Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Boy, you really don't know jack schitt about economics or business accounting.And your solution to this "problem" is .......?
Simple. Raise taxes on corporations.
Almost everyone in the bottom 60% gets their income from their job and their employer. With corporate taxes as low as they are, there is no additional incentive for a company to pay a worker more than what it would take to keep that worker. You raise taxes, and then the corp has to decide between paying more to the worker or to the government. Which do you think they will choose?
Well equality is not possible as there will always be differences between the man that works his ass off and gets a good education, and the man that is not serious and drinks. The man that has a good business education and owns his own business will make a profit and earn more money, while the man that drinks and screws around won't. You get what you put into it. The left has the belief they have for the past 150 years that have caused hundreds of millions to be slaughtered.
Why should the man that works hard get the same as the man that does nothing, but collects from the government?
Does Donald Trump work harder than you do? Does he work 100,000 times harder than a nurse? A plumber? A teacher?
No, but his family amassed that wealth and gave it to him. What right do we have to take it from him? What right do we have to tax him more then anyone else? What right did the Marxist in 1917 in the Czars russia have to do what they did? What right did Mao, Castro's Cuba or any other attempt in the past. It is a slippery slope that I sure as hell pray to god that we don't go through within the United states.
I guess his family formed a business that made a profit(billions), which means people brought the product and was rewarded with billions. The nurse, plumber, teacher gets what is the market value for what they produce or do. Is it prefect NO; hell it may not seem fair, but it is what it is.
What right do we have to take it from him?
This one claims 81%...Which is still one whole hell of a lot of millionaires.Fact is that somewhere on the order of 90+% of millionaires are new money and worked their asses of to attain their wealth.
heh heh Have a link proving this? Or do you just really, really want to believe it?
And your solution to this "problem" is .......?
Simple. Raise taxes on corporations.
Almost everyone in the bottom 60% gets their income from their job and their employer. With corporate taxes as low as they are, there is no additional incentive for a company to pay a worker more than what it would take to keep that worker. You raise taxes, and then the corp has to decide between paying more to the worker or to the government. Which do you think they will choose?
The question comes down will the business be able to compete against markets like China, India, ect. Most likely not and they won't pay the high wages for American workers, and they have shown time and time again that they will take there business over sea's. We can't compete against China and that is why so many of our businesses have closed up shop and took there business over sea's.
The businesses are in business to make a profit from what they create(do), so raising taxes on them will just make them pass that on to the consumer. You think that rich piece of shit at the top will be taxed? No, he will rise his prices on his protect, while transporting his business over sea's.
Can you tell me where I'm wrong?
No, we didn't have higher taxes in the 50s, just higher federal rates....Property taxes were vastly lower and state income, sales and other "fees" were either non-existent or a pittance compared to today...Moreover, the costs of compliance with tax and other regs has gone through the roof.Boy, you really don't know jack schitt about economics or business accounting.Simple. Raise taxes on corporations.
Almost everyone in the bottom 60% gets their income from their job and their employer. With corporate taxes as low as they are, there is no additional incentive for a company to pay a worker more than what it would take to keep that worker. You raise taxes, and then the corp has to decide between paying more to the worker or to the government. Which do you think they will choose?
Why don't you enlighten me then? Should be simple right? I mean, it's not like we had higher taxes in the 50s and less inequality. No. That wasn't the case.
Can you tell me where I'm wrong?
Actually, a lot of that has to do with the turnover rate at American call centers.And that is the problem today. Thats why jobs go to mexico at an alarming rate. Why call centers are opened in India not Indiana.
Can you tell me where I'm wrong?
Sure. You said this "The businesses are in business to make a profit from what they create(do), so raising taxes on them will just make them pass that on to the consumer."
We tax the profits of companies, which is revenue minus the total cost of business. Raising taxes on profits does not make your costs go up, so there is nothing to pass along to consumers. This is also why raising taxes on profits is a good idea, because then a company can lower their tax burden by increasing the cost of doing business, and they can do that by paying their workers more.
You have to make a certain percentage in profit to keep your doors open, you ignorant fool.Can you tell me where I'm wrong?
Sure. You said this "The businesses are in business to make a profit from what they create(do), so raising taxes on them will just make them pass that on to the consumer."
We tax the profits of companies, which is revenue minus the total cost of business. Raising taxes on profits does not make your costs go up, so there is nothing to pass along to consumers. This is also why raising taxes on profits is a good idea, because then a company can lower their tax burden by increasing the cost of doing business, and they can do that by paying their workers more.
From: It's the Inequality, Stupid | Mother Jones
It's not just that the rich have a disproportionate share; it's that problem is getting worse over time.
Unequal input, unequal output.
Don't worry, Obama will fix things.
Can you tell me where I'm wrong?
Sure. You said this "The businesses are in business to make a profit from what they create(do), so raising taxes on them will just make them pass that on to the consumer."
We tax the profits of companies, which is revenue minus the total cost of business. Raising taxes on profits does not make your costs go up, so there is nothing to pass along to consumers. This is also why raising taxes on profits is a good idea, because then a company can lower their tax burden by increasing the cost of doing business, and they can do that by paying their workers more.
No, we didn't have higher taxes in the 50s, just higher federal rates....Property taxes were vastly lower and state income, sales and other "fees" were either non-existent or a pittance compared to today...Moreover, the costs of compliance with tax and other regs has gone through the roof.
But all of that is a diversion from the fact that what you know about economics and business accounting couldn't fill out both sides of a matchbook.
You have to make a certain percentage in profit to keep your doors open, you ignorant fool.
IF. . . .I stay away from illegal substances, stay in school and educate myself, work at whatever Mcjobs I can get to develop a work ethic, experience, references, and acquire skills to qualify for better and better jobs and eventually wind up with a nice house, boat two cars, and a college fund for my kids. . . .
. . . .while. . . .
IF. . . .you party and zone out in school until you just drop out, scorn jobs that don't pay any better than welfare or hold one just long enough to qualify for unemployment insurance so you can play video games all day or hang out smoking pot and drinking beer with your buddies. . . . and then one day you realize you're middle aged and still live in a rat infested apartment in the projects with no savings, no house accruing equity, no nice car, and no prospects. . . . .
Is it fair that I have so much more than you do?
Cut into profits the price goes up to make up the loss, thus the pass on
No, we didn't have higher taxes in the 50s, just higher federal rates....Property taxes were vastly lower and state income, sales and other "fees" were either non-existent or a pittance compared to today...Moreover, the costs of compliance with tax and other regs has gone through the roof.
But all of that is a diversion from the fact that what you know about economics and business accounting couldn't fill out both sides of a matchbook.
I do so love it when you guys make shit up.
"The effective corporate tax rate that is, the percentage of corporate profits that is paid in federal corporate income taxes has followed a similar pattern. During the 1990s, corporations as a group paid an average of 25.3 percent of their profits in federal corporate income taxes, according to new Congressional Research Service estimates. By contrast, they paid more than 49 percent in the 1950s, 38 percent in the 1960s, and 33 percent in the 1970s."
The Decline of Corporate Income Tax Revenues — Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
I would point out that the drop in corp taxes corresponds to the rise in inequality, but I'm sure you'll just ignore that.
Link?since lowering them we have more start ups, thus expansion.
The seniors relying on dividends dont need to eat anyway.
This one claims 81%...Which is still one whole hell of a lot of millionaires.Fact is that somewhere on the order of 90+% of millionaires are new money and worked their asses of to attain their wealth.
heh heh Have a link proving this? Or do you just really, really want to believe it?
What percentage of millionaires are self made? | ChaCha
Though, I don't expect that a covetous little looter like you really cares at all how hard anyone works and saves to have what they do, just how much of it you can get your greedy little mitts on without having to work for it.
