Republican debate tonight on CNN.

[Cannonball996]

It sounds less like a debate and more like a panel of people grabbing for votes.

or some big corporate bucks to back their campaigns

[fast83]

i said it in '08 and i'll say it again in '12 rp is the only candidate that will stick to his guns and not be swayed.what we need is someone that will stand behind exactly what they say.

if you can't trust a woman or an employee what do you do,keep hiring whores and crackheads?

i think rp and maybe bachman

[jw33]

The main thing with Paul this time around is that he is 77 and it shows. No one with half a brain cell is laughing at him anymore though.

[SMEGMA STENCH]

As opposed to raising taxes for job creation? Have you ever owned a business?

Of course he hasn't. He and his ilk all think that money just grows on trees. That gold just lies around on the ground for the taking. That no matter how hard we're all taxed, there will always be more for the government to take and give to the undeserving.

[Geor!]

I don't think I've exposed any of my views on here, just disputed you all's. I enjoy signing on and playing devil's advocate.

Tomato/tomahto

[SMEGMA STENCH]

That's a static analysis...less taxes equals more jobs....more jobs means more people paying taxes, more people paying taxes means more revenue, more revenue equals less debt without taking more of my money.

This.

Oh bullshit. Supply and demand dictates job growth, not tax rates.

I really hope you don't actually think that. Cause if so, you gotta be the dumbest mother fucker alive. Lets set up a little experiment. You go out and get a contract labor job, where no taxes are taken out. Then, I come over and you have to give me 25% of the money you made each week. At the same time, you are trying to start a small business. I'll hold on to all the money I took from you so that you can see it, but you can't get at it. Then when your small business needs more money put into it that you don't have, you can look at that money and make your own estimations about whether or not it could help you buy the things that your business needs, if you only had it.

A few of the examples that people have been trying to tell you (but obviously failed) might include:

The hiring of an employee. Maybe more than one, eventually.

The purchasing of new machinery or apparatuses depending on the type of business it is.

The paying of bills. You know, those pesky things that you also have to pay on top of taxes. I know you don't know this, but they add up so fast it'll make your head spin.

General supplies for that business that are consumed. Again this will vary due to the type of business.

The list goes on, but you have just been educated. Welcome to real life. And now, of course, you'll not reply. You'll just spout off the same communist failure bullshit in another thread.

[Cannonball996]

ok explain to me, if my tax rate was cut in half, but demand stayed the same as did the work load, why would I hire more people?

[stevo]

ok explain to me, if my tax rate was cut in half, but demand stayed the same as did the work load, why would I hire more people?

Because it isn't just you paying less taxes, it is everyone in your tax bracket, and everyone in that bracket will have more cash on hand, meaning they will most likely be spending more, which means the demand for what ever you do/supply will increase, which means you would hire more people to match demand.

Stevo

[Cannonball996]

Because it isn't just you paying less taxes, it is everyone in your tax bracket, and everyone in that bracket will have more cash on hand, meaning they will most likely be spending more, which means the demand for what ever you do/supply will increase, which means you would hire more people to match demand.

Stevo

my business could double and I still would not need to hire anyone, its not that business is bad, but over the past few years I and I am sure other business owners would tell you the same and that is; I have learned to do more with less. part of it was the economic down turn, but technology has also played a role, as well as finding the right people. certain jobs that in the past required 2-3 people, now only require 1.

for me the taxes have never been a really big issue in business, they have always been there and will always been there. things I have noticed that have had a negative impact on my business are all the little costs now associated with doing business. there are so many little fees these days, and sometimes I even have to pay a transaction fee in order to pay a fee. I think a president who really wanted to put people back to work would put an end to some of these outrageous fees that all businesses are having to pay.

[stevo]

my business could double and I still would not need to hire anyone, its not that business is bad, but over the past few years I and I am sure other business owners would tell you the same and that is; I have learned to do more with less.

Tell that to a restaurant owner, if their business doubled, they would need more cooks, more waiters, and more dishwashers, because only so much can be done by a single person at one time.

Just because your business wouldn't need more people for an increase in production (and you have mentioned that at least ten times previously) doesn't mean every business wouldn't.

Stevo

[Cannonball996]

Tell that to a restaurant owner, if their business doubled, they would need more cooks, more waiters, and more dishwashers, because only so much can be done by a single person at one time.

Just because your business wouldn't need more people for an increase in production (and you have mentioned that at least ten times previously) doesn't mean every business wouldn't.

Stevo

thats assuming the restaurant is on the verge of labor operating capacity, in this economy I am willing to bet many businesses are not at that point. I am sure most business owners would tell you that they could handle 10-15% with out having to hire additional staff. when you factor in tax cuts of only a couple percentage points, do you really expect to drive work capacity up that much?

[lowthreeohz]

thats assuming the restaurant is on the verge of labor operating capacity, in this economy I am willing to bet many businesses are not at that point. I am sure most business owners would tell you that they could handle 10-15% with out having to hire additional staff. when you factor in tax cuts of only a couple percentage points, do you really expect to drive work capacity up that much?

is the big picture really that unfathomable to you?

[SMEGMA STENCH]

ok explain to me, if my tax rate was cut in half, but demand stayed the same as did the work load, why would I hire more people?

You wouldn't. But then, when things change, as they always do, you would. You'd hire those workers. Or rather, you'd look upon the money that the government takes from you (to waste) and wish that you could hire the new employees.

[stevo]

thats assuming the restaurant is on the verge of labor operating capacity, in this economy I am willing to bet many businesses are not at that point.

If times are so lean, you would think the business owners would have the staff trimmed to that point.

I am sure most business owners would tell you that they could handle 10-15% with out having to hire additional staff.

You didn't say 10%-15%, you double, which is 100% extra.

when you factor in tax cuts of only a couple percentage points, do you really expect to drive work capacity up that much?

The tax cuts are free and clear profit, yeah I really would expect it, as does many economists.

Stevo

[Pro88LX]

Cannonball996 watched the whole debate and still can't figure out which one of those guys he wants to get behind..........