We have a revenue problem, absolute proof we need to raise taxes

[AmyNation]

When are you libtards going to understand that corporations don't pay taxes? Taxes for a corporation are an expense and passed along to their customers, so if you want to pay more tax indirectly through the corporations in higher prices, just keep crying, you may get what you wish for.

That's not true, but don't let facts stop you from ranting.

That is true. Taxes are a cost of doing business, just like rent and electricity. It is all calculated into the price of the product or service, and passed on to the consumer. There is no such thing as a free lunch.

It's not that simple. The price of a product is more complicated than how much it costs to make, and there are more ways to distribute costs then to directly pass it on the the consumer.

 

[SniperFire]

That's not true, but don't let facts stop you from ranting.

That is true. Taxes are a cost of doing business, just like rent and electricity. It is all calculated into the price of the product or service, and passed on to the consumer. There is no such thing as a free lunch.

It's not that simple. The price of a product is more complicated than how much it costs to make, and there are more ways to distribute costs then to directly pass it on the the consumer.

No, it is pretty much that simple.

Taxing corporations is just plain stupid.

Much smarter to tax the profits received by the owners of the corporation.

 

[Erand7899]

Corporate taxes...

Obama proposes lowering corporate tax rate to 28 percent

The plan would lower the nation’s corporate tax rate to 28 percent. At the same time, Obama wants to boost overall revenue from corporate taxation by banning numerous deductions and loopholes that save companies tens of billions of dollars a year on their tax bills.

The current U.S. corporate tax rate of 35 percent is one of the highest in the world, but the abundance of loopholes and deductions enable many businesses to pay far less than that — or nothing at all. Companies in the United States pay almost half the taxes that companies in other rich countries pay, compared with the size of the economy, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.

The president’s plan targets oil and gas companies for tax increases while promising special breaks for manufacturing companies.

And in a slap at U.S. multinational corporations that shelter profits overseas, Obama wants those firms to pay a minimum tax on their foreign earnings. He also wants to end tax breaks for companies that outsource and give new tax incentives to firms that move jobs back home.

Marguerite Higgins of the conservative Heritage Foundation argued that such a tax would hurt competition.

Washington Post - February 22, 2012

When are you libtards going to understand that corporations don't pay taxes? Taxes for a corporation are an expense and passed along to their customers, so if you want to pay more tax indirectly through the corporations in higher prices, just keep crying, you may get what you wish for.

Libtards? Tell me this oh wise conservative, what is stopping these corporations from raising their prices TODAY? Is it because they are just being 'nice'?

Competition is stopping these corporations from raising their prices TODAY. Taxes are a cost of business for all corporations, and is included in the prices of all their products and services. However, higher taxes and the resultant higher prices make American products less competitive on the world markets.

 

[Too Tall]

it gives the gov't more money to send to foreign countrys .

My word, the sheer and utter ignorance on this board some times!

Guess what, genius, the US pay LESS foreign development aid per capita than anything other developed nation on earth.

btw. The word is "countries".

btw, What does this mean?

the US pay LESS foreign development aid per capita than anything other developed nation on earth.

How much foreign development aid per capita does Haiti pay?

 

[SniperFire]

it gives the gov't more money to send to foreign countrys .

My word, the sheer and utter ignorance on this board some times!

Guess what, genius, the US pay LESS foreign development aid per capita than anything other developed nation on earth.

btw. The word is "countries".

btw, What does this mean?

the US pay LESS foreign development aid per capita than anything other developed nation on earth.

How much foreign development aid per capita does Haiti pay?

 

[AmyNation]

That is true. Taxes are a cost of doing business, just like rent and electricity. It is all calculated into the price of the product or service, and passed on to the consumer. There is no such thing as a free lunch.

It's not that simple. The price of a product is more complicated than how much it costs to make, and there are more ways to distribute costs then to directly pass it on the the consumer.

No, it is pretty much that simple.

Taxing corporations is just plain stupid.

Much smarter to tax the profits received by the owners of the corporation.

I actually agree about the corporate tax, however Im aware that eliminating it will not cause prices to drop.

 

[Shelzin]

That's not true, but don't let facts stop you from ranting.

That is true. Taxes are a cost of doing business, just like rent and electricity. It is all calculated into the price of the product or service, and passed on to the consumer. There is no such thing as a free lunch.

It's not that simple. The price of a product is more complicated than how much it costs to make,

While I agree.... Competition is taken out of your equation for some reason. I don't know why. You just completely ignore it for some reason.

and there are more ways to distribute costs then to directly pass it on the the consumer.

I agree with that too. However all those ways are from outside sources, such as the government. The basic economics of profit are the same for every company.

 

[Too Tall]

That is true. Taxes are a cost of doing business, just like rent and electricity. It is all calculated into the price of the product or service, and passed on to the consumer. There is no such thing as a free lunch.

It's not that simple. The price of a product is more complicated than how much it costs to make, and there are more ways to distribute costs then to directly pass it on the the consumer.

No, it is pretty much that simple.

Taxing corporations is just plain stupid.

Much smarter to tax the profits received by the owners of the corporation.

Many of the owners of the corporations are middle class Americans through their IRA's and 401K's. Raising capital gains taxes would severely impact the retirement income of these citizens. That solution merely gives more money to the gubmint and reduces the money retirees would spend on consumer goods.

 

[Shelzin]

It's not that simple. The price of a product is more complicated than how much it costs to make, and there are more ways to distribute costs then to directly pass it on the the consumer.

No, it is pretty much that simple.

Taxing corporations is just plain stupid.

Much smarter to tax the profits received by the owners of the corporation.

I actually agree about the corporate tax, however Im aware that eliminating it will not cause prices to drop.

*laughs*

I'm sorry Amy... This is the one thing I think you are just lost on. It won't be immediate... But they will drop due to competition and greed. that's right... The prices will drop because of GREED.

 

[SniperFire]

It's not that simple. The price of a product is more complicated than how much it costs to make, and there are more ways to distribute costs then to directly pass it on the the consumer.

No, it is pretty much that simple.

Taxing corporations is just plain stupid.

Much smarter to tax the profits received by the owners of the corporation.

I actually agree about the corporate tax, however Im aware that eliminating it will not cause prices to drop.

Generally, in competitive markets, anytime costs are taken out of production there is tendency for lower prices at the consumer level.

This is because marketshare and volume are drivers - in addition to profits.

 

[AmyNation]

That is true. Taxes are a cost of doing business, just like rent and electricity. It is all calculated into the price of the product or service, and passed on to the consumer. There is no such thing as a free lunch.

It's not that simple. The price of a product is more complicated than how much it costs to make,

While I agree.... Competition is taken out of your equation for some reason. I don't know why. You just completely ignore it for some reason.

and there are more ways to distribute costs then to directly pass it on the the consumer.

I agree with that too. However all those ways are from outside sources, such as the government. The basic economics of profit are the same for every company.

I'm not ignoring competition. However American corporations don't just compete with other American corporations,they don't just sell their products to Americans, and American corporate tax is just one factor and not the biggest when it comes to price or competition. I understand you look at in a pure free market setting, however it's more complicated then that, and doesn't work in that way.

But we've has this argument before

 

[SniperFire]

It's not that simple. The price of a product is more complicated than how much it costs to make, and there are more ways to distribute costs then to directly pass it on the the consumer.

No, it is pretty much that simple.

Taxing corporations is just plain stupid.

Much smarter to tax the profits received by the owners of the corporation.

Many of the owners of the corporations are middle class Americans through their IRA's and 401K's. Raising capital gains taxes would severely impact the retirement income of these citizens. That solution merely gives more money to the gubmint and reduces the money retirees would spend on consumer goods.

I wouldn't call for raising capital gains taxes, but there would certainly be more capital gains. And for the most part the IRA and 401K profits are tax-deferred.

 

[SniperFire]

It's not that simple. The price of a product is more complicated than how much it costs to make,

While I agree.... Competition is taken out of your equation for some reason. I don't know why. You just completely ignore it for some reason.

and there are more ways to distribute costs then to directly pass it on the the consumer.

I agree with that too. However all those ways are from outside sources, such as the government. The basic economics of profit are the same for every company.

I'm not ignoring competition. However American corporations don't just compete with other American corporations,they don't just sell their products to Americans, and American corporate tax is just one factor and not the biggest when it comes to price or competition. I understand you look at in a pure free market setting, however it's more complicated then that, and doesn't work in that way.

But we've has this argument before

I didn't read all the thread, but did he argue that corporate taxes are the 'biggest' factor in competitiveness?

If no, perhaps you have created a strawman.

 

[LogikAndReazon]

If mindless socialist bureaucrats could only raise taxes high enough, social "justice" and equality of outcomes for all could be realized...............Its True LOL

 

[AmyNation]

While I agree.... Competition is taken out of your equation for some reason. I don't know why. You just completely ignore it for some reason.


I agree with that too. However all those ways are from outside sources, such as the government. The basic economics of profit are the same for every company.

I'm not ignoring competition. However American corporations don't just compete with other American corporations,they don't just sell their products to Americans, and American corporate tax is just one factor and not the biggest when it comes to price or competition. I understand you look at in a pure free market setting, however it's more complicated then that, and doesn't work in that way.

But we've has this argument before

I didn't read all the thread, but did he argue that corporate taxes are the 'biggest' factor in competitiveness?

If no, perhaps you have created a strawman.

"Not the biggest " is my statement, not his.

Also, I'm ending my participation in the coropratw tax debate here. He and I have argued this point in a different thread and I have no desire to hash it out again.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

We have a spending problem, absolute proof we need to fire some people.

Fixed it for ya.

'We' have...

If it weren’t for all the lost jobs in the public sector — mostly teachers, police, firemen and sanitation workers at the state and local level — unemployment would be significantly lower right now, perhaps as low as 7 percent. Here’s how public sector employment fared during the first years of the Clinton and Bush terms (also recessionary) compared to under Obama:

The great enemy of truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived and dishonest – but the myth – persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.
President John F. Kennedy

Ah, yes. The great data massage for Obama of 2012.

The Fact File - Size of the Federal Workforce: Growth and Stagnation

Federal employment has grown steadily under Obama. The public jobs that were lost, where this great data massage comes in, are from the state and local levels. Due to budget shortfalls, broke, etc...this has nothing to do with Obama. it has to do with state and local fiscal crisis.

The idea you're presenting is what in research I'd call "a sham".

You're welcome.

 

[SniperFire]

I'm not ignoring competition. However American corporations don't just compete with other American corporations,they don't just sell their products to Americans, and American corporate tax is just one factor and not the biggest when it comes to price or competition. I understand you look at in a pure free market setting, however it's more complicated then that, and doesn't work in that way.

But we've has this argument before

I didn't read all the thread, but did he argue that corporate taxes are the 'biggest' factor in competitiveness?

If no, perhaps you have created a strawman.

"Not the biggest " is my statement, not his.

Also, I'm ending my participation in the coropratw tax debate here. He and I have argued this point in a different thread and I have no desire to hash it out again.

Well, do better next time.

 

[Shelzin]

While I agree.... Competition is taken out of your equation for some reason. I don't know why. You just completely ignore it for some reason.


I agree with that too. However all those ways are from outside sources, such as the government. The basic economics of profit are the same for every company.

I'm not ignoring competition. However American corporations don't just compete with other American corporations,they don't just sell their products to Americans, and American corporate tax is just one factor and not the biggest when it comes to price or competition. I understand you look at in a pure free market setting, however it's more complicated then that, and doesn't work in that way.

But we've has this argument before

I didn't read all the thread, but did he argue that corporate taxes are the 'biggest' factor in competitiveness?

If no, perhaps you have created a strawman.

No I haven't... but this is built on another discussion in another thread. I agree it wont' drop a 1 to 1 ratio in regards to the removals to corporate taxes, but it will drop prices. She thinks that the corporation will just keep it or spend it for something else, and will never drop the price.

Which is insane to me but that's where we both stand as I see it. She can correct me if I'm wrong.

Edit: Or... I'll happily respect that it be dropped... I'm good that too. *shrugs*

 

[Erand7899]

Libtards? Tell me this oh wise conservative, what is stopping these corporations from raising their prices TODAY? Is it because they are just being 'nice'?

I see you punked out on the Reagan tax rates increased revenue argument. Let's see you do the same here.
The reason they dont raise prices is competition. But if tax rates go up, they go up for every company. So there is no competition holding back pricing because of tax rates. Everyone is on the same level. So prices will go up.

So, the only competition is domestic, eh Einstein? BTW, it only takes one competitor to internalize an increase. BUT, President Obama is calling for lowering the corporate tax rate. So prices should go DOWN by your thinking...

Yes, it is the market. But it is not as simple as your simple mind understands it. The price of other costs from raw goods to transportation change on a daily basis. They are not passed on daily. A corporate strategy attempts to balance profit and market-share. It is common knowledge that the only way to drastically increase market-share is to buy it.

Reagan:
That chart is an economic indictment of Reagan and Bush II. But the right is not about fiscal conservatism, the chart and those who defend it is proof of that. It is all about social conservatism. Social Darwinism combined with your Monica Lewinsky worship of the opulent...

Yes, it is the market, and it is fairly simple. Although product prices do not fluctuate with every change in the cost of production, those changes are reflected in the long range pricing strategy.

By the way, that chart includes, and mostly consists of local and state workers, and has little to do with Reagan or Bush. The recession and lack of a recovery has lowered state and local revenues and caused them to lay off workers.

 

[blastoff]

The GAO recently released a report describing the 160 separate programs the federal government has that offer assistance with housing. HUD has 91 separate programs, the Department of Agriculture has 18, the IRS has 14, the Treasury has 8, well, you get the idea by now. (By the way, who would go to the IRS to get help with housing?) If we cannot afford to fund 160 programs across multiple federal agencies we obviously need to raise taxes.

Let's see. The topic is federal government housing assistance and the federal bureaucracy has hatched 131 different programs spread among four different federal departments. Anyone smart enough to pick the over/under number as to how many of the programs are overlapping?

Now think about this. In the vast sprawling entirety of our federal bureaucracy how many other topics have just as many or more superfluous overlapping programs wasting countless billions of taxpayers' dollars? We'd probably all faint if we knew the annual dollar volume it adds up to.

But, it's "government" money and no one is responsible or accountable for how it's spent no matter how wasteful...and the beat goes on.