By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Final-Fan said:
HappySqurriel said:
I'm not defending Bush but ...

How many people here are employed by a poor person? The fact is that a reduction in corporate taxes creates jobs and is far better for "poor people" than a similar tax cut would be for them; beyond that corporations are not (really) owned by a bunch of "rich people" who own top-hats and monocles, they're owned by everyone who invests, or has a pension.

Bush's mistake was he produced tax-cuts while increasing spending, and thus ran up high deficits which devalues the dollar and creates (high) inflation.
A better question might be "How many businesses are kept afloat by poor people?" 

Giving money to poor people helps poor people more than giving it to rich people.  It's silly to argue otherwise -- when a corporation finds itself more profitable its natural inclination isn't a wage hike for the janitorial staff.  

In an ideal Keynesian or Marxist world, where the proletariat can thrive at the expense of corporations, your theory might work ... Welcome to the world of transnational corporations, that are owned by the people for the people, where the means of production are located where it is financially best for the corporation.

I was never saying that any tax cut was bad, but the thing people have to understand (and stop listening to politicians who are trying to get elected) is that not all taxes are created equal; many taxes, like corporate taxes and capital gains taxes, do far more damage than other taxes because they take the money away from the people who are good at creating new jobs and new money.