Well, at least she's honest about whose ass she's kissing

[rightwinger]

…what are they doing with the $2 trillion they are sitting on right now?

Profits, shareholders – why would they want to hire more employees and cut into profits? Corporations exist to make a profit, not to provide a living for Americans. Employees are a necessary evil.

So tax cuts do not lead to more hiring?

I'm shocked?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Looks like corporations have gotten more than their share of tax relief over the years.

Yeah! and who took over the House and senate in 2006 - Dems

Can anyone explain what this chart is supposed to show?

It's shows that you can't read a chart.

 

[NYcarbineer]

If corporations pay zero taxes, you end up with about 200 billion less in annual revenue.

The question was, who are going to have pay that 200 billion a year, instead of the corporations,

or, are you just going to add it to the deficits?

 

[rightwinger]

If corporations pay zero taxes, you end up with about 200 billion less in annual revenue.

The question was, who are going to have pay that 200 billion a year, instead of the corporations,

or, are you just going to add it to the deficits?

This is when they usually chirp in about 50% of Americans do not pay taxes

Get the money out of the working poor

 

[kiwiman127]

There's a couple of things that those who cry and moan about the 50% that don't pay taxes that they seem to forget. One, all those who are working in that 50% pay payroll taxes, pay sales, pay gas tax; etc. Two, if workers wages would increase more than inflation, which in general they haven't for the last three-plus decades, more workers would be paying income taxes. As long as wages remain flat, the more working Americans end up not paying income tax, it's that simple.

 

[The Rabbi]

…what are they doing with the $2 trillion they are sitting on right now?

Profits, shareholders – why would they want to hire more employees and cut into profits? Corporations exist to make a profit, not to provide a living for Americans. Employees are a necessary evil.

So corporations ought to fire all employees and divvy up the immense profits between management and shareholders. Right?
You are truly clueless. I pity the community you live in.

 

[bobcollum]

…what are they doing with the $2 trillion they are sitting on right now?

Profits, shareholders – why would they want to hire more employees and cut into profits? Corporations exist to make a profit, not to provide a living for Americans. Employees are a necessary evil.

So corporations ought to fire all employees and divvy up the immense profits between management and shareholders. Right?
You are truly clueless. I pity the community you live in.

No, just fire the ones that they don't need, which is what they already do.

 

[The Rabbi]

Profits, shareholders – why would they want to hire more employees and cut into profits? Corporations exist to make a profit, not to provide a living for Americans. Employees are a necessary evil.

So corporations ought to fire all employees and divvy up the immense profits between management and shareholders. Right?
You are truly clueless. I pity the community you live in.

No, just fire the ones that they don't need, which is what they already do.

Right. They don't need them because they are not productive. But if they want to grow significantly they will need employees to do that. All companioes want to grow. All have future employee needs (not to mention filling vacancies due to retirement etc). So why aren't they expanding and hiring?
Maybe because the business climate is so uncertain they cannot count on employee expense so cannot calculate the cost of any expansion. Ergo they do nothing and wait for this nightmare to be over.

 

[bobcollum]

So corporations ought to fire all employees and divvy up the immense profits between management and shareholders. Right?
You are truly clueless. I pity the community you live in.

No, just fire the ones that they don't need, which is what they already do.

Right. They don't need them because they are not productive. But if they want to grow significantly they will need employees to do that. All companioes want to grow. All have future employee needs (not to mention filling vacancies due to retirement etc). So why aren't they expanding and hiring?
Maybe because the business climate is so uncertain they cannot count on employee expense so cannot calculate the cost of any expansion. Ergo they do nothing and wait for this nightmare to be over.

By "not productive" do you mean they're slackers or the production needed was at a level that deemed them expendable? I was referring to the latter.

 

[Liability]

I am "open" to a zero per cent corporate tax rate, too.

They just pass the cost along anyway in the form of higher prices for everybody. Corporations don't actually ever pay any taxes, regardless of what is "reported."

If the shareholders sell a share or a thousand or a million shares, and the stock price has gone up (and dividends have gotten re-invested, say) then there should be a fairly high HIKE in the value -- and taxing the difference between the cost basis and the sale price at some rational income tax rate is arguably fair.

But to say "Hey, FORD. You capitalist fuckers! You had the nerve to make MONEY! Damn you! We shall now seize your income in the form of corporate taxation at a (pick a figure) 30% rate! You fucker!" is really to do NOTHING to FORD, for they will "pay" that loss of value by raising the price of their fucking and trucks. The customers will pay. End of story.

Want to increase JOBS JOBS JOBS, you dishonest Democratics? Good. Cut the corporate tax rate to 0%.

 

[rightwinger]

So corporations ought to fire all employees and divvy up the immense profits between management and shareholders. Right?
You are truly clueless. I pity the community you live in.

No, just fire the ones that they don't need, which is what they already do.

Right. They don't need them because they are not productive. But if they want to grow significantly they will need employees to do that. All companioes want to grow. All have future employee needs (not to mention filling vacancies due to retirement etc). So why aren't they expanding and hiring?
Maybe because the business climate is so uncertain they cannot count on employee expense so cannot calculate the cost of any expansion. Ergo they do nothing and wait for this nightmare to be over.

Your market is set by people buying your product. Just because you can hire more employees does not mean there is a market for your extra product. Using tax cuts to hire extra employees does not mean you will have more people willing to buy.

That's why they just keep the tax cuts

 

[The Rabbi]

No, just fire the ones that they don't need, which is what they already do.

Right. They don't need them because they are not productive. But if they want to grow significantly they will need employees to do that. All companioes want to grow. All have future employee needs (not to mention filling vacancies due to retirement etc). So why aren't they expanding and hiring?
Maybe because the business climate is so uncertain they cannot count on employee expense so cannot calculate the cost of any expansion. Ergo they do nothing and wait for this nightmare to be over.

By "not productive" do you mean they're slackers or the production needed was at a level that deemed them expendable? I was referring to the latter.

It costs more to employ them than they return in value to the company. That can be for all kinds of reasons.
My point though is that companies need employees to do essential tasks, and it is those essential tasks that make them money. They hire people because they need the tasks done, not out of the goodness of their hearts. But some people here who ought to know better think corporations are being meanies by not hiring people, forgetting that hiring is an economic act, not a charitable act.

 

[The Rabbi]

No, just fire the ones that they don't need, which is what they already do.

Right. They don't need them because they are not productive. But if they want to grow significantly they will need employees to do that. All companioes want to grow. All have future employee needs (not to mention filling vacancies due to retirement etc). So why aren't they expanding and hiring?
Maybe because the business climate is so uncertain they cannot count on employee expense so cannot calculate the cost of any expansion. Ergo they do nothing and wait for this nightmare to be over.

Your maker is set by people buying your product. Just because you can hire more employees does not mean there is a market for your extra product. Using tax cuts to hire extra employees does not mean you will have more people willing to buy.

That's why they just keep the tax cuts

It doesn't necessarily mean that. But it might.
But with the money saved from taxes they can lower the cost of their product, increasing the volume sold and necessitating more workers. Or they can pay their workers more to attract and retain talented employees. Or they can acquire a poorly managed company or division and make it perform better. Or all kinds of more productive things than handing the money over to Uncle who will blow it on bridges to nowhere and green energy jobs.

 

[bobcollum]

Right. They don't need them because they are not productive. But if they want to grow significantly they will need employees to do that. All companioes want to grow. All have future employee needs (not to mention filling vacancies due to retirement etc). So why aren't they expanding and hiring?
Maybe because the business climate is so uncertain they cannot count on employee expense so cannot calculate the cost of any expansion. Ergo they do nothing and wait for this nightmare to be over.

By "not productive" do you mean they're slackers or the production needed was at a level that deemed them expendable? I was referring to the latter.

It costs more to employ them than they return in value to the company. That can be for all kinds of reasons.
My point though is that companies need employees to do essential tasks, and it is those essential tasks that make them money. They hire people because they need the tasks done, not out of the goodness of their hearts. But some people here who ought to know better think corporations are being meanies by not hiring people, forgetting that hiring is an economic act, not a charitable act.

That's my point as well, and it can be combined with what rightwinger is saying...the question remains, why do some including yourself feel uncertainty is playing the biggest role? If essential tasks that are performed by employees is what makes money, wouldn't then the increase of essential tasks needed to be done(demand) be one of the only factors in hiring or job creation? The current situation isn't so uncertain that a higher demand would still keep a company from adding the workers to compensate, thus increasing profits. It seems t me worrying about money to the point of keeping your profits from potentially increasing is borderline insane.

 

[Meister]

By "not productive" do you mean they're slackers or the production needed was at a level that deemed them expendable? I was referring to the latter.

It costs more to employ them than they return in value to the company. That can be for all kinds of reasons.
My point though is that companies need employees to do essential tasks, and it is those essential tasks that make them money. They hire people because they need the tasks done, not out of the goodness of their hearts. But some people here who ought to know better think corporations are being meanies by not hiring people, forgetting that hiring is an economic act, not a charitable act.

That's my point as well, and it can be combined with what rightwinger is saying...the question remains, why do some including yourself feel uncertainty is playing the biggest role? If essential tasks that are performed by employees is what makes money, wouldn't then the increase of essential tasks needed to be done(demand) be one of the only factors in hiring or job creation? The current situation isn't so uncertain that a higher demand would still keep a company from adding the workers to compensate, thus increasing profits. It seems t me worrying about money to the point of keeping your profits from potentially increasing is borderline insane.

Are you a business owner?

 

[bobcollum]

It costs more to employ them than they return in value to the company. That can be for all kinds of reasons.
My point though is that companies need employees to do essential tasks, and it is those essential tasks that make them money. They hire people because they need the tasks done, not out of the goodness of their hearts. But some people here who ought to know better think corporations are being meanies by not hiring people, forgetting that hiring is an economic act, not a charitable act.

That's my point as well, and it can be combined with what rightwinger is saying...the question remains, why do some including yourself feel uncertainty is playing the biggest role? If essential tasks that are performed by employees is what makes money, wouldn't then the increase of essential tasks needed to be done(demand) be one of the only factors in hiring or job creation? The current situation isn't so uncertain that a higher demand would still keep a company from adding the workers to compensate, thus increasing profits. It seems t me worrying about money to the point of keeping your profits from potentially increasing is borderline insane.

Are you a business owner?

I can already tell where this is headed....

 

[The Rabbi]

That's my point as well, and it can be combined with what rightwinger is saying...the question remains, why do some including yourself feel uncertainty is playing the biggest role? If essential tasks that are performed by employees is what makes money, wouldn't then the increase of essential tasks needed to be done(demand) be one of the only factors in hiring or job creation? The current situation isn't so uncertain that a higher demand would still keep a company from adding the workers to compensate, thus increasing profits. It seems t me worrying about money to the point of keeping your profits from potentially increasing is borderline insane.

Are you a business owner?

I can already tell where this is headed....

The answer is obviously no.
Regardless, with Obamacare etc it is next to impossible to calculate the cost of an added employee. Many regs for Obamacare have yet to be written. Washington gushes out new regs every single day, each one of them potentially costly to someone somewhere. In that environment one cannot calculate risk with any certainty at all. SO the best thing to do is sit back and do nothing.

 

[rightwinger]

By "not productive" do you mean they're slackers or the production needed was at a level that deemed them expendable? I was referring to the latter.

It costs more to employ them than they return in value to the company. That can be for all kinds of reasons.
My point though is that companies need employees to do essential tasks, and it is those essential tasks that make them money. They hire people because they need the tasks done, not out of the goodness of their hearts. But some people here who ought to know better think corporations are being meanies by not hiring people, forgetting that hiring is an economic act, not a charitable act.

That's my point as well, and it can be combined with what rightwinger is saying...the question remains, why do some including yourself feel uncertainty is playing the biggest role? If essential tasks that are performed by employees is what makes money, wouldn't then the increase of essential tasks needed to be done(demand) be one of the only factors in hiring or job creation? The current situation isn't so uncertain that a higher demand would still keep a company from adding the workers to compensate, thus increasing profits. It seems t me worrying about money to the point of keeping your profits from potentially increasing is borderline insane.

Uncertainty is part of running a business and what taxes you might have to pay plays a very small part. What is uncertain is where will the market for your product be in six months? What are your competitors doing? Will the economy allow people to afford my product?

To claim that companies do not hire more people due to tax uncertainty is ridiculous

 

[rightwinger]

Are you a business owner?

I can already tell where this is headed....

The answer is obviously no.
Regardless, with Obamacare etc it is next to impossible to calculate the cost of an added employee. Many regs for Obamacare have yet to be written. Washington gushes out new regs every single day, each one of them potentially costly to someone somewhere. In that environment one cannot calculate risk with any certainty at all. SO the best thing to do is sit back and do nothing.

Nonsense. If there is a market for your product, you do whatever is possible, right now, to claim as big a share of that market as possible. Most Obamacare regulations do not kick in till 2014. At that time you make whatever adjustments you need to make to be profitable. Laying off employees you can no longer afford does not take that long