Thu, Jul 10, 2014, 4:05 PM EDT - U.S. Markets closed

Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Bank of America Corporation Message Board

  • joekdoe04 joekdoe04 Sep 17, 2011 2:25 PM Flag

    Contradictions by the Fringe Right On Jobs

    The claim by the Fringe Right is that only the wealthy create jobs, that government cannot create jobs.

    Yet they blame President Obama for not creating jobs AND, more importantly, they fail to criticize the wealthy for not creating any American jobs.

    Sure the wealthy have invested heavily in jobs in other countries but not in America. Isn't it time we force the wealthy to invest in the America that was the source of their wealthy. They are behaving like vampires, sucking the life blood out of the American worker for their own benefit. This is not right or fair.

    The Fringe Right must not be allowed to deprive Americans of Jobs.

    JOBS NOW!!!! DEMAND YOUR REPRESENTATIVE VOTE IN FAVOR OF OBAMA'S JOB PLAN.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • jamiedicks@ymail.com jamiedicks Sep 20, 2011 9:47 AM Flag

      IT's about Gler today before the news on the 26th. Load up folks.

    • Obama creating jobs? moron, jobs based on gov't handouts are not lasting jobs and are based on more taxes.

      What the isiot needs to do is stop demonizing business and embrace it instead. Business hires out of growth needs and then taxes will come in froma bigger and better ecom=nomy. Obama has never run a business so all he knows is more taxes for more socail programs/handouts.

    • I blame Obama for not getting out of the way to allow the market to create jobs AND, more importantly, for attacking the wealthy for not creating any American jobs while he promises to raise their taxes and uses his EPA to regulate them into bankruptcy.

      You are a fool who doesn't understand that business needs predictability about the costs of doing business before they hire new employees. When the costs of unknown higher taxes, unknown regulations and unknown healthcare mandates are staring a businessman in the face, he will go into survival mode, not growth mode.

      Obama is inviting a second recession before we recover from the last one.

      • 2 Replies to fencemout
      • You wrot, "I blame Obama for not getting out of the way to allow the market to create jobs"

        OK. But making a vague statement like that is not helpful. Specifically what would you like to have happen?

        We already have the lowest tax rates on the wealthy in 70 years. Any lower would be destructive, in fact the level they are at is destructive now. So by Obama getting out of the way, do you mean that Congress should raise the tax rates on the wealthy?

        Or do you mean that Obama should support polluting our rivers and streams? Is that what you want?

        Or do you mean Obama should want to eliminate including over 30 million workers on a medical plan because someone is opposed to having medical coverage for more Americans? Very strange values.

      • Business and the jobs its creates thrives where it is welcomed. Obama does not welcome business. He is antagonistic to business.

    • Like all those solyndra jobs you worthless idiot?

    • I agree! They also whine and cry about how the FED GOV should stay out of everything, Then they cry about how the FED GOV has NOT done enough to build a fence around the southern border.

      I will now wait for the attacks about how much I love to kiss BO's butt, and how I am a commie liberal, and not a "True" American.

    • The Fringe Right cannot muster a rebuttal to my argument. Because there is none.

      • 2 Replies to joekdoe04
      • The notion that anyone who has more money than you (do) would like them to have didn't work for it is not an 'argument'.
        It's a hackneyed party line used to influence and control the uneducated and those who, like yourself, begrudge anyone else success.

      • Obama's "Buffett Tax" proposal to change the nation's tax laws may sound seductively reasonable. Ensuring that nobody earning over a million dollars a year pays a lower percentage than the middle class sounds like justice. The truth, however, is that -- no matter how well-packaged it may be -- Obama's proposal is a nasty bit of class warfare that will destroy jobs, drive investment out of the economy, and harm the middle class, and it is certain to raise far less revenue than predicted.

        Let's begin our discussion of this with the last part. Those who feign outrage at the idea that a handful of extremely productive citizens might pay a lower percentage of their income in taxes than those with other kinds of income are being intentionally dishonest. They know full well that the reason why this occurs it that the sort of income being earned by these individuals consists largely of money that is realized in forms other than ordinary wage income, such as capital gains. Income of this sort is deliberately treated differently from how other kinds of income are treated because it accumulates over time, and is realized all at once. And for decades, inflation has been causing illusory capital gains to be reported.

        Obama's proposal would amount to a massive increase in taxes on capital gains and other similar sources of income. People whose income comes in this fashion tend to have a very high degree of control over how and when they get paid. Does anyone think that such a massive change in taxation would not be accompanied by a corresponding change in behavior? Because most individuals with incomes in this range have the resources to engage in all sorts of behavior for the purpose of tax avoidance, it seems likely that a tax of this nature would raise far less revenue than any initial predictions would suggest.

        It's bad enough to have a tax that's unfair and economically destructive. It's altogether another level of terrible to pass a tax that is both of those things and which doesn't bring in very much money

        All of the evidence that we have suggests that it won't work, that it will hurt the economy, and that any measures passed to target the "rich" today will come to haunt the middle class tomorrow.

        It is important to understand two things. First, almost all taxes that initially target only the "rich" -- the original income tax immediately comes to mind -- typically trickle down to target the middle class. This will especially prove to be the case for a tax, such as this one, where the facts on the ground make it likely to bring in far less money than initially estimated.

        Second, there's already a tax of this exact nature on the books called the Alternative Minimum Tax. Plenty of middle-class Americans already know how the AMT, also a tax passed to target supposedly tax-avoiding millionaires, has come to attack them. The Congress knows this as well, given that they have to annually pass "patches" onto the AMT to keep it from harming most of the middle class.

        We often underestimate the distorting effects that high taxes have on the economy and society as a whole. To pick just a single example, the strange state of American health care and the unique American reliance on private health insurance is a quirk that came to be as a result of extremely high taxes during the Second World War, when employers sought to hire away workers by offering tax-deductible health insurance to potential employees in lieu of other forms of compensation.

        "The suspension of one man's dividends," Calvin Coolidge once reminded us, "means the suspension of another man's pay envelope." It is hard to think of anything that the government could do to better illustrate that essential truth than making it less attractive for the wealthy to dynamically invest their money.

    • Obama's "Buffett Tax" proposal to change the nation's tax laws may sound seductively reasonable. Ensuring that nobody earning over a million dollars a year pays a lower percentage than the middle class sounds like justice. The truth, however, is that -- no matter how well-packaged it may be -- Obama's proposal is a nasty bit of class warfare that will destroy jobs, drive investment out of the economy, and harm the middle class, and it is certain to raise far less revenue than predicted.

      Let's begin our discussion of this with the last part. Those who feign outrage at the idea that a handful of extremely productive citizens might pay a lower percentage of their income in taxes than those with other kinds of income are being intentionally dishonest. They know full well that the reason why this occurs it that the sort of income being earned by these individuals consists largely of money that is realized in forms other than ordinary wage income, such as capital gains. Income of this sort is deliberately treated differently from how other kinds of income are treated because it accumulates over time, and is realized all at once. And for decades, inflation has been causing illusory capital gains to be reported.

      Obama's proposal would amount to a massive increase in taxes on capital gains and other similar sources of income. People whose income comes in this fashion tend to have a very high degree of control over how and when they get paid. Does anyone think that such a massive change in taxation would not be accompanied by a corresponding change in behavior? Because most individuals with incomes in this range have the resources to engage in all sorts of behavior for the purpose of tax avoidance, it seems likely that a tax of this nature would raise far less revenue than any initial predictions would suggest.

      It's bad enough to have a tax that's unfair and economically destructive. It's altogether another level of terrible to pass a tax that is both of those things and which doesn't bring in very much money

      All of the evidence that we have suggests that it won't work, that it will hurt the economy, and that any measures passed to target the "rich" today will come to haunt the middle class tomorrow.

      It is important to understand two things. First, almost all taxes that initially target only the "rich" -- the original income tax immediately comes to mind -- typically trickle down to target the middle class. This will especially prove to be the case for a tax, such as this one, where the facts on the ground make it likely to bring in far less money than initially estimated.

      Second, there's already a tax of this exact nature on the books called the Alternative Minimum Tax. Plenty of middle-class Americans already know how the AMT, also a tax passed to target supposedly tax-avoiding millionaires, has come to attack them. The Congress knows this as well, given that they have to annually pass "patches" onto the AMT to keep it from harming most of the middle class.

      We often underestimate the distorting effects that high taxes have on the economy and society as a whole. To pick just a single example, the strange state of American health care and the unique American reliance on private health insurance is a quirk that came to be as a result of extremely high taxes during the Second World War, when employers sought to hire away workers by offering tax-deductible health insurance to potential employees in lieu of other forms of compensation.

      "The suspension of one man's dividends," Calvin Coolidge once reminded us, "means the suspension of another man's pay envelope." It is hard to think of anything that the government could do to better illustrate that essential truth than making it less attractive for the wealthy to dynamically invest their money.

      • 2 Replies to rasheed_mfume
      • No rebuttal from you it seems. You start with invalid assumptions. For example your comment about "a handful of extremely productive citizens" completely ignores that practically all of them inherited their wealth and didn't make it on their own.

        Even the two most famous examples, Steve Jobs and Bill Gates, who are not conservatives, came from wealthy families that gave them an edge over their competition.

        Your argument is based on myths and you are in no position to accuse any one of lies.

      • There is one other point to consider. We are in the preliminary stages of one of the greatest public policy battles in our history.

        The government has current obligations that far exceed its ability to pay. In the coming years we will find ourselves with a choice: we can either pay, or we can reject as odious the promises made on our behalf by past generations. If we give in now, to this supposedly "reasonable" demand, we will simply have set the stage for the showdown over the next demand, and then for the one after that.

        What we must do instead is stand firm in support of the policy that we know to be both best for the economy and morally right. It is morally wrong when laws are written to do special favors for a single individual or group. As conservatives, we believe in equality before the law and, just as it is wrong that the law should treat anyone with special favoritism, it is equally wrong to write laws that target a specific group for special mistreatment. The solution to a tax code full of easily exploited loopholes is not to target any single group for attack through addition to the code; it is to rewrite the code from the ground up in order to ensure equitable treatment for all.

    • Until we become like China or Mexico this will not stop, thats free trade !
      Plus to become a one party country we need to destroy unions and labor.

    • My vote goes for OBAMA IMPEACHMENT. The man couldn't find his a$$ with both hands, how in the living hell do you expect him to have any clue as to job creation? Simple answer, he doesn't. Liberals know nothing about job creation. And wealthy liberals know even less. Yes, that's less than nothing. And you want to "FORCE" them to do anything? You are a person with access to liberal robot talking points and delusions of grandeur. You have no power, you'll have no power going forward, what power you had was squandered when Pelosi and Reid had to pass healthcare so they could find out what was in it. That's the incredible, unfathomable, outlandish, ridiculous stupidity of the left. And you belong with them. I rest my case.

    • Only government jobs are affirmative action do nothing welfare "jobs".

 
BAC
15.44-0.16(-1.03%)4:00 PMEDT

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.