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

[LogikAndReazon]

All we have to do is add more public union, civil servant, welfare workers to the dole to get us out of this prolonged recession...............

Every public union civil servant welfare worker understands this..........

 

[The Rabbi]

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.

What do you suppose will happen to the money corporations save by not paying the tax? Go into the mattress in the CEO's office?

 

[Katzndogz]

The way taxation works.

Based on your salary and tax bracket, 25% of every dollar goes to taxes. With what you are left, you pay expenses and buy yourself things. You get a new TV, a new Car, go on vacation.

Raise taxes and you can no longer afford to buy yourself things. The new car becomes a used car, the TV doesn't get replaced by a newer model and the vacation becomes a staycation when you stay home.

The money that the government takes from you goes first to pay government workers who are paid to administer all the money taken from you. What's left goes to pay for $300.00 Nikes for the "poor".

That's redistribution. The fact that you can no longer buy things for yourself from the money that you earned is imposing fairness. Why should you be able to work overtime to get a 60" flat screen when some poor person can only afford a 32" flat screen? It's not fair. You get yours when the neighborhood welfare queen gets hers. That's fair. Until then, the government's obligation is to make sure you don't keep that overtime money but raise taxes and take it.

 

[AmyNation]

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.

What do you suppose will happen to the money corporations save by not paying the tax? Go into the mattress in the CEO's office?

Expansion, marketing, research, hiring, bonuses, shifting of overseas offices, or how about just posted as profit.

I think it we totally eliminated corporate tax tomorrow, we would see some price reduction however it would be temporary and within 10 years prices would be back where they are now.

 

[The Rabbi]

It's actually worse than that.
People who are high earners are much more sensitive to tax changes. So you take a small businessperson, maybe a roofer, earning good money. If he takes on the next 3 jobs, he will pay possibly over 50% of it to the gov't, both state and Federal. So he decides to skip the next 3 jobs and take a small vacation instead. Not only is he not earning that money, but neither are the workmen who would do the work or any of the otehr suppliers. Or maybe he'll decide to put the jobs off until next month. Or next year.
At the margin higher tax rates suppress economic activity. Why is that a good thing?

 

[The Rabbi]

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

What do you suppose will happen to the money corporations save by not paying the tax? Go into the mattress in the CEO's office?

Expansion, marketing, research, hiring, bonuses, shifting of overseas offices, or how about just posted as profit.

I think it we totally eliminated corporate tax tomorrow, we would see some price reduction however it would be temporary and within 10 years prices would be back where they are now.

But some firms will opt to cut prices. Others might opt to pay more money to attract and retain better employees. Either way it is a win for the economy, as a cut in prices is virtually the same as a rise in salary, or a payout in dividend to owners.
What happens in 10 years is irrelevant here.

 

[Bfgrn]

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.

Then President Obama's proposal to LOWER corporate tax rates should LOWER prices.

If you are really worried about higher prices making American products less competitive on the world markets, then you should be a HUGE advocate for universal health care.

I will let a former corporate CEO explain...

2007

Health care: an issue that cries out for leadership.

Health care in this country is in shambles. At a cost of almost $12,000 a year for the average family, the system is bankrupting families and it's bankrupting companies - specifically my old industry. Take General Motors. They're currently paying out $1,525 per vehicle for health care. Compare that to the $201 Toyota is paying and it sounds even more absurd. And what about those families and individuals who can't afford insurance at all? Junior breaks his arm and all of a sudden, a fall off a bike is an $8,000 trip to the ER.

Despite all of this, none of our politicians will touch the issue. Oh sure, they'll talk about it during campaign season, but once the votes are cast, it's the forgotten issue again. The last time anyone proposed real reform was in 1993, and that plan went nowhere. Fourteen years later, Hillary Clinton's failed plan is still used as an excuse to continue ignoring the problem. That's disgraceful.

I suggest you listen carefully to the '08 candidates' "plans" for health care. Let's see if any of them have the political courage to really tackle it this time around. I don't want band-aid ideas either. I want concrete solutions - and I want to hold these guys to their promises.

 

[AmyNation]

What do you suppose will happen to the money corporations save by not paying the tax? Go into the mattress in the CEO's office?

Expansion, marketing, research, hiring, bonuses, shifting of overseas offices, or how about just posted as profit.

I think it we totally eliminated corporate tax tomorrow, we would see some price reduction however it would be temporary and within 10 years prices would be back where they are now.

But some firms will opt to cut prices. Others might opt to pay more money to attract and retain better employees. Either way it is a win for the economy, as a cut in prices is virtually the same as a rise in salary, or a payout in dividend to owners.
What happens in 10 years is irrelevant here.

I agree, it would be a win for the economy. The issue would be the deficit, how is eliminating the revenue from corporate taxes going to help pay down our debt?

 

[The Rabbi]

Expansion, marketing, research, hiring, bonuses, shifting of overseas offices, or how about just posted as profit.

I think it we totally eliminated corporate tax tomorrow, we would see some price reduction however it would be temporary and within 10 years prices would be back where they are now.

But some firms will opt to cut prices. Others might opt to pay more money to attract and retain better employees. Either way it is a win for the economy, as a cut in prices is virtually the same as a rise in salary, or a payout in dividend to owners.
What happens in 10 years is irrelevant here.

I agree, it would be a win for the economy. The issue would be the deficit, how is eliminating the revenue from corporate taxes going to help pay down our debt?

Because corporations will make more efficient use of the money than the fedgov will, thus growing the economy.
That is the issue. Democrats, who haven't cared about the deficit (if they do now), insist we need tax increases to pay for the deficit. History shows this never works. Spending only increases.
The way to pay for the deficit is to 1) quit spending so damn much;2) grow the economy and with it tax revenue to pay the accumulated debt.
I do not worship at the altar of balanced budgets. But I think at some point spending is out of control. And we are past that point.

 

[The Rabbi]

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.

Then President Obama's proposal to LOWER corporate tax rates should LOWER prices.

If you are really worried about higher prices making American products less competitive on the world markets, then you should be a HUGE advocate for universal health care.

.

What is Pres Obama's proposal to "lower corporate tax rate"? I'll bet smoke and mirrors. And as you said, it wont necessarily lower prices at all. And American products are more or less competitive based on any number of other factors, like the exchange rate.
I can't believe you want to let corporations dump their liabilities on the FedGov by letting the feds pick up the tab for medical insurance. Aren't you always screaming about "corporate welfare"?? What a hypocrite.

 

[Bfgrn]

But some firms will opt to cut prices. Others might opt to pay more money to attract and retain better employees. Either way it is a win for the economy, as a cut in prices is virtually the same as a rise in salary, or a payout in dividend to owners.
What happens in 10 years is irrelevant here.

I agree, it would be a win for the economy. The issue would be the deficit, how is eliminating the revenue from corporate taxes going to help pay down our debt?

Because corporations will make more efficient use of the money than the fedgov will, thus growing the economy.
That is the issue. Democrats, who haven't cared about the deficit (if they do now), insist we need tax increases to pay for the deficit. History shows this never works. Spending only increases.
The way to pay for the deficit is to 1) quit spending so damn much;2) grow the economy and with it tax revenue to pay the accumulated debt.
I do not worship at the altar of balanced budgets. But I think at some point spending is out of control. And we are past that point.

Corporations more efficient use of the money will be to line the pockets of shareholders. The American people are STAKE-holders in our economy.

Democrats, who haven't cared about the deficit? BULLSHIT!


Paul O'Neill Treasure Secretary - The White House 2002:

The president had promised to cut taxes, and he did. Within six months of taking office, he pushed a trillion dollars worth of tax cuts through Congress.

But O'Neill thought it should have been the end. After 9/11 and the war in Afghanistan, the budget deficit was growing. So at a meeting with the vice president after the mid-term elections in 2002, Suskind writes that O'Neill argued against a second round of tax cuts.

"Cheney, at this moment, shows his hand," says Suskind. "He says, 'You know, Paul, Reagan proved that deficits don't matter. We won the mid-term elections, this is our due.' … O'Neill is speechless."

"It was not just about not wanting the tax cut. It was about how to use the nation's resources to improve the condition of our society," says O'Neill. "And I thought the weight of working on Social Security and fundamental tax reform was a lot more important than a tax reduction."

Did he think it was irresponsible? "Well, it's for sure not what I would have done," says O'Neill.

 

[The Rabbi]

I agree, it would be a win for the economy. The issue would be the deficit, how is eliminating the revenue from corporate taxes going to help pay down our debt?

Because corporations will make more efficient use of the money than the fedgov will, thus growing the economy.
That is the issue. Democrats, who haven't cared about the deficit (if they do now), insist we need tax increases to pay for the deficit. History shows this never works. Spending only increases.
The way to pay for the deficit is to 1) quit spending so damn much;2) grow the economy and with it tax revenue to pay the accumulated debt.
I do not worship at the altar of balanced budgets. But I think at some point spending is out of control. And we are past that point.

Corporations more efficient use of the money will be to line the pockets of shareholders. The American people are STAKE-holders in our economy.

Every time you see the words "stake holder" whatever follows is sure to be bullshit.
You think corporations and their employees are not "stake holders"??

 

[Quantum Windbag]

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.

Cost distribution is about spreading the cost of development over the expected sales life of the product, or to use other products with lower costs to carry the loss on something the company wants to promote. This is what allows GM to argue that the $40,000 loss they take on the Volt is not as simple as it looks. The thing about taxes is that they are a cost that affects everything the company does. They cut into profits across the board, and cannot be shuffled around as easily. Some companies eat the higher cost for a while, but it always get passed along eventually. Eating the cost of higher taxes is the main reason prices do not immediately drop when taxes go down.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

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.

I bet it will, eventually.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

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

What are you trying to say here? How does the fact that American companies have higher tax rates than any foreign corporation prove that, if we drop the tax rate, American companies won 't be able to drop prices?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

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.

There are economist on both sides of the political debate that think we should eliminate all income taxes, corporate taxes, and capital gains taxes. They seem to thing taxes are a really big reason that the economy is not as competitive as it could be.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Expansion, marketing, research, hiring, bonuses, shifting of overseas offices, or how about just posted as profit.

I think it we totally eliminated corporate tax tomorrow, we would see some price reduction however it would be temporary and within 10 years prices would be back where they are now.

But some firms will opt to cut prices. Others might opt to pay more money to attract and retain better employees. Either way it is a win for the economy, as a cut in prices is virtually the same as a rise in salary, or a payout in dividend to owners.
What happens in 10 years is irrelevant here.

I agree, it would be a win for the economy. The issue would be the deficit, how is eliminating the revenue from corporate taxes going to help pay down our debt?

We need to change the idea that taxes on production are the way to fund the government.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The American people are STAKE-holders in our economy.

People say that in order to legitimize their attempts to claim that people owe them money. This is why Obama thinks rich people have to give back instead of give more.

 

[Bfgrn]

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.

Then President Obama's proposal to LOWER corporate tax rates should LOWER prices.

If you are really worried about higher prices making American products less competitive on the world markets, then you should be a HUGE advocate for universal health care.

.

What is Pres Obama's proposal to "lower corporate tax rate"? I'll bet smoke and mirrors. And as you said, it wont necessarily lower prices at all. And American products are more or less competitive based on any number of other factors, like the exchange rate.
I can't believe you want to let corporations dump their liabilities on the FedGov by letting the feds pick up the tab for medical insurance. Aren't you always screaming about "corporate welfare"?? What a hypocrite.

You can read it yourself. There is no smoke or mirrors. It would require negotiations and dialog as with any major reform.

THE PRESIDENT’S FRAMEWORK FOR BUSINESS TAX REFORM

Introduction

America’s system of business taxation is in need of reform. The United States has a relatively narrow corporate tax base compared to other countries—a tax base reduced by loopholes, tax expenditures, and tax planning. This is combined with a statutory corporate tax rate that will soon be the highest among advanced countries. As a result of this combination of a relatively narrow tax base and a high statutory tax rate, the U.S. tax system is uncompetitive and inefficient. The system distorts choices such as where to produce, what to invest in, how to finance a business, and what business form to use. And it does too little to encourage job creation and investment in the United States while allowing firms to benefit from incentives to locate production and shift profits overseas. The system is also too complicated—especially for America’s small businesses.
For these reasons, the President is committed to reform that will support the competitiveness of American businesses—large and small—and increase incentives to invest and hire in the United States by lowering rates, cutting tax expenditures, and reducing complexity, while being fiscally responsible.

This report presents the President’s Framework for business tax reform. In laying out this Framework, the President recognizes that tax reform will take time, require work on a bipartisan basis, and benefit from additional feedback from stakeholders and experts. To start that process, this report outlines what the President believes should be five key elements of business tax reform.

PRESIDENT OBAMA’S FIVE ELEMENTS OF BUSINESS TAX

I. Eliminate dozens of tax loopholes and subsidies, broaden the base and cut the corporate tax rate to spur growth in America: The Framework would eliminate dozens of different tax expenditures and fundamentally reform the business tax base to reduce distortions that hurt productivity and growth. It would reinvest these savings to lower the corporate tax rate to 28 percent, putting the United States in line with major competitor countries and encouraging greater investment in America.

II. Strengthen American manufacturing and innovation: The Framework would refocus the manufacturing deduction and use the savings to reduce the effective rate on manufacturing to no more than 25 percent, while encouraging greater research and development and the production of clean energy.

III. Strengthen the international tax system, including establishing a new minimum tax on foreign earnings, to encourage domestic investment: Our tax system should not give companies an incentive to locate production overseas or engage in accounting games to shift profits abroad, eroding the U.S. tax base. Introducing a minimum tax on foreign earnings would help address these problems and discourage a global race to the bottom in tax rates.

IV. Simplify and cut taxes for America’s small businesses: Tax reform should make tax filing simpler for small businesses and entrepreneurs so that they can focus on growing their businesses rather than filling out tax returns.

V. Restore fiscal responsibility and not add a dime to the deficit: Business tax reform should be fully paid for and lead to greater fiscal responsibility than our current business tax system by either eliminating or making permanent and fully paying for temporary tax provisions now in the tax code.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Then President Obama's proposal to LOWER corporate tax rates should LOWER prices.

If you are really worried about higher prices making American products less competitive on the world markets, then you should be a HUGE advocate for universal health care.

.

What is Pres Obama's proposal to "lower corporate tax rate"? I'll bet smoke and mirrors. And as you said, it wont necessarily lower prices at all. And American products are more or less competitive based on any number of other factors, like the exchange rate.
I can't believe you want to let corporations dump their liabilities on the FedGov by letting the feds pick up the tab for medical insurance. Aren't you always screaming about "corporate welfare"?? What a hypocrite.

You can read it yourself. There is no smoke or mirrors. It would require negotiations and dialog as with any major reform.

THE PRESIDENT’S FRAMEWORK FOR BUSINESS TAX REFORM

Introduction

America’s system of business taxation is in need of reform. The United States has a relatively narrow corporate tax base compared to other countries—a tax base reduced by loopholes, tax expenditures, and tax planning. This is combined with a statutory corporate tax rate that will soon be the highest among advanced countries. As a result of this combination of a relatively narrow tax base and a high statutory tax rate, the U.S. tax system is uncompetitive and inefficient. The system distorts choices such as where to produce, what to invest in, how to finance a business, and what business form to use. And it does too little to encourage job creation and investment in the United States while allowing firms to benefit from incentives to locate production and shift profits overseas. The system is also too complicated—especially for America’s small businesses.
For these reasons, the President is committed to reform that will support the competitiveness of American businesses—large and small—and increase incentives to invest and hire in the United States by lowering rates, cutting tax expenditures, and reducing complexity, while being fiscally responsible.

This report presents the President’s Framework for business tax reform. In laying out this Framework, the President recognizes that tax reform will take time, require work on a bipartisan basis, and benefit from additional feedback from stakeholders and experts. To start that process, this report outlines what the President believes should be five key elements of business tax reform.

PRESIDENT OBAMA’S FIVE ELEMENTS OF BUSINESS TAX

I. Eliminate dozens of tax loopholes and subsidies, broaden the base and cut the corporate tax rate to spur growth in America: The Framework would eliminate dozens of different tax expenditures and fundamentally reform the business tax base to reduce distortions that hurt productivity and growth. It would reinvest these savings to lower the corporate tax rate to 28 percent, putting the United States in line with major competitor countries and encouraging greater investment in America.

II. Strengthen American manufacturing and innovation: The Framework would refocus the manufacturing deduction and use the savings to reduce the effective rate on manufacturing to no more than 25 percent, while encouraging greater research and development and the production of clean energy.

III. Strengthen the international tax system, including establishing a new minimum tax on foreign earnings, to encourage domestic investment: Our tax system should not give companies an incentive to locate production overseas or engage in accounting games to shift profits abroad, eroding the U.S. tax base. Introducing a minimum tax on foreign earnings would help address these problems and discourage a global race to the bottom in tax rates.

IV. Simplify and cut taxes for America’s small businesses: Tax reform should make tax filing simpler for small businesses and entrepreneurs so that they can focus on growing their businesses rather than filling out tax returns.

V. Restore fiscal responsibility and not add a dime to the deficit: Business tax reform should be fully paid for and lead to greater fiscal responsibility than our current business tax system by either eliminating or making permanent and fully paying for temporary tax provisions now in the tax code.

No details -- Check