Taxing the Capitalists

One of the few things that creates jobs in the American economy is direct financial investment by the capitalist, (the business owner, or the stockholder). One of the only other things that creates jobs, in an indirect way, is large scale expenditures of the US government itself. Now, the question is how should we decide to manage this relationship. On the one hand, capitalists could merely invest their profit into growth of their business, or we as a nation could tax them, and then transfer their profit to those that it need it most, which does not necessarily create more technological investment but indeed increases the national GDP because poor people are able to spend money they otherwise would not have. In case one, the capitalists could keep more of their money and invest it into building new buildings, researching new technology, or improving equipment. OR. We can tax those businesses and then give that would be investment money to poor people so that they can buy food, clothes, eyeglasses, shoes and maybe cheap healthcare.

Which seems to make more sense to you?

Allow the capitalists to keep the profit they earned so that they can invest it into creating new jobs and researching new innovations which will lead onto new jobs

Tax the capitalists and give it to the poor so that the poor can sustain their lives and get ready to go back to work.

Not sure

A possibility is that even if capitalists earn their money they may not necessarily invest in business development but may merely keep it in the bank, which may not necessarily generate jobs.

Capitalists will most likely may just save their money and not invest it in new business

Capitalists would most likely invest it in their businesses so that they can make more profit in the future

Its hard to say

Economists claim that even if capitalists keep their money they still will put it in the bank and by having a large amount of money in the banking system allows the poor and middle class to borrow that money, which will stimulate the economy and create jobs.

Yes, I'd rather have a low interest rate because the capitalists put their money in the bank

No, I don't think that capitalists having money in the bank is that valuable because if the government taxes it, then gives it to the poor, they spend it or put it in the bank themselves, so it is either growing the economy or in the bank anyway.

Not sure

Yes, I'd rather have a low interest rate because the capitalists put their money in the bank

Not sure

The only problem of capitalists keeping their money in the bank and not investing it is that banks, can only lend out 75% of their money legally, so banking money, is only 3/4 effective compared to those businesses directly investing it into their businesses. For example, if Ford purchases a 1 million dollar new plant, all 1 million is circulated into the economy. But if Ford puts 1 million in the bank, only $750,000 may be lend to people who may buy cars(or anything else), thus, the economy was only stimulated by 3/4 its maximum potential, within the short period of time. Now on the other hand, if the government taxes Ford and takes that million dollars, the US government will spend about half on military and about 25% on welfare for the poor. Therefore, the weapons industry will increase, and the things that poor buy like food and clothing will increase, but Ford will most likely not see any increase. Which do you think is that most desirable outcome?

Ford should invest its money in its own business to create more jobs and more cars, which may make cars less expensive because of an increase in supply

Ford should save its money so that middle incomers can buy more cars, but will most likely increase the cost of cars, because of more money chasing the same amount of cars being produced

The government should tax Ford to make bombs and feed poor people

Hard to say

Taxation and law in the United States is supposed to be about fairness. Often big business is overtaxed, merely to afford a war effort, to maintain national defense, or to support the poor. Is it fair that large businesses which supply us with the things that we want are taxed more heavily than middle incomers or the poor.

Yes, they only reason big businesses have more money is because they over charge on their product and under pay their workers. If they paid their workers more and charged the consumer less, they wouldn't be taxed as much

No, it seems that if they managed their finances well and become wealthy as a company we should let them continue on so because they will create more jobs and produce more desirable or higher quality goods.

Its too complicated to simplify

If you were the President of one of the largest companies in the world and you had an excess of 1 billion dollars in profit what do you think should happen to that money. Now consider, that to make that 1 billion, you had to study all your life, you had to develop leadership skills, you had to risk many things in your life, you had to increase your economic intelligence, your business intelligence, your emotional intelligence, your social skills, your investment intelligence, along with a lifetime of networking, friend-building, and all the while avoiding vices, like drugs and alcohol. Now that you have made a billion dollar profit in the name of your company, do you think that you would ...

Have it invested back into the company so that they company can grow and create more jobs, more quality and more profit

Have the US government take it and give it to poor people and make bombs and military equipment with it

Put it in the bank and let others borrow the money at an interest rate

Not sure

This poll was created on 2007-01-20 03:38:33 by PoliticoMind