Not2BSubjugated
Callous Individualist
If Romney cuts taxes by 20%, cuts spending by 30% and creates 12 million jobs, or however many he's claiming, would that not increase revenue?
I'm asking this question because I don't know and wondering if anyone does.
Here is the first problem; just like Obama isn't the one creating the jobs, Mitt isn't going to create 12 million jobs because he's not doing the hiring. He tells us that by cutting taxes, employers will then hire more people. What he doesn't state is the fact that American businesses are already sitting on top of $2 trillion to $3 trillion due to our screwy tax system and even with all that excess cash they aren't hiring. What makes anyone think that letting them keep even more money that they will all of a sudden start hiring.
There is a perception that American businesses are hurting, but their profits tell a completely different story. The bottom line is this; we can cut taxes even more, but the end result will just be less revenue to the government and the wealthy will continue to hold on to even more profits.
Businesses doing more hiring and engaging in more economic activity in general isn't a function of how much money they're sitting on. It's a function of whether or not they feel that said hiring/activity WILL PROFIT. They're not looking to spend money, they're looking to make money. If they feel it's likely, they invest. If they don't, they don't.
Therefore, the fact that they're sitting on 3 trillion and not currently hiring doesn't necessarily imply that changes in the landscape that potentially make economic activity more profitable wouldn't cause hiring to happen. Whether or not an environment of improved profitability can be significantly achieved through tax cuts alone is up for debate, mind you. . . just pointing out that your particular point is. . . well, not a point at all.