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

[Dr Grump]

Yes we should be setting the example, and we have been for about 200 years, so why do you progressive morons want to follow the examples of failure like Venezuela and Cuba?

yeah, hark back to the good old days. Womenfolk stayed home, black folk had their own public toilets, and child molesters hiding behind the cloth had free reign. Gee, I miss those days...

 

[ScienceRocks]

And a false concept at that.

You liberals have this false belief that we live in a bubble. Within our bubble, there is only so much cash. Therefore if one has too much, that's the reason others have too little.

The reality is we live in a country of unlimited wealth. It's up to the individual to determine how much of wealthy they want. It may take a lot of hard work, a lot of sacrifices, a lot of doing without, but it's up to the individual.

As for redistribution of wealth, why only wealth? If you think that's such a great idea, why don't we extrapolate that to other entities?

For instance, let's say you have a dozen beautiful bushes in front of your house. Wouldn't it not be proper for government to take half of your bushes, and give them to your neighbor down the street who has none?

Or perhaps you are a television nut and have four big screens in your home. Shouldn't government come along and take two of your big screens to give to the less fortunate who are still watching that old 25 inch tube television?

If you think that is ridiculous, you're right, it is ridiculous. So why is it not ridiculous when we talk about money?

God bless America and there is no limit on wealth

But your assumption that access to that wealth is equal for all is bogus. We have created a society where wealth is concentrated at the top. We protect the wealthy and ensure that little gets in the way of accumulating and protecting wealth
We have sold our souls to the concept of trickle down where we entrust the good will of the wealthy to make sure all are taken care of

Yo ************

Why don't you bastards spend a week in Venezuela, Cuba, Somalia, etc and witness , first hand , the handy work of socialism.


.

The U.S is not Somalia, Venezuela or Cuba

It will be after a few more HIllarys become president.

We are the richest country on earth, not some third world shithole.
We can afford to take care of our people, provide healthcare, a basic standard of living, education, infrastructure

But we would rather ensure that our wealthy make more money

The reason we aren't some third world shithole is because up to now we have mostly rejected the policies that moron douche bags like you support. Somalia, Venezuela or Cuba went down the shitter when they bought they bought the whole progressive hog. Venezuela or Cuba used to be two of the wealthiest countries in Latin America. Now they are two of the poorest.

Comparing us to third world countries as a example of what we shouldn't do is ridiculous

We are the greatest country in the history of mankind. We should be setting the standard for other countries to emulate
Great countries take care of their people.

I could name dozens of first world countries that use social democracy that aint like Venezuela or Cuba. This idiot thinks a dictatorship that hates all elements of capitalism and punishes self betterment is the same. lol. Government suppose to freaking govern or it wouldn't be a goddamn government. Good governments govern for the people instead of the few at the top like in shit holes that you named.

Japan, Taiwan, south Korea, Norway, Germany, France, sweden, Spain, Britain, etc. To just name a few that use the social democracy system with a government doing things for the people.

 

[kaz]

Yes we should be setting the example, and we have been for about 200 years, so why do you progressive morons want to follow the examples of failure like Venezuela and Cuba?

yeah, hark back to the good old days. Womenfolk stayed home, black folk had their own public toilets, and child molesters hiding behind the cloth had free reign. Gee, I miss those days...

So you think women being free to make their own choices means women are "back to the good old days. Womenfolk stayed home, black folk had their own public toilets, and child molesters hiding behind the cloth had free reign. Gee, I miss those days..."

Wow, you don't think much of women, do you?

 

[bripat9643]

Unions not only supported union workers, but the standards and pay grades they established helped non Union workers as companies upped the pot to keep unions out
But republicans helped destroy the unions and collective bargaining. They established "right to work states" that meant a right to be paid less. They destroyed collective bargaining and the obligation to join unions in a union shop

How did Republicans help to destroy unions? Just because we didn't support the concept?

Your argument here is the same my father used on me years ago. He is a union man and kept telling me the same thing: Son, if it wasn't for us union people, you wouldn't be making the kind of money you make driving a truck today!

After about four or five times he laid that on me, I finally had to shut him up.

"Dad, if you didn't make so much money laying brick, I wouldn't have to work for the money I do today to afford the houses that you built!" That was the end of that argument.

Right to work states gave people the option of joining a union or not. Since many people didn't want to join the union, right to work gave people that ability not to be forced into a union they didn't want to belong to. Unions should have never had the right to force an industry to not hire somebody based on their union beliefs. And that was the other terrible thing about unions. They went from representing their workers to taking over the whole Fn company. They told the company who they could hire, who they could fire, who they were allowed to promote, who they were not allowed to promote. They got so strong that they just about ran the company; in most cases right into the ground.

Right to work states say you can enjoy the benefits of a union but don't have to pay........they are the death of unionized labor and are the godchild of the Republican Party

You are a Teamster and don't realize what the unions did for you?

Benefits? You mean like no jobs?

 

[kaz]

Unions not only supported union workers, but the standards and pay grades they established helped non Union workers as companies upped the pot to keep unions out
But republicans helped destroy the unions and collective bargaining. They established "right to work states" that meant a right to be paid less. They destroyed collective bargaining and the obligation to join unions in a union shop

How did Republicans help to destroy unions? Just because we didn't support the concept?

Your argument here is the same my father used on me years ago. He is a union man and kept telling me the same thing: Son, if it wasn't for us union people, you wouldn't be making the kind of money you make driving a truck today!

After about four or five times he laid that on me, I finally had to shut him up.

"Dad, if you didn't make so much money laying brick, I wouldn't have to work for the money I do today to afford the houses that you built!" That was the end of that argument.

Right to work states gave people the option of joining a union or not. Since many people didn't want to join the union, right to work gave people that ability not to be forced into a union they didn't want to belong to. Unions should have never had the right to force an industry to not hire somebody based on their union beliefs. And that was the other terrible thing about unions. They went from representing their workers to taking over the whole Fn company. They told the company who they could hire, who they could fire, who they were allowed to promote, who they were not allowed to promote. They got so strong that they just about ran the company; in most cases right into the ground.

Right to work states say you can enjoy the benefits of a union but don't have to pay........they are the death of unionized labor and are the godchild of the Republican Party

You are a Teamster and don't realize what the unions did for you?

Benefits? You mean like no jobs?

No jobs is what Democrats want

 

[ScienceRocks]

Unions not only supported union workers, but the standards and pay grades they established helped non Union workers as companies upped the pot to keep unions out
But republicans helped destroy the unions and collective bargaining. They established "right to work states" that meant a right to be paid less. They destroyed collective bargaining and the obligation to join unions in a union shop

How did Republicans help to destroy unions? Just because we didn't support the concept?

Your argument here is the same my father used on me years ago. He is a union man and kept telling me the same thing: Son, if it wasn't for us union people, you wouldn't be making the kind of money you make driving a truck today!

After about four or five times he laid that on me, I finally had to shut him up.

"Dad, if you didn't make so much money laying brick, I wouldn't have to work for the money I do today to afford the houses that you built!" That was the end of that argument.

Right to work states gave people the option of joining a union or not. Since many people didn't want to join the union, right to work gave people that ability not to be forced into a union they didn't want to belong to. Unions should have never had the right to force an industry to not hire somebody based on their union beliefs. And that was the other terrible thing about unions. They went from representing their workers to taking over the whole Fn company. They told the company who they could hire, who they could fire, who they were allowed to promote, who they were not allowed to promote. They got so strong that they just about ran the company; in most cases right into the ground.

Right to work states say you can enjoy the benefits of a union but don't have to pay........they are the death of unionized labor and are the godchild of the Republican Party

You are a Teamster and don't realize what the unions did for you?

Benefits? You mean like no jobs?

Lol, if it wasn't for the unions you'd be making 5 cents per hour and without any safety regulations. You'd live half as long in some jobs as you do today...But, hell, praise the rich! Your god. Seriously, take a look at employment in countries that don't have it like vietnam or africa.

 

[ScienceRocks]

Unions not only supported union workers, but the standards and pay grades they established helped non Union workers as companies upped the pot to keep unions out
But republicans helped destroy the unions and collective bargaining. They established "right to work states" that meant a right to be paid less. They destroyed collective bargaining and the obligation to join unions in a union shop

How did Republicans help to destroy unions? Just because we didn't support the concept?

Your argument here is the same my father used on me years ago. He is a union man and kept telling me the same thing: Son, if it wasn't for us union people, you wouldn't be making the kind of money you make driving a truck today!

After about four or five times he laid that on me, I finally had to shut him up.

"Dad, if you didn't make so much money laying brick, I wouldn't have to work for the money I do today to afford the houses that you built!" That was the end of that argument.

Right to work states gave people the option of joining a union or not. Since many people didn't want to join the union, right to work gave people that ability not to be forced into a union they didn't want to belong to. Unions should have never had the right to force an industry to not hire somebody based on their union beliefs. And that was the other terrible thing about unions. They went from representing their workers to taking over the whole Fn company. They told the company who they could hire, who they could fire, who they were allowed to promote, who they were not allowed to promote. They got so strong that they just about ran the company; in most cases right into the ground.

Right to work states say you can enjoy the benefits of a union but don't have to pay........they are the death of unionized labor and are the godchild of the Republican Party

You are a Teamster and don't realize what the unions did for you?

Benefits? You mean like no jobs?

No jobs is what Democrats want

Most democrats are making the big bucks in the tech, science and business sector. Little white hicks like you are fishing down by the swamp!

 

[kaz]

Unions not only supported union workers, but the standards and pay grades they established helped non Union workers as companies upped the pot to keep unions out
But republicans helped destroy the unions and collective bargaining. They established "right to work states" that meant a right to be paid less. They destroyed collective bargaining and the obligation to join unions in a union shop

How did Republicans help to destroy unions? Just because we didn't support the concept?

Your argument here is the same my father used on me years ago. He is a union man and kept telling me the same thing: Son, if it wasn't for us union people, you wouldn't be making the kind of money you make driving a truck today!

After about four or five times he laid that on me, I finally had to shut him up.

"Dad, if you didn't make so much money laying brick, I wouldn't have to work for the money I do today to afford the houses that you built!" That was the end of that argument.

Right to work states gave people the option of joining a union or not. Since many people didn't want to join the union, right to work gave people that ability not to be forced into a union they didn't want to belong to. Unions should have never had the right to force an industry to not hire somebody based on their union beliefs. And that was the other terrible thing about unions. They went from representing their workers to taking over the whole Fn company. They told the company who they could hire, who they could fire, who they were allowed to promote, who they were not allowed to promote. They got so strong that they just about ran the company; in most cases right into the ground.

Right to work states say you can enjoy the benefits of a union but don't have to pay........they are the death of unionized labor and are the godchild of the Republican Party

You are a Teamster and don't realize what the unions did for you?

Benefits? You mean like no jobs?

Lol, if it wasn't for the unions you'd be making 5 cents per hour and without any safety regulations. You'd live half as long in some jobs as you do today...But, hell, praise the rich! Your god. Seriously, take a look at employment in countries that don't have it like vietnam or africa.

If it wasn't for unions, Ford and GM would still make cars in the United States. What were you whining about again?

 

[Dr Grump]

Yes we should be setting the example, and we have been for about 200 years, so why do you progressive morons want to follow the examples of failure like Venezuela and Cuba?

yeah, hark back to the good old days. Womenfolk stayed home, black folk had their own public toilets, and child molesters hiding behind the cloth had free reign. Gee, I miss those days...

So you think women being free to make their own choices means women are "back to the good old days. Womenfolk stayed home, black folk had their own public toilets, and child molesters hiding behind the cloth had free reign. Gee, I miss those days..."

Wow, you don't think much of women, do you?

Yeah that's what I meant.....








.....If you live in Moronland

 

[Dr Grump]

If it wasn't for unions, Ford and GM would still make cars in the United States. What were you whining about again?

That's right. And you'd be earning $1.50 an hour...

 

[ScienceRocks]

When we stopped taxing corporations and the wealthy, we stopped doing things as a nation

No more moon shots, instead of building an interstate highway system, we let our roads and bridges go to hell

We complain about helping our poor and spending money on education and healthcare

We have instituted austerity to ensure more wealth at the top

Corporations and the wealthy already pay more than the half that don't pay income taxes do combined. That's easy. One taxpayer alone pays more than the half that pay nothing combined.

As they should

You tax where the money is and that is where the money is. They pay most of the income taxes because they consume most of the income and wealth.....what a concept

That's the moral code of a thief. A reported once asked John Dillinger why he robbed banks. His response: "that's where the money is."

Rich people consume wealth because they earn it.

Explain this

Wealth is being transferred from the poor and middle class to the rich because we're no longer enforcing our anti-trust laws that allow them to rule the market place and the unions are losing power. The workers deserve a say in the work they do...

 

[kaz]

Yes we should be setting the example, and we have been for about 200 years, so why do you progressive morons want to follow the examples of failure like Venezuela and Cuba?

yeah, hark back to the good old days. Womenfolk stayed home, black folk had their own public toilets, and child molesters hiding behind the cloth had free reign. Gee, I miss those days...

So you think women being free to make their own choices means women are "back to the good old days. Womenfolk stayed home, black folk had their own public toilets, and child molesters hiding behind the cloth had free reign. Gee, I miss those days..."

Wow, you don't think much of women, do you?

Yeah that's what I meant.....








.....If you live in Moronland

You either meant that or you didn't explain how anyone else meant that. So?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Lol, if it wasn't for the unions you'd be making 5 cents per hour and without any safety regulations. You'd live half as long in some jobs as you do today...But, hell, praise the rich! Your god. Seriously, take a look at employment in countries that don't have it like vietnam or africa.

How would anybody be making five cents per hour when we can't even get Americans to work for $7.70 an hour today?

 

[Dr Grump]

You either meant that or you didn't explain how anyone else meant that. So?

No, you just don't see sarcasm...nothing new there....

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Wealth is being transferred from the poor and middle class to the rich because we're no longer enforcing our anti-trust laws that allow them to rule the market place and the unions are losing power. The workers deserve a say in the work they do...

No, as I explained earlier, wealth is being transferred to the top at our will. We are the ones giving the wealthy our money in exchange for products and services that they provide for us.

Before stores started to open on Thanksgiving, remember the lines of people standing, sitting, sleeping in sleeping bags at stores just begging the wealthy to take their money? That's how they get it.

 

[Mertex]

Go ahead and explain why that is a good thing for the country.

Geez, a high-school student could answer that for you. If you want America to resemble a third-world country, then go ahead and let companies and corporations not pay anything........geez!

Keep in mind folks that the American socialists are by far the dumbest people on the planet.

If you are referring to Democratic people, because there is no such thing as American socialists, they're not the ones with "Trump" as their candidate. And, reports support the fact that Trump supporters are uneducated...i.e. the dumbest.

Let us hear why American companies should be taxed more and why that is a good thing.

You need to read more....and quit watching Faux News, you're not going to get the truth from that.


Corporate Taxes
Big corporations are making bigger and bigger profits, but they’re contributing less and less in taxes. That means they are doing less and less to help build roads and bridges, maintain our schools and fund the many other services government provides. Sixty years ago, 30 percent of total federal tax revenue was from corporations. Today […]
Issues

 

[kaz]

You either meant that or you didn't explain how anyone else meant that. So?

No, you just don't see sarcasm...nothing new there....

Sarcasm? Your admission you're a loser

 

[Dr Grump]

1) Corporations sell stock in order to fund their business venture. This venture CREATES jobs.

2) Those stocks are purchased with POST-TAX dollars. Those taxes are used to fund the myriad activities of the government at all levels.

3) The corporation makes a gross profit. Federal corporate taxes ARE PAID on that profit. Then, state and local corporate taxes ARE PAID on the original amount. No allowance is allowed for the federal taxes already lowering the base profit (in most states).

4) The remaining profit is distributed to the stockholders, as a return on their investment. That money is AGAIN taxes, usually as capital gains.

5) The corporation, as an entity, is not able to take a profit. They can reinvest a portion of the gross profit, and that reinvestment CREATES jobs. They have no other use for money.

6) Ergo, the governments get their share - they stifle job creation. They tax the investor, the corporation, and the employees. Frankly, they are running out of entities to tax.

7) The argument that corporations use our infrastructure, and thus should have an increased tax burden, is nonsensical. Investors pay for that infrastructure through the income and capital gains taxes they pay. Why should the government get paid twice from the same dollar?

8) Governments invest in infrastructure in order to attract businesses - and then you propose to create an onerous tax load on the corporation that will drive it out. Does that make any sense whatsoever?

But the reality is that hedge and superannuation funds own massive amounts of these stocks. Not mum and dads....So it's just one big merrygoround where Wall St clips the ticket everytime the gravy train passes them by. About two years ago Apple had over $200 billion in cash reserves. I don't feel sorry for them if they have to pay more..

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Right to work states say you can enjoy the benefits of a union but don't have to pay........they are the death of unionized labor and are the godchild of the Republican Party

You are a Teamster and don't realize what the unions did for you?

No, I'm not a teamster and the only time I was in a union is when I was forced to join one to get a job. That's the point.

I seen the problems with unions from young on. Because of my career, I could write books about unions and the utter chaos that took place at companies I delivered too. In fact, some of my stories are so unbelievable that many would think I was making them up.

But if I went to a shop that I had no knowledge of, no idea who the company was or what they did, I could tell you within five minutes if it was a union shop or not. That's because of the attitude and service differences between union and non-union employees. That's particularly true of those lazy good for nothing UAW workers. In fact when I used to watch the news and they ran a story about an auto plant laying off union workers, I would applaud and clap my hands at the television set. I would be screaming "Good for you worthless SOB's!"

My employer quit taking deliveries to auto plants because it took them all day to unload a truck; something non-union shops could do in a half-hour or so. And I don't miss those auto plant deliveries one bit.

 

[kaz]

1) Corporations sell stock in order to fund their business venture. This venture CREATES jobs.

2) Those stocks are purchased with POST-TAX dollars. Those taxes are used to fund the myriad activities of the government at all levels.

3) The corporation makes a gross profit. Federal corporate taxes ARE PAID on that profit. Then, state and local corporate taxes ARE PAID on the original amount. No allowance is allowed for the federal taxes already lowering the base profit (in most states).

4) The remaining profit is distributed to the stockholders, as a return on their investment. That money is AGAIN taxes, usually as capital gains.

5) The corporation, as an entity, is not able to take a profit. They can reinvest a portion of the gross profit, and that reinvestment CREATES jobs. They have no other use for money.

6) Ergo, the governments get their share - they stifle job creation. They tax the investor, the corporation, and the employees. Frankly, they are running out of entities to tax.

7) The argument that corporations use our infrastructure, and thus should have an increased tax burden, is nonsensical. Investors pay for that infrastructure through the income and capital gains taxes they pay. Why should the government get paid twice from the same dollar?

8) Governments invest in infrastructure in order to attract businesses - and then you propose to create an onerous tax load on the corporation that will drive it out. Does that make any sense whatsoever?

But the reality is that hedge and superannuation funds own massive amounts of these stocks. Not mum and dads....So it's just one big merrygoround where Wall St clips the ticket everytime the gravy train passes them by. About two years ago Apple had over $200 billion in cash reserves. I don't feel sorry for them if they have to pay more..

You don't? You must have had to dig deep to admit that ...



What a Democratic party doggie toy you are ...