Frightening Wall Street Journal Election Article

Comments

1. Jean Akins says:

   Hello Chris:

   This is an opportunity to show that God has put everything we need to fight any disease on this planet. The only problem is, is your Dad willing to try these Alternative treatments. There is a herbalist that I know that has reversed many Cancer cases. She looks at your eye and give you the herbs necessary for your healing. Please take a look at the article below and tell me what you think.
   My prayers is with your father.

   [ADMIN EDIT – Personal Advertising/Contact Information Removed. Our company and sites need to stay generic as we train for all different companies and products/services. We don’t want to set a precedent for blatant advertising in blog comments. The URL field should be used for putting your site, etc. Thanks for understanding and for your support and kind words!]
2. Kelly says:

   Chris,

   The editorial pages of the WSJ are notoriously right-leaning, just as the NYT editorials are notoriously left-leaning.

   This was written by a “Bush I” economic adviser, and Bush’s economic plan was not exactly a stellar success for most Americans. Truth is I have suffered financially under “Bush II’s” economic policy as have most “average” Americans — not policies I want continued.

   Sadly, most Americans have not actually read the candidate’s plans and compared them to each other. I have, and you can’t slip a piece of paper between McCain’s plans and Bush’s because they are so tightly connected. Under Obama’s plan, 80% of Americans will receive a tax cut and 95% of Americans with families will receive one. I’m really tired of politicians only taking care of the top, top layer of cream and letting the bottom 99% drown.

   Economists can twist the stats to make the numbers say whatever they want them to say. That’s the old “What are the 3 kinds of lies?” joke– lies, damned lies, and statistics. I’m willing to give Obama a try.

   Kelly
3. Derrick Carpenter says:

   Obama actually plans to cut taxes for small (including home based) businesses, because our businesses provide jobs and when successful pay even more taxes.
4. Chris Zavadowski says:

   Hi Kelly and Derrick,

   Thanks for your feedback. If you can point me to something that disputes what’s in that article, I’m all ears…but so far, no one has been able to show otherwise. You can’t propose sweeping tax cuts and increases in spending at the same time.

   While Obama’s tax proposals will hurt successful businesses and individuals more…neither candidate has a “good” plan to truly spur on businesses and entrepreneurs in this country. :-/

   Fortune Small Business just did an interesting article and survey based on both the candidates’ plans. 46% of business owners polled think their business would do better under a McCain administration, compared to 34% under Obama. And a whopping 49% said their business taxes are too high. (Believe me, paying close to 50% in taxes at the end of the day is not good for business).

   The truth is, all of my subscribers and students are headed toward (if not already there) creating successful businesses with the Internet. That’s why paying attention to these matters is of critical importance. Once you figure out the pieces to the puzzle and start taking action online, earning $200,000/yr isn’t all that hard (and a six figure income in America is not what it used to be). And a couple earning a combined $250,000/yr would similarly be hurt.

   But here’s the rub…

   Truth be told…it’s IMPOSSIBLE to truly tax a business. Thinking the successful/wealthy can cover the asses of the other 95% you referenced is a fallacy, because a business will simply raise prices and adjust other economics in the business to account for the higher rates. That’s why it’s dangerous for someone to think the entrepreneurs and people driving our economy should have to pay more. They won’t. It will get passed on to their customers and employees.

   Penalizing the success of someone who worked harder and smarter to get to a higher level does NOT have a positive ripple effect — especially when that business owner most likely stimulated the economy and provided more opportunity from their success. It sends an unfavorable message for future generations of entrepreneurs and business owners.

   Chris 🙂
5. Chuck Bartok says:

   I appreciate al the rhetoric about the Political Campaigns
   and the ridiculous Propsals proffered.

   In 50 years, there has never been a Preisident
   that affected MY income or abilty to create wealth.

   It is in my total control.

   Regarding Fiscal Policy, it is NOT in the Job Description of the President.
   The founding Fathers gave that power to the Legislative branch.

   WHERE is the Politcal discussion about these DO Nothing, self-serving Professional Leaches?

   As long as they create entitlements to satisfy the Sheep we wil continue to see
   “crisis” as we are supoposedly experiencing NOW.

   I am NOT.

   We predicted the end of Funny Money, stared to relign our product creation to fill
   the lack of Large Ticket purchases with the “funny Money”. A good busines person, with a well designed Plan and monitored constantly doesn’t “suffer” the cyclical vagaries of
   False economic principles.

   Don’t Borrow, re-invest in yourself, grow business with Real Capital and it doesn’t mean Squat who is in the White House. BUT do get ACTIVE in placing Business Backgrounded Legislatures.

   Doesn’t anybody read the rules anymore.

   The President’s Job is well defined
   Foreign Policy and
   CEO of the Nation’s Defense.

   Thatis the area that only one candidiate currently seeking offic has even a modicum of experience. Based on the failed Global trip, the Empty-Suit needs a lot of Learning and experience.

   Interesting, he was the second largest CASH recipiant of Lobbying money
   from the poorly managed recently failed. flawes fannie Mae and Freddie Mac
6. Samuel says:

   I appreciate the link to this article. It is important to know those who are running or are currently in office. Too many of the American citizens do not take the time to get informed on the issues that affect the direction and maybe the viability of our great nation. Further more the two party system stinks, we really do’nt get a choice. I think that our chances are better focused on the congress who can be voted out every two years if need be they are the ones that control the pursse and can limit the jurisdictions for the judges. In the mean time , every 4 years we’ll vote for the president.