I have been thinking about this for quite some time. So I want someone who thinks it's a good thing to raise taxes on those who create jobs (the wealthy). What exactly do you think obama wants to do with the money? Give more money to the super poor? Increase payouts to the welfare crowd? None of that actually creates anything but more of an entitlement generation. It actually kills the real American dream for those who want to be rich and have money. It kills any type of a dream that a person can actually achieve home ownership they can afford and things they may want.
Here's the cold hard truth giving to the poor just makes more poor, when you take from those who have you're actually killing the American dream. Poor people do not hire people to work for them The wealthy do.
I think it's obama's goal not to create anything but equality in the poor house.
The answer to your question is this:
We know that raising taxes causes job creation because
the historical data says so. When taxes are high GDP growth is high and unemployment goes down. Quality jobs are created, not McJobs.
This is very anti-intuitive, but it's the facts. Why it happens that way I can only guess.
This is a matter of using the scientific method, rather than shallow theories.
Sure, I agree that it sounds sensible to say that if you cut taxes the wealthy will have more money to invest and will create jobs. But the historical data - especially from the last 10 years, says otherwise. If it were true, we'd be at an all time unemployment low right now.
My GUESS is that higher taxes forces that wealthy to invest in higher risk - growth oriented investments, in order to achieve their profit goals. It creates a 'use it or lose it' environment.
I'd also GUESS that the more government jobs there are, the more competitive employer's job offerings have to be. That's just simple supply and demand.
Basically, supply-side economics has been tried and tried again and it's failed time and again. It sounds good, but it just doesn't work.
It's really a matter of rational, scientific thinking vs. blind faith.
The same is true for regulation. We've had boom times with lots of regulation, and disasters on many levels with deregulation.
I guess the real question is:
Would you rather pay low taxes on your present income, or pay some small percentage higher taxes on double that income?
The '90s were pretty good times for all!
Sometimes I think that the wingnuts are so obstinate that they'd rather be broke than lose an argument.