The truth about taxes

[Steelplate]

Who do you mean when you say "we"?

If you are talking about the people then I would say for the most part we are serious. If you are talking about the people whom we put in power, I would have to laugh at anyone that actually thought either party gave a shit about the debt issue or the downgrade.

Immie

IMO any politician is terrified to propose tax increases, no matter how drastically and obviously necessary they are. In today's climate they'd be run out of town with torches and pitchforks.

Sorry I am not catching your drift. Do you mean tax increases on the rich or tax increases on everyone else? In some ways I agree that they are terrified of announcing increases on the rich. I am not so certain that holds true for the rest of us.

Unfortunately, the same remains true for proposing spending cuts. The general areas where spending cuts have even been discussed are entitlements and defense. Now you are not going to believe this but I, as a conservative, agree that there should be cuts in the defense budget. I simply don't understand why the Republican morons in Congress won't even discuss such cuts. It's not like there are any real threats of a military invasion against us. I haven't looked this up but if I remember correctly we already spend a considerable amount more than the rest of the world combined. There is room to cut in the defense.

I also believe that entitlements should be looked at and cut. I think we give away way too much money to individuals, corporations, unions, and foreign governments. In times when our economy is healthy, I don't have so much of a problem with the giveaways but we are not healthy today and we should not be giving wealth away. We are a rich enough nation that we should not be allowing our poor to go hungry and without shelter. We should not be giving $4 billion to the oil industry etc. etc. etc.

Note: in both of those paragraphs the word "cut" does not mean elimination. I think many of our programs need to be modified and improved. But cutting does not mean eliminating in its entirety.

And this may be another shocker to you all. As a conservative, I do not oppose tax increases either on the rich or on the rest of us. I see no reason why people who have money should not pay a higher percentage of their wealth to help out this country. What I can't stand is the progressive attitude of vilifying the rich! Honestly, there is little that pisses me off about the progressive movement more than that. I don't blame the rich for my problems and I sure as hell don't blame them for the success or luck that has put them into their situation. I made my choices and I am where I am today because of those choices. It has nothing to do with the fact that Bill Gates succeeded in life.

That being said, I think our current tax code is a piece of shit. I think the Fair Tax would be a hundred times better than what we have now if for no other reason than it would simplify all of our lives. If the fair tax doesn't satisfy the rest of the country and they can show me that it would truly as they say be detrimental to the poor (which I completely disagree with) and the Fair Tax proposal could not be modified to satisfy everyone then I think a flat tax system would be ten times better than what we have today.

Our current tax code does one thing... it encourage the unscrupulous to cheat! Come to think of it, that is why I think so many defend it.

I think two things need to be done to save our economy. 1) we need to become fiscally responsible meaning increase revenue and decrease spending to a point where we can actually reduce the debt (meaning a surplus for the time being) and that will require some damned tough decisions and compromises on both sides of the political spectrum and 2) we need to make America corporate friendly again.

Those two things sound contradictory. How can you make America corporate friendly and increase taxes on them at the same time? I don't believe taxes are the major reason employers are fleeing this country in droves. They are leaving because of the political climate and an environment that is hellbent on strangling them with more and more regulations. Face it. The Obama administration has given an appearance of being anti-business. Whether they are or not, it is the way they come off with their favoritism towards their buddies in the unions.

If we want to save this country we... the unemployed (and I am one of those) need jobs. Politics (and I am not only blaming Democrats) needs to start working on ways to bring those jobs back.

Note: reducing regulations does not mean eliminating them in their entirety. We can all live with reasonableness. What we have today is not reasonable.

This post ended up being a hell of a lot longer than I intended!

Immie

Ok... what regulations aren't reasonable... I keep hearing this stuff, but we never hear specifics.

 

[JRK]

The Times admits taxing the rich is not enough and calls for higher taxes for everyone.

A week later and we are still amazed at how the Republicans in Congress pulled it off. They held the economy hostage, won some cheap political points, and all of us will spend the next decade paying the ransom as government programs — $900 billion over 10 years in the first round — are slashed and the recovery is put at risk. The only glimmer of hope is that the battle is not completely over — if President Obama is finally willing to fight.
Under the terms of the ill-conceived debt agreement, Congress has to propose another $1.5 trillion in deficit reduction measures by December. Just to ensure that rationality does not have a chance, Republican leaders said they would not put anyone on the deficit-cutting “super-committee” who might entertain the idea of raising taxes.
A week later and we are even more amazed by the failure of Mr. Obama and the Democratic leadership to stand up to this intransigence. If they do not start pushing back, with the same ferocity, the results will be disastrous.



LET THE BUSH CUTS EXPIRE
MAKE REAL REFORMS
TARGET TAX BREAKS AND LOWER RATES
OTHER TAXES

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/07/opinion/sunday/the-truth-about-taxes.html

You have no idea in what your taking about
1) the Liberals have run congress sense 2007, except for the house. You think that people are that stupid
2) Raising how much money we pay in income tax means there is less money to create jobs

 

[saveliberty]

Part of the problem is that 50% of the people in this country pay not one dime in federal tax... but its that same 50% that put their hand out for MORE.
[/COLOR]

This isn't quite true. Your number applies to income tax but payroll taxes are a very different story and are very high relative to historical levels.

Show me some numbers to support your claim. If you fall below the level of paying federal income tax or have earned income credits which offset your federal income tax, you probably meet a government program for assistance. Heck, earned income credit IS a handout.

 

[hipeter924]

The US could probably create a tax haven for business and end business tax altogether, if we are to believe lower tax create jobs and improve the economy; then surely on the same argument the best idea would be to eliminate it altogether on the means of production rather than just secure tax cuts for individuals or select companies.

 

[Sactowndog]

I'd be more in favor of implementing protectionist trade policies that make it more profitable to operate within the US than to export into the US. If you create jobs and expand the taxpayer base, you can reduce corporate taxes. The US is the world's greatest consumer, leverage that fact to force corporations to make an opportunity cost valuation and choose between the sales revenue generated via operating within the US or the reduction of operational expense overseas. There will be bidding wars for US commercial real estate.

So I think it is foolish to think that Asian countries don't have pro-jobs policies in their countries and if we don't act will continue to affect jobs in the US. I have sat in meetings where the subsidies for engineering jobs in Singapore and China were discussed as part of the reason for moving jobs overseas. And those jobs were moved overseas

That being said traditional protectionist policies assume sales to US based companies result in US jobs and sales to China based companies result China jobs. This often is not the case today.

As you say it must be based on cash flow not profits. We need to make sure if you generate $10B in sales and investment return in the US you have $10B in expenses, capital expenses and investment. If you only have 5B and you are sending 5B out of the country then you need to pay 20% tax on the $5B you send out.

This is a reasonable counter to the mercantilist policies of Asia. They would be free to institutue that same policies with no issue on my part. Chances are their investment is already higher than their revenue. Our problem is too many companies are selling 10B in the US and investing 5B and this isnt' sustainable for anyone.

 

[Immanuel]

IMO any politician is terrified to propose tax increases, no matter how drastically and obviously necessary they are. In today's climate they'd be run out of town with torches and pitchforks.

Sorry I am not catching your drift. Do you mean tax increases on the rich or tax increases on everyone else? In some ways I agree that they are terrified of announcing increases on the rich. I am not so certain that holds true for the rest of us.

Unfortunately, the same remains true for proposing spending cuts. The general areas where spending cuts have even been discussed are entitlements and defense. Now you are not going to believe this but I, as a conservative, agree that there should be cuts in the defense budget. I simply don't understand why the Republican morons in Congress won't even discuss such cuts. It's not like there are any real threats of a military invasion against us. I haven't looked this up but if I remember correctly we already spend a considerable amount more than the rest of the world combined. There is room to cut in the defense.

I also believe that entitlements should be looked at and cut. I think we give away way too much money to individuals, corporations, unions, and foreign governments. In times when our economy is healthy, I don't have so much of a problem with the giveaways but we are not healthy today and we should not be giving wealth away. We are a rich enough nation that we should not be allowing our poor to go hungry and without shelter. We should not be giving $4 billion to the oil industry etc. etc. etc.

Note: in both of those paragraphs the word "cut" does not mean elimination. I think many of our programs need to be modified and improved. But cutting does not mean eliminating in its entirety.

And this may be another shocker to you all. As a conservative, I do not oppose tax increases either on the rich or on the rest of us. I see no reason why people who have money should not pay a higher percentage of their wealth to help out this country. What I can't stand is the progressive attitude of vilifying the rich! Honestly, there is little that pisses me off about the progressive movement more than that. I don't blame the rich for my problems and I sure as hell don't blame them for the success or luck that has put them into their situation. I made my choices and I am where I am today because of those choices. It has nothing to do with the fact that Bill Gates succeeded in life.

That being said, I think our current tax code is a piece of shit. I think the Fair Tax would be a hundred times better than what we have now if for no other reason than it would simplify all of our lives. If the fair tax doesn't satisfy the rest of the country and they can show me that it would truly as they say be detrimental to the poor (which I completely disagree with) and the Fair Tax proposal could not be modified to satisfy everyone then I think a flat tax system would be ten times better than what we have today.

Our current tax code does one thing... it encourage the unscrupulous to cheat! Come to think of it, that is why I think so many defend it.

I think two things need to be done to save our economy. 1) we need to become fiscally responsible meaning increase revenue and decrease spending to a point where we can actually reduce the debt (meaning a surplus for the time being) and that will require some damned tough decisions and compromises on both sides of the political spectrum and 2) we need to make America corporate friendly again.

Those two things sound contradictory. How can you make America corporate friendly and increase taxes on them at the same time? I don't believe taxes are the major reason employers are fleeing this country in droves. They are leaving because of the political climate and an environment that is hellbent on strangling them with more and more regulations. Face it. The Obama administration has given an appearance of being anti-business. Whether they are or not, it is the way they come off with their favoritism towards their buddies in the unions.

If we want to save this country we... the unemployed (and I am one of those) need jobs. Politics (and I am not only blaming Democrats) needs to start working on ways to bring those jobs back.

Note: reducing regulations does not mean eliminating them in their entirety. We can all live with reasonableness. What we have today is not reasonable.

This post ended up being a hell of a lot longer than I intended!

Immie

Ok... what regulations aren't reasonable... I keep hearing this stuff, but we never hear specifics.

I am not a corporate leader. You would have to ask them why they are leaving.

Healthcare Reform for one, some environmental rules and regulations are some of the reasons I have heard.

Beyond that, I am not talking specifics. I am talking attitude.

I don't have answers to all the problems and I don't claim to. To answer your question, I would have to know all the regulations that affect all industries and how they affect those industries and quite frankly, I don't.

What I see is a political climate that is and has been driving business away. I for one do not believe that it is high taxes. Come on, our current tax code for corporations is a joke compared to times past. It is not a high tax rate that is driving these companies out. It is things like the Obama Administration defending unions over businesses. That doesn't mean I oppose protection of the worker. It is attitude that is the problem. It is a general climate of hatred towards the corporate environment that is the problem.

However, raising the tax rates on corporations will only add to the fire unless the underlying problems are dealt with.

Quite frankly, we are simply making it easier for corporations to take their employment to Mexico, China or India than it is to employ our own people. What are the regulations and reasons for that? What regulations are not reasonable? That is something we would all have to look at and discuss.

Some (I am not one) might say the minimum wage laws are part of the problem. If Hershey's can take their plant to Mexico and hire Mexican employees for next to nothing then eventually it becomes a no brainer that Hershey's and other corporations are going to go to Mexico. Does that mean the Minimum Wage is unreasonable? Some would say yes.

Immie

 

[Sactowndog]

I'd be more in favor of implementing protectionist trade policies that make it more profitable to operate within the US than to export into the US. If you create jobs and expand the taxpayer base, you can reduce corporate taxes. The US is the world's greatest consumer, leverage that fact to force corporations to make an opportunity cost valuation and choose between the sales revenue generated via operating within the US or the reduction of operational expense overseas. There will be bidding wars for US commercial real estate.

I'd be more in favor of implementing protectionist trade policies that make it more profitable to operate within the Eurozone than to export into the Eurozone. If you create jobs and expand the taxpayer base, you can reduce corporate taxes. The Eurozone is the world's 2nd greatest consumer, leverage that fact to force corporations to make an opportunity cost valuation and choose between the sales revenue generated via operating within the Eurozone or the reduction of operational expense overseas. There will be bidding wars for Eurozone commercial real estate.

I'd be more in favor of implementing protectionist trade policies that make it more profitable to operate within the China than to export into the China. If you create jobs and expand the taxpayer base, you can reduce corporate taxes. China is soon to be the world's greatest consumer, leverage that fact to force corporations to make an opportunity cost valuation and choose between the sales revenue generated via operating within the China or the reduction of operational expense overseas. There will be bidding wars for Chinese commercial real estate.

I'd be more in favor of implementing protectionist trade policies that make it more profitable to operate within the Brazil than to export into the Brazil. If you create jobs and expand the taxpayer base, you can reduce corporate taxes. Brazil is one of the world's greatest consumers, leverage that fact to force corporations to make an opportunity cost valuation and choose between the sales revenue generated via operating within Brazil or the reduction of operational expense overseas. There will be bidding wars for Brazilian commercial real estate.

What could possibly go wrong!

Do you really not think that mercantilist countries in Asia don't already have practices in place to drive the balance of trade so that it favors jobs in their countries? The issue is allowing it to continue without some reasonable response. Yes we must create a reasonable response that is not protectionist in the traditional sense but provides some counter to the practices being employed in Asia.

 

[WillowTree]

Where is the logic in saying that because taxing the rich can't fix the entire problem, therefore the rich should be exempted from helping fix any part of the problem?

The only person who said that is you.

You're full of shit.

Conservatives here at USMB won't state ONE sacrifice that the Rich should make among the sacrifices that need to be made to straighten out the fiscal mess.

The question has been asked in the past.

the rich already pay the bulk of the tax revenue and you, you big fat assed liar say they haven't made a sacrifice. you dumb left wing talking hackjob.

 

[Steelplate]

Sorry I am not catching your drift. Do you mean tax increases on the rich or tax increases on everyone else? In some ways I agree that they are terrified of announcing increases on the rich. I am not so certain that holds true for the rest of us.

Unfortunately, the same remains true for proposing spending cuts. The general areas where spending cuts have even been discussed are entitlements and defense. Now you are not going to believe this but I, as a conservative, agree that there should be cuts in the defense budget. I simply don't understand why the Republican morons in Congress won't even discuss such cuts. It's not like there are any real threats of a military invasion against us. I haven't looked this up but if I remember correctly we already spend a considerable amount more than the rest of the world combined. There is room to cut in the defense.

I also believe that entitlements should be looked at and cut. I think we give away way too much money to individuals, corporations, unions, and foreign governments. In times when our economy is healthy, I don't have so much of a problem with the giveaways but we are not healthy today and we should not be giving wealth away. We are a rich enough nation that we should not be allowing our poor to go hungry and without shelter. We should not be giving $4 billion to the oil industry etc. etc. etc.

Note: in both of those paragraphs the word "cut" does not mean elimination. I think many of our programs need to be modified and improved. But cutting does not mean eliminating in its entirety.

And this may be another shocker to you all. As a conservative, I do not oppose tax increases either on the rich or on the rest of us. I see no reason why people who have money should not pay a higher percentage of their wealth to help out this country. What I can't stand is the progressive attitude of vilifying the rich! Honestly, there is little that pisses me off about the progressive movement more than that. I don't blame the rich for my problems and I sure as hell don't blame them for the success or luck that has put them into their situation. I made my choices and I am where I am today because of those choices. It has nothing to do with the fact that Bill Gates succeeded in life.

That being said, I think our current tax code is a piece of shit. I think the Fair Tax would be a hundred times better than what we have now if for no other reason than it would simplify all of our lives. If the fair tax doesn't satisfy the rest of the country and they can show me that it would truly as they say be detrimental to the poor (which I completely disagree with) and the Fair Tax proposal could not be modified to satisfy everyone then I think a flat tax system would be ten times better than what we have today.

Our current tax code does one thing... it encourage the unscrupulous to cheat! Come to think of it, that is why I think so many defend it.

I think two things need to be done to save our economy. 1) we need to become fiscally responsible meaning increase revenue and decrease spending to a point where we can actually reduce the debt (meaning a surplus for the time being) and that will require some damned tough decisions and compromises on both sides of the political spectrum and 2) we need to make America corporate friendly again.

Those two things sound contradictory. How can you make America corporate friendly and increase taxes on them at the same time? I don't believe taxes are the major reason employers are fleeing this country in droves. They are leaving because of the political climate and an environment that is hellbent on strangling them with more and more regulations. Face it. The Obama administration has given an appearance of being anti-business. Whether they are or not, it is the way they come off with their favoritism towards their buddies in the unions.

If we want to save this country we... the unemployed (and I am one of those) need jobs. Politics (and I am not only blaming Democrats) needs to start working on ways to bring those jobs back.

Note: reducing regulations does not mean eliminating them in their entirety. We can all live with reasonableness. What we have today is not reasonable.

This post ended up being a hell of a lot longer than I intended!

Immie

Ok... what regulations aren't reasonable... I keep hearing this stuff, but we never hear specifics.

I am not a corporate leader. You would have to ask them why they are leaving.

Healthcare Reform for one, some environmental rules and regulations are some of the reasons I have heard.

Beyond that, I am not talking specifics. I am talking attitude.

I don't have answers to all the problems and I don't claim to. To answer your question, I would have to know all the regulations that affect all industries and how they affect those industries and quite frankly, I don't.

What I see is a political climate that is and has been driving business away. I for one do not believe that it is high taxes. Come on, our current tax code for corporations is a joke compared to times past. It is not a high tax rate that is driving these companies out. It is things like the Obama Administration defending unions over businesses. That doesn't mean I oppose protection of the worker. It is attitude that is the problem. It is a general climate of hatred towards the corporate environment that is the problem.

However, raising the tax rates on corporations will only add to the fire unless the underlying problems are dealt with.

Quite frankly, we are simply making it easier for corporations to take their employment to Mexico, China or India than it is to employ our own people. What are the regulations and reasons for that? What regulations are not reasonable? That is something we would all have to look at and discuss.

Some (I am not one) might say the minimum wage laws are part of the problem. If Hershey's can take their plant to Mexico and hire Mexican employees for next to nothing then eventually it becomes a no brainer that Hershey's and other corporations are going to go to Mexico. Does that mean the Minimum Wage is unreasonable? Some would say yes.

Immie

Ok... let me ask you something... you say you are unemployed, right? Why aren't you flipping burgers for $7.25/hour? Probably because you can't afford to. What makes you think that getting rid of the Minimum wage is going to help matters? Hell, we could make the minimum wage $.50/hour and have 100% employment... but would that help the situation? Would that help our citizens survive in this God Awfully expensive country?

 

[Sactowndog]

I am not a corporate leader. You would have to ask them why they are leaving.

Healthcare Reform for one, some environmental rules and regulations are some of the reasons I have heard.

Beyond that, I am not talking specifics. I am talking attitude.

I don't have answers to all the problems and I don't claim to. To answer your question, I would have to know all the regulations that affect all industries and how they affect those industries and quite frankly, I don't.

So I have sat in some of those meetings and I can tell you the reasons were.....

1) the governement was subsidizing the cost of engineering jobs sent into the country.

2) Health care costs was free because the country had national health care.

Regulations never came up once.

 

[Immanuel]

I'd be more in favor of implementing protectionist trade policies that make it more profitable to operate within the US than to export into the US. If you create jobs and expand the taxpayer base, you can reduce corporate taxes. The US is the world's greatest consumer, leverage that fact to force corporations to make an opportunity cost valuation and choose between the sales revenue generated via operating within the US or the reduction of operational expense overseas. There will be bidding wars for US commercial real estate.

So I think it is foolish to think that Asian countries don't have pro-jobs policies in their countries and if we don't act will continue to affect jobs in the US. I have sat in meetings where the subsidies for engineering jobs in Singapore and China were discussed as part of the reason for moving jobs overseas. And those jobs were moved overseas

That being said traditional protectionist policies assume sales to US based companies result in US jobs and sales to China based companies result China jobs. This often is not the case today.

As you say it must be based on cash flow not profits. We need to make sure if you generate $10B in sales and investment return in the US you have $10B in expenses, capital expenses and investment. If you only have 5B and you are sending 5B out of the country then you need to pay 20% tax on the $5B you send out.

This is a reasonable counter to the mercantilist policies of Asia. They would be free to institutue that same policies with no issue on my part. Chances are their investment is already higher than their revenue. Our problem is too many companies are selling 10B in the US and investing 5B and this isnt' sustainable for anyone.

To further my discussion with Steelplate, this helps.

You are correct. Some of the issue lies not within our own borders but without. Other countries are competing for our corporate interests and they are winning. They are selling themselves to our corporations.

We must become competitive again.

I suppose one way we could do that in a manner that would not involve reducing our own regulations would be to throw up some very large protectionist trade policies that hurt any company that wants to do business in the U.S. But, I am not sure we are willing to do that either.

Immie

 

[Immanuel]

Ok... what regulations aren't reasonable... I keep hearing this stuff, but we never hear specifics.

I am not a corporate leader. You would have to ask them why they are leaving.

Healthcare Reform for one, some environmental rules and regulations are some of the reasons I have heard.

Beyond that, I am not talking specifics. I am talking attitude.

I don't have answers to all the problems and I don't claim to. To answer your question, I would have to know all the regulations that affect all industries and how they affect those industries and quite frankly, I don't.

What I see is a political climate that is and has been driving business away. I for one do not believe that it is high taxes. Come on, our current tax code for corporations is a joke compared to times past. It is not a high tax rate that is driving these companies out. It is things like the Obama Administration defending unions over businesses. That doesn't mean I oppose protection of the worker. It is attitude that is the problem. It is a general climate of hatred towards the corporate environment that is the problem.

However, raising the tax rates on corporations will only add to the fire unless the underlying problems are dealt with.

Quite frankly, we are simply making it easier for corporations to take their employment to Mexico, China or India than it is to employ our own people. What are the regulations and reasons for that? What regulations are not reasonable? That is something we would all have to look at and discuss.

Some (I am not one) might say the minimum wage laws are part of the problem. If Hershey's can take their plant to Mexico and hire Mexican employees for next to nothing then eventually it becomes a no brainer that Hershey's and other corporations are going to go to Mexico. Does that mean the Minimum Wage is unreasonable? Some would say yes.

Immie

Ok... let me ask you something... you say you are unemployed, right? Why aren't you flipping burgers for $7.25/hour? Probably because you can't afford to. What makes you think that getting rid of the Minimum wage is going to help matters? Hell, we could make the minimum wage $.50/hour and have 100% employment... but would that help the situation? Would that help our citizens survive in this God Awfully expensive country?

Did you actually read what I said?

Some (I am not one) might say the minimum wage laws are part of the problem.

Why am I not flipping burgers? I can't stand long enough to sing a long hymm in church without doubling over in pain because of my back. How am I going to stand all day at a cook station and flip burgers?

I don't think getting rid of the minimum wage is necessarily the answer. I am not opposed to the minimum wage. I don't think we should let corporations get away with paying their employees $1.50/hour to flip burgers.

However, we ARE talking about making America competitive with foreign countries when it comes to employment. That means that we must look at where we are not competitive and find solutions to those things.

I don't have solutions yet and even if I did, I am sure many of you would not like those solutions. I'm not running for President.

The way I see it is that if we want to turn this economy around we have to become competitive again no matter what that takes.

Immie

 

[saveliberty]

Ok... let me ask you something... you say you are unemployed, right? Why aren't you flipping burgers for $7.25/hour? Probably because you can't afford to. What makes you think that getting rid of the Minimum wage is going to help matters? Hell, we could make the minimum wage $.50/hour and have 100% employment... but would that help the situation? Would that help our citizens survive in this God Awfully expensive country?

Ah yes, for it is far better to be a leech on society, because you have a higher quality of life standard? We have a whole country full of cable TV, cell phone and A/C users. Why? If you have financial problems, make the hard choices. Your going to run out of unemployment benefits at some point. Better to be in the job market than out when that time comes.

 

[Immanuel]

I am not a corporate leader. You would have to ask them why they are leaving.

Healthcare Reform for one, some environmental rules and regulations are some of the reasons I have heard.

Beyond that, I am not talking specifics. I am talking attitude.

I don't have answers to all the problems and I don't claim to. To answer your question, I would have to know all the regulations that affect all industries and how they affect those industries and quite frankly, I don't.

So I have sat in some of those meetings and I can tell you the reasons were.....

1) the governement was subsidizing the cost of engineering jobs sent into the country.

2) Health care costs was free because the country had national health care.

Regulations never came up once.

Yes they did.

Your #1 is regulations related as is your #2.

Regulations can be both foreign and domestic.

If China has national healthcare and it doesn't cost the employer a dime, then those regulations in China affect our competitiveness. If our health care regulations (before or after HCR) make it more costly to do business in the USA then we have to address those problems or face more corporations moving to China. Eventually we are going to be forced to deal with the issue.

Immie

 

[syrenn]

The Times admits taxing the rich is not enough and calls for higher taxes for everyone.



http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/07/opinion/sunday/the-truth-about-taxes.html

flat tax for ALL! Rich. poor, corporation or what ever..... no exemptions, no loop holes.

I don't give a shit if you make $1 a year.... the government is going to take its cut.... what ever that % is.

Part of the problem is that 50% of the people in this country pay not one dime in federal tax... but its that same 50% that put their hand out for MORE.

Other than Fuel taxes, FICA, Medicare, Tobacco, Alcohol, and probably a dozen more that I can't think of.

No.... consumption taxes are a choice.... you want it... pay for it right along with the tax.

I am talking income tax.

 

[Steelplate]

I am not a corporate leader. You would have to ask them why they are leaving.

Healthcare Reform for one, some environmental rules and regulations are some of the reasons I have heard.

Beyond that, I am not talking specifics. I am talking attitude.

I don't have answers to all the problems and I don't claim to. To answer your question, I would have to know all the regulations that affect all industries and how they affect those industries and quite frankly, I don't.

What I see is a political climate that is and has been driving business away. I for one do not believe that it is high taxes. Come on, our current tax code for corporations is a joke compared to times past. It is not a high tax rate that is driving these companies out. It is things like the Obama Administration defending unions over businesses. That doesn't mean I oppose protection of the worker. It is attitude that is the problem. It is a general climate of hatred towards the corporate environment that is the problem.

However, raising the tax rates on corporations will only add to the fire unless the underlying problems are dealt with.

Quite frankly, we are simply making it easier for corporations to take their employment to Mexico, China or India than it is to employ our own people. What are the regulations and reasons for that? What regulations are not reasonable? That is something we would all have to look at and discuss.

Some (I am not one) might say the minimum wage laws are part of the problem. If Hershey's can take their plant to Mexico and hire Mexican employees for next to nothing then eventually it becomes a no brainer that Hershey's and other corporations are going to go to Mexico. Does that mean the Minimum Wage is unreasonable? Some would say yes.

Immie

Ok... let me ask you something... you say you are unemployed, right? Why aren't you flipping burgers for $7.25/hour? Probably because you can't afford to. What makes you think that getting rid of the Minimum wage is going to help matters? Hell, we could make the minimum wage $.50/hour and have 100% employment... but would that help the situation? Would that help our citizens survive in this God Awfully expensive country?

Did you actually read what I said?

Some (I am not one) might say the minimum wage laws are part of the problem.

Why am I not flipping burgers? I can't stand long enough to sing a long hymm in church without doubling over in pain because of my back. How am I going to stand all day at a cook station and flip burgers?

I don't think getting rid of the minimum wage is necessarily the answer. I am not opposed to the minimum wage. I don't think we should let corporations get away with paying their employees $1.50/hour to flip burgers.

However, we ARE talking about making America competitive with foreign countries when it comes to employment. That means that we must look at where we are not competitive and find solutions to those things.

I don't have solutions yet and even if I did, I am sure many of you would not like those solutions. I'm not running for President.

The way I see it is that if we want to turn this economy around we have to become competitive again no matter what that takes.

Immie

Here's an idea.... put reasonable tariffs on imports. Right now we tax imported products at 2.5%. Other countries charge us 25%. That's ten times the rate we charge them. Even the threat of equalizing those trade barriers would put those other countries in a position where they had to actually be a Free Trade Partner, rather than a rigged trade partner.

Which would make foreign markets more accessible to US goods and open up the jobs market here in the US.

How about we make things easier on SMALL business instead of pandering to Big Business. Conglomerates have gotten so diversified that they can undercut any competition by simply taking a temporary loss in one area and having the rest of their empire support them until their competition is too weak and folds up, or weakens them enough to buy them out. Teddy Roosevelt is probably rolling over in his grave to see all the hard work he put into busting up Monopolies and Trusts go down the drain.

 

[Steelplate]

flat tax for ALL! Rich. poor, corporation or what ever..... no exemptions, no loop holes.

I don't give a shit if you make $1 a year.... the government is going to take its cut.... what ever that % is.

Part of the problem is that 50% of the people in this country pay not one dime in federal tax... but its that same 50% that put their hand out for MORE.

Other than Fuel taxes, FICA, Medicare, Tobacco, Alcohol, and probably a dozen more that I can't think of.

No.... consumption taxes are a choice.... you want it... pay for it right along with the tax.

I am talking income tax.

Consumption taxes, such as alcohol and Tobacco are very much a choice... Fuel Taxes, however... are not. like I said... there are probably at least a dozen more that I am not thinking of. FICA and Medicare taxes are not a choice either.

BTW...those 50%ers that your side seems so consumed with make $30K or less/year and have families to feed. Everything that gets imposed hits them harder. That's why they get the break. Furthermore... as it's been said, the Bush Tax Cuts put many of them into that 50% that gets everything back.

 

[Immanuel]

Ok... let me ask you something... you say you are unemployed, right? Why aren't you flipping burgers for $7.25/hour? Probably because you can't afford to. What makes you think that getting rid of the Minimum wage is going to help matters? Hell, we could make the minimum wage $.50/hour and have 100% employment... but would that help the situation? Would that help our citizens survive in this God Awfully expensive country?

Did you actually read what I said?

Some (I am not one) might say the minimum wage laws are part of the problem.

Why am I not flipping burgers? I can't stand long enough to sing a long hymm in church without doubling over in pain because of my back. How am I going to stand all day at a cook station and flip burgers?

I don't think getting rid of the minimum wage is necessarily the answer. I am not opposed to the minimum wage. I don't think we should let corporations get away with paying their employees $1.50/hour to flip burgers.

However, we ARE talking about making America competitive with foreign countries when it comes to employment. That means that we must look at where we are not competitive and find solutions to those things.

I don't have solutions yet and even if I did, I am sure many of you would not like those solutions. I'm not running for President.

The way I see it is that if we want to turn this economy around we have to become competitive again no matter what that takes.

Immie

Here's an idea.... put reasonable tariffs on imports. Right now we tax imported products at 2.5%. Other countries charge us 25%. That's ten times the rate we charge them. Even the threat of equalizing those trade barriers would put those other countries in a position where they had to actually be a Free Trade Partner, rather than a rigged trade partner.

Which would make foreign markets more accessible to US goods and open up the jobs market here in the US.

How about we make things easier on SMALL business instead of pandering to Big Business. Conglomerates have gotten so diversified that they can undercut any competition by simply taking a temporary loss in one area and having the rest of their empire support them until their competition is too weak and folds up, or weakens them enough to buy them out. Teddy Roosevelt is probably rolling over in his grave to see all the hard work he put into busting up Monopolies and Trusts go down the drain.

I mentioned tariffs above as well.

Both of your idea are acceptable ideas and something to be looked at along with in my opinion looking at other areas that can be improved. Doing one thing does not preclude the option of doing other things as well.

For instance if corporate leaders say the reason they are moving out is health care costs and China offers them no or low costs in the health care area then we need to look at our current system and ask the questions of how we can become more competitive in that area. This would not preclude the additional "incentive" of raising tariffs as you mentioned.

By the way, how do we "pander" to big business today? I keep hearing that but no one mentions any specifics.

Immie

 

[saveliberty]

Who do you think pays the import tarriffs Steelplate?

 

[Immanuel]

Who do you think pays the import tarriffs Steelplate?

Technically the consumer, but if you make the tariffs so high on a Hershey's bar, that people switch to a Mars Bar and quit buying Hershey's altogether eventually Hershey's is going to have to think twice about going to Mexico.

Immie