Please hlep me understand: Does Bill Gates or Microsoft employ people?

[jerryme1]

Please help me understand: The republicans say that the
wealthy should not be heavily taxed because they create jobs. 
My understanding is that Bill Gates (wealthy) and Microsoft
are two separate entities.  Bill Gates may employ a servant or
two at his abode. But it is Microsoft that actually employs
people. So why not tax Bill Gates and perhaps compromise with
the republicans about corporate taxation? 

[liberal N proud]

1. They are using propaganda against the people again

And people will believe them

[Mimosa]

3. Too many Americans don't understand taxes and finances, sad to say

Economics and finance should be taught starting in 8th grade. If people were taught about finances and economics and understood how money works, they couldn't be victimised by the banks and credit card companies. The schools need to include courses in economics and personal finances in the curricula. Few people learn about them at home.

[walldude]

2. It's a Republican scam...

trickle down economy does not work because the rich don't let the money trickle down they stash it in offshore accounts.

And if you think we need to compromise on corporate taxation then you need to read up. Most of our tax problems are because of giveaways to corporations, tax breaks for corporations and loopholes that allow foreign corporations to do business in the US without paying taxes.

There was a actually a vote last year to plug the loopholes in foreign tax breaks and we were going to use that money to finance health care for 9/11 first responders. The Republicans voted it down. They apparently felt that foreign tax breaks were more important than people who got sick running into the WTC on 9/11.

[jerryme1]

4. i agree

with you about corporate taxation. However, it may be starting point for Obama who obviously feels pressured to compromise.

[Canuckistanian]

5. Good point

It's Microsoft, the corporation that actually employs people. NOT Bill Gates.

And with the ruling of Citizens United, corporations are separate legal "persons" now.

So, Bill Gates' personal wealth should have ZILCH to do with whether Microsoft hires or not, right?

[jerryme1]

10. This would be a very simple argument for the president to make

and one that average people could understand.

[Shandris]

12. True, but those aren't the 'jobs' that the right is referring to...

...when they say that 'tax cuts create jobs'. Supposedly, there's this thing where when you get rich, you buy not just one or two, but an infinite stream of yachts so the boatbuilders have to hire more people. As if that made sense. Consider...

John and Janice McWealthy receive their tax cut. John ONLY makes 1.85 million dollars right now per year, poor guy.

John: "OH look Janice, we got our tax cut!"
Janice: "OH finally, thank God! Now we can buy that 40' yacht that we couldn't afford before!"

Anyone buying this excuse? I sure as hell am not. The rich already have what they want. This money isn't going to fund some miraculous job creation bullshit, it's going into an offshore account protected by more tax lawyer loopholes than Fort Knox so it can.....SIT THERE. Or buy a mansion in Crepe-on-the-Lake. Or be passed off to the 'deserving scions' that need protection from the oh-so-unfair 'death tax'.

But noting the difference between Bill and Microsoft will only bring one conservative out who's smart enough to realize you're using a bad example, then trumpet it to high hell as "See!! Liberals don't even understand how tax cuts WORK! What more proof do you need?!"

[Canuckistanian]

13. What I'd like to see

Is a system where the rich get tax cuts - but only if they can PROVE that they've DIRECTLY created jobs somehow.

If they stash it in a Swiss bank, no tax cut. If they fire people to close down a factory and move it to Mexico, no tax cut.

Let's make them live up to their claims.

[EmeraldCityGrl]

6. WA. State rejected Initiative 1098

which would have imposed an income tax on the top 1% of earners.
The initiative was initiated by Bill Gates Sr. and supported by Bill Gates,
which would have raised billions for health care and education.

The $6.3 million campaign AGAINST the initiative was bankrolled by some
of the most prominent names in Washington business, including Microsoft Corp.
CEO Steve Ballmer and Amazon.com Inc. founder Jeff Bezos. People were wrongly
lead to believe the income tax would be imposed on all incomes in two years by
the state legislature which was a flat out lie.

They also failed to understand how the tax would be applied. A couple earning $500,000
would be taxed on $100,000 ( The cut off was $400,000) at 5%. or a total of $5000. They
couldn't understand they would not be taxed on their entire income of $500,000.

People are stupid. The campaign against the initiative had middle-aged actors sitting around
the kitchen table explaining how this was a rouse to tax the middle-class. They failed
to understand any future income tax would have to be voted on by the people.

Point being...taxing Bill Gates would have been fine with him.

[kctim]

9. Then why didn't he run a $6.4 million campaign FOR the initiative?

[EmeraldCityGrl]

11. They ran a campaign.

But it wasn't a negative campaign and failed to explain fully
how the tax would be applied to the rich. I have no idea what
they spent on it, but the opposing campaign came on very quickly
near the end. 60 minutes ran a segment the weekend before
we voted that explained the tax initiative in detail. It's impossible
for me to understand any middle-class voter that understood the
initiative voting against it.

[PBS Poll-435]

7. Just that poor overworked Paper-Clip

:(

[kick-ass-bob]

8. No, no! It's the small businesses...

you know, the ones with owners making $10M a year that are getting shafted!



:sarcasm: for those without a meter...