Democrats and Republicans Are Quietly Planning a Corporate Giveaway — to the Tune of $400 Billion

bearkat42

Well-Known Member
you are retarded.

someone working at walmart spends almost 100% of what they make in a year. 100% of their income would be taxed at whatever rate a retard like you is envisioning, say 20%. that means the poor would pay 20% of their income in taxes.

a wealthy person spends nowhere near 100% of their income every year. at most, they might spend about 20% of it, and that would be taxed at 20%. so they would have a 4% tax burden, while the poor would have a 20% tax burden,

the fact that you are poor as shit and have to take out loans to pay for personal living expenses means you would be the one taxed at a higher rate, but i don't expect you to understand how stupid your own ideas are.
The extent to which these clowns are willing to protect the wealthy who, by their own rhetoric, view them as "failures" is truly mind boggling. Wealthy Republicans are telling you that you aren't as good as they are simply because you're not rich. It's quite fascinating to watch.
 

Red1966

Well-Known Member
This kind of graft on an industrial scale is bankrupting our country. Merely saying it's despicable clearly isn't effective, our government has been completely co-opted by corporate interests and those increasingly few who own them.

I've seen them. They're still human beings. What the fuck gives them the right to scam us and our children out of a prosperous and stable country?
You may be accusing the wrong people. Take a look in the mirror.
 

Red1966

Well-Known Member
Why do you favor shifting the tax burden from corporations onto individuals? Forget about spending for a moment since it's a separate issue, the revenue to pay for the budget comes from individuals and corporations. If one is paying less, the other is paying more to make up the difference since we're obligated by law to fund certain programs (SSI, etc.).

It is well established that the demand for goods and services is what drives economic growth (& employment). The poor and middle-class' consumption of those goods and services is what creates jobs

"The real job creators are not CEOs or corporations or even entrepreneurs. The job creators are the middle class and the poor, whose purchases cause businesses to expand. If the middle and poor don't have enough purchasing power, businesses won't hire." -Robert Reich

Your main argument up to this point seems to be that we shouldn't tax corporations at higher rates because it will then limit their ability to create jobs and in turn, increase unemployment. So what argument justifies the regressive tax codes for the poor and middle-class when they're actually the job creators? If taxing the job creators limits their ability to create jobs, the same reasoning should apply to the poor and middle-class, right?


You bring up an excellent point. Is this one of those loopholes that Donald Trump says he would close? To be clear, $400 billion isn't a fraction of what would be required to fund his budget, but I'm curious.. @Not GOP what do you think Trump's position on this deal would be?
Why are you so dense? Corporations don't pay taxes. Their customers pay them. If corporations pay more, their customers pay more, not less.
 

Red1966

Well-Known Member
You're saying two completely contradictory things

-You're saying you grew up in a household supported by a family owned business, and some years things were good, other years things were bad

-Then you're saying that the taxes the government implements go directly through the business, onto the consumer and prices raise

So which one is it, the business owner or the consumer?
You purposely misstated him. Nowhere did he say taxes were the reason for good or bad years. Your little commie brain just can't digest the fact that consumers ultimately pay corporate taxes.
 

Red1966

Well-Known Member
i hear this from numbnuts all the time. if it were true, they wouldn't be contributing millions to both parties and setting up operations offshore to manipulate the tax system

ever hear of pretax earnings?
Ever hear of after tax earnings? You think you made a valid argument?
 

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
Why are you so dense? Corporations don't pay taxes. Their customers pay them. If corporations pay more, their customers pay more, not less.
Let's examine how ignorant this claim is..

"Corporations don't pay taxes, their customers pay them."

Meaning, if we raise the corporate tax codes, prices will rise because their customers are paying more to make up the difference in higher taxes. If this is true, the inverse should also be true, that if we lower the corporate tax codes, prices will fall because the money that would have gone to paying higher taxes will now go to profit

Let's look at the CPI again...




OK, so beginning around the 1970s, prices steadily begin to rise. What happens to the corporate tax rate during that same period?



They go from around 50% in 1950 to 18% in 2011, a decrease of -32%


So if corporations are shifting their tax burden off onto their customers, and their customers are paying the lower corporate tax rate, why are they still paying higher prices?

"Inflation" does not account for the -32% decrease we see in the drop in corporate tax rates




The rate of inflation has remained relatively constant (which is why the slope on the CPI graph is a gradual incline) since 1960 sub the 'hyperinflation' of the 1970s. You can actually identify both slight peaks in increased prices on the first graph (represented by the gray shaded areas) that represent both of those spikes of inflation in the 70s and 80s on the Rate of Inflation graph. You can also identify the drop in prices just after the 08 financial crisis when the rate of inflation dropped below 0%.


So there you have it. Corporate tax rates have absolutely nothing to do with consumer prices. Prices rise and fall because of the rate of inflation and competition in the marketplace.
 

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Let's examine how ignorant this claim is..

"Corporations don't pay taxes, their customers pay them."

Meaning, if we raise the corporate tax codes, prices will rise because their customers are paying more to make up the difference in higher taxes. If this is true, the inverse should also be true, that if we lower the corporate tax codes, prices will fall because the money that would have gone to paying higher taxes will now go to profit

Let's look at the CPI again...




OK, so beginning around the 1970s, prices steadily begin to rise. What happens to the corporate tax rate during that same period?



They go from around 50% in 1950 to 18% in 2011, a decrease of -32%


So if corporations are shifting their tax burden off onto their customers, and their customers are paying the lower corporate tax rate, why are they still paying higher prices?

"Inflation" does not account for the -32% decrease we see in the drop in corporate tax rates




The rate of inflation has remained relatively constant (which is why the slope on the CPI graph is a gradual incline) since 1960 sub the 'hyperinflation' of the 1970s. You can actually identify both slight peaks in increased prices on the first graph (represented by the gray shaded areas) that represent both of those spikes of inflation in the 70s and 80s on the third graph. You can also identify the drop in prices just after the 08 financial crisis when the rate of inflation dropped below 0%.


So there you have it. Corporate tax rates have absolutely nothing to do with consumer prices. Prices rise and fall because of the rate of inflation and competition in the marketplace.
You're doing a decent job of teaching statistics and economics along with political science. Nicely done! The interdisciplinary thing is tricky for a lot of folks to manage, you're making it look easy.

I challenge you to read Guns, Germs and Steel and then Collapse, both by Dr. Jared Diamond. Those two books will give you, respectively, a broad understanding of the course of history from the standpoint of geographical determinism and a portfolio of cautionary tales should we as a modern globally connected people fail to learn our lessons of history.

Mind, this challenge is as much a plea to make the effort as it is an intellectual challenge. I promise, I would never presume to waste your time by suggesting something unworthy of our limited time on this earth.

I look forward to your thoughts about both.
 
Last edited:

ThickStemz

Well-Known Member
That must be why they spend millions lobbying the government to lower them huh, for the customers...
We live in a global economy.

The us has the highest corporate tax in the world, if not among the highest.

If we had a closed system it would not matter what corporate taxes were, all of them would compete evenly.

But in a country where workers are paid more than most others, regulations are thick and heavy, piling on more taxes simply is a burden and results in what we see today, as many companies as possible bailing out of the us where they can.
 

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
You're doing a decent job of teaching statistics and economics along with political science. Nicely done! The interdisciplinary thing is tricky for a lot of folks to manage, you're making it look easy.

I challenge you to read Guns, Germs and Steel and then Collapse, both by Dr. Jared Diamond. Those two books will give you, respectively, a broad understanding of the course of history from the standpoint of geographical determinism and a portfolio of cautionary tales should we as a modern globally connected people fail to learn our lessons of history.

Mind, this challenge is as much a plea to make the effort as it is an intellectual challenge. I promise, I would never presume to waste your time by suggesting something unworthy of our limited time on this earth.

I look forward to your thoughts about both.


Yeah buddy! :mrgreen:

Both are incredibly insightful, particularly GG&S! That book definitely gets credit for peaking my interest in this stuff. Collapse is pretty depressing, especially given the current political and economic climate, but still an awesome resource for knowledge.

What did you think of em?
 

ThickStemz

Well-Known Member
the lowest effective tax rate in the world, actually.
Oh I beg to differ.
First... this is an estimate of our comparitive effective corporate tax rates.
"The most recent estimate comes from the World Bank and International Finance Commission, which put the United States’ effective rate for 2014 at 27.9 percent. That’s second-highest behind New Zealand among OECD countries and 15th-highest among the 189 countries measured."

Second... You say "effective" becuase the statutory rate (the highest in the world) has deductions. What do those deductions come for? Well, they get them for paying health care for employees, pensions, investment in communities and other stuff that the government desires to promote that are not in the interest of furthering the business.

So the company is still required to spend the highest tax rate on the plant. And since we don't provide heath care, this is how our government forces employers to do it.

So even though that money isn't going to tax, the company is still spending it becuase of the tax code and it's just as expensive.

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2014/sep/09/eric-bolling/does-us-have-highest-corporate-tax-rate-free-world/

You couldn't be more wrong.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Oh I beg to differ.
First... this is an estimate of our comparitive effective corporate tax rates.
"The most recent estimate comes from the World Bank and International Finance Commission, which put the United States’ effective rate for 2014 at 27.9 percent. That’s second-highest behind New Zealand among OECD countries and 15th-highest among the 189 countries measured."

Second... You say "effective" becuase the statutory rate (the highest in the world) has deductions. What do those deductions come for? Well, they get them for paying health care for employees, pensions, investment in communities and other stuff that the government desires to promote that are not in the interest of furthering the business.

So the company is still required to spend the highest tax rate on the plant. And since we don't provide heath care, this is how our government forces employers to do it.

So even though that money isn't going to tax, the company is still spending it becuase of the tax code and it's just as expensive.

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2014/sep/09/eric-bolling/does-us-have-highest-corporate-tax-rate-free-world/

You couldn't be more wrong.
i own a business and you sell timeshares for a reason. you are an employee, i am the employer.

what you think is "not in the interest of furthering a business" actually is. there is a reason why almost all companies offer health care and retirement.

i am not sure what you mean by "investing in communities", but i am sure it is some type of racial code word in your KKK circles. every company wants good standing in communities and beyond.

and your citation just made you a liar, since you said that we have the highest corporate tax rate in the world. we do not. it is among the lowest, if not the lowest.
 

ttystikk

Well-Known Member


Yeah buddy! :mrgreen:

Both are incredibly insightful, particularly GG&S! That book definitely gets credit for peaking my interest in this stuff. Collapse is pretty depressing, especially given the current political and economic climate, but still an awesome resource for knowledge.

What did you think of em?
Collapse is without a doubt the single scariest thing I've ever read in my life.

Chapter and verse of the end of the world is written there, one only has to think about what Dr Diamond is laying out.
 

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
GG&S was about how we got to where we are.

Collapse are all the failed attempts to come before.

We have one real shot to get off this rock and as a species we MUST NOT FUCK THIS UP.

Or else, we die in the same ooze everything and everyone ever before has died in, with no more trace than any of them.
 

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
We live in a global economy.

The us has the highest corporate tax in the world, if not among the highest.

If we had a closed system it would not matter what corporate taxes were, all of them would compete evenly.

But in a country where workers are paid more than most others, regulations are thick and heavy, piling on more taxes simply is a burden and results in what we see today, as many companies as possible bailing out of the us where they can.
What happened to the "corporate taxes get pushed onto the customer" argument?

Now it's the "but we have to be competitive in the global economy!" argument?


What does it matter if US corporations are competitive if none of the benefits for being competitive are dispersed among the US population? Why in the world should I care if Walmart can pay their executives exceedingly higher salaries because of lower corporate taxes if their employees aren't even earning a living wage?

It seems like you're saying we have to give corporations these low tax rates because it'll benefit the American people, and if we don't, prices will rise.. Well, ever since we started progressively lowering the corporate tax rates, average CEO compensation has skyrocketed by 325%, average hourly earnings have stagnated, the tax burden placed on individuals has risen by more than 30% since the 1960s, and prices still rise..

So forgive me, but what the fuck else is it going to take for you to realize that no, lower corporate tax rates are not good for the American people? What can you point to and conclude that lower corporate tax rates have been a success?
 

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
GG&S was about how we got to where we are.

Collapse are all the failed attempts to come before.

We have one real shot to get off this rock and as a species we MUST NOT FUCK THIS UP.

Or else, we die in the same ooze everything and everyone ever before has died in, with no more trace than any of them.
Both incredibly terrifying and incredibly inspirational, eh?

My kinda book, man!
 

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
My friend, Collapse is why I'm doing what I am doing in my basement.
How did you come across the book?

I was in B&N and saw the Pulitzer Prize sticker on the cover of GG&S, read that, was blown away and started looking at Diamond's other works. My exgf got me Collapse for my birthday which is funny considering the book

We should swap reading lists, I bet there's a ton of good stuff on yours!
 
Top