Should The Rich Be Required To Pay Higher Taxes In the US?

[Dad2three]

Yes, but neither get get the GOP to agree to get rid of ALL of Reagan's tax cuts for the rich! Since the EFFECTIVE rates for the top 1/10th of 1% 1% is about 1/3rd of what it was 1932-1980. You know the underpinning of "supply side" Give the "job creators" tax cuts and it trickles down? lol

So where is your proof that it didn't trickle down? You think jobs moving overseas is bad now, what do you suppose it would be like if we increased taxes back to pre-Reagan years?

REALLY? You mean GOOD GOV'T POLICY wouldn't stop that? Having tax policy that punishes off shoring jobs but rewards creating US jobs?

Seems LOTS of jobs off shored even though tax rates on the top 1/10th of 1% "make" over half of capital gains/dividends WHILE their effective tax rate has been cut by 1/3rd!!!!


WHAT DOES TAX POLICY MATTER ON OFF SHORING JOBS ANYWAYS? RECORD CORP PROFITS, LOWEST LABOR COSTS EVER RECORDED IN THE US AND LOWEST CORP TAX BURDEN IN 40+ YEARS, WHERE ARE THOSE "JOBS, JOBS, JOBS" GOP/DUBYA PROMISED?



Jul 30, 2014 - Senate Republicans blocked a bill that would end tax breaks for companies that send jobs overseas
Senate Republicans block bill to end tax breaks for outsourcing

FULL QUESTION:

When Democratic presidential candidates talk about tax breaks for corporations that ship our jobs overseas and tax breaks and subsidies for oil companies, what are they referring to and are they accurate?

FULL ANSWER:

It’s true that Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have associated the transfer of U.S. jobs overseas with tax breaks, or loopholes, for companies that practice off-shoring:

Obama, Nov. 3, 2007: When I am president, I will end the tax giveaways to companies that ship our jobs overseas, and I will put the money in the pockets of working Americans, and seniors, and homeowners who deserve a break.

Clinton, Nov. 19, 2007: And we are going to finally close the tax loopholes and stop giving tax breaks to companies that ship jobs overseas. Enough with outsourcing American jobs using taxpayer dollars.

Both candidates are referring to a feature of the U.S. tax code that allows domestic companies to defer taxes on “unrepatriated income.” In other words, revenue that companies earn through their overseas subsidiaries goes untaxed by the IRS as long as it stays off the company’s U.S. books.

But economists, including left-leaning ones, do not agree that eliminating this provision will bring an end to off-shoring. And here’s why: In the U.S., companies are taxed 35 percent on earnings of $10 million to $15 million or on all earnings over $18.3 million. That’s one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world, making an overseas move somewhat attractive to companies that wish to avoid the U.S. tax rate. But that’s not the leading reason companies send jobs overseas. According to a 2005 report by the Government Accountability Office, global technological advancement, increased openness of countries such as China and India, the higher education level of foreign workers in technological fields, and the reduced cost per foreign worker are all contributing factors to off-shoring.

We first addressed this popular theme in 2004, when we reported on a John Kerry campaign ad in which he blamed President George W. Bush for providing tax incentives to companies “outsourcing” jobs overseas. At the time we found that such tax breaks, which do exist, pre-dated the Bush administration and that even Democratic-leaning economists did not support the idea that changing the corporate tax code would end the movement of jobs overseas.

Three years later, in Dec. 2007, we reported on an ad launched by a labor group in support of John Edwards. The ad implied that corporate tax breaks were responsible for the shipment of jobs overseas from an Iowa Maytag plant. We found that the jobs were actually sent to Ohio and that, again, eliminating such tax breaks would not go far in stanching the flow of jobs overseas.

Oil and Gas Company Tax Breaks

OIL AND GAS ARE THE ONLY INDUSTRIES THAT "OFF SHORE" JOBS? LOL

THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT, WHY ARE WE GIVING TAX BREAKS TO AN INDUSTRY WITH RECORD PROFITS. You think they need it?

You missed the point entirely.

Tax breaks, tax incentives, rich getting richer are all BS excuses for why there are less jobs in this country. We've out-priced ourselves in labor many years ago thanks to unions.

As this report points out, it has nothing to do with taxes with the exception that we have the highest corporate tax rate in the world. It has to do with labor costs, education, and consumer demand.

US companies don't offshore because it's a trend, they offshore because they need to supply American consumers with cheap products. Those who didn't offshore invested in technology such as automation. There are even McDonald's restaurants that are now experimenting with employee-less outlets. Machines will now make your Big Mac combo.

You can't blame this on Reagan, Republicans or any single entity. This has been in the making for a long time now, and now that it's here, we are looking for excuses why it is.

You want to take away tax breaks from oil companies, then don't complain when gasoline increases 20 cents per gallon more, because industry always finds a way to make up for their losses.

MORE right wing nonsense. Share of US being in unions has shrunk by over half the last 35 years, but it's unions fault?


Hint GOOD GOV'T POLICY (something the GOP has been against since Reagan's "GOV'T IS THE PROBLEM" BS!!!)


Yeah, Corps CAN'T make less money, Corps (and the rich) CAN'T pay more taxes. My fukkn gawd, grow up, grow a brain!



Reaganomics killed America’s middle class



There’s nothing “normal” about having a middle class. Having a middle class is a choice that a society has to make, and it’s a choice we need to make again in this generation, if we want to stop the destruction of the remnants of the last generation’s middle class.

Despite what you might read in the Wall Street Journal or see on Fox News, capitalism is not an economic system that produces a middle class. In fact, if left to its own devices, capitalism tends towards vast levels of inequality and monopoly. The natural and most stable state of capitalism actually looks a lot like the Victorian England depicted in Charles Dickens’ novels.


....Reagan began deregulating and cutting taxes on capitalism in 1981, and today, with more classical “raw capitalism,” what we call “Reaganomics,” or “supply side economics,” our nation’s largest employer is WalMart and they pay around $10 an hour.

Reaganomics killed America’s middle class


Reagan Set Up The Death Of The Middle Class, But China Was The Clincher

Our 2010 Reagan Revolution Home To Roost series, especially the post Reagan Revolution Home To Roost — In Charts described the beginning of the great decoupling of the American economy from the middle class.

The summary:

Conservative policies transformed the United States from the largest creditor nation to the largest debtor nation in just a few years, and it has only gotten worse since then.

Working people’s share of the benefits from increased productivity took a sudden turn down.

This resulted in intense concentration of wealth at the top.


Reagan Set Up The Death Of The Middle Class, But China Was The Clincher

 

[Dad2three]

Yes, but neither get get the GOP to agree to get rid of ALL of Reagan's tax cuts for the rich! Since the EFFECTIVE rates for the top 1/10th of 1% 1% is about 1/3rd of what it was 1932-1980. You know the underpinning of "supply side" Give the "job creators" tax cuts and it trickles down? lol

So where is your proof that it didn't trickle down? You think jobs moving overseas is bad now, what do you suppose it would be like if we increased taxes back to pre-Reagan years?

REALLY? You mean GOOD GOV'T POLICY wouldn't stop that? Having tax policy that punishes off shoring jobs but rewards creating US jobs?

Seems LOTS of jobs off shored even though tax rates on the top 1/10th of 1% "make" over half of capital gains/dividends WHILE their effective tax rate has been cut by 1/3rd!!!!


WHAT DOES TAX POLICY MATTER ON OFF SHORING JOBS ANYWAYS? RECORD CORP PROFITS, LOWEST LABOR COSTS EVER RECORDED IN THE US AND LOWEST CORP TAX BURDEN IN 40+ YEARS, WHERE ARE THOSE "JOBS, JOBS, JOBS" GOP/DUBYA PROMISED?



Jul 30, 2014 - Senate Republicans blocked a bill that would end tax breaks for companies that send jobs overseas
Senate Republicans block bill to end tax breaks for outsourcing

FULL QUESTION:

When Democratic presidential candidates talk about tax breaks for corporations that ship our jobs overseas and tax breaks and subsidies for oil companies, what are they referring to and are they accurate?

FULL ANSWER:

It’s true that Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have associated the transfer of U.S. jobs overseas with tax breaks, or loopholes, for companies that practice off-shoring:

Obama, Nov. 3, 2007: When I am president, I will end the tax giveaways to companies that ship our jobs overseas, and I will put the money in the pockets of working Americans, and seniors, and homeowners who deserve a break.

Clinton, Nov. 19, 2007: And we are going to finally close the tax loopholes and stop giving tax breaks to companies that ship jobs overseas. Enough with outsourcing American jobs using taxpayer dollars.

Both candidates are referring to a feature of the U.S. tax code that allows domestic companies to defer taxes on “unrepatriated income.” In other words, revenue that companies earn through their overseas subsidiaries goes untaxed by the IRS as long as it stays off the company’s U.S. books.

But economists, including left-leaning ones, do not agree that eliminating this provision will bring an end to off-shoring. And here’s why: In the U.S., companies are taxed 35 percent on earnings of $10 million to $15 million or on all earnings over $18.3 million. That’s one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world, making an overseas move somewhat attractive to companies that wish to avoid the U.S. tax rate. But that’s not the leading reason companies send jobs overseas. According to a 2005 report by the Government Accountability Office, global technological advancement, increased openness of countries such as China and India, the higher education level of foreign workers in technological fields, and the reduced cost per foreign worker are all contributing factors to off-shoring.

We first addressed this popular theme in 2004, when we reported on a John Kerry campaign ad in which he blamed President George W. Bush for providing tax incentives to companies “outsourcing” jobs overseas. At the time we found that such tax breaks, which do exist, pre-dated the Bush administration and that even Democratic-leaning economists did not support the idea that changing the corporate tax code would end the movement of jobs overseas.

Three years later, in Dec. 2007, we reported on an ad launched by a labor group in support of John Edwards. The ad implied that corporate tax breaks were responsible for the shipment of jobs overseas from an Iowa Maytag plant. We found that the jobs were actually sent to Ohio and that, again, eliminating such tax breaks would not go far in stanching the flow of jobs overseas.

Oil and Gas Company Tax Breaks

Sens. John Walsh (D-Mont.) and Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) introduced the bill, which would give companies incentives to bring jobs back to the United States, including a tax write-off for the relocating costs and an additional 20 percent credit.

Currently, U.S. companies can deduct from their corporate taxes some expenses of moving facilities overseas. Democrats said 2.4 million jobs have been outsourced in the past 10 years.

“It is wrong that American workers subsidize a corporate decision to pack up American jobs and ship them overseas,” Walsh said Wednesday. “That’s bologna.”


Senate Republicans block bill to end tax breaks for outsourcing

And as this Fact Check report points out, eliminating those tax breaks won't keep one American job here. It's all a dog and pony show by the Democrats. Do you really think that a couple of thousand dollars in tax breaks is going to play a part in a major decision such as moving your operations overseas?

The Democrats are trying to tell you that peeing on a three alarm house fire will put the fire out. Moving expenses may be costly, but not nearly as costly as keeping up with new US regulations, OSHA regulations, environmental regulations, healthcare regulations, taxation and so on. Write-offs are nothing more than not paying taxes on the money you spent on expenditures, and it's not all that much.

Got it, you can't critically think or read links. Yeah, why doesn't the US look more like China right?

HINT, US CORP TAXES (WHICH OBAMA PROPOSED YEARS AGO TO DROP TO 28% AND GET RID OF LOOPHOLES, AND USE REVENUES TO FUND INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS, GOP REFUSES!!) , ISN'T REALLY A BURDEN RIGHT WINGERS CLAIM, IT'S JUST A TALKING POINT


Warren Buffett: ‘It Is A Myth’ That U.S. Corporate Taxes Are High

The interesting thing about the corporate rate is that corporate profits, as a percentage of GDP last year were the highest or just about the highest in the last 50 years. They were ten and a fraction percent of GDP. That’s higher than we’ve seen in 50 years. The corporate taxes as a percentage of GDP were 1.2 percent, $180 billion. That’s just about the lowest we’ve seen. So our corporate tax rate last year, effectively, in terms of taxes paid for the United States, was around 12 percent, which is well below those existing in most of the industrialized countries around the world. So it is a myth that American corporations are paying 35 percent or anything like it…Corporate taxes are not strangling American competitiveness.


Warren Buffett: ‘It Is A Myth’ That U.S. Corporate Taxes Are High






The corporate tax myth


-- U.S. corporations pay one of the highest tax rates in the world. There's little debate about that.

Still, some argue the difference in the overall tax burden for U.S. companies isn't nearly as great it appears.


In fact, the United States collects less corporate tax relative to the overall economy than almost any other country in the world.

And that's a more objective measure of tax burden. Different accounting rules around the world means what's counted as income in one country isn't counted in another -- that makes comparisons of tax rates misleading.


The corporate tax myth

 

[ninja007]

the OP should actually read should freeloaders and liberals and blacks get a job and at least pretend to contribute to society?

 

[Dad2three]

Corporate Deadbeats: How Companies Get Rich Off Of Taxes


You and your wallet have a big stake in huge tax-dodging deals being crafted by big American companies, like Burger King merging with Tim Hortons, the Canadian coffee and doughnut chain.

Burger King is looking to swap the 35 percent corporate tax rate in the U.S. for Canada’s 15 percent rate, even though its working headquarters will remain in Miami. The little people—the millions of us who pay our taxes week to week—will pick up some of the tax burden Burger King and other multinationals shirk through these so-called inversions, in which they move their headquarters, on paper, to escape taxes while continuing to enjoy all the benefits of doing business in America.

It’s just one of several ways multinationals don’t pay their fair share, and they get away with it because the federal government encourages such behavior (YOU KNOW, GOOD GOV'T POLICY???). If Congress taxed you the way it taxes multinational corporations, you would have a much fatter wallet. If you were Apple, General Electric, Google or Microsoft, taxes would not be a burden at all. Instead, taxes would help you prosper.

http://www.newsweek.com/2014/09/12/corporate-deadbeats-how-companies-get-rich-taxes-268303.html

 

[Dad2three]

the OP should actually read should freeloaders and liberals and blacks get a job and at least pretend to contribute to society?

Good job Bubba,. can you give US some Trump and throw in the bad Hispanics too?

 

[frigidweirdo]

Our industry has went to China. Who's fault is that?

Our middle-class has become smaller. Median family wages has dropped under Obama.

We went from one of the best education systems? When was that?

Student debt is through the roof. Could it be because supply and demand dictates the cost of college and always has? You know, those colleges mostly run by liberals?

The rich are making record profits. What's wrong with that? If they made less profit, how would that help you?

Our infrastructure has gone to ship. Who's fault is that? Do you suppose it has anything to do with union costs to repair and rebuild roads and bridges?

Industry to China, whose fault? The Chinese for opening up their economy and being able to produce things cheaper than America would even be able to do?

Middle class becoming smaller? Doubtful, maybe slightly smaller because of the recession, hardly Obama's fault, but will probably go back to similar levels later one.

Student debt is something that has existed for a long time. Universities have to make their money, they can't run on thin air. The issue of whether they're cheap/free or expensive is down to government subsidies.

The rich are making record profits due to a recession that was helped along massively by two majorly expensive wars.

The infrastructure is all about spending money on it. But as many people, especially the right, call for lower taxes, that means less money to spend on infrastructure.

 

[frigidweirdo]

You missed the point entirely.

Tax breaks, tax incentives, rich getting richer are all BS excuses for why there are less jobs in this country. We've out-priced ourselves in labor many years ago thanks to unions.

As the expectations of the standard of living rise, people want to earn more money.

To earn more money you to be more skilled, which means better education.

The problem isn't that crappy jobs are going to China. The problem is the US is failing miserably to take the jobs that pay higher wages. Germany is a perfect example of a country where the education system is geared towards the needs of the workforce. The US is a country where the education system is geared towards the rich and no one else.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You missed the point entirely.

Tax breaks, tax incentives, rich getting richer are all BS excuses for why there are less jobs in this country. We've out-priced ourselves in labor many years ago thanks to unions.

As the expectations of the standard of living rise, people want to earn more money.

To earn more money you to be more skilled, which means better education.

The problem isn't that crappy jobs are going to China. The problem is the US is failing miserably to take the jobs that pay higher wages. Germany is a perfect example of a country where the education system is geared towards the needs of the workforce. The US is a country where the education system is geared towards the rich and no one else.

Yes, of course. I'm sure that's where union teachers want to take our children: towards the rich as they always have.

 

[frigidweirdo]

You missed the point entirely.

Tax breaks, tax incentives, rich getting richer are all BS excuses for why there are less jobs in this country. We've out-priced ourselves in labor many years ago thanks to unions.

As the expectations of the standard of living rise, people want to earn more money.

To earn more money you to be more skilled, which means better education.

The problem isn't that crappy jobs are going to China. The problem is the US is failing miserably to take the jobs that pay higher wages. Germany is a perfect example of a country where the education system is geared towards the needs of the workforce. The US is a country where the education system is geared towards the rich and no one else.

Yes, of course. I'm sure that's where union teachers want to take our children: towards the rich as they always have.

I don't like the teaching unions in the US. They are a major part of the problem. As too are the Republican and Democratic parties.

 

[danielpalos]

Our industry has went to China. Who's fault is that?

Our middle-class has become smaller. Median family wages has dropped under Obama.

We went from one of the best education systems? When was that?

Student debt is through the roof. Could it be because supply and demand dictates the cost of college and always has? You know, those colleges mostly run by liberals?

The rich are making record profits. What's wrong with that? If they made less profit, how would that help you?

Our infrastructure has gone to ship. Who's fault is that? Do you suppose it has anything to do with union costs to repair and rebuild roads and bridges?

Industry to China, whose fault? The Chinese for opening up their economy and being able to produce things cheaper than America would even be able to do?

Middle class becoming smaller? Doubtful, maybe slightly smaller because of the recession, hardly Obama's fault, but will probably go back to similar levels later one.

Student debt is something that has existed for a long time. Universities have to make their money, they can't run on thin air. The issue of whether they're cheap/free or expensive is down to government subsidies.

The rich are making record profits due to a recession that was helped along massively by two majorly expensive wars.

The infrastructure is all about spending money on it. But as many people, especially the right, call for lower taxes, that means less money to spend on infrastructure.

The right makes it seem like we should have simply goaded the Chinese into an industrial automation race to make their form of socialism work better.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Wait ... so you admit that the "vast majority of the middle class and poor PAY less than 10% in federal taxes." Since you are aware that they are not carrying their weight, why all the silly socialist whining? Under the current system, the top 25% pay 86% of all federal personal income tax. They pay for our military, our highways, our education and health care, our courts and the very gov't that takes what is theirs not only to pay for all that but to pick up the slack for you socialist slackers. So what is your gripe? That they don't pay 96% or 106%?
Socialists are the weeping pimple on society's butt.

No. I stated that the middle class and poor pay less than 10% of their total income in federal tax. I also stated that the rich and wealthy pay less than that.

Well, you're an idiot, so that makes sense to you.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

We are talking thirty years since Reagan slashed taxes on the rich. Before that the U.S. Built the worlds largest military, interstate highway system and put a man on the moon
Since supply side we have no major accomplishments as a nation

Since Reagan
1. Our industry has want to China
2. Our middle class has become far smaller
3. We have want from one of the best education systems to 14th in the world.
4. Student debt is through the roof!
5. The rich are making record profit...Still they offshore jobs and go through the loop holes.
6. Our infrastructure has gone to shit...
7. Science is being cut and China is catching up to us.

The republican plan sucks ass.

Of course, since Reagan we've had 8 years of Clinton (D) and 7 years of Obama (D) but don't let facts interfere with your mindless hate, Bubba..

Yes, but neither get get the GOP to agree to get rid of ALL of Reagan's tax cuts for the rich! Since the EFFECTIVE rates for the top 1/10th of 1% 1% is about 1/3rd of what it was 1932-1980. You know the underpinning of "supply side" Give the "job creators" tax cuts and it trickles down? lol

YAWN
left-wingers like this one are comical bunch of crybabies!!!
the Left will tell you Reagan raised taxes ELEVEN TIMES out of one side of their mouth, and in the next moment they are crying out of the other side of their mouths about supply-side economics.

11 tax hikes and reagan still cant get no love from left-wing nutjobs????

lol

Yep, 11 tax hikes on the avg guy, but Ronnie gutted the rich's top rate from 70% to 28% WHILE increasing SS taxes 60%. lol

Moron

WHILE increasing SS taxes 60%. lol

Wow, that's awful! What was the rate in 1980 and what was the rate when he left office?

 

[OnePercenter]

Well, you're an idiot, so that makes sense to you.

So tell us, what percentage of total income did you pay in federal tax for 2014?

Federal tax ÷ total income=?

I'll start. Thanks to Republicans, I personally paid zero.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Well, you're an idiot, so that makes sense to you.

So tell us, what percentage of total income did you pay in federal tax for 2014?

Federal tax ÷ total income=?

I'll start. Thanks to Republicans, I personally paid zero.

What was your total income?

 

[Hancock]

I think the rich should ABSOLUTELY pay more because the majority of them are selfish and don't care about anybody but themselves! Trust me, if you are a millionaire, it is NOT going to hurt you if you just pay a little more in taxes. I believe that if you are a good and righteous person, you would want to help the poor or people that are less fortunate. It's as simple as that! People need to stop being so selfish.

You mean the way they do now?

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

 

[SAYIT]

Well, you're an idiot, so that makes sense to you.

So tell us, what percentage of total income did you pay in federal tax for 2014?

Federal tax ÷ total income=?

I'll start. Thanks to Republicans, I personally paid zero.

Which is exactly what happens to most guys who live in their mommy's basement and rarely venture out.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Our industry has went to China. Who's fault is that?

Our middle-class has become smaller. Median family wages has dropped under Obama.

We went from one of the best education systems? When was that?

Student debt is through the roof. Could it be because supply and demand dictates the cost of college and always has? You know, those colleges mostly run by liberals?

The rich are making record profits. What's wrong with that? If they made less profit, how would that help you?

Our infrastructure has gone to ship. Who's fault is that? Do you suppose it has anything to do with union costs to repair and rebuild roads and bridges?

Industry to China, whose fault? The Chinese for opening up their economy and being able to produce things cheaper than America would even be able to do?

Middle class becoming smaller? Doubtful, maybe slightly smaller because of the recession, hardly Obama's fault, but will probably go back to similar levels later one.

Student debt is something that has existed for a long time. Universities have to make their money, they can't run on thin air. The issue of whether they're cheap/free or expensive is down to government subsidies.

The rich are making record profits due to a recession that was helped along massively by two majorly expensive wars.

The infrastructure is all about spending money on it. But as many people, especially the right, call for lower taxes, that means less money to spend on infrastructure.

The right makes it seem like we should have simply goaded the Chinese into an industrial automation race to make their form of socialism work better.

No, but if not for unions that guaranteed floor sweepers $18.00 per hour plus benefits, many of those jobs could have remained in the US. Then you add on taxes, regulations and environmental choke holds, you have all the necessary ingredients to move jobs out of the country.

Prior to that Republicans did put out the warning signs for years, but they were ignored. They told the public that the Republicans were only looking out for their rich buddies. Ignore them. They have no idea what they are talking about. Unions were indestructible.

That's why everything today is made in China. But instead of blaming who was responsible, all we hear from the left is our jobs are overseas because the evil rich man only wanted to get richer; the same left that shop at Wal-Mart every week.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Our industry has went to China. Who's fault is that?

Our middle-class has become smaller. Median family wages has dropped under Obama.

We went from one of the best education systems? When was that?

Student debt is through the roof. Could it be because supply and demand dictates the cost of college and always has? You know, those colleges mostly run by liberals?

The rich are making record profits. What's wrong with that? If they made less profit, how would that help you?

Our infrastructure has gone to ship. Who's fault is that? Do you suppose it has anything to do with union costs to repair and rebuild roads and bridges?

Industry to China, whose fault? The Chinese for opening up their economy and being able to produce things cheaper than America would even be able to do?

Middle class becoming smaller? Doubtful, maybe slightly smaller because of the recession, hardly Obama's fault, but will probably go back to similar levels later one.

Student debt is something that has existed for a long time. Universities have to make their money, they can't run on thin air. The issue of whether they're cheap/free or expensive is down to government subsidies.

The rich are making record profits due to a recession that was helped along massively by two majorly expensive wars.

The infrastructure is all about spending money on it. But as many people, especially the right, call for lower taxes, that means less money to spend on infrastructure.

The right makes it seem like we should have simply goaded the Chinese into an industrial automation race to make their form of socialism work better.

No, but if not for unions that guaranteed floor sweepers $18.00 per hour plus benefits, many of those jobs could have remained in the US. Then you add on taxes, regulations and environmental choke holds, you have all the necessary ingredients to move jobs out of the country.

Prior to that Republicans did put out the warning signs for years, but they were ignored. They told the public that the Republicans were only looking out for their rich buddies. Ignore them. They have no idea what they are talking about. Unions were indestructible.

That's why everything today is made in China. But instead of blaming who was responsible, all we hear from the left is our jobs are overseas because the evil rich man only wanted to get richer; the same left that shop at Wal-Mart every week.

Spot on Ray, but the left will never accept they were part of the problem.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Our industry has went to China. Who's fault is that?

Our middle-class has become smaller. Median family wages has dropped under Obama.

We went from one of the best education systems? When was that?

Student debt is through the roof. Could it be because supply and demand dictates the cost of college and always has? You know, those colleges mostly run by liberals?

The rich are making record profits. What's wrong with that? If they made less profit, how would that help you?

Our infrastructure has gone to ship. Who's fault is that? Do you suppose it has anything to do with union costs to repair and rebuild roads and bridges?

Industry to China, whose fault? The Chinese for opening up their economy and being able to produce things cheaper than America would even be able to do?

Middle class becoming smaller? Doubtful, maybe slightly smaller because of the recession, hardly Obama's fault, but will probably go back to similar levels later one.

Student debt is something that has existed for a long time. Universities have to make their money, they can't run on thin air. The issue of whether they're cheap/free or expensive is down to government subsidies.

The rich are making record profits due to a recession that was helped along massively by two majorly expensive wars.

The infrastructure is all about spending money on it. But as many people, especially the right, call for lower taxes, that means less money to spend on infrastructure.

The right makes it seem like we should have simply goaded the Chinese into an industrial automation race to make their form of socialism work better.

No, but if not for unions that guaranteed floor sweepers $18.00 per hour plus benefits, many of those jobs could have remained in the US. Then you add on taxes, regulations and environmental choke holds, you have all the necessary ingredients to move jobs out of the country.

Prior to that Republicans did put out the warning signs for years, but they were ignored. They told the public that the Republicans were only looking out for their rich buddies. Ignore them. They have no idea what they are talking about. Unions were indestructible.

That's why everything today is made in China. But instead of blaming who was responsible, all we hear from the left is our jobs are overseas because the evil rich man only wanted to get richer; the same left that shop at Wal-Mart every week.

The reason things are made in China is because a person can easily live off of $300 a month in China. So you can pay people $300, $400 a month. In the US this is impossible.

Everyone knows this. Everyone knows the US should have workers who are earning more because they're producing higher quality goods or doing other things that earn more money. But no, the US hasn't figured this out and hasn't moved education to meet the needs.

Both Reps AND Dems are responsible for this.

 

[danielpalos]

Well, you're an idiot, so that makes sense to you.

So tell us, what percentage of total income did you pay in federal tax for 2014?

Federal tax ÷ total income=?

I'll start. Thanks to Republicans, I personally paid zero.

Thanks to a "tax loophole", I don't even have to file a tax return; and, it didn't cost me anything. Is it any wonder the wealthier complain about having to lobby Congress for their tax loopholes.