My question is if you were to take the average yearly Bush tax break for those earning over $ 100,000 per year and have just applied those monies to new jobs either in the form of direct jobs or small business job creating tax breaks; how many new jobs would have been created on an annual basis at approximately $35,000 annually per job?
My estimate is that for every 80 billion the treasury lost in tax breaks; you could have created directly 3 million new jobs at $35,000 a year. My calculations are based on 100 billion yearly would create 3 million jobs directly and using a calculation that taxes out of the 3 million jobs would be approximately 20%, giving the treasury 20 billion in new taxes out of the 100 billion spent for the new jobs being a net of 80 billion.
Also is there a common economic 'rule of thumb' that for every new job created, a certain amount of indirect jobs are also created? If so what is the ratio for the aforementioned example?
My point is that Bush's tax cuts for the people who need it least would have been better used for establishing massive tax relief for small business job creation or direct jobs. If the country is willing to run deficits to give tax breaks to the upper earners; why not propose how better to apply those same monies for real job creation and not depend on the upper classes to take their tax breaks and somehow indirectly create jobs through their greater spending which is no guarantee of creating more jobs.
Any information and comments are welcome.