The Republican created Myth about Raising Taxes during a recession - Page 16

catawba · #**151** (**permalink**) 03-18-2009, 01:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rebellion

There won't be a laugh because the stats will change insignificantly even if this alleged loophole was closed. The number would still be well over half. That's because the facts don't take into consideration dem hacks (these politicians) who have no idea what they're talking about. The formula is very simple, no income equals no tax.

OK, Let us all see your proof that over 2/3 of America's corporations made no profit from 1998 until 2005, the period of the GAO study!

We will wait!

presluc · #**152** (**permalink**) 03-18-2009, 02:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pjohns

This appears to be a tacit admission that you, too, do not appreciate the difference between four-and a half percent and four-and-a half percentage points.

An increase from 35 percent to 39.6 percent (the previous top marginal rate) is actually an increase of 13.1-plus percent.

If you truly believe that an increase of more than 13.1 percent upon high earners is justified, then please feel free to say so. But it is really not quite candid to refer to it as a mere "4-1/2%" increase. It is almost three times that.

And your apparent implication one must be deeply opposed to America's high earners in order to be supportive of "the American worker" smacks of class warfare.

First, I am not really comfortable with the implication that any couple with a household income of greater than $250,000 per year is "rich"--especially in California, New York, DC, or other communities with a very high cost of living.

Moreover, I do not have much use for the politics of envy; and the sentiment you have just expressed, in this regard, seems to be grounded in exactly that.

Sadly, some who express almost Jacobin sentiments appear far less animated by any desire to help the middle class (or even the working class) than they are by the desire to punish the wealthy, as some sort of emotionally satisfying end in itself.

What I don't appreicate is corporations that outsource more and more American jobs and American taxes then whine and cry cause their profits dropped and their taxes went up, cause the American consumer/worker
stopped buying their products and started paying less taxes.

A majority of Americans ain't making anywhere close to $250,000 a year.

The wealthy corporations punished themselves when their turned their back on their best customer, the American consumer/worker.

As it has been said by corporations outsourceing American jobs is not personal, just business.
The American consumer/worker is saying buying foriegn products instead of American products is not personal, just business.

pjohns · #**153** (**permalink**) 03-18-2009, 03:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by presluc

A majority of Americans ain't making anywhere close to $250,000 a year.

It is still class warfare to express outrage over the fact that some people do.

And in Los Angeles, San Francisco, New York, DC, and many other American cities, a husband and wife with a combined income of $250K would not even approach the upper-middle class. Nowhere close.

To subsume all Americans into a single container, and come up with some average of what a "majority" are or are not earning, is entirely irrelevant. It is reminiscent of Mark Twain's witticism: A man who has placed one foot in a bucket of ice water, and the other foot in a bucket of boiling water, is, on average, comfortable.

Quote:

Originally Posted by presluc

The American consumer/worker is saying buying foriegn products instead of American products is not personal, just business.

I am not a protectionist. So I have no problem with Americans' purchasing goods that originated in other countries.

Why would you suppose otherwise?

squidward · #**154** (**permalink**) 03-18-2009, 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by catawba

OK, Let us all see your proof that over 2/3 of America's corporations made no profit from 1998 until 2005, the period of the GAO study!

We will wait!

Type S-corps are pass through.
The share holders pay personal income tax on it.

squidward · #**155** (**permalink**) 03-18-2009, 04:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by presluc

A majority of Americans ain't making anywhere close to $250,000 a year.

....and the majority of those that do own very little of the personal wealth in this country.

THose with the real wealth are offering up the small fries for personal sacrifice. These are your potential sons and daughters who will never be allowed to escape the middle class again.

catawba · #**156** (**permalink**) 03-18-2009, 09:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by squidward

Type S-corps are pass through.
The share holders pay personal income tax on it.

I'm still waiting for proof that over 2/3 of America's corporations made no profit from 1998 until 2005, the period of the GAO study!

Anikdote · #**157** (**permalink**) 03-19-2009, 04:51 AM

So... I decided to a do a bit more investigation on this study by the GAO. First lets be clear about what businesses were involved. The article from CBS fails to mention that the study was not done on US companies alone. From SF Gate:

Quote:

About two-thirds of U.S. companies and foreign firms doing business in this country paid no federal income taxes from 1998 to 2005, according to a study by the Government Accountability Office.

Additionally from the source provided by Cat:

Quote:

An outside tax expert, Chris Edwards of the libertarian Cato Institute in Washington, said increasing numbers of limited liability corporations and so-called "S" corporations pay taxes under individual tax codes.

So the study also included companies who have no corporate tax liability anyway, as all their taxes are paid through the individual tax code. Now we can see that 2/3 line blur, and what's more is that it's our tax code, written by our politicians that make this possible. Companies and individuals will always seek ways to pay the least amount of taxes possible, period. The only real solution is a tax code that doesn't allow politicians to build in loops holes for the corporations that get them elected.

More from the SF Gate article, this pretty much sums it up in my opinion:

Quote:

"In that respect, they are just like individuals," he said. "Don't we all fill out our tax returns as aggressively as we know how and take every deduction and credit we're entitled to, even if they're unprincipled, even if they're in the tax code only because Congress thinks we will appreciate them for subsidizing us?"

Chris Edwards, director of tax policy at the libertarian Cato Institute in Washington, D.C., agreed that the report didn't prove that corporations are abusive or deceptive in their tax practices.

"It's common sense: Corporations don't earn profits in many years," he said.

But, Edwards added: "All that said, I think there probably is large tax avoidance by U.S. multinational corporations, but in my view that's driven by the very high U.S. corporate tax rate. A corporate tax rate cut is long overdue."

catawba · #**158** (**permalink**) 03-19-2009, 08:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anikdote

this pretty much sums it up in my opinion:

Yep, tax loopholes as you mentioned and ones like the "retention bonuses" need to be eliminated, which is part of Obama's tax reform plans.

PatriotNews · #**159** (**permalink**) 03-19-2009, 08:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by catawba

Yep, tax loopholes as you mentioned and ones like the "retention bonuses" need to be eliminated, which is part of Obama's tax reform plans.

All tax loopholes should be eliminated so that you don't have any loopholes. We need to raise taxes on the poor. Those lousy bums don't pay any taxes. That's a huge loophole! Then President Osama can deliver on his middle class tax cuts like he promised.

Anikdote · #**160** (**permalink**) 03-19-2009, 09:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by catawba

Yep, tax loopholes as you mentioned and ones like the "retention bonuses" need to be eliminated, which is part of Obama's tax reform plans.

I don't like loop holes of any variety, but unlike you I'm not afflicted by wealth envy and would actually like to see an equitable tax code.

And quite frankly, had PrezBO cared about the AIG bonuses he wouldn't have approved the loop hole created by Dodd. You can go two routes from here, either he's lying or incompetent. Not sure which answer bothers me more...

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Will Raising Taxes On Oil Companies Lower Fuel Prices?	Toby	Opinion POLLS	24	06-26-2008 03:17 PM
Ted Kennedy: Raising Your Taxes; Avoiding His	DiscerningBlog	Political Blogs	1	04-15-2008 04:50 PM
Talk of Raising Taxes ALREADY	JP5	Latest World News	29	11-14-2006 07:24 PM
Bush proposes raising taxes...	PJO34	Current Events	17	02-02-2005 02:24 PM