helps play catch up for the part they are not paying on;)

  7. #27
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Vermont
    Posts
    24,101
    Three things Obama did that McCain wouldn't.

    Answered honestly-He answered the question. He could have easily said he needed more info to answer a question about a guys tax position.

    Listened to the guy speak and actually understood the question

    Articulated his answer well.

  8. #28
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ (Jets Stadium Section 246)
    Posts
    36,394
    Great video, paulie. I saw this on the news yesterday and glad someone posted it.

    That's a good, honest exchange between a concerned citizen and the probably next POTUS. I'm glad Obama didn't try to twist it and say his plan actually would work for the guy and I'm glad the guy was determined with his questions. But, the fact is that a lot of people making good money (say $250K) but who aren't rich millionaires contribute to this economy in a variety of ways and support employment. That vicinity of income could be the tipping point for a family that employees "luxury" services like a weekly landscaper or a house-cleaning service. The guy who makes millions won't fire his gardener because of Obama's plan but the family of 5 trying to save for college that has two working parents in a high tax state like NJ might cut back on things that support this economy and cause people to lose jobs. That's the "trickle down" effect as I see it.

    Again, I'm glad to see this conversation take place and I think it shows that Obama's plan could hurt a lot of "regular people" because it will cramp on people who, quite frankly aren't really "rich" but do contribute to this economy in ways that many people ignore. It's the same thing with raising the capital gains tax and/or the tax on dividends. It may cause a lot of people to cut back on things that employ lower income and hourly workers.

  9. #29
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ (Jets Stadium Section 246)
    Posts
    36,394
    [QUOTE=CTM;2805649]I've done parts of DD on well over 100 businesses in the last 2 years, and not a single one of them claims anywhere near what they say they earn.

    If I had to guess, I'd say no more then 10% are honest frankly.[/QUOTE]

    Then maybe, before raising taxes, Obama should go after this low hanging fruit and actually ramp up enforcement of existing tax code?

  10. #30
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    22,105
    Good video and I don't understand how anyone can criticize Obama for giving the guy a straight answer.

    Plus, socialism is an economic theory, not, per se, a political theory. People yell out "socialist" but don't know what it means and use it, instead, as a sort of "diet communism" which it is far from it. The people invoking the term in McCain/Palin audiences are using it in a social context rather than economic.

    The opposite of socialism is not democracy, it's unfetterred free market. A country can have an economy with socialist influences and still be a democracy. Most of the US NATO allies fall into that category.

    Heck, the US economy since the New Deal has had socialist influences.

    This criticism of Obama's plan as redistribution of wealth, since that is what the US does anyway with a tax plan is off base. But it's a talking point for Republican pundits because it allows their supporters to make an illogical leap that being having a "socialist" economic plan is the same as being a "socialist" on social issues.

  11. #31
    [QUOTE=CTM;2805636]paying there fair share of taxes[/QUOTE]

    I'd love to hear you define, as the self-described registered Republican, what "fair share of taxes" means.

  12. #32
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    22,105
    [QUOTE=jetstream23;2805717]Great video, paulie. I saw this on the news yesterday and glad someone posted it.

    That's a good, honest exchange between a concerned citizen and the probably next POTUS. I'm glad Obama didn't try to twist it and say his plan actually would work for the guy and I'm glad the guy was determined with his questions. But, the fact is that a lot of people making good money (say $250K) but who aren't rich millionaires contribute to this economy in a variety of ways and support employment. That vicinity of income could be the tipping point for a family that employees "luxury" services like a weekly landscaper or a house-cleaning service. The guy who makes millions won't fire his gardener because of Obama's plan but the family of 5 trying to save for college that has two working parents in a high tax state like NJ might cut back on things that support this economy and cause people to lose jobs. That's the "trickle down" effect as I see it.

    Again, I'm glad to see this conversation take place and [B]I think it shows that Obama's plan could hurt a lot of "regular people" because it will cramp on people who, quite frankly aren't really "rich" but do contribute to this economy in ways that many people ignore.[/B] It's the same thing with raising the capital gains tax and/or the tax on dividends. It may cause a lot of people to cut back on things that employ lower income and hourly workers.[/QUOTE]

    By claiming that his plan will hurt a lot of "regular" people, I'm a little confused because are we talking about gross income here or adjusted gross income?

    Because if it's adjusted gross income we're talking about (after all the business credits and deductions), I don't know how the extra tax is going to cause a lot of businesses to cut back and not employ workers, when making business expenditures and employing workers actually will reduce the adjusted gross income and could, potentially, have the adjusted gross income fall below the $250K tax threshold..

  13. #33
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Not bababooey and I resent the implication
    Posts
    21,029
    [QUOTE=jetstream23;2805725]Then maybe, before raising taxes, Obama should go after this low hanging fruit and actually ramp up enforcement of existing tax code?[/QUOTE]

    But that's more regulation :eek:

    How about jump dump the whole mother****er and go with an easily enforceable consumption tax?

  14. #34
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Not bababooey and I resent the implication
    Posts
    21,029
    [QUOTE=Warfish;2805740]I'd love to hear you define, as the self-described registered Republican, what "fair share of taxes" means.[/QUOTE]

    In the context of my point above, their "fair share" would be according to the tax code enacted by our current government, whether I agree with it or not.

    I was in a guys house a little over a month ago with just about every amenity you can think of, huge LCD's, granite counter tops, wood floors, stainless steel appliances, huge stone pool with a waterfall and sliding board, exquisite stone work and stone walls, out door bar and grill, etcc. All paid for in cash cause he he's been making roughly 300k a year for the last 5 years and claiming between 50-80k in on his taxes.

  15. #35
    [QUOTE=bitonti;2805597]bottom line the guy still running a business which makes more than 250k a year and s--t happens. I don't get why a man making over 250k a year is some sort of victim here. Maybe you guys can help me out. The way i see it his life is good before Obama, his life is still good after Obama. [/QUOTE]


    You've just exemplified the f*cked up thinking behind Obama's Robin Hood "fair" tax plan.


    Does this guy earn more than me? Yes. Do I begrudge someone that works hard and makes this kind of money, just because I haven't (so far) been able to do so? No.


    This is the EXACT type of person that generates wealth in the US -- a small business owner. Personally, I don't think it's "fair" to shift a higher tax burden to guys like this, just because they can "afford it".

  16. #36
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Not bababooey and I resent the implication
    Posts
    21,029
    [QUOTE=SanAntonio_JetFan;2805765]You've just exemplified the f*cked up thinking behind Obama's Robin Hood "fair" tax plan.


    Does this guy earn more than me? Yes. Do I begrudge someone that works hard and makes this kind of money, just because I haven't (so far) been able to do so? No.


    This is the EXACT type of person that generates wealth in the US -- a small business owner. Personally, I don't think it's "fair" to shift a higher tax burden to guys like this, just because they can "afford it".[/QUOTE]

    This I agree with. I'm not for higher taxes for anyone, in fact I'm for less govt spending primarily.

    My questions above where directed only at those that believe these types of policies are bad in a macro economic sense, when I could see a tax like this on businesses causing more business reinvestment, which ultimately is good for the economy..

  17. #37
    [QUOTE=pauliec;2805571]Pretty fascinating exchange here as Obama is confronted with some real, honest, tough questions about his new tax plan. This is exactly what I like to see -- an undecided, blue-collar voter who is being upfront and not going out of his way to kiss the Senator's ass. Obama handled it decently well but still concedes that his plan will probably tax this guy more so than McCain's plan.

    Here's the vid:
    [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vFC9jv9jfoA[/url]


    Here's a writeup from the Post:[/QUOTE]

    You know, while everyone who makes a good living here is crying about taxes and socialism, the point of the matter is simple:

    [B]We're fighting two wars. [/B] The government needs more revenue and therefore will raise taxes. Furthermore, Obama proposes to raise those taxes back to the Clinton/Reagan era, not some new stratosphere that America hasn't seen before.

  18. #38
    [QUOTE=CTM;2805668]That wasn't really my point. Although, if you tax them higher on what they do claim, it helps play catch up for the part they are not paying on;)[/QUOTE]

    That is absolutely asinine.

  19. #39
    [QUOTE=CTM;2805763]In the context of my point above, their "fair share" would be according to the tax code enacted by our current government, whether I agree with it or not.[/quote]

    Fair enough. A bit of a non-answer, but eh.

    Guess you have no further opinion on the topic then.

    We both know I wasn't asking what the Official Govt. idea of "Fair Share" was.:rolleyes:

    [QUOTE=CTM;2805763]I was in a guys house a little over a month ago with just about every amenity you can think of, huge LCD's, granite counter tops, wood floors, stainless steel appliances, huge stone pool with a waterfall and sliding board, exquisite stone work and stone walls, out door bar and grill, etcc. All paid for in cash cause he he's been making roughly 300k a year for the last 5 years and claiming between 50-80k in on his taxes.[/QUOTE]

    So you hang out with a Tax Cheat. Did you report him to the IRS?

    Guess it's okay for your friends not to pay THEIR fair share as long as you enjoy the fruits of their cheating, eh?:P

    So how were the ribs off that killer Grill?

  20. #40
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    22,962
    [QUOTE=CTM;2805748]How about jump dump the whole mother****er and go with an easily enforceable consumption tax?[/QUOTE]

    Because people who use tax loopholes to weasel out of paying wouldn't be able to write off their $20,000 umbrella stand as a business expense, would they?

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us