True (with corrections), but also limited in comprehension. Yes, businesses have to pass on the cost of taxes as well as other expenses but let us remember we are the people they pass them on to – - – or TRY to pass them on to.

Result?

The price of particular goods and services may get too high and people simply quit buying, thereby putting that business out of business and it’s employees out of work, thereby cutting income to the people THEY in turn are no longer able to deal with.

If the things they produced were formerly sold to other nations, it might worsen the balance of payments as they proceed to buy from other suppliers in other nations. (But that’s okay because we can still pretend like it was the Republicans who cost those jobs rather than higher expenses we generated.)

Possibly enough people can continue to afford certain items affected, but it reduces spending money they would have used on other goods and services. Other businesses go out of business, or waitresses have fewer customers and lower tips for example. Things like that.

That’s all part of life, but it would be nice if folks realized they couldn’t do just one thing — in this case “tax the rich” — without doing other things, hurting other people too.

David for big pictures and honesty

I had both read and been told that newly elected House members are called into the Speaker’s Office and told get in line with the party’s position ( vote the way we tell you) or you won’t get committee assignments and any bills you try to initiate wont fly. That just about kills any chance for reelection so they are essentially a lame duck before they are sworn in if they don’t go along.
This plus no tax pledges, etc. put a lot of pressure on them.

Lem is so right on who to blame. It’s us the Voters

Reinterpreted, his vote meant for FL-01 citizens:

1. Complete expiration of the so-called Bush tax cuts for everyone, not just for those with incomes over $400/$450 K.

2. Immediate sharp cuts in virtually everything, including his own district’s favorite federal bugetary sacred cow, defense spending. (Alas, government doesn’t create jobs… yeah, right.)

In essence, his vote is less about what is best for the generally lower median income level constituents of FL-01, and more about anti-Obama emotions held by the same constituents. Instead of voting “nay” and gaining emotional rah rahs, the sensible decision would have been to vote “yea” and put some energy into informing his constituency about what is required from the nation to balance the budget… just as it was after George W. Bush lost the popular vote in 2000.