There's the problem, he's cutting the throat of businesses with more than $250,000 in income (that's us). His proposals also include increasing the taxes on inventory (I believe that's part of the whole capital gains tax) and that's the big killer. We pay more taxes on our inventory than on our income and Sen. Obama is going directly after that money.


No, what I said was that the market impact is the result of people's opinions. The effect of that is rolling downhill and hitting more and more people. The specific sector of the economy that I'm employed in is DIRECTLY impacted by housing and that means that we are feeling the hit right now. Four years of losing money would put us under.

[/quote]OVER and OVER again it's the same damn thing.
"Obama's going to hurt us. Obama's going to hurt us."
But Bush has been a ray of light for us all over the last 8 years... [/quote]
Sen. Obama's plans are short-sighted and will damage this country substantially over the long haul. Increasing taxes on the very people who have the financial ability to pull us out of this situation only exascerbates the situation.

__________________
~
~
~

Our nation has not always lived up to its ideals, yet those ideals have never ceased to guide us. They expose our flaws, and lead us to mend them. We are the beneficiaries of the work of the generations before us and it is each generation's responsibility to continue that work. - Laura Bush

God is a conservative -

Ecclesiastes 10:2--"A wise man's heart inclines him to the right, but a fool's heart to the left."

"cutting the throat"?
Oh. The melodrama...


I guess I'm going to waste some time digging up your comment now...
Cause I accurately described what you said.


This is just plain utterly absurd.
One of the things that kills me about people claiming junk like this is that you have NO IDEA of what kind of taxes people were paying in the past...

ALL THIS TIME, taxes on the rich have been lowered...
... and lowered...
... and lowered some more ...

But now that somebody is talking about rolling us back to a time in the past when the rich paid a slightly higher, THE SKY WILL FALL in some people's eyes...

Let's cover some basic ground-work here...
Biden: Taxes Will Still Be Less than Under Reagan | Politicususa

Also, some truth about small business and Obama's plan...

How Many Would Actually Pay More?

McCain is right about one thing. Many small-business owners would indeed see their taxes go up if Obama is elected and raises the top income-tax rates. According to a survey from the National Federation of Independent Businesses, about eight out of 10 small-business owners responding to the poll report that they are organized legally in a way that would require them to pay taxes on their business income as individuals, rather than as a corporation. But since Obama's plan wouldn't affect those making less than $250,000 for couples, or about $200,000 for singles, we need to estimate how many would fall into those high-income categories.

Obama's plan, according to his economic policy director Jason Furman, would return the top two federal income-tax rates to what they were before Bush lowered them. In addition, Obama would adjust the income-tax brackets to ensure that no married couple making under $250,000 or single filer making under $200,000 would pay the top rates.

The actual number of business owners who would be affected turns out to be well under a million, and the number of employers would be even less. Based on the number of taxpayers who now report any sort of business income on their returns, the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center projects that 663,608 taxpayers with business income, or business losses, will fall into the top two tax brackets in 2009, when any Obama tax changes would first take effect. Not all of those can properly be called "small-business owners," however. Some are farmers. Many are lawyers, accountants or other professionals who get some of their income in the form of partnership distributions. Others may be passive investors in real-estate partnerships or similar investment arrangements and not really persons who own and manage a business.

It is also not clear how many who report business income actually employ any workers. In 2004, the Tax Policy Center found that hundreds of thousands of individual taxpayers who had business income from partnerships or subchapter-S corporations (whose owners pay taxes as individuals) did not claim any tax deductions for employee expenses. For all these reasons we judge that the actual number of small-business employers who would face higher tax rates under Obama is probably far below 663,608, and certainly a far cry from McCain's ridiculously inflated 23 million figure.

FactCheck.org: McCain's Small-Business Bunk

He plans to raise the minimum wage to $9.50/hr. by 2011.

How will small businesses be able to withstand what would turn out to be a nearly 85% increase in the minimum wage in a span of just five years?

And then there is this.

__________________
Every step taken toward the installment of Sharia law will be justifiable to the person who values appearance more than freedom and democracy.

Jack Kemp is about as relevant as Bob Dole... Zero. If you are an honest businessman, you have a responsibility to pay your workers a living wage. The minimum wage is not a living wage especially with the increasing economic turmoil.

The failure of business to self regulate has brought this on. When you get business to self regulate, then we won't need government to do it.

__________________

As an employer you have a responsibility to keep your business open and your employees employed. If your expenses outweigh your income, then no one has a job. If you raise your prices, then it effects the poorest people the most. So you can raise wages and close your business or you can raise prices and your employees can pay more for the products you and thousands of other small businesses produce, pushing them more and more to buying everything from Wal-Mart, driving you out of business or if not buying at Wal-Mart, consuming the additional income by having to pay more for stuff. So much for small business and "the little guy".....

__________________
~
~
~

Our nation has not always lived up to its ideals, yet those ideals have never ceased to guide us. They expose our flaws, and lead us to mend them. We are the beneficiaries of the work of the generations before us and it is each generation's responsibility to continue that work. - Laura Bush

God is a conservative -

Ecclesiastes 10:2--"A wise man's heart inclines him to the right, but a fool's heart to the left."

1) How about being honest and taking the "increase" number from what Obama's ACTUAL starting point is, instead of taking into account increases that were put into effect WHILE BUSH WAS IN THE WHITE HOUSE???

2) All these years the businesses have been taking advantage of the constant minimum wage with the dollar value changing over time...
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0774473.html
Adjusting for a constant dollar, in 1978 we had $6.27.
In 2006, $4.04.

And people like you are complaining over every nickel the employer SHOULD give up to help reflect a REAL minimum wage.
You IGNORE the times that the employers get the benefits, but complain when its time to give them to the employees.


To which I reply with this...
http://www.politicalwrinkles.com/ope...s-mr-bush.html

MOST people will get tax CUTS. Not tax increases.

What really kills me about these discussions is how ridiculously two-faced they are...

1) Cost of living goes UP, and the minimum wage stays STAGNANT, that's nothing...
2) But insisting that the minimum wage must go UP to match the cost of living, suddenly that's class warfare.
That's an attack on small business...

Any rational and objective observer would notice that the Republicans are GAINING ground on one side, and insisting that nobody should look at what goes on behind the curtain.
But when people try to FIX the system to ADJUST things back to the WAY THEY WERE, then suddenly its something that will topple the world...

Payroll should not be viewed as an expense in the traditional sense of the word. Payroll should be treated as a capital investment but it's a difference of mindset. Small businesses aren't going to be competing on price... They just aren't, therefore they should be competing on quality. Better pay allows a business to keep better workers, keeping better workers will allow the business to create better products/services, and better products/services will allow the businesses to succeed. Instead, small business owners have a mindset today that they need to be competing with Wal-Mart on price...

Their reality check bounced.

__________________

Payroll is a pure expense, talk to any business owner and they'll tell you the same thing. Through that whole post, you completely ignored the results of higher prices on those who can least afford it. Raising expences means either raising prices cutting expenses in other areas. It's simple math. Unavoidable and inescapable math. All of the elitist crap of making a better product and selling it at a higher price means jack to someone who just got priced out of buying from a small business and now has to buy it at a "big box" store or find something else to cut back on in order to afford the same product.

__________________
~
~
~

Our nation has not always lived up to its ideals, yet those ideals have never ceased to guide us. They expose our flaws, and lead us to mend them. We are the beneficiaries of the work of the generations before us and it is each generation's responsibility to continue that work. - Laura Bush

God is a conservative -

Ecclesiastes 10:2--"A wise man's heart inclines him to the right, but a fool's heart to the left."

"elitist crap"???
You want to talk "elitist"?

There is MOUNDS of evidence and data showing what has REALLY GONE ON over the years.

Historical Income Tables - Families
Under Clinton (1992-2000) average ("mean") household income rose $15164.
Under Bush (2000-2007) average ("mean") household income fell $348.
This is adjusted for inflation under "2007 dollars"

If you scroll down to "MALE HOUSEHOLDER, NO SPOUSE PRESENT", the difference is even scarier.
Clinton had average income in this category rise by $13,662.
Bush had average income in this category fall by $7,149.
That's a gap of $20,811 dollars!

"Class warfare"?
The Republicans have been waging it against the "fundamentals of our economy" FOR YEARS.

And if you check this compared to the "CEO" paycheck???
THAT keeps going up...

And you want to hear something REALLY funny???
Under Clinton, the rich did INCREDIBLY WELL.
Even thought Clinton was a "democrat" with all the crap you want to associate with Democrats, neo-cons can't wrap their head around the fact that their "doom and gloom" predictions were PROVEN COMPLETELY FALSE UNDER CLINTON...

So if I were to believe Republicans in their "they're going to fire people cause the rich get taxed", what they are really saying is that to keep that CEO paycheck rising, they're going to fire some of those people's whose incomes they have been DROPPING ALL THIS TIME...