@Cruiser I am well aware. However, there is a balancing act involved there too, just as some of the income tax cuts have gone to the other side of the Laffer Curve. I mean, if tax cuts were always a good thing then optimum revenue would be obtained by setting the tax rate at 0%, and since that isn’t true then it stands to reason that it’s possible to overdo things.
But if I read that right then it sounds like a cut in _business taxes would help you, but since we still need revenue then an increase in personal income tax would be pretty much required.
Also bear in mind that I am from a state that had an odd balance of taxes and moved to another where it is even weirder. Neither NH nor WA have a state income tax. NH has no sales tax either but the property taxes are pretty steep. And where I am now, there is a 9.5% sales tax on most things, liquor and tobacco cost twice what they did in NH, and they just put extra taxes on candy and bottled water in addition to adding anotehr $1 to a pack of cigs.
Any way you slice it, someone gets screwed. In NH, it’s anybody who either owns property or rents from someone who does. In WA, it’s anybody who buys anything,especially certain “sin” items as well as property owners and renters. And in the US, it’s the poor who spend a larger percentage of their income on non-income taxes and can’t afford to be in less than perfect health, the middle class who gets a huge chunk of their paycheck yanked from them by Uncle Sam, and businesses who have to put up with ridiculous taxes in addition to high expenses.
Notice who doesn’t get affected: the rich. In fact, their incomes have skyrocketed in the last decade and yet they pay about half the income tax (as a percentage of their income) as a middle-class person and their incomes are so big that things like sales tax are less than pocket change to most of them. They are making out like bandits!
And whether you like to admit it, you are at best middle-class. Many people who consider themselves “middle-class” are in fact at the upper end of lower-class. Then there is the outcry over “Joe the plumber” because people didn’t understand the difference between taxing those who earn >$250K/year and raising taxes on small business. Hell, one of my old co-workers thought that every penny that [redacted] Incorporated earned counted as personal income for the owner! If that were true then going through the hassle/expense of incorporating would be futile. Taxing the rich and taxing businesses are apples and Buicks; beyond unrelated.
It never ceases to amaze, amuse, and confound me how many people that are up in arms about taxing the rich are not themselves even close to rich. It’s almost masochistic really.
I should note that that small company I used to work for managed to cover their taxes and the increasing cost of paying for our insurance pretty easily. Of course, the management lived in regular houses as opposed to small mansions,didn’t own vacation homes in the Carribean, and we went through some really lean times without layoffs. I think it may have had something to do with the fact that they were more concerned with the company than with making literally obscene amounts of money for themselves. So tell me, as a small business guy, would you rather have $1 million or would you rather have $100K/yr for the rest of your life?
The point there is that it’s possible for the suits to live a decent life without raping the companies that pay them or the regular, working-class employees, though you wouldn’t know it from watching Wall Street, banks, or insurance companies. It’s also possible to strike a different balance of taxation that would be friendlier to business while being more fair to individuals than our current system.
Of course, like all things, the devil is in the details. It would be easy to do it wrong, but I think we’d almost have to try to make it more wrong than what we have now.