Plan to Cut Corporate Tax Rate to 15%

[GaryDog]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/24/us/politics/trump-corporate-tax-rate-15-percent.html?_r=0

This plan sounds great!

With all the money saved by corporations, think of how many new jobs they will create!!! Plus the price of EVERYTHING will go down!!!

This is a WIN for the AMERICAN PEOPLE!!

Any thoughts?

If you live in a white trash country, which voted overwhelmingly for Trump and you find your life better because the rich are getting richer and Trump's promises are connecting to you, than yes, its a win. But you know and I know, talk is not only cheap, it doesn't pay bills or put food on the table....but as long as red necks are happy, hey, more power!!!

In a few more months, reality will sink in and idiots will wake up.....no infastructure bill is coming, no mega jobs from China, no wage increases, Trump is gonna make you idiots life a living hell in a few more months, you'll see

Trickle down has never ever ever ever ever ever worked.

As I have always said, only one thing trickles down: URINE.

Only if you pee in your pants, right?

I think the tax cut is a wonderful idea. One thing, that some cannot for the life of them to grasp is that whatever these companies do with THEIR money, it is THEIR money do with as they see fit!

That's hardly the point, dipshit.

 

[GaryDog]

This is an unnecessary tax cut, and likely a back-breaker for the national debt. Get ready for deficits to explode, and the dollar to potentially collapse.

The U.S. has long had one of the lowest effective corporate tax rates in the world, and this was not needed.

 

[miketx]

Why do post those totally meaningless pictures? What do you think they prove? And it is the point, that people can do what they want with THEIR money, and not forced to do what some thieving asshole says they have to.

 

[GaryDog]

Why do post those totally meaningless pictures? What do you think they prove? And it is the point, that people can do what they want with THEIR money, and not forced to do what some thieving asshole says they have to.

Uh, it's called a graph. It contains information.

Tomorrow we'll work on verbs and long division, sweetheart.

 

[miketx]

Why do post those totally meaningless pictures? What do you think they prove? And it is the point, that people can do what they want with THEIR money, and not forced to do what some thieving asshole says they have to.

Uh, it's called a graph. It contains information.

Tomorrow we'll work on verbs and long division, sweetheart.

In other words, you'll post some more fake BS.

 

[Rustic]

This is an unnecessary tax cut, and likely a back-breaker for the national debt. Get ready for deficits to explode, and the dollar to potentially collapse.

The U.S. has long had one of the lowest effective corporate tax rates in the world, and this was not needed.

Any tax of any sort should be in the single digits… Max

 

[NightFox]

Can anyone provide a real life example of a big company actually paying the top biz rate ?

Aggregate tax rates? (including local, state, federal and international)

General Electric total corporate tax rate 2015: 79.2%

If you're talking just federal corporate income taxes and nothing else I suspect it would be difficult to find any company paying the statutory maximum.

General Electric paid zero for years as long as their CEO was working for Obama.

ROFLMAO, Why doesn't surprise me that you don't the difference between 79.2% and ZERO, or is that you don't understand that federal corporate income taxes are not the only taxes that corporations have to pay?

You must be one of Senator Speaks with Forked Tongue-D MA pals, huh? You and her pissed because you couldn't confiscate the remaining 20.8 cents on the dollar that GE shareholders managed to eke out after government got done raping & pillaging them?

 

[xotoxi]

Why do post those totally meaningless pictures? What do you think they prove? And it is the point, that people can do what they want with THEIR money, and not forced to do what some thieving asshole says they have to.

Uh, it's called a graph. It contains information.

Tomorrow we'll work on verbs and long division, sweetheart.

In other words, you'll post some more fake BS.

Are you another one of those people who thinks that facts are "fake BS"?

 

[miketx]

Why do post those totally meaningless pictures? What do you think they prove? And it is the point, that people can do what they want with THEIR money, and not forced to do what some thieving asshole says they have to.

Uh, it's called a graph. It contains information.

Tomorrow we'll work on verbs and long division, sweetheart.

In other words, you'll post some more fake BS.

Are you another one of those people who thinks that facts are "fake BS"?

What facts are posted? Links and graphs? How are those facts? Are you so dumbed down that you believe everything the media says?

 

[GaryDog]

This is an unnecessary tax cut, and likely a back-breaker for the national debt. Get ready for deficits to explode, and the dollar to potentially collapse.

The U.S. has long had one of the lowest effective corporate tax rates in the world, and this was not needed.

Any tax of any sort should be in the single digits… Max

What are you, a forklift driver? Thanks for your input, Lennie. Now look at the rabbits.

 

[jillian]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/24/us/politics/trump-corporate-tax-rate-15-percent.html?_r=0

This plan sounds great!

With all the money saved by corporations, think of how many new jobs they will create!!! Plus the price of EVERYTHING will go down!!!

This is a WIN for the AMERICAN PEOPLE!!

Any thoughts?

too bad it's been a fail every other time the radical right has cut taxes for rich people and corporations

 

[GaryDog]

Why do post those totally meaningless pictures? What do you think they prove? And it is the point, that people can do what they want with THEIR money, and not forced to do what some thieving asshole says they have to.

Uh, it's called a graph. It contains information.

Tomorrow we'll work on verbs and long division, sweetheart.

In other words, you'll post some more fake BS.

Are you another one of those people who thinks that facts are "fake BS"?

What facts are posted? Links and graphs? How are those facts? Are you so dumbed down that you believe everything the media says?

It's a comparison of the effective corporate tax rate for western countries, as per the OECD. Holy shit, can you read?

 

[miketx]

Why do post those totally meaningless pictures? What do you think they prove? And it is the point, that people can do what they want with THEIR money, and not forced to do what some thieving asshole says they have to.

Uh, it's called a graph. It contains information.

Tomorrow we'll work on verbs and long division, sweetheart.

In other words, you'll post some more fake BS.

Are you another one of those people who thinks that facts are "fake BS"?

What facts are posted? Links and graphs? How are those facts? Are you so dumbed down that you believe everything the media says?

It's a comparison of the effective corporate tax rate for western countries, as per the OECD. Holy shit, can you read?

Yeah I can read. When will you post some facts, and not libtard regurgitated garbage?

 

[GaryDog]

Uh, it's called a graph. It contains information.

Tomorrow we'll work on verbs and long division, sweetheart.

In other words, you'll post some more fake BS.

Are you another one of those people who thinks that facts are "fake BS"?

What facts are posted? Links and graphs? How are those facts? Are you so dumbed down that you believe everything the media says?

It's a comparison of the effective corporate tax rate for western countries, as per the OECD. Holy shit, can you read?

Yeah I can read. When will you post some facts, and not libtard regurgitated garbage?

The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and the U.S. Treasury -- the sources behind that graph -- are not "libtard garbage". Perhaps you've heard of both?

 

[miketx]

In other words, you'll post some more fake BS.

Are you another one of those people who thinks that facts are "fake BS"?

What facts are posted? Links and graphs? How are those facts? Are you so dumbed down that you believe everything the media says?

It's a comparison of the effective corporate tax rate for western countries, as per the OECD. Holy shit, can you read?

Yeah I can read. When will you post some facts, and not libtard regurgitated garbage?

The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and the U.S. Treasury -- the sources behind that graph -- are not "libtard garbage". Perhaps you've heard of both?

If the government is the source, it is suspect, as is anything you post.

 

[da Vinci]

Corporate tax windfalls are not what drive job creation. Demand is what drives job creation. Cutting the corporate tax rate in an environment where we need to reduce our deficit and address the national debt is about the worst idea imaginable. Corporate profits have consistently hit record highs each quarter for the last five to six years, so it's not as if corporations are in need of tax relief. Also, tax rates are not what drive price. A combination of supply and demand is what drives price. Corporate tax rates are fine where the are. Over 12 million private sector jobs were created during the Obama era under those tax rates.

If you want a tax policy that will stimulate the economy and create more jobs, cut taxes for the bottom personal income brackets and offset that by raising taxes on the higher income brackets. This is a no brainer, though it seems to escape the republican electorate. Tax cuts for the lower income brackets would provide a boost to aggregate demand, which would lead businesses to hire more employees to meet that demand.

What was the demand for small computers before venture capitalists using new money from Reagan's deregulation and tax cuts provided capital for companies like Apple, Microsoft, etc.? There was none, but the "windfall's from Reagan policies allowed investors to take risks on new investments that eventually drove the prosperity of the 1990's. No amount of middle class tax cuts intended to increase demand could have done this.

There was certainly demand for data processing, and more efficient means of consuming, storing, and sharing data back in the 80's. Personal computers were a vehicle to meet that demand. This is true independent of any regressive tax cuts.

Put another way, personal computers - much less regressive tax cuts - didn't invent the demand for data processing any more than the automobile invented the demand for transportation. You're mistaking technological innovation of an already existing, demanded process with the creation of an entirely new, not-previously-demanded process.

If you want to give the Reagan tax cuts credit for something that they actually created, look no further than our national debt. The trend of ballooning deficit spending and national debt begins in the 80s with Reagan's tax cuts. One could also make the argument that those tax cuts play a role in the skewed distribution of wealth and income that has taken hold over the last several decades as well.

There was no demand for personal computers because hardly anyone knew abou them and major companies like IBM and Polaroid who could have produced them didn't because they understood there was no demand for them. Companies like Apple and Microsoft were producing hardware and software for a small market for tech enthusiasts until financing from venture capitalists eager to invest the money they had made from the deregulation of financial institutions and the break up of stagnant corporations allowed these start ups to produce products that finally did gain the notice of both businesses and individuals. Because of this new source of financing these start ups were able to create products that then created their own demand and that is what fueled the economy of the 1990's. Without the bustling economy Reagan created with tax cuts and deregulation, the financing simply wouldn't have been there to launch these new companies.

You have an uncanny ability of missing the point, even though I clearly spelled it out for you. What do personal computers do? They allow us to store, share, process, and consume data. That said, people have been storing, sharing, processing, and consuming data well before the personal computer. And there has always been a demand for more efficient means of storing, sharing, processing, and consuming data. The personal computer met that demand.

Just as there was demand for more efficient means of transportation before the automobile came along, there was also demand for more efficient means of data processing before the PC came along. This is the point, and it is also the fallacy in your line of reasoning.

Whether or not Reagan ever cut taxes is of no consequence to the birth of the personal computer. The personal computer would have came about regardless because it was a tool that met the demand of more efficient means of data processing. One more time: the demand for efficient means of processing predates the birth of the personal computer.

You are talking nonsense. If demand for personal computers was as obvious as you claim, why did major corporations that were already producing computers not begin to make personal computers until after these small start ups financed by investors loaded with money from the Reagan tax cuts and deregulation made them popular? According to you, the CEO's of all the major electronics corporations were too stupid to see the demand for personal computers you claim was so obvious.

The Reagan tax cuts did contribute to more debt, but along with his deregulation they also revitalized the American economy after nearly twenty years of stagnation, and they freed up enormous amounts of investment capital that had been locked away in older, inefficient companies and allowed that capital to be invested in innovative ideas like personal computers which the banks and big corporations had no interest in. No amount of middle class tax cuts intended to increase demand can finance innovative ideas that the major corporations and banks had turned away from, only tax cuts that increase the amount of investment capital to the investor class can.

It isn't "my claim" that we are always in search of more efficient means of data processing. There is always a demand for more efficient means of data processing. This is why companies invest in R&D to come up with new products and innovation to meet that demand. The personal computer was one step in a long line of incremental steps of improving efficiency in data processing. I can't believe that this even needs to be explained to you. What, do you think this is some new concept that I just invented in this thread? Do you honestly believe that I just invented this idea that the economy is always looking for more efficient means of doing things?

And other major corporations took longer to get personal computers to market because doing so isn't easy. It takes quite a bit of time, R&D, testing, retooling, etc, to come up with new innovations that improve data processing. It takes even more time getting those new innovations to market. But, again, corporations invest in this because there is always a demand for more efficient means of data processing. And this is the case regardless of fiscal policy.

Regarding the rest of your comment, there weren't "twenty years of stagnation" prior to the Reagan tax cuts. During the 20 years leading up to the Reagan tax cuts, GDP growth averaged 3.7% per year. The Reagan years - after the tax cut - saw an average GDP growth of 3.5% year. These figures are per the Bureau of Economic Analysis.

At this point I can only reiterate that nothing you are saying correlates with reality. The PC would have came out regardless of tax cuts. A cure for cancer will one day be discovered regardless of tax cuts. The next leap in data processing will come about completely independent of tax cuts. Taxes exist to fund the government, and we're currently operating on a budget deficit. Therefore, we need to increase tax revenues (and control spending, of course). Tax cuts obviously reduce tax revenues so doing so in an environment where we're trying to get control over our budget deficit would be a terrible policy idea - particularly given the fact that the corporate world is already sitting on $2 trillion in cash that it could use to invest today if it chose to do so, and also that corporate profits are breaking records each quarter. The corporate world doesn't need a tax cut at the moment, and the government certainly cannot afford one. If you're looking to stimulate economic growth through fiscal policy, then you should advocate tax cuts for the lower personal income brackets, and those should be offset by increases on the top tier income brackets. Doing so would boost aggregate demand, create jobs, and grow GDP.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/24/us/politics/trump-corporate-tax-rate-15-percent.html?_r=0

This plan sounds great!

With all the money saved by corporations, think of how many new jobs they will create!!! Plus the price of EVERYTHING will go down!!!

This is a WIN for the AMERICAN PEOPLE!!

Any thoughts?

That's why Democrats hate it

You love it because your owners told you to.
And, you want to pay more and get nothing.

To the OP - read it. It's not a "plan". There are a few talking points but no substance.

It's a great gift to dump, his family and other 1%. Jobs? Find any example of where it has added jobs.

Death tax? Anyone here believe the end of the death tax will do anything at all for you?

Dig deep. If this passes, you'll need to.


Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

 

[GaryDog]

Are you another one of those people who thinks that facts are "fake BS"?

What facts are posted? Links and graphs? How are those facts? Are you so dumbed down that you believe everything the media says?

It's a comparison of the effective corporate tax rate for western countries, as per the OECD. Holy shit, can you read?

Yeah I can read. When will you post some facts, and not libtard regurgitated garbage?

The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and the U.S. Treasury -- the sources behind that graph -- are not "libtard garbage". Perhaps you've heard of both?

If the government is the source, it is suspect, as is anything you post.

Jesus ****, you're stupid. What do you want for data on tax information if not for the U.S. Treasury (i.e. THE TAX COLLECTOR)? Jesus on your toast? A Ren and Stimpy cartoon?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/24/us/politics/trump-corporate-tax-rate-15-percent.html?_r=0

This plan sounds great!

With all the money saved by corporations, think of how many new jobs they will create!!! Plus the price of EVERYTHING will go down!!!

This is a WIN for the AMERICAN PEOPLE!!

Any thoughts?

If you live in a white trash country, which voted overwhelmingly for Trump and you find your life better because the rich are getting richer and Trump's promises are connecting to you, than yes, its a win. But you know and I know, talk is not only cheap, it doesn't pay bills or put food on the table....but as long as red necks are happy, hey, more power!!!

In a few more months, reality will sink in and idiots will wake up.....no infastructure bill is coming, no mega jobs from China, no wage increases, Trump is gonna make you idiots life a living hell in a few more months, you'll see

Trickle down has never ever ever ever ever ever worked.

As I have always said, only one thing trickles down: URINE.

Only if you pee in your pants, right?

I think the tax cut is a wonderful idea. One thing, that some cannot for the life of them to grasp is that whatever these companies do with THEIR money, it is THEIR money do with as they see fit!

That's very funny.

You don't get to choose whether or not pay your taxes but you believe the wealthy should.

I have a cardboard box smarter than you.

(If you believe trickle down produces jobs, post examples.)




Sent from my iPad using USMessageBoard.com

 

[mudwhistle]

Can anyone provide a real life example of a big company actually paying the top biz rate ?

Aggregate tax rates? (including local, state, federal and international)

General Electric total corporate tax rate 2015: 79.2%

If you're talking just federal corporate income taxes and nothing else I suspect it would be difficult to find any company paying the statutory maximum.

General Electric paid zero for years as long as their CEO was working for Obama.

ROFLMAO, Why doesn't surprise me that you don't the difference between 79.2% and ZERO, or is that you don't understand that federal corporate income taxes are not the only taxes that corporations have to pay?

You must be one of Senator Speaks with Forked Tongue-D MA pals, huh? You and her pissed because you couldn't confiscate the remaining 20.8 cents on the dollar that GE shareholders managed to eke out after government got done raping & pillaging them?

And again you assume I don't know that......you sniveling little shit....

We are talking about federal coprorate taxes after all, aren’t we???