Since when are economic policies supposed to increase the number of people on Welfare?

Does it strike anyone else as strange that John McCain says he doesn't know as much about economics as he should, yet his economic plan is the best of the two?

McCain's plan is to cut taxes on businesses. I'm sure many people see this and say "but then they will raise taxes on workers to make up the difference!" And as long Liberals run Congress, that's probably true. That's the Socialist way, tax everyone 100% then redistribute it the way they want to. And guess what, that means you get a shot at whatever is leftover after they take their share. Care to guess who gets the higher percentage? That is how Socialization...I mean, er...Nationalization works. The government, that can't even balance their own budget and have spent away the portion of your retirement fund that they force you to pay, will decide how much money, fuel, food and the luxury items that Americans thrive on (televisions, computers, cars, and good old toilet paper) that each individual citizen is entitled to. This only benefits those way at the bottom of the social-economic ladder that would rather lay around all day instead of working, at the expense of all the rest of Americans.

But back on the candidates' economic plans. One of the core truths of economics is that businesses do not pay taxes out of their pockets, that slap that burden onto their customers by raising prices. They have to, there is no other way for them to pay the difference. By lowering taxes on businesses, two things happen: 1) businesses lower prices and 2) they can hire more workers.

So what are the benefits of each of these results? Since most consumers have a limited, fixed amount of money to use each month (within certain parameters), lower prices means consumers can buy more items. To account for increased demand on goods, businesses have to hire more workers to supply more goods and services to meet the demand. This means more people have money to purchase more goods from more companies (because once you meet daily needs such as food, clothing, and toilet paper, you stretch out into comfort and luxury items which is where the American economy actually lies). As more and more people are able to buy more and more goods and services, more workers are needed and the work force becomes more specialized which increases the need for trained and educated workers which increases wages and the economy gets even stronger.

This is all sounds good for John Q. Public, but how does that help keep taxes down? This part is even more simple. If you have 1000 workers earning $1600 a month ($10/hr) paying 30% taxes, the government gets $480,000 a month in taxes. But if you only have 500 workers earning $800 a month ($5/hr) and 500 unemployed earning $0, at 30% the government only gets $120,000 a month. So they have to raise taxes. But to make up the difference they would have to raise taxes, except that would require taxing at 120%, which is of course not even possible so they tax at 50% and borrow the rest from China.

In the first economy workers have $1120 per month to spend on goods and services in the economy and the government has $480,000. In the second, workers have $400 per month and the government has to borrow (and pay interest) on the $320,000 SHORTFALL. Plus, they have to increase their spending to help the 500 unemployed. Which economy do you want to live in???

So now I've made McCain's plan sound all rosey and good (which it is), how does Obama's plan stack up? He wants to raise taxes on businesses and use the money to fund Social and Welfare programs. This causes businesses to raise prices because they have to, and to fire workers because 1) the business can't afford to keep them and 2) the higher prices means consumers are buying fewer individual items so supply exceed demand and fewer workers are needed to keep up. So now you have fewer consumers and fewer people paying taxes and the government has to borrow even more money to pay unemployment and Welfare to the poor people that the government made poor to begin with by forcing their companies to fire them to be able to afford the extra taxes levied on them.

Basically Obama's plan creates a larger poor class so that Uncle Obama and Aunt Pelosi can take care of you in the way they want to, instead of giving you the freedom to choose on your own. And we all know deep down inside that money is freedom. Anyone who thinks differently has never been poor (and believe me I have, but am no longer). Money buys us transportation to leave our homes and gives a reason and destination once we do leave. Six Flags, Disney World, Oceans of Fun or even Put-put Golf all take money. State Parks, National Parks, Wildlife Refuges charge admission and require gas (and we know how much money that takes). Even picnics in the park require a car and gas, or at the very least, bus fare. Want to play catch with your kid? You need to buy a ball and maybe some ball gloves.

Money is freedom and that will never change. So the question is do you want to decide how to earn and spend that money? Or do you want Uncle Obama and Aunt Pelosi to make those decisions for you?