Taxes and Job Creation

I need for someone to explain to me how less taxes equals more job creation. I don't want the Fox News talking points, I want the facts.

Joe Walsh my wonderful congressman who preaches fiscal responsibility, and moral wholesomeness is looking more and more like just another in a long line of used car salesman sent to Washington. For someone who blames the people who have defaulted on their mortgages it seems really backward that he has had his own house foreclosed on. The story doesn't end there as his campaign staff is suing him for over $20,000.00  owed to them.

The icing on the cake is the alleged $117,000.00 Joe Walsh is behind in child support payments. He claims its much less. So let's say it's in fact much less, say around 35 thousand dollars. That is the amount he loaned his campaign for his house seat. The moral person that he says he is should have paid what is owed to his own children. What I can't figure out is that he is against abortion yet he helps create kids and then decides he is going to let them fend for themselves. I guess that's the personal responsibility he preaches about in Washington.

Joe Walsh is for not raising taxes on the wealthiest two percent in the country and he calls them as most Republicans do, job killing tax increases. Let's take one example.  Hedge fund manager John Paulson had an income of 4.9 BILLION dollars last year. I think that's great. As a matter of fact, that same amount at a salary of almost 27 thousand a year would employ 184,000 people.

Now I'm no fool, but the people that make $27,000 a year are putting every penny they earn back into the economy just to get by. Where as Mr. Paulson can not possibly spend that amount of money reasonably. So you come back and tell me that someone making $27,000.00 a year with two kids pay no taxes at all and Mr. Paulson pays a ton of money in taxes. At face value that is true. When you look closer though, Mr. Paulson, if his salary is structured the way most people in the top two percent of income earners pays around 17.2%.  He pays very little if any into Social Security, because after you reach $107,000.00 in income you don't pay Social Security on anything made above that amount. Same with Medicare. On the other hand the person making around $27,000.00 with two kids pays no federal income tax, but still pays their share of Social Security and Medicare.

This is the problem. My congressman wants to eliminate those two programs as we know them. What I want to know is if Mr. Paulsons taxes were raised just three percent, he would still have 3.8 billion left to create jobs. I also want to know if the theory that less taxes equals more jobs, then why have the tax cuts that have been in place for the last ten years left us with a 9.2 percent unemployment and a huge national debt?  On the other hand when Clinton and Gingrich compromised in 1994 on a tax hike of three percent while cutting most welfare programs, our country had a surplus of over 230 million a year and unemployment at around five percent by the time they left office.

I am not someone who wants taxes raised just to spend more. I want the tax hike used to pay down the bills our congress has accumulated over the years and the tax increase must be tied to that. Why should the money I have paid into Social Security since I was 16 be used to pay down the debt. That money I will need for retirement where as Mr. Paulson will have no worries about his financial health when he retires. Once again can anyone show me some facts that lower taxes equal more jobs.