Bernie Sanders introduces 'Stop BEZOS' bill

[dblack]

Which is why I said it needs to be handled federally. But to accomplish that, we'd need to agree that it's wrong. And don't seem willing to admit that.

I think you'll find this is not an issue with most Americans. And actually, it would take a constitutional amendment for the feds to control how a state spends (or collects) their own money. It's simply not in the purview of the federal government.

It's like you get it, but just can't give in. Weird.

No, it's just I look at ...

No. I'm taking about how, when you get cornered by the fact that all these taxation shenanigans are an abuse of government power, you fall back on the "everyone is doing it" defense. And I when I say, "right, that's why we need a Constitutional amendment prohibiting the practice for all states" you start shuffling your feet and mumbling. What the hell?

Good luck with that Constitutional amendment thing. I can think of several amendments that would produce much better results for this country. And it's not "everyone is doing it" it's the idea they will do it no matter what you propose.

But I wish to extrapolate on this. Let's say that in my state, the corporate tax is 15%. In yours, it's 11%. Should the federal government come in and force your state to increase their corporate tax rate to 15%? and if not, why not?

Your extrapolation is diversion. And we already covered it. The issue isn't states having different tax rates. It's states offering different tax rates to different companies. Did you forget already?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I think you'll find this is not an issue with most Americans. And actually, it would take a constitutional amendment for the feds to control how a state spends (or collects) their own money. It's simply not in the purview of the federal government.

It's like you get it, but just can't give in. Weird.

No, it's just I look at ...

No. I'm taking about how, when you get cornered by the fact that all these taxation shenanigans are an abuse of government power, you fall back on the "everyone is doing it" defense. And I when I say, "right, that's why we need a Constitutional amendment prohibiting the practice for all states" you start shuffling your feet and mumbling. What the hell?

Good luck with that Constitutional amendment thing. I can think of several amendments that would produce much better results for this country. And it's not "everyone is doing it" it's the idea they will do it no matter what you propose.

But I wish to extrapolate on this. Let's say that in my state, the corporate tax is 15%. In yours, it's 11%. Should the federal government come in and force your state to increase their corporate tax rate to 15%? and if not, why not?

Your extrapolation is diversion. And we already covered it. The issue isn't states having different tax rates. It's states offering different tax rates to different companies. Did you forget already?

What's the difference? If my state is drawing more companies to my state because our tax rate is lower than your state, whats the difference if they do that with individual companies?

 

[dblack]

It's like you get it, but just can't give in. Weird.

No, it's just I look at ...

No. I'm taking about how, when you get cornered by the fact that all these taxation shenanigans are an abuse of government power, you fall back on the "everyone is doing it" defense. And I when I say, "right, that's why we need a Constitutional amendment prohibiting the practice for all states" you start shuffling your feet and mumbling. What the hell?

Good luck with that Constitutional amendment thing. I can think of several amendments that would produce much better results for this country. And it's not "everyone is doing it" it's the idea they will do it no matter what you propose.

But I wish to extrapolate on this. Let's say that in my state, the corporate tax is 15%. In yours, it's 11%. Should the federal government come in and force your state to increase their corporate tax rate to 15%? and if not, why not?

Your extrapolation is diversion. And we already covered it. The issue isn't states having different tax rates. It's states offering different tax rates to different companies. Did you forget already?

What's the difference? If my state is drawing more companies to my state because our tax rate is lower than your state, whats the difference if they do that with individual companies?

I don't have time to explain such basic political concepts. Look up "equal protection" for fuck's sake.

 

[jillian]

I wonder if that asshole has even heard of the Constitution?
Holy fuck

What part of the constitution do you think it violates?

That question does not imply support for the proposal (or at least as it was described ed by wing nut boy). But you throwing around a term which seems inappropriate should be explained

 

[jillian]

No, it's just I look at ...

No. I'm taking about how, when you get cornered by the fact that all these taxation shenanigans are an abuse of government power, you fall back on the "everyone is doing it" defense. And I when I say, "right, that's why we need a Constitutional amendment prohibiting the practice for all states" you start shuffling your feet and mumbling. What the hell?

Good luck with that Constitutional amendment thing. I can think of several amendments that would produce much better results for this country. And it's not "everyone is doing it" it's the idea they will do it no matter what you propose.

But I wish to extrapolate on this. Let's say that in my state, the corporate tax is 15%. In yours, it's 11%. Should the federal government come in and force your state to increase their corporate tax rate to 15%? and if not, why not?

Your extrapolation is diversion. And we already covered it. The issue isn't states having different tax rates. It's states offering different tax rates to different companies. Did you forget already?

What's the difference? If my state is drawing more companies to my state because our tax rate is lower than your state, whats the difference if they do that with individual companies?

I don't have time to explain such basic political concepts. Look up "equal protection" for fuck's sake.

In other words you have no answe

 

[dblack]

No. I'm taking about how, when you get cornered by the fact that all these taxation shenanigans are an abuse of government power, you fall back on the "everyone is doing it" defense. And I when I say, "right, that's why we need a Constitutional amendment prohibiting the practice for all states" you start shuffling your feet and mumbling. What the hell?

Good luck with that Constitutional amendment thing. I can think of several amendments that would produce much better results for this country. And it's not "everyone is doing it" it's the idea they will do it no matter what you propose.

But I wish to extrapolate on this. Let's say that in my state, the corporate tax is 15%. In yours, it's 11%. Should the federal government come in and force your state to increase their corporate tax rate to 15%? and if not, why not?

Your extrapolation is diversion. And we already covered it. The issue isn't states having different tax rates. It's states offering different tax rates to different companies. Did you forget already?

What's the difference? If my state is drawing more companies to my state because our tax rate is lower than your state, whats the difference if they do that with individual companies?

I don't have time to explain such basic political concepts. Look up "equal protection" for fuck's sake.

In other words you have no answer.

Sure. Whatever keeps the wind in your sails. But it's an ignorant wind, and you know it.

 

[Brain357]

It's like you get it, but just can't give in. Weird.

No, it's just I look at ...

No. I'm taking about how, when you get cornered by the fact that all these taxation shenanigans are an abuse of government power, you fall back on the "everyone is doing it" defense. And I when I say, "right, that's why we need a Constitutional amendment prohibiting the practice for all states" you start shuffling your feet and mumbling. What the hell?

Good luck with that Constitutional amendment thing. I can think of several amendments that would produce much better results for this country. And it's not "everyone is doing it" it's the idea they will do it no matter what you propose.

But I wish to extrapolate on this. Let's say that in my state, the corporate tax is 15%. In yours, it's 11%. Should the federal government come in and force your state to increase their corporate tax rate to 15%? and if not, why not?

Your extrapolation is diversion. And we already covered it. The issue isn't states having different tax rates. It's states offering different tax rates to different companies. Did you forget already?

What's the difference? If my state is drawing more companies to my state because our tax rate is lower than your state, whats the difference if they do that with individual companies?

If your state draws more companies with a lower tax rate, the cost of doing business there will increase. Land will get more expensive, it will be more expensive to lease a building... Eventually any benefits from lower taxes will be eaten up in other costs. There are many reasons why states with the lowest taxes aren't all economic juggernauts. Look at California, it is by far the largest economy. Do you think they have the lowest taxes? You really put way too much into this tax thing. Is Amazon going to put their OH distribution in CA?

If every company in the state gets the same tax rates, government is not picking winners and losers.

 

[LuckyDuck]

This is a fascinating idea. Our biggest economic problem is stagnant wages. Could this be an answer?

Update: September 6, 2018: U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders on Wednesday introduced a bill that would tax corporations with more than 500 employees for the full amount employees receive in government assistance. The bill's title, "Stop Bad Employers by Zeroing Out Subsidies Act," or "Stop BEZOS," is an open jab at Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos. Sanders had previously criticized Amazon after a study found that some fulfillment center employees relied on a federal food assistance program. Sanders' criticism drew a heated response from Amazon, which prompted another detailed critique from Sanders' office, one that included testimonials from Amazon employeesabout working conditions.

Bernie Sanders introduces 'Stop BEZOS' bill

The companies would simply pack up and move out of the US and set up shops in nations where there are no unions and really poor workers.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No, it's just I look at ...

No. I'm taking about how, when you get cornered by the fact that all these taxation shenanigans are an abuse of government power, you fall back on the "everyone is doing it" defense. And I when I say, "right, that's why we need a Constitutional amendment prohibiting the practice for all states" you start shuffling your feet and mumbling. What the hell?

Good luck with that Constitutional amendment thing. I can think of several amendments that would produce much better results for this country. And it's not "everyone is doing it" it's the idea they will do it no matter what you propose.

But I wish to extrapolate on this. Let's say that in my state, the corporate tax is 15%. In yours, it's 11%. Should the federal government come in and force your state to increase their corporate tax rate to 15%? and if not, why not?

Your extrapolation is diversion. And we already covered it. The issue isn't states having different tax rates. It's states offering different tax rates to different companies. Did you forget already?

What's the difference? If my state is drawing more companies to my state because our tax rate is lower than your state, whats the difference if they do that with individual companies?

If your state draws more companies with a lower tax rate, the cost of doing business there will increase. Land will get more expensive, it will be more expensive to lease a building... Eventually any benefits from lower taxes will be eaten up in other costs. There are many reasons why states with the lowest taxes aren't all economic juggernauts. Look at California, it is by far the largest economy. Do you think they have the lowest taxes? You really put way too much into this tax thing. Is Amazon going to put their OH distribution in CA?

If every company in the state gets the same tax rates, government is not picking winners and losers.

However if each state has different tax rates, then the governments are picking winners and losers.

Now if what you say is true (which is completely false) of all these expenses going up because businesses are moving to a certain state, then what's the problem? You should encourage states to offer abatements because it will ultimately lead to their own demise.

You see, even you don't really believe what you say.

Yes, California does attract businesses which was my earlier point: they have the weather in their favor. However many businesses have left because of their high tax rates. They moved to Texas.

If anything, the cost of doing business decreases because businesses interact with other businesses. It's my line of work. I pickup parts from one company to deliver to another company that does certain processes. It's either de-burring, paint, e-coating, machine work, assembly, just a list of things.

It's cheaper for a company to send those parts to another local company than it is to ship it several states away.

 

[dblack]

So, does anyone in this thread actually support Bernie's proposal?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

No, it's just I look at ...

No. I'm taking about how, when you get cornered by the fact that all these taxation shenanigans are an abuse of government power, you fall back on the "everyone is doing it" defense. And I when I say, "right, that's why we need a Constitutional amendment prohibiting the practice for all states" you start shuffling your feet and mumbling. What the hell?

Good luck with that Constitutional amendment thing. I can think of several amendments that would produce much better results for this country. And it's not "everyone is doing it" it's the idea they will do it no matter what you propose.

But I wish to extrapolate on this. Let's say that in my state, the corporate tax is 15%. In yours, it's 11%. Should the federal government come in and force your state to increase their corporate tax rate to 15%? and if not, why not?

Your extrapolation is diversion. And we already covered it. The issue isn't states having different tax rates. It's states offering different tax rates to different companies. Did you forget already?

What's the difference? If my state is drawing more companies to my state because our tax rate is lower than your state, whats the difference if they do that with individual companies?

I don't have time to explain such basic political concepts. Look up "equal protection" for fuck's sake.

If equal protection applies to taxation, why do wealthy people pay much more taxes than non-wealthy people?

 

[dblack]

No. I'm taking about how, when you get cornered by the fact that all these taxation shenanigans are an abuse of government power, you fall back on the "everyone is doing it" defense. And I when I say, "right, that's why we need a Constitutional amendment prohibiting the practice for all states" you start shuffling your feet and mumbling. What the hell?

Good luck with that Constitutional amendment thing. I can think of several amendments that would produce much better results for this country. And it's not "everyone is doing it" it's the idea they will do it no matter what you propose.

But I wish to extrapolate on this. Let's say that in my state, the corporate tax is 15%. In yours, it's 11%. Should the federal government come in and force your state to increase their corporate tax rate to 15%? and if not, why not?

Your extrapolation is diversion. And we already covered it. The issue isn't states having different tax rates. It's states offering different tax rates to different companies. Did you forget already?

What's the difference? If my state is drawing more companies to my state because our tax rate is lower than your state, whats the difference if they do that with individual companies?

I don't have time to explain such basic political concepts. Look up "equal protection" for fuck's sake.

If equal protection applies to taxation, why do wealthy people pay much more taxes than non-wealthy people?

Because the laws aren't equally applied when it comes to taxation? They should be, but they aren't. We should fix that. But so what? What does that have to do with the current argument? Are you saying that because it's already happening, that we should have even more it? How does that make any fucking sense?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Good luck with that Constitutional amendment thing. I can think of several amendments that would produce much better results for this country. And it's not "everyone is doing it" it's the idea they will do it no matter what you propose.

But I wish to extrapolate on this. Let's say that in my state, the corporate tax is 15%. In yours, it's 11%. Should the federal government come in and force your state to increase their corporate tax rate to 15%? and if not, why not?

Your extrapolation is diversion. And we already covered it. The issue isn't states having different tax rates. It's states offering different tax rates to different companies. Did you forget already?

What's the difference? If my state is drawing more companies to my state because our tax rate is lower than your state, whats the difference if they do that with individual companies?

I don't have time to explain such basic political concepts. Look up "equal protection" for fuck's sake.

If equal protection applies to taxation, why do wealthy people pay much more taxes than non-wealthy people?

Because the laws aren't equally applied when it comes to taxation? They should be, but they aren't. We should fix that. But so what? What does that have to do with the current argument? Are you saying that because it's already happening, that we should have even more it? How does that make any fucking sense?

You're never going to fix anything. They will never tax the non-wealthy the same as the wealthy. They will never amend State's Rights when it comes to how they tax. They will never create local taxes to assess costs to people that have kids in school.

Taxation is unequal and always will be. However, when it comes to cities or states giving tax breaks to businesses, that's so far down on the list of unequal taxation it isn't even worth the time to consider change. Start with Commie Care, start with sin taxes, start with income taxes. And if you can get that all straightened out, then address city or state tax abatements.

 

[dblack]

Your extrapolation is diversion. And we already covered it. The issue isn't states having different tax rates. It's states offering different tax rates to different companies. Did you forget already?

What's the difference? If my state is drawing more companies to my state because our tax rate is lower than your state, whats the difference if they do that with individual companies?

I don't have time to explain such basic political concepts. Look up "equal protection" for fuck's sake.

If equal protection applies to taxation, why do wealthy people pay much more taxes than non-wealthy people?

Because the laws aren't equally applied when it comes to taxation? They should be, but they aren't. We should fix that. But so what? What does that have to do with the current argument? Are you saying that because it's already happening, that we should have even more it? How does that make any fucking sense?

You're never going to fix anything. They will never tax the non-wealthy the same as the wealthy. They will never amend State's Rights when it comes to how they tax. They will never create local taxes to assess costs to people that have kids in school.

Taxation is unequal and always will be. However, when it comes to cities or states giving tax breaks to businesses, that's so far down on the list of unequal taxation it isn't even worth the time to consider change. Start with Commie Care, start with sin taxes, start with income taxes. And if you can get that all straightened out, then address city or state tax abatements.

So, you agree it's wrong. But you think it's less wrong because you like the results. If I had a nickel for every time I've heard that one. It's used for every single piece of overreaching legislation.

Speaking of which, do you support Bernie's proposal? You seem to be arguing for exactly that kind of 'targeted' tax policy.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

What's the difference? If my state is drawing more companies to my state because our tax rate is lower than your state, whats the difference if they do that with individual companies?

I don't have time to explain such basic political concepts. Look up "equal protection" for fuck's sake.

If equal protection applies to taxation, why do wealthy people pay much more taxes than non-wealthy people?

Because the laws aren't equally applied when it comes to taxation? They should be, but they aren't. We should fix that. But so what? What does that have to do with the current argument? Are you saying that because it's already happening, that we should have even more it? How does that make any fucking sense?

You're never going to fix anything. They will never tax the non-wealthy the same as the wealthy. They will never amend State's Rights when it comes to how they tax. They will never create local taxes to assess costs to people that have kids in school.

Taxation is unequal and always will be. However, when it comes to cities or states giving tax breaks to businesses, that's so far down on the list of unequal taxation it isn't even worth the time to consider change. Start with Commie Care, start with sin taxes, start with income taxes. And if you can get that all straightened out, then address city or state tax abatements.

So, you agree it's wrong. But you think it's less wrong because you like the results. If I had a nickel for every time I've heard that one. It's used for every single piece of overreaching legislation.

Speaking of which, do you support Bernie's proposal? You seem to be arguing for exactly that kind of 'targeted' tax policy.

Why would I be for that? I'm for lower taxes, not higher. I'm for creating jobs, not reducing them.

This suggestion is a prime example of what I talked about earlier: taxing people into submission. The lefts hate for corporations and industry is what drives things like this. But again, it's all a dog and pony show; Sanders giving his supporters what they want. Even if Democrats had total power of the houses, they wouldn't dream of trying to make this into law because they know the effect it would have on businesses.

 

[TNHarley]

I wonder if that asshole has even heard of the Constitution?
Holy fuck

What part of the constitution do you think it violates?

That question does not imply support for the proposal (or at least as it was described ed by wing nut boy). But you throwing around a term which seems inappropriate should be explained

What part? How about the part that doesnt exist that gives the fed gov the power to do that shit?

 

[dblack]

This suggestion is a prime example of what I talked about earlier: taxing people into submission. The lefts hate for corporations and industry is what drives things like this. But again, it's all a dog and pony show; Sanders giving his supporters what they want. Even if Democrats had total power of the houses, they wouldn't dream of trying to make this into law because they know the effect it would have on businesses.

It's a prime example of what you're advocating for - government using the tax code to manipulate society. Bernie just has different goals in mind. This is why I say that your political ideology is no different than the Democrats. You just want to punish/reward different people.

 

[Brain357]

So, does anyone in this thread actually support Bernie's proposal?

Not at this time, but I am getting desperate to see wages increase. Something is wrong with the market, and I’m losing faith it will be fixed.

 

[dblack]

So, does anyone in this thread actually support Bernie's proposal?

Not at this time, but I am getting desperate to see wages increase. Something is wrong with the market, and I’m losing faith it will be fixed.

I see. If you get desperate, all bets are off.

 

[Brain357]

No. I'm taking about how, when you get cornered by the fact that all these taxation shenanigans are an abuse of government power, you fall back on the "everyone is doing it" defense. And I when I say, "right, that's why we need a Constitutional amendment prohibiting the practice for all states" you start shuffling your feet and mumbling. What the hell?

Good luck with that Constitutional amendment thing. I can think of several amendments that would produce much better results for this country. And it's not "everyone is doing it" it's the idea they will do it no matter what you propose.

But I wish to extrapolate on this. Let's say that in my state, the corporate tax is 15%. In yours, it's 11%. Should the federal government come in and force your state to increase their corporate tax rate to 15%? and if not, why not?

Your extrapolation is diversion. And we already covered it. The issue isn't states having different tax rates. It's states offering different tax rates to different companies. Did you forget already?

What's the difference? If my state is drawing more companies to my state because our tax rate is lower than your state, whats the difference if they do that with individual companies?

If your state draws more companies with a lower tax rate, the cost of doing business there will increase. Land will get more expensive, it will be more expensive to lease a building... Eventually any benefits from lower taxes will be eaten up in other costs. There are many reasons why states with the lowest taxes aren't all economic juggernauts. Look at California, it is by far the largest economy. Do you think they have the lowest taxes? You really put way too much into this tax thing. Is Amazon going to put their OH distribution in CA?

If every company in the state gets the same tax rates, government is not picking winners and losers.

However if each state has different tax rates, then the governments are picking winners and losers.

Now if what you say is true (which is completely false) of all these expenses going up because businesses are moving to a certain state, then what's the problem? You should encourage states to offer abatements because it will ultimately lead to their own demise.

You see, even you don't really believe what you say.

Yes, California does attract businesses which was my earlier point: they have the weather in their favor. However many businesses have left because of their high tax rates. They moved to Texas.

If anything, the cost of doing business decreases because businesses interact with other businesses. It's my line of work. I pickup parts from one company to deliver to another company that does certain processes. It's either de-burring, paint, e-coating, machine work, assembly, just a list of things.

It's cheaper for a company to send those parts to another local company than it is to ship it several states away.

California has the biggest ecomomy, you think it’s cheap to do business there? You think real estate is chip in CA? You seem to have no understanding of markets.