Another corporate moocher skips America

[The T]

Nationalize Pfizer now! That'll teach future corporate-moocher tax-cheaters .





Another corporate moocher skips town | MSNBC

“Great corporations,” President Theodore Roosevelt said more than a century ago, “exist only because they are created and safe-guarded by our [government] institutions.”

One way corporations are safeguarded is that they pay less in taxes than people do. But not enough less, by the lights of Pfizer, to remain a U.S. company, as it’s been since 1849.

So the “world’s largest research-based pharmaceutical company” wants to reincorporate with AstraZeneca in Britain, where it would pay less corporate tax. Under current rules, it can do that—and still maintain its headquarters inside the U.S.

First one would have to believe that the money in question that the company earns/generates belongs to government. Here's a hint dumbfuck: It isn't. It isn't government's or yours for that matter. Moocher? Really? I'd say that role belongs to you and the Government.

 

[bedowin62]

why wont the loser Left ask themselves why corporations want to leave?

are LWNJs too stupid to think critically? or too hung up on simplistic talking points like "greed"?

 

[The T]

why wont the loser Left ask themselves why corporations want to leave?

are LWNJs too stupid to think critically? or too hung up on simplistic talking points like "greed"?

Especially when the greed is theirs.

 

[zeke]

why wont the loser Left ask themselves why corporations want to leave?

are LWNJs too stupid to think critically? or too hung up on simplistic talking points like "greed"?

Do you think that all large corporations should move their headquarters to whatever country they can find where they pay the lowest taxes. All the while continuing to generate the bulk of their sales and profits here in the USA?

Wouldn't that be great? Then, when there is less money coming into the Treasury, we can either borrow more money or do less for the people left here and the companies who remained.

I think that we would just be a lot better off if we (as a nation) were completely bankrupt and unable to pay our debts and obligations.

What a shining beacon on a hill we would be then; deadbeat and broke.

And you support that idea. Right?

 

[bedowin62]

why wont the loser Left ask themselves why corporations want to leave?

are LWNJs too stupid to think critically? or too hung up on simplistic talking points like "greed"?

Do you think that all large corporations should move their headquarters to whatever country they can find where they pay the lowest taxes. All the while continuing to generate the bulk of their sales and profits here in the USA?

Wouldn't that be great? Then, when there is less money coming into the Treasury, we can either borrow more money or do less for the people left here and the companies who remained.

I think that we would just be a lot better off if we (as a nation) were completely bankrupt and unable to pay our debts and obligations.

What a shining beacon on a hill we would be then; deadbeat and broke.

And you support that idea. Right?

why dont you stop with the idiotic excuses for your inability to provide a climate that is good for American businesses and job growth?

 

[zeke]

why wont the loser Left ask themselves why corporations want to leave?

are LWNJs too stupid to think critically? or too hung up on simplistic talking points like "greed"?

Do you think that all large corporations should move their headquarters to whatever country they can find where they pay the lowest taxes. All the while continuing to generate the bulk of their sales and profits here in the USA?

Wouldn't that be great? Then, when there is less money coming into the Treasury, we can either borrow more money or do less for the people left here and the companies who remained.

I think that we would just be a lot better off if we (as a nation) were completely bankrupt and unable to pay our debts and obligations.

What a shining beacon on a hill we would be then; deadbeat and broke.

And you support that idea. Right?

why dont you stop with the idiotic excuses for your inability to provide a climate that is good for American businesses and job growth?

WTF are you babbling about?

I am the head of Pfizer. I could give a **** less about "creating jobs" and "American business growth". WTF is wrong with you? Where does it say as a corporate CEO that it is the CEO's responsibility to "create" jobs? Where does it say that?

As a CEO, my shareholders are who I answer to. And if I can move this company to GB, get lower taxes and lower health care costs and hire just as good of workers and continue to do great, profitable business in the USA, why in the **** would I worry about creating American jobs?

You are crazy dude. Pfizer as a corporation is much more important than the USA. At least to the CEO. America doesn't pay the CEO's multi million dollar salary. Pfizer does.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Are they doing anything that is illegal?

Everyone on the Right keeps saying that no one did anything illegal in the 2008 crash. Yet it happened.

Not an answer to the question.

BTW the answer is no they are doing nothing illegal.

All they are doing is moving operations to a country that wants them there.

We obviously don't.

 

[WinterBorn]

Are they doing anything that is illegal?

Greedy corporate-moochers are experts at circumventing the law.

This idea that a business decision to save millions of dollars is somehow "greedy" is laughable. I have stock in Pfizer, and I applaud their decision.

As for them circumventing the law, that is nonsense. The laws were written to tax companies based in the US. Moving to another country is not circumventing anything. It is fleeing an oppressive tax system that sucks the profits Pfizer earns. It is avoiding or minimizing the loss to a parasite.

When you have the most oppressive tax system in the industrialized world, this is the result. It is exactly what the dems were told would happen.

 

[bedowin62]

Do you think that all large corporations should move their headquarters to whatever country they can find where they pay the lowest taxes. All the while continuing to generate the bulk of their sales and profits here in the USA?

Wouldn't that be great? Then, when there is less money coming into the Treasury, we can either borrow more money or do less for the people left here and the companies who remained.

I think that we would just be a lot better off if we (as a nation) were completely bankrupt and unable to pay our debts and obligations.

What a shining beacon on a hill we would be then; deadbeat and broke.

And you support that idea. Right?

why dont you stop with the idiotic excuses for your inability to provide a climate that is good for American businesses and job growth?

WTF are you babbling about?

I am the head of Pfizer. I could give a **** less about "creating jobs" and "American business growth". WTF is wrong with you? Where does it say as a corporate CEO that it is the CEO's responsibility to "create" jobs? Where does it say that?

As a CEO, my shareholders are who I answer to. And if I can move this company to GB, get lower taxes and lower health care costs and hire just as good of workers and continue to do great, profitable business in the USA, why in the **** would I worry about creating American jobs?

You are crazy dude. Pfizer as a corporation is much more important than the USA. At least to the CEO. America doesn't pay the CEO's multi million dollar salary. Pfizer does.

waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!! i'm a left-wing loser who cant stop crying!1


all companies want to grow (create jobs). gosh you're an idiot

nobody wants to move to another country unless they feel they need to

you're a clown; an angry one at that

 

[The Rabbi]

The US has the highest corporate tax rates in the industrialized world, they would be stupid not to go somewhere else.

So they will move to a country that caps how much they can charge for their drugs to approximately one third of what they charge in the US, but they will be saving money. Great deal for them. The problem is that we allow these pharmaceutical companies to charge us three times as much as they charge people in the UK, so we get double raped. It really is time to cap how much these companies can charge in the US. We could make it simple and allow for them to charge 10% above the worldwide average of all other countries. These companies have created an unbelievable amount of wealth off of the American people while the rest of the world gets the reduced rate. We are fools.

If you cap the amount drug companies can charge, then you can say bye-bye to any new drugs. Drug companies aren't going to spend billions on research so they can lose money on the results.

Back in the 90's Congress changed the patent system. Until then you could patent a drug for 7 years. After that it was off patent and of course subject to competition from cheaper generics. So Congress did the logical thing: they shortened the patent period to 5 years from 7. To save money for consumers, right?
Unfortunately drug companies only had 5 years, not 7, to recapture costs. So drug prices increased dramatically for those 5 years of patent protection.
Nice going guys.
Cap drug prices here and you won't see any drug development. The rest of the world are the true moochers here, riding on the coat-tails of American consumers who basically pay for developing new drugs that they get to use at reduced prices. Why isn't this a scandal?

 

[Avatar4321]

Who is the greedy one:

The person or business trying to keep more of their own money

or

The person who wanted to violently take their money through government action for their own personl desires and pet projects?

 

[zeke]

why dont you stop with the idiotic excuses for your inability to provide a climate that is good for American businesses and job growth?

WTF are you babbling about?

I am the head of Pfizer. I could give a **** less about "creating jobs" and "American business growth". WTF is wrong with you? Where does it say as a corporate CEO that it is the CEO's responsibility to "create" jobs? Where does it say that?

As a CEO, my shareholders are who I answer to. And if I can move this company to GB, get lower taxes and lower health care costs and hire just as good of workers and continue to do great, profitable business in the USA, why in the **** would I worry about creating American jobs?

You are crazy dude. Pfizer as a corporation is much more important than the USA. At least to the CEO. America doesn't pay the CEO's multi million dollar salary. Pfizer does.

waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!! i'm a left-wing loser who cant stop crying!1


all companies want to grow (create jobs). gosh you're an idiot

nobody wants to move to another country unless they feel they need to

you're a clown; an angry one at that

Do you have to try to be as stupid as you are? Or does it come naturally?

Corporations WANT to create jobs? Where in the hell did you hear that bullshit? CEO's of major corporations want to create shareholder value and stock price increases. IF Pfizer could get rid of 50% of their workforce and still do the business they currently do, that would happen in a heart beat. Do you have ANY idea of how well the CEO would be taken care of IF the CEO could get rid of 50% of the workforce?

And if a corporation believes they can make more money by moving operations and headquarters outside of the USA, why wouldn't they. I mean, we (our COngress) has made it so easy to do. Why wouldn't a CEO beholden to shareholders, many in other countries, move to where ever they could to make the most money?

But the idea you have that major corporations are looking to grow their workforce is just plain ole stupid on your part.

Hell next thing you know you will be claiming that the companies still here will be getting rid of all their automation....... you know......so they can "create" some more jobs.

LMAO idiot.

 

[bedowin62]

WTF are you babbling about?

I am the head of Pfizer. I could give a **** less about "creating jobs" and "American business growth". WTF is wrong with you? Where does it say as a corporate CEO that it is the CEO's responsibility to "create" jobs? Where does it say that?

As a CEO, my shareholders are who I answer to. And if I can move this company to GB, get lower taxes and lower health care costs and hire just as good of workers and continue to do great, profitable business in the USA, why in the **** would I worry about creating American jobs?

You are crazy dude. Pfizer as a corporation is much more important than the USA. At least to the CEO. America doesn't pay the CEO's multi million dollar salary. Pfizer does.

waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!! i'm a left-wing loser who cant stop crying!1


all companies want to grow (create jobs). gosh you're an idiot

nobody wants to move to another country unless they feel they need to

you're a clown; an angry one at that

Do you have to try to be as stupid as you are? Or does it come naturally?

Corporations WANT to create jobs? Where in the hell did you hear that bullshit? CEO's of major corporations want to create shareholder value and stock price increases. IF Pfizer could get rid of 50% of their workforce and still do the business they currently do, that would happen in a heart beat. Do you have ANY idea of how well the CEO would be taken care of IF the CEO could get rid of 50% of the workforce?

And if a corporation believes they can make more money by moving operations and headquarters outside of the USA, why wouldn't they. I mean, we (our COngress) has made it so easy to do. Why wouldn't a CEO beholden to shareholders, many in other countries, move to where ever they could to make the most money?

But the idea you have that major corporations are looking to grow their workforce is just plain ole stupid on your part.

Hell next thing you know you will be claiming that the companies still here will be getting rid of all their automation....... you know......so they can "create" some more jobs.

LMAO idiot.

growing a company DOES increase shareholder value and stock prices

my god what an idiot you are

 

[The Rabbi]

WTF are you babbling about?

I am the head of Pfizer. I could give a **** less about "creating jobs" and "American business growth". WTF is wrong with you? Where does it say as a corporate CEO that it is the CEO's responsibility to "create" jobs? Where does it say that?

As a CEO, my shareholders are who I answer to. And if I can move this company to GB, get lower taxes and lower health care costs and hire just as good of workers and continue to do great, profitable business in the USA, why in the **** would I worry about creating American jobs?

You are crazy dude. Pfizer as a corporation is much more important than the USA. At least to the CEO. America doesn't pay the CEO's multi million dollar salary. Pfizer does.

waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!! i'm a left-wing loser who cant stop crying!1


all companies want to grow (create jobs). gosh you're an idiot

nobody wants to move to another country unless they feel they need to

you're a clown; an angry one at that

Do you have to try to be as stupid as you are? Or does it come naturally?

Corporations WANT to create jobs? Where in the hell did you hear that bullshit? CEO's of major corporations want to create shareholder value and stock price increases. IF Pfizer could get rid of 50% of their workforce and still do the business they currently do, that would happen in a heart beat. Do you have ANY idea of how well the CEO would be taken care of IF the CEO could get rid of 50% of the workforce?

And if a corporation believes they can make more money by moving operations and headquarters outside of the USA, why wouldn't they. I mean, we (our COngress) has made it so easy to do. Why wouldn't a CEO beholden to shareholders, many in other countries, move to where ever they could to make the most money?

But the idea you have that major corporations are looking to grow their workforce is just plain ole stupid on your part.

Hell next thing you know you will be claiming that the companies still here will be getting rid of all their automation....... you know......so they can "create" some more jobs.

LMAO idiot.

It's Zeke, toothless stumpbroke of USMB weighing in from the trailer part. Hey, Zeke, in reality no one can fire 50% of his workforce and have a functioning company. In reality as companies grow they must increase head count.
I realize that's reality and you are a distant stranger but it's the truth.

 

[bedowin62]

you mean companies would rather have only the amount of employess they need to keep operations going; and not have people just for nothing collecting a paycheck?


MY GOD WHAT AN ABOMINATION!!

how GREEDY CAN THEY GET?

lol you're a damn fool!!

 

[zeke]

Who is the greedy one:

The person or business trying to keep more of their own money

or

The person who wanted to violently take their money through government action for their own personl desires and pet projects?

Oh yea, that's so right wing of you.

Who is the greedy one you ask? Could it be the corporations that spent millions on lobbying efforts to get the preferential treatment they wanted, only to find out they could move off shore and make even more money?

No, to your warped mind, those kinds of actions aren't greedy at all. Right?

 

[The Rabbi]

Who is the greedy one:

The person or business trying to keep more of their own money

or

The person who wanted to violently take their money through government action for their own personl desires and pet projects?

Oh yea, that's so right wing of you.

Who is the greedy one you ask? Could it be the corporations that spent millions on lobbying efforts to get the preferential treatment they wanted, only to find out they could move off shore and make even more money?

No, to your warped mind, those kinds of actions aren't greedy at all. Right?

It's not greedy to want more money from your business, Zeke. It is greedy to expect government to pay for every little need you have. Like beers at 9AM.

 

[zeke]

you mean companies would rather have only the amount of employess they need to keep operations going; and not have people just for nothing collecting a paycheck?


MY GOD WHAT AN ABOMINATION!!

how GREEDY CAN THEY GET?

lol you're a damn fool!!

Which position you want to take there asshole?

Corporations want to create jobs or corporations want to keep their work force the right size?

You can't argue both sides idiot. But you sure are trying. Pick a story and stick to it.

 

[Avatar4321]

Who is the greedy one:

The person or business trying to keep more of their own money

or

The person who wanted to violently take their money through government action for their own personl desires and pet projects?

Oh yea, that's so right wing of you.

Who is the greedy one you ask? Could it be the corporations that spent millions on lobbying efforts to get the preferential treatment they wanted, only to find out they could move off shore and make even more money?

No, to your warped mind, those kinds of actions aren't greedy at all. Right?

What preferential treatment have they gotten?

Did you ever think they wouldn't find moving off shore more profitable if you didn't take so much of their money?

 

[The T]

Who is the greedy one:

The person or business trying to keep more of their own money

or

The person who wanted to violently take their money through government action for their own personl desires and pet projects?

Oh yea, that's so right wing of you.

Who is the greedy one you ask? Could it be the corporations that spent millions on lobbying efforts to get the preferential treatment they wanted, only to find out they could move off shore and make even more money?

No, to your warped mind, those kinds of actions aren't greedy at all. Right?

Zeke? It isn't YOUR money or the Government's. Get it?