Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Party Rooster, Feb 11, 2012.
Let me guess, the catch is that the personal rates go up. He won't let the "millionaire tax" go.
Isn't this the guy that insists that the rich pay their fair share?
Does not approve
"Taxing the rich" means taxing small businesses that don't donate to the DNC. General Electric and Google will be fine.
It also makes it easier for the gov't to raise everyone else's tax rates, well everyone else that actually pays labor taxes
Google and GE are multinational corporations. That is why they don't pay as much into the US government as an American business. Not because they get special treatment. If you worked 3 months in the US, and another 9 in Hong Kong, you would pay fewer taxes too.
And the reason why multinational corporations only keep the minimum necessary portion of their operations in the US (necessary to have full access to American consumers, without having to produce anything in the US), is the 39% total corporate tax rate the US has (I think 35% of that is just the federal tax rate). And after the corporation is taxed that, the same exact profits are taxed again, another 15%, once they reach the shareholders who funded the corporation in the first place.
If Google did what you do (produce full time in the US), the US government would take over half of the profits its shareholders earn by investing in the company. They wouldn't be fine. They would be much worse than you are for instance. The only reason why they are fine is because they are out of the reach of the American government. And they do pay taxes to the full, they aren't tax evaders, btw. They just don't pay them here.
If you want to tax multinational corporations more, there are two options:
1. Lower corporate and payroll tax rates, and get rid of regulations and the burden of an overly litigious legal system, enough to cause them to want to be here.
2. Forget about corporate and payroll taxes altogether (because let's face it, the US is incapable of doing the things I described in point 1, while it stays a democratic republic, because it's filled with greedy, irrational fucks), and instead reform the tax system completely and impose an across the board uniform VAT and income tax.
That way, you wouldn't tax the portion of the corporation which is not in the US (the production part), you would tax their sales and their investors. Both of which they can't and wouldn't want to move out of the US.
Corporate and payroll taxes (which are both ridiculously high, even compared to socialist nations) are the biggest penalty on production a government could create. It is destroying production in this country at an alarming rate.
You mean payroll taxes? What do payroll taxes (which go towards keeping various social security programs afloat) have to do with corporate taxes (which go towards the general budget)?
Just get rid of the corporate tax.
An obvious dance to the center, right on the election year schedule.
"Obama's corporate plan will also include a new minimum tax on foreign profits earned in low tax countries - an unpopular idea in the corporate community."
Whenever a Democrat says they are cutting taxes, they want to raise them in a different way. Give with the right hand and and take away with the left.
What would really help is if small business could get some real relief from their state and federal tax burden.
No I mean any taxes, if you let them raise any form of taxes because you think it won't affect you, because you're not "rich" the next year they'll raise your taxes and there will be less opposition because the "rich" already had a tax increase so they won't care and the poor don't pay taxes anyway so they won't care.
Never agree to a tax increase for any reason
I don't know guys, Obama has followed through on the majority of his campaign promises from 2008...I'm sure he's really serious about this. Heh. Heh. :icon_cool
The corporate tax affects how a company can hire and pay people.
The income tax affects whether CEOs can buy this year's Lamborghini or last year's model.
Hey I didn't say lowering corporate taxes was a bad thing, it's just bullshit that it took him 3 years to come to that realization. Maybe someone should keep screwing with his calendar and tell him it's October. Next thing you know he'll be auditing the Fed and dropping the DOE.
Your envy of his Lamborghini doesn't give you the right to steal from him.
Besides, your attempt at stealing his Lamborghini won't work. You are just screwing yourself over. A rich CEO can at any time just move to a country that doesn't rob him blind. And the politicians in your country can't follow him. What they can do is use the power you handed them, to rob this CEO you were envious of, to rob you instead.
And, in a twist of sweet irony, your money is most likely going to fund some green project, who's CEO drives this year's Lamborghini. Except that unlike the other CEO (the one who was running a productive business, and was chased out of the country by your envy), this CEO hasn't earned his Lambo. He stole it from you, the guy who started the whole thing.
Isn't this like Ron Paul's idea of fat tariffs for outsourced labor on American goods and services?
Move production to China?
Fuck you, pay me
Move call centers to India?
Fuck you, pay me
Remove jobs from the American economy?
Fuck you, pay me
I like the idea of seriously punishing outsourcing. There really is no other way to compete with Wing Wang's 50 cent an hour engineering job. At least then some of this trade deficit money comes back into the states, and the multinationals could always avoid these tariffs by moving production back here.
Great idea! We'll punish outsourcing so that everyone here gets paid $40/hour and every product will be 10x more expensive! Yay protectionism!!!
Offer a real counterargument and not a talking point. China has its currency artificially devalued; it is out main economic problem and nobody will touch it (aside from education quality and costs). We cannot compete with that, period. On our current path the government will be supplying all of the jobs and just keep printing money and borrowing until the dollar is worthless. Please tell me how our current free-trade magic will prevent that?
Rising costs will be an acceptable side effect.
You would. The only recourse your victims have is to leave. Of course you would like to punish that.
Guess what: you can't. Once someone leaves, they are outside the reach of your grubby thieving claws.
Norm's dead on here. Companies outsource right now because it's too complicated/expensive to maintain all their business operations within the country and stay competitive. Punishing a company further only makes it more expensive, thus will lead to more outsourcing. It makes much more sense to give them incentives to stay. For example, a few corporations wanted to move foreign funds back into the US, and asked for a tax exemption on doing so. The government denied it, and those funds remained outside the US... when they could have been reinvested in our economy.
In most companies the most flexible expense is labor. Now imagine you raise taxation or regulation on those companies, which makes it more expensive for them to operate. They have to cut expenses somewhere. Now to an extent this can be done with new efficiency measures, but the best way to cut expense is labor. Either cut wages/benefits, employ one person to do the work of two, or employ one person overseas to do the work of one American for less.
You think you can "punish" them by making it more expensive to operate, but they will "punish" us right back by outsourcing. A corporation cannot simply take a hit in profits, because then the shareholders (owners) won't reinvest in that company. Without capital, you can't turn a profit. The company will fail (in an obnoxious example) and many people would still lose their jobs.
It's not a talking point, dummy. It's a fact. it is great that China is subsidizing its economy. That means they are wasting their own money to sell us cheaper goods. We win. Yes we lose jobs, but you are obviously not aware of the concept of comparative advantage.
We have lost our comparative advantage in manufacturing. Our country needs to find a new industry in which we have a comparative advantage.
Here is an example: Obama wants to "compete" with China in the "green" economy. If China can make a solar panel for $50 and they sell it to us for $75, but an American company can only make it for $100 and sell it for $150, then one of two things have to happen: The government either subsidizes the cost to the tune of $75/panel OR they impose a tariff on the Chinese panel for $75 so that our panels are competitive. Either way the American people pay the difference and we are worse off for it.
This this this. China is in the prime of their industrial age, why would you want to push the US back 50 years by trying to compete with that? Enough with that protectionism crap and trying to push manufacturing, were in the information age for a reason.
And a guy with an S Corp pays personal income tax. Guess who actually drives the economy. It's not the evil CEO you've been indoctrinated into hating.
When Obama (or any liberal Democrat for that matter) suggests lowering a tax rate there is ALWAYS a catch involved, usually raising or creating another tax elsewhere.