| Main |

Friday, November 12, 2010

Guest Blog: We Didn't Vote for This

FrankKnapp110 This is a guest blog by Frank Knapp, Jr., President and CEO of the South Carolina Small Business Chamber of Commerce.

Whether Americans voted for Republicans or Democrats in the mid-term election, one thing is clear: Voters were demanding that Congress focus intensively on job creation on Main Street -- not lobbyists and campaign donors from big business and Wall Street.

Apparently, many in Congress and President Obama, if recent reports are true, either didn't get the message or simply don't care now that the voting is over.

The top legislative priority of the newly "Tea Party-empowered" during the lame duck session is hardly what Tea Party insurgents had in mind. The proposal is to (1) increase the national debt by borrowing $700 billion to $1 trillion over the next 10 years; (2) spend the money on big, non-job producing tax cuts for the wealthiest 2 percent of Americans; (3) use small business as the excuse.

This bad-business proposal is now being pushed in Congress and the media by those advocating extending the Bush-era tax cuts to the top two income brackets. While proponents acknowledge that less than 3 percent of the taxpayers who would receive the tax cuts actually have some business income, they insist that these approximately 900,000 taxpayers are the very successful small business owners who will stop hiring and purchasing if they don't get their tax cut. Wrong, wrong, wrong.

First, almost all real small business owners are middle-class Americans with middle-class incomes. Walk down any Main Street and you won't find small business owners netting over $250,000 a year in profit (dollars remaining after the cost of employee wages and other business expenses are deducted from taxable income).

These middle-income, Main Street small businesses are the ones we really need to help create the new jobs to lift us out of this down economy. There is absolutely no evidence that the wealthiest small business owners create more jobs than those in any other tax brackets. As any small business owner knows, the number of employees does not correlate with profit.

Faux Small Business Taxpayers
So who are these mysterious high-income "small business" taxpayers in the top two brackets who Congress is considering borrowing hundreds of billions from foreign countries in order to give a tax cut?

Very few of them are what most would consider small business owners. They include partners in large corporate law firms, hedge fund managers, K Street lobbyists, high-powered consultants, Wall Street bond traders and the country's wealthiest millionaires -- all of whom claim some business income and thus are counted in IRS eyes as small businesses. These aren't "mom and pop" businesses, says Adam Looney, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution.

Not only are the vast majority of these 900,000 "faux" small business taxpayers not involved in job hiring decisions, the tax cut won't even cause them to significantly increase their personal spending to create the demand for new jobs.

The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) evaluated 11 policy options in terms of boosting economic growth and creating jobs. It found that "policies that would temporarily increase the after-tax income of people with relatively high income...would have smaller effects because such tax cuts would probably not affect the recipients' spending significantly."

The wealthiest Americans are more likely to save their money from a tax cut rather than spend it, according to Moody's Analytics, Inc.

How Can We Create Jobs?
If we really want to give a tax cut that will create jobs, then we could cut employer payroll taxes on businesses that actually increase their workforce. The CBO estimates this would have six to eight times as much job-creating impact as an income tax cut. The policy the CBO found with the biggest bang for the buck is extending unemployment insurance. It would boost demand by providing income to people most needing to spend it in the local economy.

Alternatively we could create more customers for our small businesses through infrastructure projects, many of them long overdue upkeep or modernization, or keeping teachers and law enforcement officers working rather than laid off. The policy the CBO found with the biggest bang for the buck is extending unemployment insurance -- a direct infusion of money into local economies by people buying for their basic needs.

Increasing the nation's deficit while not saving or creating jobs is just more politics as usual in Washington where those with the most money get rewarded with even more money.

Congress needs to hear this loud and clear. These high-end tax cuts serve K Street lobbyists not Main Street shop owners. Politicians should not use us to justify a very bad business decision.

This guest blog is by Frank Knapp, who is also the creator and host of a 2-hour talk-radio show called U Need 2 Know, which airs weekdays in Columbia, and is a frequent op-ed contributor for South Carolina newspapers and national publications such as The Hill. Mr. Knapp serves on numerous committees such as the American Sustainable Business Council Steering Committee and the University of South Carolina Small Business Development Center Advisory Board and was previously Chairman of the City of Columbia's Small Business Regulatory Review Committee.

November 12, 2010 at 12:14 PM in Business, Corporatism, Economy, Populism, Guest Blogger, Jobs, Obama Administration, Taxes | Permalink

Comments

At last someone is telling the truth about the tax cuts for the wealthy and making it clear that the Republicans are lying when they say they would help make jobs in the small business community.

Posted by: Jonathan | Nov 12, 2010 3:02:41 PM

We need to keep the pressure on our elected officials and raise hell with Obama, who becomes more disappointing daily in his failure to stand up for anything meaningful for the "little people."

No more tax cuts for the rich. No more.

Posted by: bg | Nov 12, 2010 5:16:55 PM

College can be expensive, and finding the money to pay for it isn’t always easy. Loans are a common method to pay for schooling, but loans must be repaid, and with interest, the cost of a college education grows.

Figuring out how you are going to afford the high costs of higher education can be an intimidating prospect for anyone. However, you should not be dissuaded from furthering your education because you think you will not be able to afford the expense. Instead, spend some time researching all of the financial aid or college grants you may qualify for; some of which may include federal school grants.

Posted by: School Scholarships | Nov 13, 2010 8:27:32 AM

https://www.hulu.com/watch/192858/charlie-rose-david-walker-and-martin-feldstein-on-the-deficit-dexter-filkins-of-the-new-york-times-thanassis-cambanis

Please go to HULU and watch Charlie Rose.
Season 18 : Ep. 209|53:18|
David Walker, CEO of the Peter G. Peterson Foundation & Martin Feldstein of Harvard University on the Deficit; Afghanistan with Dexter Filkins of The New York Times; Thanassis Cambanis on his book 'A Privilege To Die'
The topic is about the Bi-partisan commission on proposals to reduce the Federal deficit. They are proposing to privatize both social security and Medicare with personal savings accounts invested in Wall Street. Obama may make Bush's must cherished dream come true. Please watch it and feel the fear. They propose a system on Universal Personal Retirement Accounts. The looting and wealth stripping continues unabated and if you don't have money, you will not have health care or a retirement.

Posted by: qofdisks | Nov 15, 2010 12:38:36 PM

I haven't yet watched the show above but I have read other articles about what the horrible commission is recommending. It is sad but I have absolutely no faith that Obama will not go along with this madness and so many of the Democrats are bought off by corporations and banks that I wouldn't be surprised if we surrendered to the pigs who want to put corporations and banks in total control of us and everything we do.

After, all David Axelrod was already on TV yesterday saying Obama will "stand tall" against any PERMANENT extension of tax cuts for the rich. Powerful, isn't it? Last I heard we elected Dems to GET RID OF tax cuts for the rich. At least if the administration put up a fight against the Rs and then ended up having to compromise that would be a step in the right direction. As it stands they are surrendering even before the Congress gets back to work.

I am beginning to think that Obama is either completely unprepared to be president or he is a shill for moneyed interests, or both.

Posted by: barb | Nov 15, 2010 1:00:24 PM

Post a comment