Tough questions for Lbs

Their profits are calculated by what they take in compared to what it cost them to get their products out there. The difference is profit. But if they calculate into the equation the fact that will need to pay the taxes, they will add that cost into the mix to determine the higher price per unit.

Thus, ultimately, the consumers pay the taxes.
Was that a yes or a no? Are you saying no corporate profits are ever effected or reduced by taxes?
 
Sorry, but corporations just don’t get to have consumers pick up lost profit.
The market will determine what price you can sell your goods or services

If a corporation could get a higher price for their goods……they already would
You are sorry. And wrong. Of course they pass along taxes as part of the cost of production. The market does set the price. But businessmen all have to take the taxes into account as a cost of production. So, everyone has to set a price with that in mind. The magic of competition includes costs and that’s part of how prices get set.
 
You are sorry. And wrong. Of course they pass along taxes as part of the cost of production. The market does set the price. But businessmen all have to take the taxes into account as a cost of production. So, everyone has to set a price with that in mind. The magic of competition includes costs and that’s part of how prices get set.
The market does set the price. If corporations could sell their products for more, they would already be doing that.
 
Go back and read the full answer. Already provided: and stop asking others to spoon-feed you, you imbecile.
Got it . You're a coward and would rather give a weasel answer than a simple yes or no. Typical MAGA.
 
The only thing you’ve “got” is syphilis, you troll.

I have a complete answer. You just didn’t care for it. Tough fuckng luck, you whiny bitch. 😎
Not a problem. MAGAs are incapable of giving a straight answer anyway.
 
Another question:

If capitalism is evil and socialism is the answer, why aren't those immigrants trying to get into Venezuela instead of coming here? It's closer to most of those Central American countries than the US.
 
All contributions to this thread should ask a question about what liberals have great logical difficulty trying to “answer.”

1. One of the recent entries: DEFINE “woman.”

2. Can a biological male be a “birthing person?” (What the fuck is a birthing person?)

3. How does a few hundred more billion dollars being spent by the US Government help (in any way) trying to LOWER inflation?

4. If you raise the taxes on a corporation, can you deny that every penny of those additional costs or manufacture and supply WILL be passed along to the consumers?

4b. Can any lib cite three historical incidents where the additional cost of taxation wasn’t passed along to a corporation’s consumer?

4c. Therefore, can any lib justify raising corporate taxes when you know (or should know) that the taxes (being passed along to the consumer) means that the new tax is really just a cynical way to make people pay more taxes?

((( to be continued? Or maybe moved? )))

Are you still confused? Sex is determined by biology whereas gender is more fluid and determined by psychology.
 
Another question:

If capitalism is evil and socialism is the answer, why aren't those immigrants trying to get into Venezuela instead of coming here? It's closer to most of those Central American countries than the US.

Who is saying socialism is the answer? Venezuela had no middle class.. that's why Hugo Chavez was elected.
 
Great melody.
He and Paul were ripped off by EMI, Dick James and owed millions in taxes.
When George Harrison agreed to back Monty Python Holy Grail (?) he had to mortgage one of his properties to raise the $5MM, Eric Idle said he was concerned for George had the movie flopped. I mean George should have had $5MM in a cookie jar. That's how you know, let to their own devises, record companies screw their artists - royally
 
Who is saying socialism is the answer? Venezuela had no middle class.. that's why Hugo Chavez was elected.

Democrats are saying socialism is the answer. Please list the names of every socialist Republican that you can think of. You can't. My party doesn't have the equivalency of a Bernie Sanders, AOC, Ilhan Omar, or any of the rest of those socialist Democrats, because we know what socialism is.
 
Another tough question for liberals:

Liberals have been mostly responsible for laws and regulations that protect people. For instance, laws that regulate the use of tobacco, alcohol, and firearms. Laws and regulations having to do with workplace and environmental conditions, child labor, health and safety, etc.

So why would they not want laws protecting the most vulnerable members of society, which is the unborn?
 

Forum List

Back
Top