Letters to the Editor

Your views in 200 words or less

TAX CUTS: Wealthy are the ones who create jobs

Letter by Don Wilbur, University Place on Jan. 3, 2011 at 10:29 am with 26 Comments »
January 3, 2011 12:57 pm

Re: “Profs ask rich to give tax cuts to charity” (TNT, 12-30).

Three professors at Yale and Cornell who decry the failure to increase taxes on the wealthiest in the recent lame duck congress believe the wealthiest should give their “tax savings” to charities. They recommend three charities: Habitat for Humanity, Children’s Aid Society and the Salvation Army, which they believe will create economic growth.

American history has shown that the government and charities never create economic growth. On the contrary, the wealthiest people in the country create growth and jobs. Bill Gates, Andrew Carnegie, Henry Ford and thousands more wealthy people created business empires that employed millions of people without advice from intellectuals.

Simple logic suggest the wealthy should keep their money to create jobs not waste it on the non-productive government and charities. Nevertheless, currently 1 percent of the wealthiest fund 40 percent of the income tax revenue and donate huge sums of money to charity.

The wealthiest have been the major factor that built America, to the envy of the world, while the intellectuals study, read their books, talk to the colleagues and have been an obstruction to growth because they are not doers.

Intellectuals like Marx and Lenin created a monster in Russia that resulted in millions of deaths over almost a century, and the country is still impoverished. Americans must go to the doers for success and ignore the intellectuals.

Tags:
Leave a comment Comments → 26
  1. readingthelatest says:

    These wealthy people you speak of, the ones that create jobs…. They’ve had nearly 10 years of reduced taxation.

    Where the heck are all the jobs they supposedly create?

    I agree with your assessment of what made the USA great. But the wealthy in our country today don’t carry the same philosophical sentiment as those of the past. Then, they were patriots. Today they are just greedy.

    And before it gets said- I do not think excessive taxation is patriotic. But the wealthy men of yesteryear understood a thriving country meant a thriving, long-lasting enterprise and thus invested (hired people) in our country.

    The wealthy of today have no such inclination. They want the quickest profits. They don’t care about sustainability. And as long as we give them tax breaks to hire and do so without requiring them to actually hire, I see no change in our economic situation.

  2. rr98411 says:

    “And as long as we give them tax breaks to hire and do so without requiring them to actually hire, I see no change in our economic situation”

    Unless a business actually hires a person, and holds on to that person for a subscribed period of time then they don’t get the tax credit (break). I would submit their are other reasons why a business will or will not hire.

    I, as a businessman, will not hire until demand for my product/service justifies the increasingly added expense of an employee.

  3. beerBoy says:

    Simple logic suggest the wealthy should keep their money to create jobs not waste it on the non-productive government and charities. Nevertheless, currently 1 percent of the wealthiest fund 40 percent of the income tax revenue and donate huge sums of money to charity.

    Thank you for the demonstration of why simple logic isn’t appropriate.

    As noted in a post above – 10 years of tax cuts already…..no jobs.

    And, as far as all that charitable giving….Don, Don, Don…..you really don’t know about the tax-incentives for charitable giving? Such as charitable unitrusts that payout to you and your heirs as long as they are alive and then – after two generations – provide capital to the charity?

    Tax law provides financial incentive for “charity”. They give a little so they can keep more.

  4. rr98411 says:

    Over the last 10 years the yearly unemployment rate was as follows:

    1999 – 4.2
    2000 – 4.0
    2001 – 4.7
    2002 – 5.8
    2003 – 6.0
    2004 – 5.5
    2005 – 5.1
    2006 – 4.6
    2007 – 4.6
    2008 – 5.8
    2009 – 9.3
    2010 – 9.7 (approx)

    Source: BLS

    I am not saying a whole bunch of jobs were created but the unemployment rate was relatively low. Also a low tax rate is but one component to job growth.

  5. rr98411 says:

    As far as giving, according to Giving USA Foundation charitable giving statistics saw giving above $300 billion for three years… 2009 / 2008 / 2007.

    Individuals tend to make the bulk of the giving though I have yet to find reliable sources for income range.

  6. Publico says:

    Yet another nonsensical Wilburism. Where did you get your economics degree Don? We all want to know.
    From the Wall Street Journal: “The Bush administration created about three million jobs (net) over its eight years, a fraction of the 23 million jobs created under President Bill Clinton’s administration and only slightly better than President George H.W. Bush did in his four years in office.” All that with his tax cuts for the wealthy. What a joke!

  7. whatIdo says:

    “Where the heck are all the jobs?”

    Ask Harry and Nancy, they’ve been in control the last 4 years. The jobs (3 letter word according to Joe) vaporized one year after the duo took over the strings.

  8. sharkie69 says:

    “I, as a businessman, will not hire until demand for my product/service justifies the increasingly added expense of an employee.”

    Finally, someone tells the truth.

    “whatIdo says:
    January 3, 2011 at 4:18 pm
    “Where the heck are all the jobs?”

    Ask Harry and Nancy, they’ve been in control the last 4 years. The jobs (3 letter word according to Joe) vaporized one year after the duo took over the strings.”

    From the same Conservatives that say government doesn’t create jobs

  9. whatIdo says:

    Have Harry and Nancy created jobs sumner?

  10. denismenis says:

    This tortured logic – that “intellectuals” stifle growth – doesn’t reconcile itself with the names enumerated in the letter: Gates, Carnegie and Ford were pretty smart people.

    I agree with “latest”:: wealth creates nothing if it doesn’t have character.

  11. beerBoy says:

    In 2000, 135 million citizens were employed. In 2010 there were 139 million Americans employed. Given the 9.7% increase in population since 2000, we would expect to see at least 148 million citizens with jobs.

    http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/michael-collins/33416/decline-and-fall-maybe-january-1-2011

    rr -The W Administration had the lowest jobs creation numbers since Hoover – they did not keep up with population growth – yet your cited figures claim that unemployment levels remained relatively static. That isn’t possible the equation doesn’t balance. It hasn’t been just since the Obama Administration that the unemployment numbers have been manipulated downward.

  12. rr98411 says:

    beerBoy – they are from the BLS.

  13. sue1234 says:

    Bush’s tax cuts did not work. Bush created 3 million jobs.
    The rich do not create jobs. That is just another brilliant lie from the gopcult’s elite to keep their stupid rank and file voting against their own best interests. Once again, we see how the cultlike adherence to a failed ideology is the core of republican dogma.

  14. rr98411 says:

    Sue#### – Tax cuts by themselves do not necessarily create jobs. Their are other factors that contribute to job growth. Tax revenue is a better measure of whether cutting tax rates work… they did in the fact that tax revenue increased following the tax rate cut of 2003.

    If we are proposing tax rate increases as a way of creating jobs, that will not work either in that it removes money from your pocket and sends it to the government. Not the best way of creating a job.

  15. beerBoy says:

    rr – are you suggesting that the US Dept of Labor is somehow pure and not subject to manipulating statistics for political gain?

  16. The wealthy are getting wealthier.

    Jobs are getting fewer.

    So much for your theory, Don.

    The supply of jobs is created by a demand for manufactured goods and services. Our manufactured good are now supplied by China. Our services are now supplied by desperate immigrants.

    Trickle down doesn’t work for the working class, and it never will.

    Maybe it’s time for a real tea party.

  17. “rr – are you suggesting that the US Dept of Labor is somehow pure and not subject to manipulating statistics for political gain?”

    nope – data is data and tends to be pure. How many people are working? How many people wanna work? Total and divde as needed to get an unemployment figure… simplistic I know. But the facts will be the facts.

    What you get is a bunch of talking heads spining their interpretation of the data as needed to push their respective talking points and agenda.

    Recently much ado has been reported about the BLS removing food and energy from the inflation index (at least on that propaganda network FOXNews), not to worry though the data is still there.

    For all items the inflation rate for a 12 month period is 1.1, remove food and energy the rate is .8 We are not being “lied” to by the media, nor the administration, things are just being spun to make them look better in a positive light. I don’t see a conspiracy… I do see them pushing the credibility line though.

  18. mattersnot1 says:

    How many jobs have been CREATED by poor people?

  19. beerBoy says:

    How many people are working? How many people wanna work? Total and divde as needed to get an unemployment figure… simplistic I know.

    Yep, it is simplistic…..and not the way it has always been done.

  20. “How many jobs have been CREATED by poor people?”

    Most anyone I’ve ever worked for claimed to be broke.

  21. beerBoy says:

    mattersnot – as meaningless as the mantra that tax cuts to the rich will create jobs.

    You keep the ms screen name in hibernation for this long and you log on to post some meaningless jingoism…….

  22. whatIdo says:

    “Some people are almost always small as they rarely, if ever, talk about things or ideas.” … and again.

  23. You keep dwindling…….

  24. geografood says:

    Well, no one will accuse Mr Wilbur of being one the intellectuals he obviously despises. As others have noted, his grasp of economics is sadly lacking (rich people do not create jobs, small businesses do). But so is his understanding of history. He admires wealthy people (as conservatives have always done), but look at how his examples amassed their wealth.

    Gates was found by federal courts to have used illegal monopolistic practices in order to charge us twice as much as he needed in order to profit from his software. Carnegie called in local police and private Pinkertons to smash in the heads of workers trying to unionize for the type treatment that Mr Wilbur would certainly consider standard workplace practices, such as the weekends off. Ford also busted heads and publicly admired Hitler’s anti-semitism. They were ruthlessly greedy businessmen, who once they had amassed their wealth, trickled some down on the people they had stepped on.

  25. geografood says:

    Mr Wilbur also parrots the ridiculous GOP talking point that government never creates economic growth. Some examples where the federal government involvement created economic growth include; Erie and Ohio canals, national postal service, national railroad systems, federal highway systems, dams and electrical grid, the Internet, and basic research funding for healthcare and technology.

    He also asserts that charities do not spur economic growth. That is not the point that the professors are trying to make. By giving rich people tax breaks that they do not need and which result in the loss of much needed government services, more people need basic assistance to live and that they should give more than usual.

  26. brymarbuch says:

    I disagree with the statement in the letter that “charities never create economic growth.” My dad was was orphaned at age five and a charity case; a wealthy benefactor housed and put him through school. His benefactor, Milton Hershey, gave his entire fortune to charity. My dad went on to great success and put seven kids through college and they in turn have (so far) put 14 grandchildren through college. My family has had much economic growth due to charity.

*
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part and abiding by these simple rules.

JavaScript is required to post comments.

Follow the comments on this post with RSS 2.0