Reagan's True Legacy: Terminating the American Dream

Jane White: Reagan's True Legacy: Terminating the American Dream


Wonder why we've got record federal deficits? Much of the cause stems from Reagan's corporate tax breaks; by 1983 the portion of tax receipts derived from corporate income taxes dropped to an all-time low of 6.2%, down from 12.5% in 1980 and 32.1% in 1952.

Fuck you, pissant,.

Bet you think Jimmy was better. I LOVED sitting in gas lines, you f-ing piece of shit.

Sounds like you fell for the Oil corps, Gunny.
 
It's not about boosting profits. It's about maintaining them at a level in order to stay in business. And they don't charge as much as they can, they charge as much as the market will bear in order to maintain profitability.

Umm, "charge as much as they can" and "charge as much as the market will bear" are the same things. Rewording my arguments does nothing to refute them.

And it is about boosting profits. Only a wingnut would run a business without trying to maximize profits.:cuckoo:

No, they're not the same. I can charge $1,000 a widget. However the market will not bear it.

Is english your 2nd language?

That would explain your ignorance of american english. How else to explain your delusion that "charge as much as they can" is not a reference to what the market will pay. :cuckoo:

Either that, or you're getting so desperate that you're willing to lie about a saying that everyone (but you) is familiar with.

In context of this specific discussion it is not about boosting profits. It's about offsetting the corporate tax rate. Moving goalposts won't get you far with me ;)

Business is ALWAYS about boosting profit. Only a wingnut would think otherwise




No, it's not. I mathematically proved it. You dodged it. Only wingnuts think math doesn't apply to them :cuckoo:

You only proved that you are so stupid, you think business charge less than what the market will pay when taxes are low :cuckoo:



Only wingnuts think that increased cost of doing business means that cost of goods won't go up :cuckoo:

I see that business is not your only area of ignorance. Income taxes aren't included in "Cost of Goods".

Cost of goods sold - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Only a wingnut thinks that an increase in taxes isn't an increase to cost to the business :cuckoo:

I guess the IRS is run by wingnuts

Cost of Goods Sold and the Tax Gap









Only a wingnut would think that if a business can't cut costs anymore to maintain profitability that they won't increase prices in order to maintain it :cuckoo:
I see you still can't explain how a business is going to cut costs it has already cut. :lol:

We have the one of the highest tax rates and one of the highest standard of living in the world. Reality proves that things are in balance

We're talking about corporate tax rates. And we have nearly the highest in the world. Other industrialized nations that actually have a better standard of living have a lower corporate tax rate. This proves that things are not in balance.

And we have nearly the highest corporate income in the world. Sounds like our tax rates are properly balanced.

Duck, dodge and weave and avoid the point at all costs sangha. Countries with a demonstrably higher standard of living have a significantly lower tax rate.

No, nations with a higher standard of living are socialistic. Try again
 
Umm, "charge as much as they can" and "charge as much as the market will bear" are the same things. Rewording my arguments does nothing to refute them.

And it is about boosting profits. Only a wingnut would run a business without trying to maximize profits.:cuckoo:

No, they're not the same. I can charge $1,000 a widget. However the market will not bear it.

Is english your 2nd language?

That would explain your ignorance of american english. How else to explain your delusion that "charge as much as they can" is not a reference to what the market will pay. :cuckoo:

Only a wingnut thinks that words don't have meanings. You can charge anything you want. However the market will not bear anything you want. :cuckoo:




You only proved that you are so stupid, you think business charge less than what the market will pay when taxes are low :cuckoo:

Once again. Words have meanings. I never said anything of the sort. Only wingnuts get to make up their own definitions :cuckoo:





I see that business is not your only area of ignorance. Income taxes aren't included in "Cost of Goods".

Cost of goods sold - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Only a wingnut thinks that taxes aren't factored in to the cost of goods to the consumer :cuckoo: And only a wingnut thinks that this is interchangable with the cost of goods a manufacturer pays for to produce their product :cuckoo:




I guess the IRS is run by wingnuts

Cost of Goods Sold and the Tax Gap

Only a wingnut thinks rephrasing the same disproven and strawman talking point makes it somehow more valid. :cuckoo:









Only a wingnut would think that if a business can't cut costs anymore to maintain profitability that they won't increase prices in order to maintain it :cuckoo:

I see you still can't explain how a business is going to cut costs it has already cut. :lol:

And I see that you can't explain how they are not going to raise prices if they have already cut as far as they can go AND taxes are being raised. Only a wingnut thinks basic business math doesn't apply to them :cuckoo:
 
Last edited:
Jane White: Reagan's True Legacy: Terminating the American Dream


Wonder why we've got record federal deficits? Much of the cause stems from Reagan's corporate tax breaks; by 1983 the portion of tax receipts derived from corporate income taxes dropped to an all-time low of 6.2%, down from 12.5% in 1980 and 32.1% in 1952.

Fuck you, pissant,.

Bet you think Jimmy was better. I LOVED sitting in gas lines, you f-ing piece of shit.



Sounds like you fell for the Oil corps, Gunny.

Sounds more like Gunny has a mouth full of Reagan cock.
 
And don't forget, every consumer pays for the corporate tax rate, as it is factored into the price of every service and good purchased by a manufacturer doing business in this nation.

Just think. Eliminate that, and you receive in essence about a 39% pay increase.

fascinating, isn't it?

You really are an idiot, aren't you?

This may be a surprise for you, but income taxes are based on INCOME!!! IOW, they are not a cost of production and can not be "factored into the price"

Except that the discussion was about corporate taxes. And they are and are.
What is not realized by Sane?Ha! is that the price of corporate tax is factored into EVERYTHING they buy. It is, in essence a consumption tax because it increases the costs of doing business in this nation. They pass that tax burden on to all those who buy their products and services.

But it's easier to just demonize the corporations as greedy bastards instead of placing the blame, properly, on their tinpot gods in government who misuse the funds to no end.

Hungary, for instance, according to this chart could see about a 17% reduction of costs, if the corporate tax was eliminated.

Yes, they are.

If I know that I'm going to have to pay 35% of whatever I make to someone else. And I must have $10,000 a week in order to maintain the business, I am going to raise the prices in order to make that $10,000.

Take you widget example. I sell a widget for $1.00 profit each. Someone is going to take 35% of that. Leaving me $0.65 per widget. But I need $1.00 per in order to survive. Therefore I am going to raise my price to a $1.54 per widget in order to ensure that I still have that $1.00 after taxes. This leaves me at $1.00 per widget gain, and satisfies my tax liability of 35% per dollar.

The other option is to cut production costs and overhead (people) to ensure that I have a GMROI of 1.54. This amounts to essentially the same thing as increasing costs as far as the math is concerned. But you can only cut production and people so far before you start losing capacity and actually start negatively impacting your GMROI. It's a balancing act.

But if we have one of the highest in the world, that is a strong indication that we are out of balance by quite a bit.

Feel free to run the numbers above. They all work out.

People get too wrapped up in percentages. They forget to factor in actual bottom line dollars that are needed after the percentage of taxes taken out. It's not dollars, it's not percentages. It's dollars and percentages together.

See, these are the unintended and often deliberately ignored consequences of government. The statists wish to ignore the impact of their own actions and support because it speaks as to why they should not be allowed such power and scope in all areas of civilian life and should instead be relegated to a bare minimum of duties and powers.

This is why the Laffer curve is so useful and accurate. You must find the balance of services and taxation and liberty.. The least impact for the most benefit. This often means that we cannot pad ourselves in government luxury because it is inefficient and expensive for little return. It may 'feel good', but that doesn't make it a good idea. Emotions are almost always a lousy barometer of value.
 
Jeff Madrick: On Reagan's Birthday We Still Celebrate His Policies That Broke the Middle Class

He was better at political compromise than is realized. He was forced to raise some business taxes because supply-side "voodoo" economics did not work. But the major tax increase was to raise payroll taxes, which are regressive. On balance, Reagan reduced taxes for the rich much more than for the middle.
Yes... supply side economics never worked. :rolleyes:

Still pretending Reagan is the font of all evil I see.

We really have to get you over your Huffpoo addiction.
 

Forum List

Back
Top