US loses $100 billion a year in offshore tax havens

[Maple]

and we will have no American business left in America.

Wouldn't it be a good idea to reduce corporate taxes, like Ireland has done, to make business's want to locate in America, thereby increasing the revenue the government takes in because there are more participants and therefore hiring Americans????? Noooooo Waaaaay, that makes too much sense.

 

[GHook93]

Right after the Great Crash, the knee-jerk reaction was to resort to good old protectionism. What we got was Smoot-Hawley! What it did was make the Great Depression 100 fold worse!

"Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it!"
- George Santayana

When conservatives rail in the media of the dangers of "returning to Smoot Hawley, which created the Great Depression," all they do is reveal their ignorance of economics and history. The Smoot-Hawley tariff legislation, which increased taxes on some imported goods by a third to two-thirds to protect American industries, was signed into law on June 17, 1930, well into the Great Depression. In the following two years, international trade dropped from 6 percent of GNP to roughly 2 percent of GNP (between 1930 and 1932), but most of that was the result of the depression going worldwide, not Smoot-Hawley. The main result of Smoot-Hawley was that American businesses now had strong financial incentives to do business with other American companies, rather than bring in products made with cheaper foreign labor: Americans started trading with other Americans.

Smoot-Hawley "protectionist" legislation did not cause the Great Depression, and while it may have had a slight short-term negative effect on the economy ("1.4 percent at most" according to many historians) its long-term effect was to bring American jobs back to America.

READ WHAT I WROTE! See above. Protectionism doesn't come about when things are going good, its usually a knee-jerk reaction when things are going bad. Smoot-Hawley didn't cause the GP, but it made it worse. After the market crash which touched off the GP, in a knee-jerk reaction by the Hoover administration to the crisis. In an effort to fix the situation it MADE IT MUCH WORSE!

You know what the reaction was:

It provoked a storm of foreign retaliatory measures and came to stand as a symbol of the "beggar-thy-neighbor" policies (policies designed to improve one's own lot at the expense of that of others) of the 1930s.

What was the effect on America and Americans?

American exports and imports were reduced by more than half.

The policies contributed to a drastic decline in international trade. For example, U.S. imports from Europe declined from a 1929 high of $1,334 million to just $390 million in 1932, while U.S. exports to Europe fell from $2,341 million in 1929 to $784 million in 1932. Overall, world trade declined by some 66% between 1929 and 1934. More generally, Smoot-Hawley did nothing to foster trust and cooperation among nations in either the political or economic realm during a perilous era in international relations

And don't insult us by minimizing the S.H. tarriff effect!

When the dust had settled, Congress had agreed to tariff levels that exceeded the already high rates established by the 1922 Fordney-McCumber Act and represented among the most protectionist tariffs in U.S. history.

Could some tarriffs work? Possibly! But knee-jerk broad protectionism just sounds like a back idea to me!

Smoot-Hawley Tariff

 

[GHook93]

A Senate report estimated in 2008 that the United States loses up to $100 billion a year in tax revenue to offshore tax havens

Shell companies and sham headquarters" in places like Switzerland and the Cayman Islands.

The citizens of New York and Texas shoulder over $8 billion a year, and the good people of California are on the hook for an extra $11 billion.

Large multi-billion dollar corporations who have used gimmicks to avoid paying their fair share

80 percent of the hundred biggest U.S. companies took advantage of tax havens.

Bailout beneficiaries Morgan Stanley, Citigroup, and Bank of America boast over 300 subsidiaries in the Cayman Islands.

It has an effect on every taxpayer who has to take on this extra burden.

Offshore Tax Havens: A State-By-State Breakdown Of The Cost To Taxpayers

Simple fix: Lower the Corporate tax rate in the US.

When they move offshore, their tax rate is zero. It's ridiculous.

Agree its ridiculous, but so is the 35% Corporate tax rate! The dual taxation. The small business killing payroll tax. The high capital gains tax. Etc.

Obama is right that the loop holes and tax havens must be closed, but it should be inconjunction with the reduction of the corporate, payroll, follow-through income and capital gains tax!

 

[Iriemon]

Simple fix: Lower the Corporate tax rate in the US.

When they move offshore, their tax rate is zero. It's ridiculous.

Agree its ridiculous, but so is the 35% Corporate tax rate! The dual taxation. The small business killing payroll tax. The high capital gains tax. Etc.

Obama is right that the loop holes and tax havens must be closed, but it should be inconjunction with the reduction of the corporate, payroll, follow-through income and capital gains tax!

High cap gains tax? Last I heard long term cap gains tax was 15%, half of what folks who work for their money pay.

I agree on the corporate tax. Eliminate it. Raise the tax on individuals instead. And do like Reagan and make cap gains and dividend taxes the same as income tax.

 

[driveby]

Bobo, you forgot to add:

Sincerely,

"House Slave" to the Democrat Party .......

 

[raceright]

Wrong, I see the trade deficit and the loses of manufacturing jobs as a HUGE problem! I am not blind I see the state of the economy and a saw the state of the economy before the Obamessiah showed up. I am not one to sit here and say Reagan was a god, because I believe the opposite.

Globalization has taken off for many reasons you neglect. First, because communication via the WWW is quick, efficient and inexpensive. Second, designers in the States can sent specs to China, India or Mexico in an e-mail arriving in seconds. Third, shipping costs are less. Marketing over the internet allows companies to do business in places they never could before.

The Cheese has moved and there is no reason fighting it. Protectionism is a knee-jerk reaction in which we have previously seen fail. Right after the Great Crash, the knee-jerk reaction was to resort to good old protectionism. What we got was Smoot-Hawley! What it did was make the Great Depression 100 fold worse!

"Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it!"
- George Santayana

Venesuela's economy is hurting right now because gas prices went down, and because we are going through a global recession. You just think their hurting because of protectionism. Doesn't make it so.

I know he is the left's hero, but Venezuela's economy was one of the worst in Latin America even when the price of oil was high. Protectionism and communism have deepened the hurt on that country. But you can go on worshipping your idol though!


So none of the profits paid to it American workers or executives mean anything. When the wife and I went to buy the car, t here were only Americans selling them! You need a little education buddy!


They will lose if the battle isn't fought correctly. Ron Paul had some great suggestions of reshaping the so-called "free trade agreements" and possibly leaving the WTO. That is not rejecting globalization, but using it to our advantage.

I think the best way to fight the battle is implement the Fair Tax! The 3rd world's low wages advantage wouldn't stand a chance!

TX and UT are picking up corporations like no other time in history. You are DEAD WRONG here!

It will bite us in the ass! mark my words!

I did a google search and I see Texas losing a lot of jobs to India and Mexico.

It only makes sense. First the companies moved down south to escape the unions, but then they found that you guys are too expensive too.

Microsoft jobs in texas moved to india, verizon wireless, my company too in Fort Worth sent jobs to India.

No one worries too much until it is their job. And years ago the people who are losing jobs today, didn't think their jobs were in jeopordy, just like you and I aren't too worried today. Just wait.

Simple, a person wants to make something to sell,first insurance
workers comp,liability,theft(big one and needed in the USA)auto,health,unemployment,medicare all paid for for your workers.
Next pay employees taxes state and federal match there social security,maybe pay there Union benifits for them.Extra-pay there child suport for them. Then pay taxes on all supplies,gas phones
auto's equiptment. Pay Pay Pay now let me see what was it we were trying to sell...HMM have it made in china and avoid all this stuff sounds like a winner. You want to know why businesses leave the US consider this and you tell me if you would not do the same.[/QUOTE]

Very simple solution to this. OBAMA WILL END THOSE OFFSHORE TAX HAVENS.

What you forget is that US Companies were profitable in the 90's. In a good economy, all these companies had no problem paying these taxes.

Or, they may have complained, but they still made profits. They'll always complain until they pay zero.

Maybe you are too young to remember it, but we did just fine before Bushanomics. Some companies were going overseas, but not so many that it was hurting our economy. So corporations are hurting because no one is buying anything. Do you think Toyota employees are buying anything making $15 hr? Barely.

And why didn't the GOP from 2000-2006 make things right? Instead they set up off shore tax shelters and helped corporations dodge paying taxes.

You right wingers will defend anything the GOP does, no matter how bad it is for America.

The most refreshing thing you guys say is, "there is nothing you can do about globalization". At least thats honest.

But I do think we can do something about it. You just don't want to, because it might raise the price of goods. Big deal. They'll raise their prices anyways. They'll raise them as much as they think they can get away with raising them. If you tax them, that might raise the price, but only if they think they can still sell their product at that price. If they can't, then they'll find other ways to cut spending. And since they only hire as many employees as they need, I don't worry about that too much either. Maybe their executives just won't get as big a bonus if we end these offshore tax shelters.[/QUOTE]


======================================

BoBo as I could have predicted you'd miss the point I was not talking about paying taxes that would be in addition to what I listed
Just like most American workers you do not appreciate all the other things a boss has to do for you as you did not even notice this in my segment. Oh ya you say, well if you want to be in business you have to do these things. BUT IF YOU MAKE THESE THINGS OVERSEAS YOU DO NOT ,AND GUESS WHAT EVERYONE WHO SHOPS IN THE USA WANT IT JUST THAT WAY CHEAPER AS THEY
ONLY THINK ABOUT THERE OWN WALLET AS THEY ACCUSE ALL BUSINESS OWNERS .

 

[sealybobo]

and we will have no American business left in America.

Wouldn't it be a good idea to reduce corporate taxes, like Ireland has done, to make business's want to locate in America, thereby increasing the revenue the government takes in because there are more participants and therefore hiring Americans????? Noooooo Waaaaay, that makes too much sense.

Wouldn't it be a BETTER idea if we taxed corporations fairly so they paid their fair share? Then our treasury will have some money in it.

The GOP from 2000-2006 did what you are suggesting and it didn't work. Jobs still went overseas. In fact, people like you say it is inevidable, right? So IF they are going to do business here, then they have to pay taxes here. If they don't, you will, and that's what you don't get.

Next you are going to say this: Wouldn't it be a good idea to reduce wages, like Mexico has done, to make business want to locate in America.

Where were these companies before they moved to Ireland? Do those countries take their imports? I wouldn't. If you want to operate in Ireland, sell your shit to Ireland. Hope you enjoy the tax breaks.

PS. Doesn't Ireland have free/socialized healthcare too? Do you want to follow their model on that too?

 

[GHook93]

Wouldn't it be a BETTER idea if we taxed corporations fairly so they paid their fair share? Then our treasury will have some money in it.

NO, because it then creates the corporations to venue shop! And then we have to hear you ***** and cry about those evil corporations!

The GOP from 2000-2006 did what you are suggesting and it didn't work. Jobs still went overseas. In fact, people like you say it is inevidable, right? So IF they are going to do business here, then they have to pay taxes here. If they don't, you will, and that's what you don't get.

No they didn't you disingenious ! The corporate tax remained at an astronimical 35%! You keep crying about the situation now. Get it straight, our situation in America has everything to do with the mortgage meltdown and there were many people at fault from BOTH PARTIES and from the private sector!

Next you are going to say this: Wouldn't it be a good idea to reduce wages, like Mexico has done, to make business want to locate in America.

That happens on its own, just as property reduction is happening on its own. See you and many people in your camp believe that government should dictate wages, whether to go up or down. Yet that didn't work to well for the Soviets. Fiscal conservatives realize that wages can only be set by the market!

Where were these companies before they moved to Ireland?

My company moved to Ireland, from England. Many were in the EU.

Do those countries take their imports?

Yes they do, with open arms!

I wouldn't.

That is because you are Comrade Bozo!

If you want to operate in Ireland, sell your shit to Ireland. Hope you enjoy the tax breaks.

Spoken like a true socialist!

PS. Doesn't Ireland have free/socialized healthcare too? Do you want to follow their model on that too?

I personally do, cut cost in other programs like welfare and raise the age of social security to fit with people living longer and having longer work lifes.

 

[sealybobo]

Wouldn't it be a BETTER idea if we taxed corporations fairly so they paid their fair share? Then our treasury will have some money in it.

NO, because it then creates the corporations to venue shop! And then we have to hear you ***** and cry about those evil corporations!

The GOP from 2000-2006 did what you are suggesting and it didn't work. Jobs still went overseas. In fact, people like you say it is inevidable, right? So IF they are going to do business here, then they have to pay taxes here. If they don't, you will, and that's what you don't get.

No they didn't you disingenious ! The corporate tax remained at an astronimical 35%! You keep crying about the situation now. Get it straight, our situation in America has everything to do with the mortgage meltdown and there were many people at fault from BOTH PARTIES and from the private sector!


That happens on its own, just as property reduction is happening on its own. See you and many people in your camp believe that government should dictate wages, whether to go up or down. Yet that didn't work to well for the Soviets. Fiscal conservatives realize that wages can only be set by the market!


My company moved to Ireland, from England. Many were in the EU.


Yes they do, with open arms!


That is because you are Comrade Bozo!

If you want to operate in Ireland, sell your shit to Ireland. Hope you enjoy the tax breaks.

Spoken like a true socialist!

PS. Doesn't Ireland have free/socialized healthcare too? Do you want to follow their model on that too?

I personally do, cut cost in other programs like welfare and raise the age of social security to fit with people living longer and having longer work lifes.

Socialism doesn't sound so bad after 8 years of your CAPITALISM! Communism was corrupted, and so has your capitalism.

The nation had few taxes in its early history. From 1791 to 1802, the United States government was supported by internal taxes on distilled spirits, carriages, refined sugar, tobacco and snuff, property sold at auction, corporate bonds, and slaves. The high cost of the War of 1812 brought about the nation's first sales taxes on gold, silverware, jewelry, and watches. In 1817, however, Congress did away with all internal taxes, relying on tariffs on imported goods to provide sufficient funds for running the government.

You house slaves/brainwashed people think that we should be paying all the taxes and corporations shouldn't? You have it BACKWARDS!!! WRONG!!!

 

[sealybobo]

In 1981, Congress enacted the largest tax cut in U.S. history, approximately $750 billion over six years. The tax reduction, however, was partially offset by two tax acts, in 1982 and 1984, that attempted to raise approximately $265 billion.
On Oct. 22, 1986, President Reagan signed into law the Tax Reform Act of 1986, one of the most far-reaching reforms of the United States tax system since the adoption of the income tax. The top tax rate on individual income was lowered from 50% to 28%, the lowest it had been since 1916. Tax preferences were eliminated to make up most of the revenue. In an attempt to remain revenue neutral, the act called for a $120 billion increase in business taxation and a corresponding decrease in individual taxation over a five-year period.
Following what seemed to be a yearly tradition of new tax acts that began in 1986, the Revenue Reconciliation Act of 1990 was signed into law on Nov. 5, 1990. As with the '87, '88, and '89 acts, the 1990 act, while providing a number of substantive provisions, was small in comparison with the 1986 act. The emphasis of the 1990 act was increased taxes on the wealthy.
On Aug. 10, 1993, President Clinton signed the Revenue Reconciliation Act of 1993 into law. The act's purpose was to reduce by approximately $496 billion the federal deficit that would otherwise accumulate in fiscal years 1994 through 1998. In 1997, Clinton signed another tax act. The act, which cut taxes by $152 billion, included a cut in capital-gains tax for individuals, a $500 per child tax credit, and tax incentives for education.
President George W. Bush signed a series of tax cuts into law. The largest was the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001. It was estimated to save taxpayers $1.3 trillion over ten years, making it the third largest tax cut since World War II. The Bush tax cut created a new lowest rate, 10% for the first several thousand dollars earned. It also established a slow schedule of incremental tax cuts that would eventually double the child tax credit from $500 to $1,000, adjust brackets so that middle-income couples owed the same tax as comparable singles, cut the top four tax rates (28% to 25%; 31% to 28%; 36% to 33%; and 39.6% to 35%).
The Jobs and Growth Tax Relief and Reconciliation Act of 2003 accelerated the tax rate cuts that had been enacted in 2001, and temporarily reduced the tax rate on capital gains and dividends to 15%. In 2004, the U.S. was forced to eliminate a corporate tax provision that had been ruled illegal by the World Trade Organization. Along with that tax hike, Congress passed a cornucopia of tax breaks, which for individuals included an option to deduct the payment of whichever state taxes were higher, sales or income taxes.
Two tax bills signed in 2005 and 2006 extended through 2010 the favorable rates on capital gains and dividends that had been enacted in 2003, raised the exemption levels for the Alternative Minimum Tax, and enacted new tax incentives designed to persuade individuals to save more for retirement.

 

[GHook93]

AHHH Isolationism love it.
$20.00 dollar tomato's here we come

Let's also buy that $100K GM/Ford/Chysler/Domestic car with the square tires and no doors!

I think you should be kicked out of this country for being so anti American. You sound like a terrorist would sound bashing the US.

Now, suck on this headline from last week you ******* traitorous *****.

Ford Motor Co., the healthiest of Detroit's auto makers, scored a small victory, outselling Toyota Motor Co. for the first time in at least a year as the Japanese auto maker's sales fell even more preciptiously than those of its U.S. rival.


Must be something wrong with Toyota's cars if they can't beat such a piece of shit like a Ford.

Go back to Texas you ******* anti American red necks!!!

In reality my friend I am really digging two American made cars at the moment.
(1) Tesla - Model S
- 300 miles per charge; 45 mins to charge; damn cool looking; Seats 5 adults 2 children; more room than a station-wagon; 0-60 4.8 secs; uses 0 oil and has no emission! I want to take the plunge on this promising automobile!
http://www.usmessageboard.com/1118025-post1.html

(2) GM Volt (wow my 3rd GM in a row)!
Very cool looking, gets 40 miles per charge and then the gas engine kicks in for another 600 mile range.

I am digging these to cars not because they are made in america, by americans, by american corporations and with american parts, but rather that they are producing a product that I really want.

Serious the Model S makes !

 

[sealybobo]

Let's also buy that $100K GM/Ford/Chysler/Domestic car with the square tires and no doors!

I think you should be kicked out of this country for being so anti American. You sound like a terrorist would sound bashing the US.

Now, suck on this headline from last week you ******* traitorous *****.

Ford Motor Co., the healthiest of Detroit's auto makers, scored a small victory, outselling Toyota Motor Co. for the first time in at least a year as the Japanese auto maker's sales fell even more preciptiously than those of its U.S. rival.


Must be something wrong with Toyota's cars if they can't beat such a piece of shit like a Ford.

Go back to Texas you ******* anti American red necks!!!

In reality my friend I am really digging two American made cars at the moment.
(1) Tesla - Model S
- 300 miles per charge; 45 mins to charge; damn cool looking; Seats 5 adults 2 children; more room than a station-wagon; 0-60 4.8 secs; uses 0 oil and has no emission! I want to take the plunge on this promising automobile!
http://www.usmessageboard.com/1118025-post1.html

(2) GM Volt (wow my 3rd GM in a row)!
Very cool looking, gets 40 miles per charge and then the gas engine kicks in for another 600 mile range.

I am digging these to cars not because they are made in america, by americans, by american corporations and with american parts, but rather that they are producing a product that I really want.

Serious the Model S makes !

Why are you saying American cars have square tires and no doors?

And I don't knock people down south who buy Toyota's and Honda's because that's where they make their livings.

Anyone up north should buy an American car, not because they are made in america, by americans, by american corporations and with american parts, but rather that they are producing a damn fine product. Just as good as Honda/Toyota at least.

And I'd rather pay a little more if it means higher wages for all of us.

 

[GHook93]

Why are you saying American cars have square tires and no doors?

In the context of the discussion. If you take away the competition (meaning foreign competition) through protectionism, then the domestic producers have less incentive to make better things. The products get worse through lack of need to make them better!

Anyone up north should buy an American car, not because they are made in america, by americans, by american corporations and with american parts, but rather that they are producing a damn fine product. Just as good as Honda/Toyota at least.

I don't make my living off of American cars! And I sell just as many products to Texas and CA (actually more in CA) as I do in MI, OH and IL. In fact I sell a heck of a lot to Canada, does that mean I am obligated to buy Canada now?

And I'd rather pay a little more if it means higher wages for all of us.

Not a reality that works!

 

[sealybobo]

Why are you saying American cars have square tires and no doors?

In the context of the discussion. If you take away the competition (meaning foreign competition) through protectionism, then the domestic producers have less incentive to make better things. The products get worse through lack of need to make them better!

Anyone up north should buy an American car, not because they are made in america, by americans, by american corporations and with american parts, but rather that they are producing a damn fine product. Just as good as Honda/Toyota at least.

I don't make my living off of American cars! And I sell just as many products to Texas and CA (actually more in CA) as I do in MI, OH and IL. In fact I sell a heck of a lot to Canada, does that mean I am obligated to buy Canada now?

And I'd rather pay a little more if it means higher wages for all of us.

Not a reality that works!

You may not realize it, but your wages are as high as they are because of the Big 3 and the Unions. Unions drove all our wages up.

I don't make a living off cars either, but many people I know do. So I know they are important, even though they don't directly affect me.

And I sell to Cali and IL and MI. No, you shouldn't buy from Canada because they buy from you. You should buy from your own state when possible though.

But I'm in Michigan and I know many Windsor companies who would not do business with me at my old company because we were not in Canada. And the City of Detroit would not do business with us because we weren't located in the city. So, my company leased an office in Detroit. Not a bad policy if you ask me. Buying local is not a bad thing.

And, I will never argue with you about the Big 3 producing shitty products that only lasted 4 years when there was no Toyota and Honda. Chris Rock said it best. Drug dealers don't make their money on the original purchase. They make money on the come back.

I don't mind always having a new car. I pay $250 and I always have a new car, warrantee, road side service, etc. Every 3 years I turn in my lease and get a new one.

 

[jreeves]

A Senate report estimated in 2008 that the United States loses up to $100 billion a year in tax revenue to offshore tax havens

Shell companies and sham headquarters" in places like Switzerland and the Cayman Islands.

The citizens of New York and Texas shoulder over $8 billion a year, and the good people of California are on the hook for an extra $11 billion.

Large multi-billion dollar corporations who have used gimmicks to avoid paying their fair share

80 percent of the hundred biggest U.S. companies took advantage of tax havens.

Bailout beneficiaries Morgan Stanley, Citigroup, and Bank of America boast over 300 subsidiaries in the Cayman Islands.

It has an effect on every taxpayer who has to take on this extra burden.

Offshore Tax Havens: A State-By-State Breakdown Of The Cost To Taxpayers

Bush and Republicans are to blame!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[sealybobo]

A Senate report estimated in 2008 that the United States loses up to $100 billion a year in tax revenue to offshore tax havens

Shell companies and sham headquarters" in places like Switzerland and the Cayman Islands.

The citizens of New York and Texas shoulder over $8 billion a year, and the good people of California are on the hook for an extra $11 billion.

Large multi-billion dollar corporations who have used gimmicks to avoid paying their fair share

80 percent of the hundred biggest U.S. companies took advantage of tax havens.

Bailout beneficiaries Morgan Stanley, Citigroup, and Bank of America boast over 300 subsidiaries in the Cayman Islands.

It has an effect on every taxpayer who has to take on this extra burden.

Offshore Tax Havens: A State-By-State Breakdown Of The Cost To Taxpayers

Bush and Republicans are to blame!!!!!!!!!!!!

Funny these offshore tax havens were created in the last 8 years and were ignored when the GOP were in charge. Isn't that something?

Did you hear? Our government is going to get that money we have coming to us. I bet you have a problem with this because you care more about the rich than you do the masses because you forget, you're one of us.

And if by chance you are rich, your time as a tax evader are up. Patriotic my ass. The middle class made this country great, not the rich.

 

[Toro]

Funny these offshore tax havens were created in the last 8 years and were ignored when the GOP were in charge. Isn't that something?

Which offshore tax havens were created in the past eight years? Surely you don't mean the Caymans or Switzerland or Jersey or Bermuda or Luxembourg or Liechtenstein, etc?

 

[sealybobo]

Funny these offshore tax havens were created in the last 8 years and were ignored when the GOP were in charge. Isn't that something?

Which offshore tax havens were created in the past eight years? Surely you don't mean the Caymans or Switzerland or Jersey or Bermuda or Luxembourg or Liechtenstein, etc?

The GOP between 2000 and 2006 gave all kinds of tax breaks and created all kinds of loopholes. Loopholes so people could take their money overseas. Ok, so it occured during Clinton/Newt's time too. Wouldn't Congress have to do something about that? And of course Reagan and Bush1 would have veto'ed any such bill, but all those people the last 8 years who got the Bush tax breaks, also got breaks to take their money overseas. inton signed it because he was a sellout.

But who's in charge now? All of the sudden the rich are turning themselves in. Did you hear the news today?

On who's watch are these people getting rounded up? OBAMA's, Pelosi's, Reed's.

Coime on. The GOP are all about giving the rich MORE tax breaks. Of course they turned a blind eye the last 8 or so years.

Is gas as expensive as it was when Bush was in charge?

Did the GOP take on healthcare?

How about the banking collapse. Result of the Tom Delay/Bush era.

Bottom line is that when the gov was all GOP run, yes, they set up these loopholes and offshoring for the rich. Now the Dems are undoing that mistake.

Our government needs the money. Would you prefer us middle class people pay it?

I'm sure you have a different spin so lets hear it.

 

[sealybobo]

Funny these offshore tax havens were created in the last 8 years and were ignored when the GOP were in charge. Isn't that something?

Which offshore tax havens were created in the past eight years? Surely you don't mean the Caymans or Switzerland or Jersey or Bermuda or Luxembourg or Liechtenstein, etc?

Isn't it funny that the Bush team created these loopholes and tax breaks and their Haloburton moved offshore to the Arab Emerits. So our government defense contractor isn't even an American company any more. If they do wrong, we can't do anything about it. Their money is overseas. Probably funding the terrorism which keeps them in business.

 

[Toro]

Funny these offshore tax havens were created in the last 8 years and were ignored when the GOP were in charge. Isn't that something?

Which offshore tax havens were created in the past eight years? Surely you don't mean the Caymans or Switzerland or Jersey or Bermuda or Luxembourg or Liechtenstein, etc?

Isn't it funny that the Bush team created these loopholes and tax breaks and their Haloburton moved offshore to the Arab Emerits. So our government defense contractor isn't even an American company any more. If they do wrong, we can't do anything about it. Their money is overseas. Probably funding the terrorism which keeps them in business.

What loopholes and tax breaks did the Bush administration create that caused companies to move offshore?