Fair taxation.

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Second, corporations, tend to create monopolies and oligopolies, they manipulate markets, and distort the market.

pure liberal stupidity. There are 60 million corporations and they all compete with each other!! Show your 2 best examples of a tendency toward monopoly or admit to lacking the IQ to be here.

1) Standard Oil
2) Microsoft

That said monopolies are rathe rare. Oligopolies aren't.
If you really want to find where oligopolies are in the US take a look at the areas where the US has higher prices than the rest of the developed world :
broadband access
healthcare
medicine / pharma
banks

Next thing you will tell us is that the Time Warner merger with Comcast will mean higher prices and fewer choices.

Sure if they want to drive away even more customers to Dish Phone companies or a dozen internet streaming services. Don't forget they know GM makes tons more money than Rolls Royce becausae GM has lower prices that a broader audience can afford. Isn't thinking fun?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Same goes for microsofts overpriced products , a company with a monopoly can clearly set the prices, put a bad product into the market ( e.g. windows vista ) and force the consumer to upgrade.

By the way, I am using Vista and have no problems with it. Also, I missed President Obama's mandate that we have to upgrade, was that in the last State of the Union snoozer? As far as I know, there is not a capitalist system which forces the consumer to do anything.

I'm using Windows 8( widely thought to be crap). I have no trouble with it, but Microsoft is rushing out new OS anyway just to hold on to as many customers as possible. I got it free or virtually free with PC. Microsoft is hardly a coercive monopoly, but rather a friendly giant slowly going downhill to defeat like IBM did when its brief time in the capitalist sun had past.

 

[CultureCitizen]

Well no, this concept of "perfect competition" is certainly not part of Economics 101, which I have actually taken.

Different teachers ... I guess. I did review the topic.
Regarding healthcare, no , it is not the best : Cuba has lower infant mortality, sweedes and europeans in general live longer as well as japanese. Part of this is due to the eating habits, but also part is due to their healthcare system.
I had a long discussion on another forum regarding the healthcare system. There are many variables, but the main one is that as insurance companies and the government pour money into the system prices go up very quickly. The only state that has been saved from cycle is Maryland due to the policy they adopted long ago.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

This[health care] is what is called market failure:

dear, you can't be more illiterate than that. Liberals made competition in health care illegal in 1946 so of course whats left of the market does not work very well.

Lets see, housing and health care and the USSR failed. Was govt interference in the self correcting Republican free market place high or low??

isn't learning to think fun?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

t the main one is that as insurance companies and the government pour money into the system prices go up very quickly.

and price go down in IT and energy when soviet libcommies allow the self correcting free market to work. A liberal will simply lack the IQ to understand how capitalism works.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Same goes for microsofts overpriced products , a company with a monopoly can clearly set the prices, put a bad product into the market ( e.g. windows vista ) and force the consumer to upgrade.

dear if you think Microsoft is over priced you ought to try APPLE!!

Exactly how slow are you?

 

[Boss]

Boss, I had to upgrade , my previous machine had a disk failure at that time... new machines had vista pre-installed.
At that point I could have downgraded to XP, had I known what awaited me I would have done.
Half of the software I had didn't run on Vista and I had to either upgrade to a new version or quit using the software.
I upgraded some , and stopped using some other.

None of this sounds like Microsoft forced you into a purchase.

All of your programs will run in Vista, you have to set them to run in "Compatibility Mode" to function properly sometimes. I'm running software dating back to Win98SE with no problem whatsoever. The Compatibility Mode feature in Vista is what I like most about it. Now... that said, I do have to do a System Restore now and then, but I am running an archaic chipset and not a lot of RAM.

But again, when it comes to computers and technology, the prices in a free market capitalist system are governed by laws of supply and demand. Consumers demand the latest/greatest and are willing to pay for it. Some consumers are more cost conscious and will settle for the hand-me-downs. It's a free value determination by the individual.

 

[Boss]

Well no, this concept of "perfect competition" is certainly not part of Economics 101, which I have actually taken.

Different teachers ... I guess. I did review the topic.
Regarding healthcare, no , it is not the best : Cuba has lower infant mortality, sweedes and europeans in general live longer as well as japanese. Part of this is due to the eating habits, but also part is due to their healthcare system.
I had a long discussion on another forum regarding the healthcare system. There are many variables, but the main one is that as insurance companies and the government pour money into the system prices go up very quickly. The only state that has been saved from cycle is Maryland due to the policy they adopted long ago.

Jeesh... how did this turn into a 10 year-old debate over Obamacare?

One of the biggest problems with our health care system is that it's a bureaucratic hot mess... light on the hot, heavy on the mess. And all these commercials you see.... "If you or a loved one took Dudrex, you may be entitled to a compensation.... our lawyers want to hear from you!" Where do you think the money comes from all of that? Someone has to pay for all these million dollar settlements. Ultimately, it is the consumer.

You see, we live in a rather spoiled society who wants to be coddled and protected at any cost. We want to be able to sue that mean old pharmaceutical company for giving us bad meds or that doctor who botched our surgery and caused us pain and suffering. Whenever all of that becomes under the control of Federal government, it's a completely different story.

Mortality rates simply don't mean better health care. In the US, the infant mortality rate is high because US doctors attempt every effort to save lives. A newborn who would have been a stillborn statistic in another country becomes part of our infant mortality rate because of better health care. Life expectancy is higher in Scandinavian countries because they are largely an immobile society for most of the year. They stay in their frigid little villages and towns, don't venture out much in winter, and they don't have millions of illegals flooding over their borders bringing new diseases in.

 

[CultureCitizen]

Well no, this concept of "perfect competition" is certainly not part of Economics 101, which I have actually taken.

Different teachers ... I guess. I did review the topic.
Regarding healthcare, no , it is not the best : Cuba has lower infant mortality, sweedes and europeans in general live longer as well as japanese. Part of this is due to the eating habits, but also part is due to their healthcare system.
I had a long discussion on another forum regarding the healthcare system. There are many variables, but the main one is that as insurance companies and the government pour money into the system prices go up very quickly. The only state that has been saved from cycle is Maryland due to the policy they adopted long ago.

Jeesh... how did this turn into a 10 year-old debate over Obamacare?

One of the biggest problems with our health care system is that it's a bureaucratic hot mess... light on the hot, heavy on the mess. And all these commercials you see.... "If you or a loved one took Dudrex, you may be entitled to a compensation.... our lawyers want to hear from you!" Where do you think the money comes from all of that? Someone has to pay for all these million dollar settlements. Ultimately, it is the consumer.

You see, we live in a rather spoiled society who wants to be coddled and protected at any cost. We want to be able to sue that mean old pharmaceutical company for giving us bad meds or that doctor who botched our surgery and caused us pain and suffering. Whenever all of that becomes under the control of Federal government, it's a completely different story.

Mortality rates simply don't mean better health care. In the US, the infant mortality rate is high because US doctors attempt every effort to save lives. A newborn who would have been a stillborn statistic in another country becomes part of our infant mortality rate because of better health care. Life expectancy is higher in Scandinavian countries because they are largely an immobile society for most of the year. They stay in their frigid little villages and towns, don't venture out much in winter, and they don't have millions of illegals flooding over their borders bringing new diseases in.

Boss,
I agree with you in the lawyers part. Nevertheless, malpractice must be pursued when it occurs.
I get your point on the illegals and I kind of agree( see below), but your point on infant mortality rates being lower in Cuba is laughable. Their pediatric care is good period, and the part on Scandinavia , oh!! that did give me a good laugh at least.Jajaja.
Ok now seriously, scandinavia is the most notable case, but there are many countries which beat the USA... including Costa Rica , which guess what , receives thousands of Nicaraguan inmigrants ( they don't like them much ).

List of countries by life expectancy - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Take a good look at the list... so other 30+ countries, have good healthcare systems. Arguably better than the US. They pay more taxes in some cases, but they are put to good use. And in every one of those countries health care is less expensive than in the US. This has produced medical tourism 1 million US citizens search health care in other countries every year.

 

[CultureCitizen]

Boss, I had to upgrade , my previous machine had a disk failure at that time... new machines had vista pre-installed.
At that point I could have downgraded to XP, had I known what awaited me I would have done.
Half of the software I had didn't run on Vista and I had to either upgrade to a new version or quit using the software.
I upgraded some , and stopped using some other.

None of this sounds like Microsoft forced you into a purchase.

All of your programs will run in Vista, you have to set them to run in "Compatibility Mode" to function properly sometimes. I'm running software dating back to Win98SE with no problem whatsoever. The Compatibility Mode feature in Vista is what I like most about it. Now... that said, I do have to do a System Restore now and then, but I am running an archaic chipset and not a lot of RAM.

But again, when it comes to computers and technology, the prices in a free market capitalist system are governed by laws of supply and demand. Consumers demand the latest/greatest and are willing to pay for it. Some consumers are more cost conscious and will settle for the hand-me-downs. It's a free value determination by the individual.

Oh , come on man, don't get me going through that inferno again. No , I am no longer in Vista, but I had to dump lots of programs for which I didn't want to pay an upgrade, and no , compatibility mode did not solve the issue. Anyway, what is finally breaking the monopoly is the rise of smartphones and tablets... believe me I'll stay away from a windows phone as long as they exist.

 

[Boss]

Well no, this concept of "perfect competition" is certainly not part of Economics 101, which I have actually taken.

Different teachers ... I guess. I did review the topic.
Regarding healthcare, no , it is not the best : Cuba has lower infant mortality, sweedes and europeans in general live longer as well as japanese. Part of this is due to the eating habits, but also part is due to their healthcare system.
I had a long discussion on another forum regarding the healthcare system. There are many variables, but the main one is that as insurance companies and the government pour money into the system prices go up very quickly. The only state that has been saved from cycle is Maryland due to the policy they adopted long ago.

Jeesh... how did this turn into a 10 year-old debate over Obamacare?

One of the biggest problems with our health care system is that it's a bureaucratic hot mess... light on the hot, heavy on the mess. And all these commercials you see.... "If you or a loved one took Dudrex, you may be entitled to a compensation.... our lawyers want to hear from you!" Where do you think the money comes from all of that? Someone has to pay for all these million dollar settlements. Ultimately, it is the consumer.

You see, we live in a rather spoiled society who wants to be coddled and protected at any cost. We want to be able to sue that mean old pharmaceutical company for giving us bad meds or that doctor who botched our surgery and caused us pain and suffering. Whenever all of that becomes under the control of Federal government, it's a completely different story.

Mortality rates simply don't mean better health care. In the US, the infant mortality rate is high because US doctors attempt every effort to save lives. A newborn who would have been a stillborn statistic in another country becomes part of our infant mortality rate because of better health care. Life expectancy is higher in Scandinavian countries because they are largely an immobile society for most of the year. They stay in their frigid little villages and towns, don't venture out much in winter, and they don't have millions of illegals flooding over their borders bringing new diseases in.

Boss,
I agree with you in the lawyers part. Nevertheless, malpractice must be pursued when it occurs.
I get your point on the illegals and I kind of agree( see below), but your point on infant mortality rates being lower in Cuba is laughable. Their pediatric care is good period, and the part on Scandinavia , oh!! that did give me a good laugh at least.Jajaja.
Ok now seriously, scandinavia is the most notable case, but there are many countries which beat the USA... including Costa Rica , which guess what , receives thousands of Nicaraguan inmigrants ( they don't like them much ).

List of countries by life expectancy - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Take a good look at the list... they have good healthcare systems, yes , they pay more taxes , in some cases, but they are put to good use.

You are talking about completely different cultures. Here, we are a spoiled litigious minded society who will exploit any circumstance to our advantage whenever possible. Screw you, I've got mine! Whereas, in Scandinavian countries the people are much more familial. The culture is closer-knit than our 'vast melting pot'. They don't tend to abuse their public health care because it belongs to their neighbors and friends, it's communal. So these 'socialist' systems of health care appear to work well in isolated close-knit communities of that region.

Examples like Costa Rica and Cuba are pathetic. You honestly believe those places have superior health care to the United States of America? Really?

Let me share a personal story here since I know the natives love them so much... Several years ago, I worked with a Russian woman named Svetlana. She was very smart and well-educated, and she had been part of the ruling class in Russia growing up. All the negative propaganda we learned through the Cold War, Svetlana heard the opposite from the Russian perspective. She didn't like it here, she often lamented on how great she had it back home, and how much more expensive it was to live in America.

So one day I asked her, "if it was so great there, why are you here?"
She sort of paused and started to tear up, and I felt like I had maybe overstepped in my query, but it just bugged me. She fought back her emotions and said... "it's my daughter."

She had a baby girl who was about 14 months old and the doctors in Russia had discovered a heart abnormality which would eventually lead to death without a particular surgical procedure. Their recommendation for the surgery was UAB in Alabama.

 

[Boss]

Boss, I had to upgrade , my previous machine had a disk failure at that time... new machines had vista pre-installed.
At that point I could have downgraded to XP, had I known what awaited me I would have done.
Half of the software I had didn't run on Vista and I had to either upgrade to a new version or quit using the software.
I upgraded some , and stopped using some other.

None of this sounds like Microsoft forced you into a purchase.

All of your programs will run in Vista, you have to set them to run in "Compatibility Mode" to function properly sometimes. I'm running software dating back to Win98SE with no problem whatsoever. The Compatibility Mode feature in Vista is what I like most about it. Now... that said, I do have to do a System Restore now and then, but I am running an archaic chipset and not a lot of RAM.

But again, when it comes to computers and technology, the prices in a free market capitalist system are governed by laws of supply and demand. Consumers demand the latest/greatest and are willing to pay for it. Some consumers are more cost conscious and will settle for the hand-me-downs. It's a free value determination by the individual.

Oh , come on man, don't get me going through that inferno again. No , I am no longer in Vista, but I had to dump lots of programs for which I didn't want to pay an upgrade, and no , compatibility mode did not solve the issue. Anyway, what is finally breaking the monopoly is the rise of smartphones and tablets... believe me I'll stay away from a windows phone as long as they exist.

The point was you were giving me Microsoft and Vista as an example of a broken capitalist system where monopolies force you to buy their inferior products. As it turns out, Microsoft didn't force you to do anything, they gave you options and you made your choice. You have complaints about the quality of the product for the price, but you also have Microsoft's competition offering you an alternative. Apple products are more expensive but their fans say the product is better, so worth the extra money. And that's how free market capitalism works and why it's so awesome, you have choices, you can make the decision based on your personal value judgment.

 

[CultureCitizen]

Boss, I had to upgrade , my previous machine had a disk failure at that time... new machines had vista pre-installed.
At that point I could have downgraded to XP, had I known what awaited me I would have done.
Half of the software I had didn't run on Vista and I had to either upgrade to a new version or quit using the software.
I upgraded some , and stopped using some other.

None of this sounds like Microsoft forced you into a purchase.

All of your programs will run in Vista, you have to set them to run in "Compatibility Mode" to function properly sometimes. I'm running software dating back to Win98SE with no problem whatsoever. The Compatibility Mode feature in Vista is what I like most about it. Now... that said, I do have to do a System Restore now and then, but I am running an archaic chipset and not a lot of RAM.

But again, when it comes to computers and technology, the prices in a free market capitalist system are governed by laws of supply and demand. Consumers demand the latest/greatest and are willing to pay for it. Some consumers are more cost conscious and will settle for the hand-me-downs. It's a free value determination by the individual.

Oh , come on man, don't get me going through that inferno again. No , I am no longer in Vista, but I had to dump lots of programs for which I didn't want to pay an upgrade, and no , compatibility mode did not solve the issue. Anyway, what is finally breaking the monopoly is the rise of smartphones and tablets... believe me I'll stay away from a windows phone as long as they exist.

The point was you were giving me Microsoft and Vista as an example of a broken capitalist system where monopolies force you to buy their inferior products. As it turns out, Microsoft didn't force you to do anything, they gave you options and you made your choice. You have complaints about the quality of the product for the price, but you also have Microsoft's competition offering you an alternative. Apple products are more expensive but their fans say the product is better, so worth the extra money. And that's how free market capitalism works and why it's so awesome, you have choices, you can make the decision based on your personal value judgment.

Oh , but it did. I can do anything I want with my home computer , installing linux. Not so with my work computer.

 

[CultureCitizen]

Examples like Costa Rica and Cuba are pathetic. You honestly believe those places have superior health care to the United States of America? Really?

I don't really know Costa Rica well enough. From the short time I've been there I get the impression that their health care is not so good but the combination of living in a stress-free environment where people eat much less and tend to exercise more yields a healthier population. Hence the healthcare system does not have to be top level and still people live as long as in the US ( and are probably healthier ).
On the other hand , japan , germany , and france. Sure, I am completely sure their healthcare system is first class.

I've known people who end up going to Mexico to get both medicine and healthcare services to save some money... so I guess in the end if prices continue to go up this will become a trend. I am not sure though if this is a desirable situation.

It is a trend that worries me : letting corporations get their way charging not too fair prices and paying close to nothing in taxes is just making jobs and services move away.
Your perspective seems to be different... I hope you are correct, but looking at how wages and corporate proffits have been moving in the past decade I fear the oposite.

 

[DGS49]

A corporation is a fictitious "person" (latin, "corpus") created by the State in order to let its owner(s) operate a legal business without subjecting themselves personally to unlimited liability associated with the business. Without the corporate form, many businesses simply could not exist, as the risk of eventual ruinous personal liability would prevent any investor from giving it a go. Can you imagine a private swimming pool or go-kart race track without the corporate (or LLC) form of business? Never happen. Even a restaurant could ruin its owner with a single tainted meal, under the wrong circumstances.

Regardless, taxing corporations is perverse and stupid. In fact, most corporations are NOT subject to federal income taxes (Subchapter S), but serve merely as conduits to the owners, who actually pay the tax.

Large corporations are nothing more than that same fictitious person, representing the collective interests of the business' owners, officers, employees, customers, suppliers, vendors, and agents. ALL of these people pay taxes, so one need not fret about the fictitious person itself not paying taxes in its own right.

Comparing a taxed corporate regime and one with no corporate taxes, one sees that the money NOT paid in taxes will go to one or more of several places: To the employees in increased wages or bonuses or benefits (which are generally taxed), to the owners as dividends (which are taxed) or plowed back into the business, where, hopefully, they will result in greater revenues, profits, or activities, all of which generate taxes of one kind or another. So the reality is that the ultimate tax collector gets just as much revenue with a Zero corporate tax rate as it does with a 35% corporate tax rate (provided the corporation does not hoard its cash).

The perverse and harmful effects of corporate taxation are (1) that corporations are required to spend inordinate amounts of money on tax accountants and attorneys to minimize their tax liabilities, and (2) that, rather than optimizing their profits, they are employing perverse and costly strategies just to minimize tax liabilities, and that serve no useful purpose. Burger King moves its HQ to Canada? How stupid is that?

It's just like "taxing the Rich." You can make the rates whatever you want, but the truly rich will figure out how to avoid the huge bites and the total tax revenue will not change much. The only ones who get screwed are the professional athletes and entertainers who get paid in large lump sums, at one time.

 

[CultureCitizen]

plowed back into the business, where, hopefully, they will result in greater revenues, profits, or activities, all of which generate taxes of one kind or another.

So the money gets plowed back into the business generating revenues and proffits... even if the corporation decides to open an office offshore ? Yes, I can see the picture... clearly . Chinese have certainly seen the beneffit of this situation.

Extrapolating your example one would conclude that the only valid tax is the payroll tax.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Extrapolating your example one would conclude that the only valid tax is the payroll tax.

the payroll or income tax is ok, but a sales tax is better since its very easy to collect as compared to chasing 350 million Americans around to collect the tax.

 

[Boss]

It is a trend that worries me : letting corporations get their way charging not too fair prices and paying close to nothing in taxes is just making jobs and services move away.
Your perspective seems to be different... I hope you are correct, but looking at how wages and corporate proffits have been moving in the past decade I fear the oposite.

Think about what you just said for a moment and then think about who has been in power for the past decade? Has it been the Reagan-style free market capitalist conservatives or has it been the radical left wing socialist liberals? The policies we have been getting are clearly from the left, clearly more socialist than capitalist, and clearly not conservative free market capitalist. Yet... Record corporate profits and stagnant wages. Why do you suppose that is?

I illustrated how free market capitalism works earlier with the price of gas. These greedy corporations could be charging much more for gas right now and people would be happy. So why is that not happening? Why are they intentionally giving up all that profit they could be making? It's because competition drives the market. I can make much greater profit selling gas at $1.95 than you can at $2.95, even though you are clearing $1 more per gallon. The reason? Consumers would rather buy from me than you. As you can see, "not too fair prices" has nothing to do with profits.

Wages are stagnant for various reasons, most importantly is because the cost to the employer to hire someone is much greater than it was just 6 years ago. Long term high unemployment has never been as bad as it has been the past decade. Lots of qualified people looking for a job means the wages a company has to pay are less.

None of these problems can be fixed by converting a free market capitalist system into a socialist system. The more you attempt to go down that road, the more problems you will see arise as a result. The key to a solution is the prosperity free market capitalism brings when it is allowed to do it's thing. This means getting government out of the way, allowing the private sector capitalists the flexibility to grow and prosper, which in turn, delivers new jobs, higher pay and enormous economic prosperity for all.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

It is a trend that worries me : letting corporations get their way charging not too fair prices and paying close to nothing in taxes is just making jobs and services move away.
Your perspective seems to be different... I hope you are correct, but looking at how wages and corporate proffits have been moving in the past decade I fear the oposite.

Think about what you just said for a moment and then think about who has been in power for the past decade? Has it been the Reagan-style free market capitalist conservatives or has it been the radical left wing socialist liberals? The policies we have been getting are clearly from the left, clearly more socialist than capitalist, and clearly not conservative free market capitalist. Yet... Record corporate profits and stagnant wages. Why do you suppose that is?

I illustrated how free market capitalism works earlier with the price of gas. These greedy corporations could be charging much more for gas right now and people would be happy. So why is that not happening? Why are they intentionally giving up all that profit they could be making? It's because competition drives the market. I can make much greater profit selling gas at $1.95 than you can at $2.95, even though you are clearing $1 more per gallon. The reason? Consumers would rather buy from me than you. As you can see, "not too fair prices" has nothing to do with profits.

Wages are stagnant for various reasons, most importantly is because the cost to the employer to hire someone is much greater than it was just 6 years ago. Long term high unemployment has never been as bad as it has been the past decade. Lots of qualified people looking for a job means the wages a company has to pay are less.

None of these problems can be fixed by converting a free market capitalist system into a socialist system. The more you attempt to go down that road, the more problems you will see arise as a result. The key to a solution is the prosperity free market capitalism brings when it is allowed to do it's thing. This means getting government out of the way, allowing the private sector capitalists the flexibility to grow and prosper, which in turn, delivers new jobs, higher pay and enormous economic prosperity for all.

great points!! Liberals need to pretend that:

1) China didn't just eliminate 40% of the worlds poverty by switching to capitalism and

2) under capitalism you don't need to offer the best jobs and products in the entire world just to survive.

 

[CultureCitizen]

Think about what you just said for a moment and then think about who has been in power for the past decade? Has it been the Reagan-style free market capitalist conservatives or has it been the radical left wing socialist liberals? The policies we have been getting are clearly from the left, clearly more socialist than capitalist, and clearly not conservative free market capitalist. Yet... Record corporate profits and stagnant wages. Why do you suppose that is?

Hold your horses.
The current problems started with Dubya's war on Iraq and Dubya's crisis, who, lets remember was in charge for eight years.
That said, I do agree with republicans in some issues:
The way in which medicare and medicaid are set up is not the correct one and are probably making the healthcare more expensive, the same goes for student loans.
Nevertheless, there has to be a mechanism to provide for healthcare and education for poor people . In Japan the government covers 70% and the person covers the remainder. This forces the person to do "shopping". Also the hospitals are strictly non profit organizations ... now you might not like this other solution, but I find it better than the current state of things.

Putting all the blame on either republicans or democrats is not completely fair. Its an oversimplification, both parties have played a role.

Now, why I am so disquited with the earnigs of the corporations ? Simply because those great fortunes seem to be floating around in the ficticious economy, the one that plays to the casino with derivatives, and doesn't actually increases production.

Now my point on this thread : put a low and competitive tax on global corporate income (e.g 15%) and have the rest of the 30 largest economies agree to have the same tax.