Ernst and Young: Obama’s Tax Increase Would Kill 710,000 Jobs
Curtis Dubay
July 18, 2012 at 11:00 am
"A new study conducted by Ernst and Young proves conclusively that the
President’s tax increase would be devastating to the economy and jobs.
The study finds that, if Congress misguidedly adopted President Obama’s
plan to raise taxes on job creators by allowing the Bush-era tax policies
to expire for incomes over $200,000 ($250,000 for married filers), the
economy and jobs would suffer terribly:
•Output in the long run would fall by 1.3 percent, or $200 billion, in
today’s economy;
•Employment in the long run would fall by 0.5 percent or, roughly 710,000
fewer jobs, in today’s economy;
•Capital stock and investment in the long run would fall by 1.4 percent
and 2.4 percent, respectively; and
•Real after-tax wages would fall by 1.8 percent.
There are almost 13 million Americans out of work today. President Obama’s
tax increase would needlessly add almost three-quarters of a million
people to that already much too large number. Even those with jobs
wouldn’t escape the pain of President Obama’s tax increase, as they would
see their wages suffer.
The report validates Heritage’s argument that President Obama’s tax
increase plan would badly hurt job creation because it would fall heaviest
on the most successful businesses that employ workers and pay their taxes
through the individual income tax (known as flow-through businesses). The
study reports:
The concern over higher individual tax rates has also been a focus because
of the prominent role played by flow-through businesses—S corporations,
partnerships, limited liability companies, and sole proprietorships—in the
US economy and that a large fraction of flow-through income is subject to
the top two individual income tax rates. These businesses employ 54% of
the private sector work force and pay 44% of federal business income
taxes. The number of workers employed by large flow-through businesses is
also significant: more than 20 million workers are employed by
flow-through businesses with more than 100 employees. (Emphasis added.)
President Obama is fond of saying his tax increase wouldn’t impact 97
percent of small businesses. But those 97 percent of small businesses
aren’t job creators. They range from people in their basements selling
items on e-Bay to lawyers who practice out of their homes.
The businesses that would pay this tax increase are the businesses that
hire millions of workers. Higher taxes on these vital job creators could
force them to cut back on their existing workforce and would certainly
cause them to slow hiring of new workers.
President Obama couches his argument for tax hikes on the rich in terms of
fairness. But it would be anything but fair that millions of unemployed
Americans desperate to go back to work would find it harder to land a job
to provide for their families because of President Obama’s misguided class
warfare.
There can be no doubt any more that President Obama’s Taxmageddon tax
increase would devastate jobs."
Irish Mike
Obama has been an unmitigated disaster for this country. If you voted for
Obama in 2008 to prove you're not a racist, vote against him in 2012 to
prove you're not an idiot.
On Aug 7, 3:07 am, "Irish Mike" <ad7c...@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
> President Obama is fond of saying his tax increase wouldn’t impact 97
> percent of small businesses. But those 97 percent of small businesses
> aren’t job creators. They range from people in their basements selling
> items on e-Bay to lawyers who practice out of their homes.
>> President Obama is fond of saying his tax increase wouldn t impact 97
>> percent of small businesses. But those 97 percent of small businesses
>> aren t job creators. They range from people in their basements selling
>> items on e-Bay to lawyers who practice out of their homes.
> Ernst and Young: Obama’s Tax Increase Would Kill 710,000 Jobs
> Curtis Dubay
> July 18, 2012 at 11:00 am
> "A new study conducted by Ernst and Young proves conclusively that the
> President’s tax increase would be devastating to the economy and jobs.
> The study finds that, if Congress misguidedly adopted President Obama’s
> plan to raise taxes on job creators by allowing the Bush-era tax policies
> to expire for incomes over $200,000 ($250,000 for married filers), the
> economy and jobs would suffer terribly:
> •Output in the long run would fall by 1.3 percent, or $200 billion, in
> today’s economy;
> •Employment in the long run would fall by 0.5 percent or, roughly 710,000
> fewer jobs, in today’s economy;
> •Capital stock and investment in the long run would fall by 1.4 percent
> and 2.4 percent, respectively; and
> •Real after-tax wages would fall by 1.8 percent.
> There are almost 13 million Americans out of work today. President Obama’s
> tax increase would needlessly add almost three-quarters of a million
> people to that already much too large number. Even those with jobs
> wouldn’t escape the pain of President Obama’s tax increase, as they would
> see their wages suffer.
> The report validates Heritage’s argument that President Obama’s tax
> increase plan would badly hurt job creation because it would fall heaviest
> on the most successful businesses that employ workers and pay their taxes
> through the individual income tax (known as flow-through businesses). The
> study reports:
> The concern over higher individual tax rates has also been a focus because
> of the prominent role played by flow-through businesses—S corporations,
> partnerships, limited liability companies, and sole proprietorships—in the
> US economy and that a large fraction of flow-through income is subject to
> the top two individual income tax rates. These businesses employ 54% of
> the private sector work force and pay 44% of federal business income
> taxes. The number of workers employed by large flow-through businesses is
> also significant: more than 20 million workers are employed by
> flow-through businesses with more than 100 employees. (Emphasis added.)
> President Obama is fond of saying his tax increase wouldn’t impact 97
> percent of small businesses. But those 97 percent of small businesses
> aren’t job creators. They range from people in their basements selling
> items on e-Bay to lawyers who practice out of their homes.
> The businesses that would pay this tax increase are the businesses that
> hire millions of workers. Higher taxes on these vital job creators could
> force them to cut back on their existing workforce and would certainly
> cause them to slow hiring of new workers.
> President Obama couches his argument for tax hikes on the rich in terms of
> fairness. But it would be anything but fair that millions of unemployed
> Americans desperate to go back to work would find it harder to land a job
> to provide for their families because of President Obama’s misguided class
> warfare.
> There can be no doubt any more that President Obama’s Taxmageddon tax
> increase would devastate jobs."
> Irish Mike
> Obama has been an unmitigated disaster for this country. If you voted for
> Obama in 2008 to prove you're not a racist, vote against him in 2012 to
> prove you're not an idiot.
If I had a dime for every so-called study that has predicted that this
or that government policy would cost X thousand jobs....
Somebody puts one out every goddamn day. And they're never right.
> On Tue, 7 Aug 2012 06:17:43 -0700 (PDT), gpsman
> <gps...@driversmail.com> wrote this crap:
> >> There can be no doubt any more that President Obama s Taxmageddon tax
> >> increase would devastate jobs."
> >Only an idiot would purport to predict such a thing with absolute
> >certainty.
> It was a study done by a government agency. I saw the same report on
> national news.
> Bernie Goldberg reported it on Fox News. The number one news network.
> >How much more than 99% of the money does the 1% purport to need to
> >create more jobs...?
> You're so smart, you figger it out. But there's an old Chinese saying
> that I once made up. "If the pie gets bigger, more people can eat."
> Vote for Romney. Repeal the nightmares.
A "journalist" at your number one news network asked a relative of one
of the Sikhs who had been killed in Wisconsin if the Sikh community
there had ever been the victim of "anti-semitic" violence before.
Another one said it was too bad the Sikhs weren't armed. In other
words, members of a sect that is dedicated to non-violence should have
been carrying firearms during worship services.
On Tue, 7 Aug 2012 07:17:40 -0700 (PDT), "John B."
<johnb...@gmail.com> wrote this crap:
>If I had a dime for every so-called study that has predicted that this
>or that government policy would cost X thousand jobs....
>Somebody puts one out every goddamn day. And they're never right.
Think about that when you hear the next report on climate change.
John B. wrote:
> On Aug 7, 9:56 am, Horvath1...@net.net wrote:
>> On Tue, 7 Aug 2012 06:17:43 -0700 (PDT), gpsman
>> <gps...@driversmail.com> wrote this crap:
>>>> There can be no doubt any more that President Obama s Taxmageddon tax
>>>> increase would devastate jobs."
>>> Only an idiot would purport to predict such a thing with absolute
>>> certainty.
>> It was a study done by a government agency. I saw the same report on
>> national news.
>> Bernie Goldberg reported it on Fox News. The number one news network.
>>> How much more than 99% of the money does the 1% purport to need to
>>> create more jobs...?
>> You're so smart, you figger it out. But there's an old Chinese saying
>> that I once made up. "If the pie gets bigger, more people can eat."
>> Vote for Romney. Repeal the nightmares.
> A "journalist" at your number one news network asked a relative of one
> of the Sikhs who had been killed in Wisconsin if the Sikh community
> there had ever been the victim of "anti-semitic" violence before.
> Another one said it was too bad the Sikhs weren't armed. In other
> words, members of a sect that is dedicated to non-violence should have
> been carrying firearms during worship services.
Who was that? I thought everyone in Wisc. was armed. ;-)
On Tue, 07 Aug 2012 10:37:37 -0400, Horvath1...@net.net wrote:
>On Tue, 7 Aug 2012 07:15:45 -0700 (PDT), "John B."
><johnb...@gmail.com> wrote this crap:
>>On Aug 7, 9:56 am, Horvath1...@net.net wrote:
>>> You're so smart, you figger it out. But there's an old Chinese saying
>>> that I once made up. "If the pie gets bigger, more people can eat."
>>Ernst & Young is a government agency? Who knew?
>They were hired by the government.
Here's positive proof how full of shit you are. Again.
From bizjournals.com re Ernst & Young tax study:
"The study was commissioned by four business groups that are opposed
to this tax increase, which will go into effect Jan. 1 under current
law. Those groups include the National Federation of Independent
Business, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Independent Community Bankers
of America and the S Corporation Association."
On Tue, 07 Aug 2012 09:41:58 -0500, MNMikeW <mnmiik...@aol.com> wrote:
>John B. wrote:
>> On Aug 7, 9:56 am, Horvath1...@net.net wrote:
>> A "journalist" at your number one news network asked a relative of one
>> of the Sikhs who had been killed in Wisconsin if the Sikh community
>> there had ever been the victim of "anti-semitic" violence before.
>> Another one said it was too bad the Sikhs weren't armed. In other
>> words, members of a sect that is dedicated to non-violence should have
>> been carrying firearms during worship services.
>Who was that? I thought everyone in Wisc. was armed. ;-)
The real laugh was that the FOX "journalist" thought that Sikhs are
victims of anti-Semitism. Brilliant folks over there.
bkni...@conramp.net wrote:
> On Tue, 07 Aug 2012 09:41:58 -0500, MNMikeW <mnmiik...@aol.com> wrote:
>> John B. wrote:
>>> On Aug 7, 9:56 am, Horvath1...@net.net wrote:
>>> A "journalist" at your number one news network asked a relative of one
>>> of the Sikhs who had been killed in Wisconsin if the Sikh community
>>> there had ever been the victim of "anti-semitic" violence before.
>>> Another one said it was too bad the Sikhs weren't armed. In other
>>> words, members of a sect that is dedicated to non-violence should have
>>> been carrying firearms during worship services.
>> Who was that? I thought everyone in Wisc. was armed. ;-)
> The real laugh was that the FOX "journalist" thought that Sikhs are
> victims of anti-Semitism. Brilliant folks over there.
On Tue, 07 Aug 2012 10:25:55 -0500, MNMikeW <mnmiik...@aol.com> wrote:
>bkni...@conramp.net wrote:
>> On Tue, 07 Aug 2012 09:41:58 -0500, MNMikeW <mnmiik...@aol.com> wrote:
>>> John B. wrote:
>>>> On Aug 7, 9:56 am, Horvath1...@net.net wrote:
>>>> A "journalist" at your number one news network asked a relative of one
>>>> of the Sikhs who had been killed in Wisconsin if the Sikh community
>>>> there had ever been the victim of "anti-semitic" violence before.
>>>> Another one said it was too bad the Sikhs weren't armed. In other
>>>> words, members of a sect that is dedicated to non-violence should have
>>>> been carrying firearms during worship services.
>>> Who was that? I thought everyone in Wisc. was armed. ;-)
>> The real laugh was that the FOX "journalist" thought that Sikhs are
>> victims of anti-Semitism. Brilliant folks over there.
>Again, who?
It wasn't me who first posted this so I googled it.
From Politico.com
"Fox News host Gregg Jarrett asked a nephew of one of the victims,
"Have there been any prior acts of violence against members of the
temple? Any anti-Semitic acts?"
> On Aug 7, 9:56 am, Horvath1...@net.net wrote:
> > On Tue, 7 Aug 2012 06:17:43 -0700 (PDT), gpsman
> > <gps...@driversmail.com> wrote this crap:
> > >> There can be no doubt any more that President Obama s Taxmageddon tax
> > >> increase would devastate jobs."
> > >Only an idiot would purport to predict such a thing with absolute
> > >certainty.
> > It was a study done by a government agency. I saw the same report on
> > national news.
> > Bernie Goldberg reported it on Fox News. The number one news network.
> > >How much more than 99% of the money does the 1% purport to need to
> > >create more jobs...?
> > You're so smart, you figger it out. But there's an old Chinese saying
> > that I once made up. "If the pie gets bigger, more people can eat."
> > Vote for Romney. Repeal the nightmares.
> A "journalist" at your number one news network asked a relative of one
> of the Sikhs who had been killed in Wisconsin if the Sikh community
> there had ever been the victim of "anti-semitic" violence before.
> Another one said it was too bad the Sikhs weren't armed. In other
> words, members of a sect that is dedicated to non-violence should have
> been carrying firearms during worship services.
I suppose all the commemorations in British Army cemeteries around world
dedicated to Sikhs are for non-violence. In reality, the Sikhs have a
reputation as great warriors.
On Tue, 07 Aug 2012 09:47:32 -0500, bkni...@conramp.net wrote this
crap:
>"The study was commissioned by four business groups that are opposed
>to this tax increase, which will go into effect Jan. 1 under current
>law. Those groups include the National Federation of Independent
>Business, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Independent Community Bankers
>of America and the S Corporation Association."
And you think the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the *National*
Federation of Independent Business are NOT government agencies. All
those people are from the government.
On Tue, 07 Aug 2012 12:24:03 -0400, Horvath1...@net.net wrote:
>On Tue, 07 Aug 2012 09:47:32 -0500, bkni...@conramp.net wrote this
>crap:
>>"The study was commissioned by four business groups that are opposed
>>to this tax increase, which will go into effect Jan. 1 under current
>>law. Those groups include the National Federation of Independent
>>Business, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Independent Community Bankers
>>of America and the S Corporation Association."
>And you think the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the *National*
>Federation of Independent Business are NOT government agencies. All
>those people are from the government.
>>>>> A "journalist" at your number one news network asked a relative of one
>>>>> of the Sikhs who had been killed in Wisconsin if the Sikh community
>>>>> there had ever been the victim of "anti-semitic" violence before.
>>>>> Another one said it was too bad the Sikhs weren't armed. In other
>>>>> words, members of a sect that is dedicated to non-violence should have
>>>>> been carrying firearms during worship services.
>>>> Who was that? I thought everyone in Wisc. was armed. ;-)
>>> The real laugh was that the FOX "journalist" thought that Sikhs are
>>> victims of anti-Semitism. Brilliant folks over there.
>>Again, who?
>It wasn't me who first posted this so I googled it.
>From Politico.com
>"Fox News host Gregg Jarrett asked a nephew of one of the victims,
>"Have there been any prior acts of violence against members of the
>temple? Any anti-Semitic acts?"
How can that possibly mean that Sikhs were victims of anti-Semitic
acts?
On Tue, 07 Aug 2012 12:34:28 -0400, Horvath1...@net.net wrote:
>On Tue, 07 Aug 2012 10:40:15 -0500, bkni...@conramp.net wrote this
>crap:
>>>>>> A "journalist" at your number one news network asked a relative of one
>>>>>> of the Sikhs who had been killed in Wisconsin if the Sikh community
>>>>>> there had ever been the victim of "anti-semitic" violence before.
>>>>>> Another one said it was too bad the Sikhs weren't armed. In other
>>>>>> words, members of a sect that is dedicated to non-violence should have
>>>>>> been carrying firearms during worship services.
>>>>> Who was that? I thought everyone in Wisc. was armed. ;-)
>>>> The real laugh was that the FOX "journalist" thought that Sikhs are
>>>> victims of anti-Semitism. Brilliant folks over there.
>>>Again, who?
>>It wasn't me who first posted this so I googled it.
>>From Politico.com
>>"Fox News host Gregg Jarrett asked a nephew of one of the victims,
>>"Have there been any prior acts of violence against members of the
>>temple? Any anti-Semitic acts?"
>How can that possibly mean that Sikhs were victims of anti-Semitic
>acts?
Are you really that dense? Read all of the above and see if you can
understand it.
> On Aug 7, 3:07 am, "Irish Mike" <ad7c...@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
> > President Obama is fond of saying his tax increase wouldn’t impact 97
> > percent of small businesses. But those 97 percent of small businesses
> > aren’t job creators. They range from people in their basements selling
> > items on e-Bay to lawyers who practice out of their homes.
> > There can be no doubt any more that President Obama’s Taxmageddon tax
> > increase would devastate jobs."
> Only an idiot would purport to predict such a thing with absolute
> certainty.
> How much more than 99% of the money does the 1% purport to need to
> create more jobs...?
> -----
> - gpsman
What terrifies Democrats is having to defend Obama's miserable record,
failed economic policies and lack of leadership. Which is why they are
working so hard to encourage class warfare in this country.
Irish Mike
"I will make no excuses". Presidential candidate Barak Obama. LOL. I'm
sorry, but it's hard to type that broken campaign promise and not laugh
out loud. I mean, seriously, is there any one, or any thing, that Obama
has not blamed for his miserable record, failed economic policies and lack
of leadership?
bkni...@conramp.net wrote:
> On Tue, 07 Aug 2012 10:25:55 -0500, MNMikeW <mnmiik...@aol.com> wrote:
>> bkni...@conramp.net wrote:
>>> On Tue, 07 Aug 2012 09:41:58 -0500, MNMikeW <mnmiik...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> John B. wrote:
>>>>> On Aug 7, 9:56 am, Horvath1...@net.net wrote:
>>>>> A "journalist" at your number one news network asked a relative of one
>>>>> of the Sikhs who had been killed in Wisconsin if the Sikh community
>>>>> there had ever been the victim of "anti-semitic" violence before.
>>>>> Another one said it was too bad the Sikhs weren't armed. In other
>>>>> words, members of a sect that is dedicated to non-violence should have
>>>>> been carrying firearms during worship services.
>>>> Who was that? I thought everyone in Wisc. was armed. ;-)
>>> The real laugh was that the FOX "journalist" thought that Sikhs are
>>> victims of anti-Semitism. Brilliant folks over there.
>> Again, who?
> It wasn't me who first posted this so I googled it.
> From Politico.com
> "Fox News host Gregg Jarrett asked a nephew of one of the victims,
> "Have there been any prior acts of violence against members of the
> temple? Any anti-Semitic acts?"
> On Aug 7, 9:56 am, Horvath1...@net.net wrote:
> > On Tue, 7 Aug 2012 06:17:43 -0700 (PDT), gpsman
> > <gps...@driversmail.com> wrote this crap:
> > >> There can be no doubt any more that President Obama s Taxmageddon tax
> > >> increase would devastate jobs."
> > >Only an idiot would purport to predict such a thing with absolute
> > >certainty.
> > It was a study done by a government agency. I saw the same report on
> > national news.
> > Bernie Goldberg reported it on Fox News. The number one news network.
> > >How much more than 99% of the money does the 1% purport to need to
> > >create more jobs...?
> > You're so smart, you figger it out. But there's an old Chinese saying
> > that I once made up. "If the pie gets bigger, more people can eat."
> > Vote for Romney. Repeal the nightmares.
> A "journalist" at your number one news network asked a relative of one
> of the Sikhs who had been killed in Wisconsin if the Sikh community
> there had ever been the victim of "anti-semitic" violence before.
> Another one said it was too bad the Sikhs weren't armed. In other
> words, members of a sect that is dedicated to non-violence should have
> been carrying firearms during worship services.
Translation: The results of this jobs study make Obama look like a
clueless idiot on the economy. Let me try to change the subject by
attacking Fox News. Nice try bucko, but no one is buying it. Now stick
your head back in the Obama kool aid bucket.
Irish Mike
What terrifies Democrats is having to defend Obama's miserable record,
failed economic policies and lack of leadership. Which is why they are
working so hard to encourage class warfare in this country.
> On Aug 7, 3:07 am, "Irish Mike" <ad7c...@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
> > Ernst and Young: Obama s Tax Increase Would Kill 710,000 Jobs
> > Curtis Dubay
> > July 18, 2012 at 11:00 am
> > "A new study conducted by Ernst and Young proves conclusively that the
> > President s tax increase would be devastating to the economy and jobs.
> > The study finds that, if Congress misguidedly adopted President Obama s
> > plan to raise taxes on job creators by allowing the Bush-era tax policies
> > to expire for incomes over $200,000 ($250,000 for married filers), the
> > economy and jobs would suffer terribly:
> > Output in the long run would fall by 1.3 percent, or $200 billion, in
> > today s economy;
> > Employment in the long run would fall by 0.5 percent or, roughly 710,000
> > fewer jobs, in today s economy;
> > Capital stock and investment in the long run would fall by 1.4 percent
> > and 2.4 percent, respectively; and
> > Real after-tax wages would fall by 1.8 percent.
> > There are almost 13 million Americans out of work today. President Obama s
> > tax increase would needlessly add almost three-quarters of a million
> > people to that already much too large number. Even those with jobs
> > wouldn t escape the pain of President Obama s tax increase, as they would
> > see their wages suffer.
> > The report validates Heritage s argument that President Obama s tax
> > increase plan would badly hurt job creation because it would fall heaviest
> > on the most successful businesses that employ workers and pay their taxes
> > through the individual income tax (known as flow-through businesses). The
> > study reports:
> > The concern over higher individual tax rates has also been a focus because
> > of the prominent role played by flow-through businesses S corporations,
> > partnerships, limited liability companies, and sole proprietorships in the
> > US economy and that a large fraction of flow-through income is subject to
> > the top two individual income tax rates. These businesses employ 54% of
> > the private sector work force and pay 44% of federal business income
> > taxes. The number of workers employed by large flow-through businesses is
> > also significant: more than 20 million workers are employed by
> > flow-through businesses with more than 100 employees. (Emphasis added.)
> > President Obama is fond of saying his tax increase wouldn t impact 97
> > percent of small businesses. But those 97 percent of small businesses
> > aren t job creators. They range from people in their basements selling
> > items on e-Bay to lawyers who practice out of their homes.
> > The businesses that would pay this tax increase are the businesses that
> > hire millions of workers. Higher taxes on these vital job creators could
> > force them to cut back on their existing workforce and would certainly
> > cause them to slow hiring of new workers.
> > President Obama couches his argument for tax hikes on the rich in terms of
> > fairness. But it would be anything but fair that millions of unemployed
> > Americans desperate to go back to work would find it harder to land a job
> > to provide for their families because of President Obama s misguided class
> > warfare.
> > There can be no doubt any more that President Obama s Taxmageddon tax
> > increase would devastate jobs."
> > Irish Mike
> > Obama has been an unmitigated disaster for this country. If you voted for
> > Obama in 2008 to prove you're not a racist, vote against him in 2012 to
> > prove you're not an idiot.
> If I had a dime for every so-called study that has predicted that this
> or that government policy would cost X thousand jobs....
> Somebody puts one out every goddamn day. And they're never right.
Trjanslation: This study makes Obama look like a clueless idiot on the
economy. Let me attack the study and just say that studies are "never
right". Sorry bucko, but that dog won't hunt. Now stick your head back
in that Obama kool aid bucket.
Irish Mike
Obama has been an unmitigated disaster for this country. If you voted for
Obama in 2008 to prove you're not a racist, vote against him in 2012 to
prove you're not an idiot.
