State House seat: $150,000 campaign?

State House seat: $150,000 campaign?

There are 4 comments on the The Tennessean story from Apr 15, 2012, titled State House seat: $150,000 campaign?. In it, The Tennessean reports that:

At least one of two late entries into local races for a seat in the Tennessee House of Representatives is struggling mightily to raise campaign money, an indication that both political newcomers may be running uphill all the way to the Aug.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Tennessean.

Ann

Smartt, TN

#1 Apr 15, 2012
More TAX CUTS FOR THE VERY RICH REPUBLICANS.

Taxes are never popular, especially in April of an election year. But the Republicans’ latest effort to tilt the tax code in favor of the wealthy, and starve the government of needed revenue, is particularly cynical.

More Help for the Wealthy




This week, the House Republican leadership is expected to bring up the “Small Business Tax Cut Act,” a bill to let most business owners deduct up to 20 percent of their business income in 2012 — a $46 billion tax cut. Despite the Mom-and-Pop label, it is designed so that nearly half of the tax cut would go to people with annual income over $1 million, and more than four-fifths would go to those making over $200,000, according to the Tax Policy Center.

The bill’s proponents, led by Majority Leader Eric Cantor, say that lower taxes would lead to more hiring. But the economic reality is that employers, big and small, are hesitant to hire because of slow or uncertain demand for their products and services, not because of their tax burden. And companies would receive the tax cut even if they did not hire new workers — making it a windfall, not an incentive.

The bill is predicated on an overly broad definition of “small business”— one with fewer than 500 employees, which can include multimillion-dollar partnerships and corporations. It is also based on a willful denial of the reality that small businesses are not the big job creators politicians often say they are.

If “small” were set at 50 employees, small businesses would be credited with creating less than a third of the new jobs over the last 20 years. And many such jobs are soon lost as small businesses struggle or fail. The best way to encourage their success is with continued government spending to support demand and by building a well-regulated banking system that is not prone to the busts that devastate small businesses.

As for the broader economy, the Congressional Budget Office analyzed 13 policies last year for their potential impact on economic growth and job creation in 2012 and 2013. The option of a business tax cut along the lines of the Cantor bill ranked next to last in bang for the buck. More effective options include fiscal aid to states and increased safety net spending, which create jobs by bolstering consumer demand — and which Republicans fiercely oppose.

Another immediate step Congress could take to create demand and jobs would be for House Republicans to drop their objections and reauthorize the highway bill, at least for two years, as the Senate has done. That would help private-sector contractors and suppliers, as well as government workers, boosting local businesses in areas where jobs are created. Extending the research and development tax credit would also help some businesses, but Senate Republicans have blocked that.

The business tax cut for not-so-small businesses will almost certainly pass the House. Senate Democrats have introduced a tax relief bill that is linked specifically to companies hiring new employees. They should stick with that. This doesn’t mean that the tax system doesn’t need fixing. It does. In the Senate this week, the Democratic leadership will make an argument for more fairness, by calling for a vote on the Buffett Rule. It would require the wealthiest taxpayers to pay at least 30 percent of their income in federal taxes and, in the process, raise some $47 billion over 10 years. Republican senators are expected to block the vote. When you mail your taxes this week, think about that.
Nonsensical

Franklin, TN

#2 Apr 16, 2012
C'mon Ann, give us a break. Do you think it is easy to support 46 million people on welfare?
DSDN

Spring Hill, TN

#3 May 1, 2012
Out of the three people running, one of them is a local Spring Hill guy, and the other 2 are lawyers from Franklin. I am tired of Franklin people always being the representation for Spring Hill and other cities in Wiliamson County. Not to mention the 2 lawyers seem to be awful greedy...I mean 100k to run a campaign and still doing fundraisers? That seems absurd to me. Kiser has got my vote. He's the one with the experience (business and education), the only one not taking any special issues money as donations are from the voters only and well, I like the idea of us finally having local representation. The last thing we need are more lawyers in politics. I hope every voter takes time to look at every candidate not just in this race but every time they vote.
fyi dummy

Spring Hill, TN

#4 May 4, 2012
Ann wrote:
More TAX CUTS FOR THE VERY RICH REPUBLICANS.
Taxes are never popular, especially in April of an election year. But the Republicans’ latest effort to tilt the tax code in favor of the wealthy, and starve the government of needed revenue, is particularly cynical.
More Help for the Wealthy
This week, the House Republican leadership is expected to bring up the “Small Business Tax Cut Act,” a bill to let most business owners deduct up to 20 percent of their business income in 2012 — a $46 billion tax cut. Despite the Mom-and-Pop label, it is designed so that nearly half of the tax cut would go to people with annual income over $1 million, and more than four-fifths would go to those making over $200,000, according to the Tax Policy Center.
The bill’s proponents, led by Majority Leader Eric Cantor, say that lower taxes would lead to more hiring. But the economic reality is that employers, big and small, are hesitant to hire because of slow or uncertain demand for their products and services, not because of their tax burden. And companies would receive the tax cut even if they did not hire new workers — making it a windfall, not an incentive.
The bill is predicated on an overly broad definition of “small business”— one with fewer than 500 employees, which can include multimillion-dollar partnerships and corporations. It is also based on a willful denial of the reality that small businesses are not the big job creators politicians often say they are.
If “small” were set at 50 employees, small businesses would be credited with creating less than a third of the new jobs over the last 20 years. And many such jobs are soon lost as small businesses struggle or fail. The best way to encourage their success is with continued government spending to support demand and by building a well-regulated banking system that is not prone to the busts that devastate small businesses.
As for the broader economy, the Congressional Budget Office analyzed 13 policies last year for their potential impact on economic growth and job creation in 2012 and 2013. The option of a business tax cut along the lines of the Cantor bill ranked next to last in bang for the buck. More effective options include fiscal aid to states and increased safety net spending, which create jobs by bolstering consumer demand — and which Republicans fiercely oppose.
Another immediate step Congress could take to create demand and jobs would be for House Republicans to drop their objections and reauthorize the highway bill, at least for two years, as the Senate has done. That would help private-sector contractors and suppliers, as well as government workers, boosting local businesses in areas where jobs are created. Extending the research and development tax credit would also help some businesses, but Senate Republicans have blocked that.
The business tax cut for not-so-small businesses will almost certainly pass the House. Senate Democrats have introduced a tax relief bill that is linked specifically to companies hiring new employees. They should stick with that. This doesn’t mean that the tax system doesn’t need fixing. It does. In the Senate this week, the Democratic leadership will make an argument for more fairness, by calling for a vote on the Buffett Rule. It would require the wealthiest taxpayers to pay at least 30 percent of their income in federal taxes and, in the process, raise some $47 billion over 10 years. Republican senators are expected to block the vote. When you mail your taxes this week, think about that.
Blahblah,blah. Typical liberal Crap. BTW, nice cut and paste job .

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Fairview Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Where is she? Thu Past 1
Bucky, Inhumane Sheriff Aug 22 Do something 1
mike (vinson) Davis (Dec '08) Aug 21 Mike Davis 35
Eric Plank Aug 20 Curious2222 3
Election Who do you support for U.S. House in Tennessee ... (Oct '10) Aug 19 Lol 308
Christy Brewer Aug 19 Bgrisham7 1
food giveaway Aug 19 wap1950 1

Fairview Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Fairview Mortgages