Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (46033)	9/22/2010 2:20:49 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

when the facts tell a very different story," No they don't. "They are using the label of small business to disguise the fact that some of the biggest beneficiaries [of keeping tax rates on the wealthy in place] are hedge funds, major Washington law firms, big private equity companies No disguise. They are accurately pointing out that succesfull small businesses will be hurt by the higher tax rates. It's also a bad thing that the big equity companies, lawyers, etc, will have to pay higher taxes. not "all of the income is from entities that might be considered 'small.'" Of course. Its not just a tax on small businesses, but it will hit more small businesses than large ones. "People using this story that "some" or even "many" of the small businesses aren't small, have to acknowledge that there will, in fact, be a tax hike on hundreds of thousands of small businesses and families," said Don Stewart, a spokesman for Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky). "If it's not 750,000, what number are they satisfied with? Is it okay to "only" give a tax hike to 700,000 small businesses? 300,000? 100,000? I'd love to see that argument: "Hey, it's okay, we're only going to raise taxes on a couple hundred thousand small businesses!" Stewart has a good point.