The word "Rich" is now politically incorrect, the correct term is "Job Creator" (death, Obama)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
uh, so what do you suppose we do this time? They have had tax breaks for the rich for the last 10 years and more jobs are being sent overseas and more unemployment is on the rise. This country is heading over a cliff and you want to keep driving like you are Mr Magoo
My god, they walk amongst us.. How frightening is that..? When you made dumb statements like that, the sane people feel bad for you. Best to keep quiet so no one knows the truth about you..
Really? Who do you think fuels the economy? Middle class and especially the poor constantly buy the garbage that the rich provide. The poor/middle are the ones who have to get up and PHYSICALLY go to work. thus transportation cost, clothing, childcare ect. The rich for the most part never have to leave their homes and make millions. I think if you quit thinking of all of the rich as the same and look at the freeloaders who are included with those who actually provide jobs for someone else besides maids, you proably look at thing differently
Do Libs have ANY clue as to how capitalism works? They want to cut taxes because those companies keep their money out of the US, so it doesn't get stolen, er, taxed. With the highest corporate tax rate in the world, it's no wonder they stay away.
The GOP is trying to get more money back to the US. When will you Libs get that?
You're confusing two concepts here. One is how much cash and highly liquid assets are on-shore vs. off-shore for tax purposes. This is significantly impacted by transfer pricing, which allows a company to effectively shift their profit amongst differing geographies to take advantage of lower tax regions.
The other principle is that significantly lower cost of living in developing parts of the world combined with cheaper and more mobile technology enable a company to harness a labor force that costs one quarter of an American FTE.
Even if you declare another "tax holiday" and get corporations to bring some of their cash back here, you still won't have changed the dynamic that enables them to reap the benefits of a perpetually cheaper labor force - which means, all else equal, lower operating expense, higher profit margins, and higher operating cash flow available for a variety of uses (increased investment, share repurchases, discretionary management bonuses, etc.). So really, you're not offering anything that would substantially help job creation in the US.
Oh, and I know about this "capitalism thing" from a corporate perspective...quite possibly a lot more than you do.
You're confusing two concepts here. One is how much cash and highly liquid assets are on-shore vs. off-shore for tax purposes. This is significantly impacted by transfer pricing, which allows a company to effectively shift their profit amongst differing geographies to take advantage of lower tax regions.
The other principle is that significantly lower cost of living in developing parts of the world combined with cheaper and more mobile technology enable a company to harness a labor force that costs one quarter of an American FTE.
Even if you declare another "tax holiday" and get corporations to bring some of their cash back here, you still won't have changed the dynamic that enables them to reap the benefits of a perpetually cheaper labor force - which means, all else equal, lower operating expense, higher profit margins, and higher operating cash flow available for a variety of uses (increased investment, share repurchases, discretionary management bonuses, etc.). So really, you're not offering anything that would substantially help job creation in the US.
Oh, and I know about this "capitalism thing" from a corporate perspective...quite possibly a lot more than you do.
how about
1. get rid of the corporate tax... a high tax makes people run
2. bring back the import tarriffs...to include USA companies like GE (hq'd in CT) who make everything in mexico then IMPORT it back to the USA).....make it MORE ECONOMICAL to be made here than to ship it in....
3 get rid of the income tax al together...a good portion of income is never reproted to begin with...let's be smart...tax spending..not income
.....A bit dramatic. Especially considering the US economy is 80%+ small business.
The corporation is a great tool for unlimited personal gain without any personal consequence of failure. In the modern world, it has come to mean socialized risk without the corresponding benefit of socialized gain. Socialism is socialism. Many refuse to recognize that fact.
Well, I am in the 80% of the economy that is small business.
I have been empowered and enriched by Microsoft, Dell, Intel, and Hewlett Packard by the productivity revolution they started and sustained. My lifetime purchases of Microsoft products will never amount to more than a tiny fraction of their value to me. No socialized risk in those companies, is there?
My business has as its primary partner a huge, profitable corporation whose mission is to serve me and others like me--every one a small business. One of its functions is to bring products and services from other large corporations to me and my customers. If they fail, they fail. No socialized risk there, either.
I drive a Chevy--GM shareholders were wiped out 100% in the bailout. Not a dime of socialized risk there. (In fact, the investor class and taxpayers were stripped of property that was given for the benefit of UAW members, but that is another story about socialized risk for unions.)
Fannie and Freddie, Bear Sterns, Lehman Brothers...ALL of the shareholders were wiped out, along with preferred shareholders, and a lot of creditor money. No socialized risk there.
All these cases represent real people who lost real money. Your hypothetical notion does not square with the actual facts of business in America.
You are talking about a concept, socialized risk, that applies to a fraction of one percent of all corporations. This is not a logical base from which to smear all corporations or promote socialism.
By the way, North Korea has no corporations. I'm not sure how you would go about emigrating there, though--the corporations that would fly you to nearly anywhere else in the world do not offer service to North Korea.
And NO people on welfare have people working for them.
So what's your point?
Ok, lets do it this way. We can both agree that people are going to live with or without government help right? So this being true, anything that they buy or do is going to cost something which turn is paid to someone else. Even if they go about doing something illegal they would go through the court system and eventually jail time. Here are the scenarios:
1. The police officer who arrested them
2. The public defender
3. The judge/baliff/court staff
4. The prison staff/guards
5. The electricians/laborers who built the prison
6. Prison towns that spring up to support the prison
7 The prison town has everything from barbers to mayors
Granted, the "job creators" are going to make money regardless what the poor/middle class do, even if it is criminal! so again why should I, opr anyone else not in their tax bracket really care? All they are goint to do is find other loopholes to write their corporate jets off
Ok, lets do it this way. We can both agree that people are going to live with or without government help right? So this being true, anything that they buy or do is going to cost something which turn is paid to someone else. Even if they go about doing something illegal they would go through the court system and eventually jail time. Here are the scenarios:
1. The police officer who arrested them
2. The public defender
3. The judge/baliff/court staff
4. The prison staff/guards
5. The electricians/laborers who built the prison
6. Prison towns that spring up to support the prison
7 The prison town has everything from barbers to mayors
Granted, the "job creators" are going to make money regardless what the poor/middle class do, even if it is criminal! so again why should I, opr anyone else not in their tax bracket really care? All they are goint to do is find other loopholes to write their corporate jets off
And every nickel that supported the criminal justice system ultimately came out of the pockets of people in the free enterprise system. The fallacy is not recognizing the fact that the money would have been spent on other things--generating the same kind of chain of activity, only in the productive sector, not the government sector.
If my share of the criminal justice system is $4,000 per year, and half of that is wasted in chasing around drug users, then I am short $2,000 that I would have spent on goods or services of my own choosing.
And every nickel that supported the criminal justice system ultimately came out of the pockets of people in the free enterprise system. The fallacy is not recognizing the fact that the money would have been spent on other things--generating the same kind of chain of activity, only in the productive sector, not the government sector.
If my share of the criminal justice system is $4,000 per year, and half of that is wasted in chasing around drug users, then I am short $2,000 that I would have spent on goods or services of my own choosing.
But look at all of the jobs that "chasing down drug DEALERS (not users) creates If they would take the money from legalized marijuana and spend it on fighting the real hard drugs that would save the country millions a year. You say the money would be spent somewhere else, is besides the point. The point of the matter is that the money would exchange hands and eventually end up in the hands of the wealthiest 10%
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If they would take the money from legalized marijuana and spend it on fighting the real hard drugs that would save the country millions a year. You say the money would be spent somewhere else, is besides the point. The point of the matter is that the money would exchange hands and eventually end up in the hands of the wealthiest 10%
