Can socialists in this country explain how taxing American corporations/companies more is good?

[Ray From Cleveland]

LMAO. You want me to address the ******* lies and Bullshit you write? What the **** for? No one can argue against lies and Bullshit. Just put me on ignore and I will keep ******* with you.

That's what makes this fun. Don't ya think. Or do you think you are providing a valuable service by spreading right wing lies and Bullshit?

How are you going to **** with me if I put you on ignore? That's like screaming my name in anger in your moms basement. I'll never hear it.

No, I haven't thought name calling and posting worthless crap on a message board was fun. That may be entertaining in teen chat rooms somewhere, but not in adult discussion blogs.

 

[Kondor3]

Not People... Corporations... and the Corporatists have been raping America long enough, so... phukk 'em.

You don't mean that, otherwise you would have nothing to do with them. You wouldn't be on this internet, you wouldn't have cable or satellite television, you wouldn't have your I phone, you wouldn't have any video games, you wouldn't have an automobile or several of them, you wouldn't have nothing without corporations. ...

Yep... they can do a lot of good... right up to the split second where they begin to do a lot of wrong... or begin exploiting their position, to the detriment of their 'fellow citizens'.

So how have they been raping us?

Sending jobs off-shore, exploiting overseas Slave Labor, pocketing the profits, and not re-investing in the 'community' (their home country, the United States).

Also... controlling the vast majority of the Mainstream Media... to the point where we hear and see what the Corporatists WANT us to hear and see.

Time to bust 'em up again, just like Teddy did.

Afterwards, the new crop of Baby Bells can begin providing all those good benefits to the Nation again, utilizing our own national labor and material resources.

 

[Conservative65]

The sad part is those who continue to enable freeloaders to be freeloaders wonder why they continue to do that. If you give someone that doesn't want to work a chance to not work then hand them a "living" more in value than they could earn, they're not going to work and will continue to vote for those enabling them. Liberals that allow it to continue either do it on purpose or are too stupid to realize they're doing that because of their so called compassion. I would say it's a combination of both.

Liberal politicians never enact anything without an ulterior motive. As long as the dressing looks nice and compassionate, the sheep will never know because they never look for the man behind the curtain.

DumBama took over and put over 20 million more Americans on food stamps, another 15 million on Commie Care, and I won't even go into the disability numbers.

To a liberal, that was a pure accident. The Democrats were only trying to help all those poor people. It was never the Democrats intention to create all those government dependents even though most government dependents vote Democrat.

It's just like with immigration. The same song and dance: Democrats are out to help those poor people from other countries. Yeah? I bet if foreigners were known to vote Republican when they get a chance, our borders would be locked up solid today and nobody would be able to get in.

15 million more on food stamps at 4.9% unemployment under Obama than under Bush at the same percentage. You get a couple different responses from them when you ask them why so many more at the same unemployment rate. The most common blames businesses for not paying enough of a wage for those jobs. What I get from that is the jobs Liberals are willing to use to take credit for unemployment being down really aren't good jobs but they'll count them in order to take credit for unemployment being down. What's funnier is that they give credit to Obama for having created the jobs they say suck yet still use them to give him credit for lowering unemployment. It's the mentality of saying you had your roof re-shingled then paying the person that did it despite it leaking worse than it did before having it done.

 

[Conservative65]

LMAO. You want me to address the ******* lies and Bullshit you write? What the **** for? No one can argue against lies and Bullshit. Just put me on ignore and I will keep ******* with you.

That's what makes this fun. Don't ya think. Or do you think you are providing a valuable service by spreading right wing lies and Bullshit?

How are you going to **** with me if I put you on ignore? That's like screaming my name in anger in your moms basement. I'll never hear it.

No, I haven't thought name calling and posting worthless crap on a message board was fun. That may be entertaining in teen chat rooms somewhere, but not in adult discussion blogs.

Wilbur is one who says he bitchslaps people on this FORUM.

 

[Kondor3]

There is the tax rate...

Then there is the amount actually paid out in taxes...

When you have too many shelters, and too many tax breaks, the rate itself still doesn't matter, if you're not contributing your share...

There's that term again--share.

When you have a society or government that rewards failure and penalizes success, how do you expect that society to advance?

"What is YOUR fair share of what somebody else worked for?"
Thomas Sowell

When so many can get more from handouts when they don't work than they could earn if they did based on the low skill set they offer, they have no incentive to work. They're easy targets for Liberals wanting to convince them it's not their fault.

Oh, LibTards can be pretty damned bad, alright, and there are more Welfare Queens and their feral Inner City offspring than you can shake a stick at.

That does not, however, negate the fact that (1) corporations control the media, and half-control our politics, and (2) they're off-shoring, at the expense of Americans, who cannot compete with Slave Labor in China and India and Mexico, etc.

When the scales tip that far, it's time for a forcible Market Correction.

Which is, quite possibly, what we're about to see unfold; once a Centrist-Socialist gets into power, who's had a wake-up call about off-shoring, courtesy of Bernie and his followers.

 

[Kondor3]

...The only people not contributing their share are the 47% who pay zero federal income tax. Those are the people you should target.

Even if that were true, Mittens was unable to sell that back in 2012, and Attila the Hun sure-as-hell won't be able to sell that in 2016.

 

[Conservative65]

There is the tax rate...

Then there is the amount actually paid out in taxes...

When you have too many shelters, and too many tax breaks, the rate itself still doesn't matter, if you're not contributing your share...

There's that term again--share.

When you have a society or government that rewards failure and penalizes success, how do you expect that society to advance?

"What is YOUR fair share of what somebody else worked for?"
Thomas Sowell

When so many can get more from handouts when they don't work than they could earn if they did based on the low skill set they offer, they have no incentive to work. They're easy targets for Liberals wanting to convince them it's not their fault.

Oh, LibTards can be pretty damned bad, alright, and there are more Welfare Queens and their feral Inner City offspring than you can shake a stick at.

That does not, however, negate the fact that (1) corporations control the media, and half-control our politics, and (2) they're off-shoring, at the expense of Americans, who cannot compete with Slave Labor in China and India and Mexico, etc.

When the scales tip that far, it's time for a forcible Market Correction.

Which is, quite possibly, what we're about to see unfold; once a Centrist-Socialist gets into power, who's had a wake-up call about off-shoring, courtesy of Bernie and his followers.

I have an easy solution to prevent off shoring. Have the socialist whose only answer is "corporations don't pay their fair share" stop incentivizing them to leave by making it more expensive to operate here than offshore.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Doesn't matter.

When the general public shells out trillions for the national and regional and local infrastructure which these tax-shelter recipients utilize to operate, and when the general public shells out billions to provide the schools and services that grow and sustain their worker bees, then those tax-shelter recipients must do more to help pay for the worker bee farm.

Your 'rewards' argument would have met with far more receptive minds, prior to 30+ years of Trickle-Down Reaganomics, which has resulted in the 1% vs 99% state of affairs.

This is what happens when the time comes to press the Reset button.

Think of it as a Market Correction.

Should make it easier to swallow.

Oh please.

When cities or states wish to lure businesses to their area, what's the first thing they offer? That's right, tax abatements. Why? Because those businesses bring great value to their city or state.

Those businesses generate much tax revenue just from the employees alone. They bring in visitors from out of town to conduct business. Those new businesses make that area a more inviting place to live. When property values go up, so do property taxes. The city gets the windfall. And when more people move to your city, that presents an opportunity for more businesses such as restaurants, bars and hotels.

So corporations do more than their share supporting infrastructure, schools, and overall tax contributions. If companies were a burden instead of an advantage for a city or state, they would not be welcome over there.

 

[WillowTree]

...The only people not contributing their share are the 47% who pay zero federal income tax. Those are the people you should target.

Even if that were true, Mittens was unable to sell that back in 2012, and Attila the Hun sure-as-hell won't be able to sell that in 2016.

It is true and it proves you morons are not really interested in the fair share bullshit line you peddle.

 

[Kondor3]

...They should tax welfare checks too.

Rubbish.

I'm all for vetting Welfare Recipients far more aggressively, but, for those who qualify, welfare is a pittance; not enough to get by on, and taxation would make that worse.

Want to be more of a hard-ass about who gets it?

Fine.

Let's talk.

Want to impose taxes on the miserable pittance that they get, once they DO qualify?

You're gonna meet stiff resistance.

Good people don't kick their neighbors in the teeth while they're experiencing extreme financial duress.

 

[WillowTree]

...They should tax welfare checks too.

Rubbish.

I'm all for vetting Welfare Recipients far more aggressively, but, for those who qualify, welfare is a pittance; not enough to get by on, and taxation would make that worse.

Bullshit. Make them assholes pay their fair share. Let the takers help instead of punishing the makers.

 

[WillowTree]

Oh, and the takers need to be drug tested too just like the makers are.

 

[Conservative65]

...The only people not contributing their share are the 47% who pay zero federal income tax. Those are the people you should target.

Even if that were true, Mittens was unable to sell that back in 2012, and Attila the Hun sure-as-hell won't be able to sell that in 2016.

It is true. Almost half do not pay federal income taxes which means many of them, if not all, don't pay state income taxes. Since my state starts its return using the results of federal numbers, if you don't pay federal you don't pay state here.

Liberals constantly talk about people not paying their fair share. What they're saying is that those already contributing are doing too little while those that aren't paying a dime are still doing too much. Many of those not paying a dime benefit from social programs, whether it be federal or state/local, to which they don't contribute to the pot that funds them. Instead of simply saying "thank you" they ***** and moan that those without whom the freeloaders wouldn't have it handed to them not paying enough. I need some bleeding heart to explain in a logical not emotional manner how someone not contributing but benefiting is doing enough yet someone contributing but not benefiting isn't paying enough.

 

[WillowTree]

Why dosen't the NFL pay federal taxes? You never hear the libtards scream about that do ya?

 

[WillowTree]

Why is media matters tax exempt? You never hear libtards scream about that? Why does PBS get tax subsidies? How about Planned Parenthood?

 

[Conservative65]

Truck driving is honest work, asshole. And if I didn't drive a truck and pay taxes to finance entitlements, you would be screwed sitting around in your mother's basement collecting disability and pretending that posting shit on the internet is a contribution to society.

What is it with asshole truck drivers talking shit they know nothing about. Bouncing around in that cab all day has scrambled your ******* brain..


But like I have said before; anytime you want to bet all your meager possessions that I don't live in a basement nor collect snap, let me know. I have an attorney who will provide the proof and collect my money. He will get a cut of your money also.

If you don't have the balls to bet the house, shut the **** up.

If you don't have the balls to do it like a man instead of hiding behind some ***** lawyer, let me know, coward. I'll do it man to man. You hide like a little *****.

 

[Kondor3]

...When cities or states wish to lure businesses to their area, what's the first thing they offer? That's right, tax abatements. Why? Because those businesses bring great value to their city or state.

Except that the 'great value' hardly ever turns out to be as 'great' as its desperate front-men portray during the selling process.

...Those businesses generate much tax revenue just from the employees alone. They bring in visitors from out of town to conduct business. Those new businesses make that area a more inviting place to live. When property values go up, so do property taxes. The city gets the windfall. And when more people move to your city, that presents an opportunity for more businesses such as restaurants, bars and hotels. ..

Right up to the time when they move their plants off-shore, and exploit foreign Slave Labor, and shut down the American plants, and phukk-over their worker bees.

...So corporations do more than their share supporting infrastructure, schools, and overall tax contributions. If companies were a burden instead of an advantage for a city or state, they would not be welcome over there.

Ah, yes, the ol' Corporatists Happy Community Sing-Along Hymnal...it's even half-true... right up to the moment they pull up stakes and leave the community hanging.

 

[WillowTree]

Social security is a tax, taken from your paycheck your whole working life, then when a person reaches old age and starts collecting social security it is taxed again. You damn right welfare checks should be taxed.

 

[Kondor3]

...They should tax welfare checks too.

Rubbish.

I'm all for vetting Welfare Recipients far more aggressively, but, for those who qualify, welfare is a pittance; not enough to get by on, and taxation would make that worse.

Bullshit. Make them assholes pay their fair share. Let the takers help instead of punishing the makers.

Ah, a regular Humanitarian, eh?

Well, in that case... nahhhhhh, we'll just let 'em take it from your pocketbook, then laugh at you while you squeal... that works, too.

 

[Kondor3]

Social security is a tax, taken from your paycheck your whole working life, then when a person reaches old age and starts collecting social security it is taxed again. You damn right welfare checks should be taxed.

The thresholds on social security taxation are designed to only hit those who can still afford it in their old age... apples and oranges.