That is literally one of the most biased websites around, if you search ‘cbpp’ it gives you the option to search ‘cbpp liberal’ and can you not understand that if you cut taxes on those rich guys(those who give the middle class jobs) then they will be able to spend more money to make more money and then their taxes will even out, and then there will be a larger and richer middle class, who will therefore be paying a larger amount of taxes, and therefore having more money to spend on the deficit. Read a book.
i just need to sound off to the last commenter. just because ‘cbpp liberal’ comes up as a search suggestion doesn’t mean the source is biased. google doesn’t dictate definitions. if it did, things would be a lot less fortunate for santorum.
and ‘those rich guys’ are making record-breaking profits while implementing mass layoffs. do you understand what that means? it means that giving them more money to spend does not ensure that they will spend it. read the news.
First of all, this is an obviously even less credible source due to bias. It says socialist in the name. We all know who that guy is voting for. Also, given that all the stated facts in that article are true, I don’t remember him stating that any of those companies who were making profits were letting workers go, I’m willing to bet that they are hiring more. All the increased unemployment was likely cause by businesses like solyndra, which were given huge government grants to lose money and go out of business. Even if that isn’t true, the best reason for them to not spend that money is because they know the Obama and his followers want to take it from them. So, pending the imminent decline in revenue that those businesses would experience due to Obama taking all of their hard earned money to give it to a bunch of people who don’t have jobs but need iPhones, they keep it so they wont lose their business all together and go bankrupt. Therefore, if cuts were to be given to these large businesses, they might have some confidence in the government not taking it all from them and would be willing to spend it to try to make more money, creating more jobs. But you seem to think a better option would be to take all of their money so they do go bankrupt and then have to let all of their employees go because they aren’t making enough money to stay in business. Sounds like a great plan to me! Don’t tell me to read news when all you read is shit written by marxists who believe they know how to spend your money better than you do. Go read The Wealth of Nations or something.
just because it’s left-leaning doesn’t mean it’s not credible. kindly learn to fact-check. but you want ‘unbiased’ sources? how about jp morgan cutting 3k jobs while raising revenue 6%? how about exxon making $16 billion in profits in the last quarter alone - a record-breaking high - while gas prices are over $4/gallon? how about the fact that a typical CEO makes $9.6 million/year while the average wage is just under $43k? how about bank of america announcing that it will lay off $16k workers while still making $93 billion in net revenue? don’t be fooled. businesses are are not hurting for revenue, and neither are the people in charge. that’s how a CEO makes over 200x what his employees make. the money isn’t going back out into the economy, it’s going into offshore bank accounts. open your eyes.
Wednesday, 24 of October, 2012
with 340 notes
by: Washington Post via: 8675307