I have been in my own business for the last 30+ years--that's where I have been. I am a small business electrical contractor--with absolutely no work today. Why--there is no demand for our service. Americans have tucked in--they aren't spending money--they are in survival mode.
You liberals crack me up. I don't think you even know that prior to Ronald Reagan--there was one of your's that believed in trickle down economics. His name was John F. Kennedy--who also believed that by giving back Americans their own dam money--it would stimulate a stagnant economy. It worked for him too. In fact, prior to Reagan--JFK gave the largest tax cut to Americans & believe it or not businesse's too.
We have gone now from trickle down economics--to Obama's flood the basement economics. 787 BILLION dollars spent that has not created 1 single private sector job. It's such a failure--that they are now trying to claim the amount of jobs "saved"--which has never been done before in the history of the United States. It's laughable--
Your man is trying to do an FDR. In the 1930's we actually needed roads & bridges. What took thousands of men with shovels in the 1930's can be done with a couple of heavy equipment operators. In fact, our economy is so diverse from the 1930's that the ONLY way you stimulate the economy today--is to effect ALL sectors of the economy. The ONLY way you can do that is by giving tax cuts---while at the same time CUT the freakin spending--which this administration has not done.
The very first thing FDR did? He cut 100 million out of the federal budget. 100 million back in the 1930's was enormous. Your guy hasn't caught onto that yet--
im sorry to hear that, man, about your business. im on vacation at the moment, but in a week i'll be back in building myself. i kept poking until i found some niches that saved my 2009.
so you know, if your clients are scarce out of lack of liquidity, especially as a b2c contractor, that is a demand-side concern, not a trickle-down supply-side concern.
on the supply side, tax burden inspires more investment than tax cuts do. when tax-time comes around, your investments, especially new hires, really come in handy for their deductibility.
where sweeping tax cuts are made, private enterprise policies gravitate away from deductible investments. because supply-side econ is targetted way above the typical small business toward bigger businesses and international concerns, some of these companies reduced their deductibility stateside in lieu of chasing profits with overseas production. 'cut-taxes' policy can be tied to overseas outsourcing and deindustrialization.
i credit the nature of the clinton recovery, with its strong employment component to this phenomenon, citing the reagan recovery as its antithesis: a jobless recovery with significant increase in outsourcing and deindustrialization. the thatcher economy is an even more vivid example. while reagan's economy was unprecedented, the jobs performance was lack-luster and tax-cuts were too deep for their budgets by his second term... enter voodoo economics.
the laffer curve was right on in 82 perhaps, and again with clinton, but that you propose sweeping tax cuts and bush
enacted sweeping tax cuts while on the path to war are demonstrations of ineptitude on the topic. targetted tax cuts like bush's 100k deductibility for start-ups could be fruitful.
supply-side econ chiefly targets large businesses which are publicly traded, and the institutions which trade them. i ignore the dow as an indicator. i dont think it has anything to do with privately owned mainstreet business.
supply-side econ has its merits, but both sides of the economy are important. that said, trickle-down is bullshit. wealth doesnt trickle down. it does not trickle into employment. it doesnt trickle into small biz.
