Open Thread (10/3/2008)

I watched a little of the debate last night, and was struck my Palin's response to the question on raising taxes on Business or Person more than $250,000/ yr. and how it would affect all the small businesses and possibly cause them to lay off workers or not increase the work force. She is right.

But Biden, said that 95% of all the small businesses make less than $250,000. Can hardly believe that. Take this area, it is primarily dependent on the small business for the employment. Kraft, the medical treatment facilities and the University of Illinois are the major employers, with the rest being the retail stores, food services and all the small businesses.

For example, Erwin, Martinkus, Alladin Electric, The Esquire, Tumble Inn, Tatmans, Berns Clancy, Sodemann, Clark Dietz, Shelby, O'brian, Farm and Fleet, Champaign Asphalt, Duce, Kan-Doo and Imperial Concrete, are all small businesses and employ many people. Do we think for a moment, that increasing taxes on them will not affect us locally?

A long time ago, I managed Whitt's End in Champaign, it averaged about $1,200 per day or $438,000 year and employed between 18 to 25 people, some full time and some part time. It was just a local bar, but probably did fall in the $250,000 range, and most certainly did when you also included the Charleston site, which nearly doubled the income.

That is a dangerous tax increase and Biden, was making an answer for political gain that is very deceptive.

Candidate for Mayor of Urbana
Rex Bradfield

Since when is Farm and Fleet a small business? It's a multi-state regional big-box chain.  (Unless the local one is a franchise... okay, yeah, wikipedia says they're franchised).  Most retail around here, like everywhere, is chains.  Are the clothing type stores franchised like the fast food?  Honest question - a friend of mine owns some Subway restaurants in Taiwan, they're franchised so run the whole thing like a small business, but I don't know how it goes with other types of stores.  The other local examples you have, yeah, small businesses. 

But I suppose the question is, the country needs revenue to operate. Where should that revenue come from? Who should pay it?

Any tax proposals ever, they always are met with "but that will hurt [insert example here]."  And yes, there is some pain.   But we can't tax businesses because that's bad for the economy (or so it is said), we can't tax property because of the farmers and the little old ladies on fixed incomes, and we can't tax the "fat cats" because that's class warfare and they'll stop buying yachts and employing all the shipbuilders.  Any group you name, there's a photogenic victim waiting in the wings to make the commercial.

So... where, then?  Completely aside from any specifics of the debate last night, where should the revenue come from?  There's a multi-front war on and the country's infrastructure is rapidly falling behind and falling apart.

Meanwhile I'll do my part to give revenue to local bars this evening :D

Congrats to Tim Johnson for having the guts to vote no on the bail out a second time.  Thanks Tim.

By the way, here are my numbers:

There are approximately 34,736,000 tax units reporting business income in the US.
Of these, only 479,000(1.4%) fall in the 33% or 35% marginal tax rate.
The tax brackets for 33% and 35% include all businesses that make more than $250,000 annually (actually, it includes plenty that make less than $250,000, since the cutoff for 33% is less than $250,000).
Since, at most, 1.4% of tax units with business income have AGI > $250,000, I think Biden's assertion of 95% is correct.

Source: Tax Policy Center

We're talking about net income not gross income.  So a guy who owns a small business that nets him $250,000 a year, why shouldn't he pay more in income taxes?  What difference does it make whether he makes $250,000 in wages or makes it as the owner of a business?

I agree. That is why I think there should be only one tax system for the federal government. Stop taxing corporations and tax all personal income no matter what the source. If you make 250k from capital gains pay the tax on 250k if it comes from a paycheck the same amount, if you make it as a sole proprietor pay the same amount. That would be truly fair. It also would remove the double taxation of income on corporations.

I sent Tim an email on His site and got an instant automated reply that the system received it. That's a hell of lot more than I got from "Dick Turban" or from the "Messiah"

Thought

That is an interesting site. Thanks for the link.

I found the distinction on taxes on those who have mortgages and those who do not to be disturbing, Did I misread that?

Candidate for Mayor of Urbana
Rex Bradfield

Stop taxing corporations and tax all personal income no matter what the source.

Except then people are just going to form shell corporations to hold all their assets or their family's assets and the money won't ever be realized as "personal income."

"insult people" ? Just read any post above by one of the tolerant liberals and then tell me about insults.

Somebody can't tell the difference between critiquing arguments and being insulting.

It's pretty common over here now.  You say somebody's argument doesn't make sense, and they call you an idiot.  You point out the personal insult and they claim you started it by attacking their argument.  After all, if you say Sarah Palin is an idiot you are really calling all Repubicans idiots, dontcha know?

It is getting really old, but shows no signs of dying.

Why should business taxes be progressive in the first place?  I don't see why a business with $1M of income split among ten owners should pay a higher tax rate than a business with $100,000 of income and only one owner.  Dividends should be deductable like interest payments.

"Right, but a large portion of corporate income is never distributed as personal income."

This is true that portion not distrubited in anyway is reinvested and is not taxed currently anyway.

"Or you could eliminate capital gains taxes to avoid double taxation, or allow corporations to deduct dividends."

This is true.  Personally though I would prefer to eliminate taxes on the business so that we are encouraging reinvestment and capital growth rather then just dispersements to investors.

When you're ready to have a rational conversation that doesn't include blanket insults aimed at everyone with whom you disagree, I'm ready.

Yes, but I don't see much of you anymore. I don't include blanket insults aimed at everyone with whom I disagree, and then I get no response from you and a half-a-dozen people just slurring me for no reason. If I say nothing, it continues. If I respond thoughtfully with an edge, I'm told that both people need to settle down.

Neither of those seem like decent solutions to me, so I'm merely asking for clarity on the issue. Please do not take this in any way to be a critique of your lack of activity--I certainly never put this site before my kids, so I wouldn't expect you to do the same.

It would be nice if you opened the front page keys to a few others, but that's just me.

anon... This election was doomed for the GOP for quite some time.  As people, GOP included, have been saying for over a year, this is the Dem's to lose.  The only shocking part was that McCain actually pulled ahead for a while (remember the bed wetting on the other side (Obama's campaign manager's words, not mine)).

The financial crisis brought the tried and true, "It's the economy, stupid." back to the forefront.  It'd be pretty interesting if the usual roller coaster of polling end up getting McCain back ahead in the national polling and downright amazing if he's able to beat out Obama in the EV distrobution.  But that's old news.  Bigger news is that Obama is finally beating "generic dem" which [sarcasm] is really impressive this deep in an election they're basically being handed. [/sarcasm]

"The Republicans did this to themselves."

And how.

--

Glock21 Op/Ed

I don't think you have a clue about what conservatives think

I think you'd be mighty surprised. I grew up in a Republican family and my dad still takes the Wall Street Journal daily. I was a conservative in high school, but I grew out of it. And the funny thing is, the more I learn, the more liberal I become.

And the more I learn, the more I look forward to the Obama administration.

I'm not in a painful spot at all.

I wouldn't expect you to say anything different.

The thing is, it isn't just McCain. It's the whole core of the GOP economic policy that's being voted on, and it's getting a big thumbs down. We tried it, and look how it works -- the Dow lost 400 700 points so far today. The Dow's lost over a third of its value in the last year. Do you think people don't see that and remember how George Bush wanted to privatize Social Security?

When McCain goes down in flames, the GOP will have a choice. Will they blame their candidate -- the candidate they chose all by themselves in a year-long process they directed, they financed, they controlled, and they voted in -- or will they search their souls? Will they actually have the courage to take a look at the fundamentals of their economic policies in the light of their obvious catastrophic failure? Or will they go on being Reaganite/Friedmanite ideologues, remaining economic fundamentalist flat-earthers even as they're sailing over the edge?

This story isn't just about McCain in 2008, it's about many elections to come, and as much as I'm liking Democratic prospects for the next few decades, I'm sorry that Bush and company had to bring this country so low to its knees before Americans woke up to just what snake oil the GOP was selling.

In the meantime, McCain and Palin are talking about what? It's no longer bread and circuses, folks -- it's lipstick and pigs.

And I actually feel badly for xian, who is routinely treated pretty badly on here, and usually puts up with quite a bit before lashing back.  Unfortunately, because of differing activity schedules, xian and I seem to be on IP.com at nearly opposite times, so by the time I catch up, it's usually too late to intervene.  For that, I'm sorry, but I just can't be on here all the time.  I do appreciate that you manage to ignore the worst of it for so long.

I appreciate the empathy. I couldn't live with the guilt if you discarded your job and family to defend me on an internet website, so the empathy is easily enough ;)

It was Rangel and the democrats who refused to do anything about the GSE's and Fannie Mae they have them on tape. Bush was the one who sent someone to congress and tried to get more oversight of Fannie Mae and Franklin Raines who gave Obama $125.000 dollars in campaign contributions.