Trump Effects

[iNow]

Nice job evading the actual points made or showing any comprehension whatsoever. 

1 hour ago, Butch said:

Who pays corporate taxes?

 

33 minutes ago, iNow said:

A better question is who pays FOR these cuts that they neither needed nor requested. A few facts are helpful here to understand context. 

The headline corporate tax rate was 35%. With loopholes and accounting gimmicks, actual corporate taxes paid was closer to a 20% rate. 

Corporations were only asking for a cut to their headline tax rate from 35% to 29%, but we gave them an even bigger cut and made the headline rate 21%. We did so without closing any of the existing loopholes. In fact, most analyses show that the number of loopholes has actually increased with this bill. 

That means corporate taxes have a new effective rate closer to 10%. 

Now, the core argument is that corporations will suddenly go gangbusters and hire a bunch of people and give all employees a huge raise now that they have all this extra cash available. However, corporations are already sitting on record cash reserves, they’re overloaded with cash yet wages continue to stay flat and hiring remains muted.

This suggests a lack of cash isn’t the problem, and further tax cuts are unlikely to help. What’s likely to happen is this extra money will be used for stock buybacks to inflate their stock prices, coupled with bonuses to executives.

We also know that other countries will retaliate by adjusting their own corporate taxes and the benfit were hoping for here I the US will be diminished. It will become a race to the bottom, amd all of us individuals and workers here in the US and around the globe will unnecessarily suffer and lose opportunities.

If the goal was to help us workers and to assist the middle class, a better approach would’ve been to give the huge rate cut directly to us, not to the corporations with our fingers crossed... just hoping/wishing/praying that they’ll use it to pay workers more. The only reason they would is due to kindness and good natures, but those are uncommon in the cutthroat world of business where quarterly profit takes priority above all else. There are simply no provisions in the bill mandating that corporations use this money to increase wages or jobs so (while a tiny fraction might) most wont. 

Corprations asked for 29%. They got 21%. Why not just cut out the middle man and give that extra 8% directly to us? It’s because we’re being sold a lie, that’s why  

This was a giant giveaway to rich friends and donors, and next they’ll claim a desperate need to “fix the deficit and debt”...the same deficit they just completely exploded with the tax bill... by cutting our Medicare, Medicaid, social security, and investment in schools, roads, and related infrastructure that all of us at all income levels depend so heavily upon.

So, as I stated at the beginning of this post... A much better question than “who pays corporate taxes” is instead who pays FOR these cuts that corporations neither needed nor requested? The answer is you and me, brother. Sad. 

 

5 minutes ago, Butch said:

Big surprise, consumers pay corporate taxes. It is a hidden tax, that is people don't know they are paying it every time they purchase a product or service.

 

[Butch]

2 minutes ago, iNow said:

Nice job evading the actual points made or showing any comprehension whatsoever. 

 

I don't think business should pay any tax, in fact I think a national sales tax of 30-35% would be the only tax we need.

[iNow]

9 minutes ago, Butch said:

I don't think business should pay any tax, in fact I think a national sales tax of 30-35% would be the only tax we need.

You prefer making poor people even poorer and forcing them to suffer more than they already do, while making rich people even richer and crumbling the social infrastructure poor and rick folks all depend on?

[Phi for All]

14 minutes ago, Butch said:

I don't think business should pay any tax, in fact I think a national sales tax of 30-35% would be the only tax we need.

Worst idea EVER, no surprise.

You have been SO brainwashed! You're throwing away one of the most prestigious and profitable national charters on the planet as if it's worthless. A corporate charter in the US is a ticket to enormous potential in virtually every area of business. Why do you think that should be free? why do you think it's proper for a corporation NOT to help pay for roads and ports and the very infrastructure they use the most and the hardest? Why don't you listen to your precious Founding Fathers now? They were terrified of corporations getting exactly the power you so blithely give away to them. 

[swansont]

1 hour ago, Butch said:

Big surprise, consumers pay corporate taxes. It is a hidden tax, that is people don't know they are paying it every time they purchase a product or service.

Consumers are the only entity that pay taxes, taxing any other entity is just hiding the tax from the consumer!

This is such BS. 

People get paid, too. Does that money come from the wage fairy? They earn it. But companies provide goods and services, so they earn the money that is paid to them. Some corporations are just people who have filed the right paperwork.

"consumers pay corporate taxes" is a sham argument.

The relevant question is what will corporations do with a lower tax rate. Will they pass the savings on to the consumer? If that doesn't happen it's proof your claim is garbage. And guess what: ISPs have already announced service fee increases, even with the drop in the corporate tax rate. 

http://www.dslreports.com/shownews/Comcast-Hikes-Prices-Increases-Sneaky-Fees-for-2018-140907?ref=hvper.com

[John Cuthber]

17 minutes ago, swansont said:

The relevant question is what will corporations do with a lower tax rate. Will they pass the savings on to the consumer?

My understanding of US corporate law is that they are pretty much required to pass it to shareholders.

The money will go to rich people.

[Phi for All]

1 hour ago, Butch said:

Big surprise, consumers pay corporate taxes. It is a hidden tax, that is people don't know they are paying it every time they purchase a product or service.

Consumers are the only entity that pay taxes, taxing any other entity is just hiding the tax from the consumer!

More brainwashing. Corporations have lots of costs of doing business, including wages. They pass along costs they can get away with, but even when Eisenhower set the highest marginal rate in the 90% region, it didn't suddenly mean consumer goods became unaffordable. In fact, the 50s were about rampant consumerism and competitive pricing. So I don't understand why you preach the GOP garbage instead of seeing with your own eyes what really happens.

It's like the arguments against increasing the minimum wage to $15/hour because it would make the hamburgers cost too much. In reality, it would cost about 17 cents more for a Big Mac, but would allow employees to earn a living wage from a single job. Similar increases could happen in a number of industries without seriously affecting market share. 

Part of the problem is the Trump Effect, but I also think many too many people only listen to sources that agree with them. Reinforcement is critical to propaganda campaigns, and these algorithms that only feed us what we like to hear have become legion. I think 50 years from now we'll look back on this time as one of tremendous manipulation by those with the wealth to buy all the spin they want. Lots of maneuvering by those with the most money. We'll see if the other 98% of us have anything left when they finish looting the treasuries.

[swansont]

23 minutes ago, John Cuthber said:

My understanding of US corporate law is that they are pretty much required to pass it to shareholders.

The money will go to rich people.

For publicly-traded companies, yes. Unless they make the argument that cutting prices will generate more profits, which might be true in some cases. But that's not the case for quasi-monopolies like ISPs.

[iNow]

27 minutes ago, John Cuthber said:

The money will go to rich people.

Nuh uh. All those poor and destitute families struggling to find food and shelter for the night can put it into their 401ks!

[Ten oz]

1 hour ago, Butch said:

I don't think business should pay any tax, in fact I think a national sales tax of 30-35% would be the only tax we need.

Why shouldn't a business pay taxes? Do businesses not use public funded services? Uber and FedEx benefit directly from roads, streets lights, police & fire departments, and etc just like common citizens do. Business lobby the govt. Why should businesses be able to use public funded services for free? 

[rangerx]

2 hours ago, Butch said:

I don't think business should pay any tax, in fact I think a national sales tax of 30-35% would be the only tax we need.

You mean like corporate welfare.

12 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

Why shouldn't a business pay taxes? Do businesses not use public funded services? Uber and FedEx benefit directly from roads, streets lights, police & fire departments, and etc just like common citizens do. Business lobby the govt. Why should businesses be able to use public funded services for free? 

Corporations leech off the resource base of a country. Mining, logging, fishing, ranching, agriculture are public resources, often extracted without adequate compensation to stakeholders or mitigation of pollution.

It's one thing to not pay for it in the first place, but to wholesale it and not pay taxes afterward is bad for the system, irrespective of the need for jobs. Placing the onus of taxation on the worker leads to a dark place.

Edited December 27, 2017 by rangerx

[Ten oz]

12 minutes ago, rangerx said:

You mean like corporate welfare.

Corporations leech off the resource base of a country. Mining, logging, fishing, ranching, agriculture are public resources, often extracted without adequate compensation to stakeholders or mitigation of pollution.

It's one thing to not pay for it in the first place, but to wholesale it and not pay taxes afterward is bad for the system, irrespective of the need for jobs. Placing the onus of taxation on the worker leads to a dark place.

When the argument is about rights the right's position is that corporations are people. Businesses have the right to lobby the govt, finance campaign propaganda during elections, refuse service based on religious beliefs, and etc. Yet when it comes to taxation corporations cease to be people and become some sort of deity totem manifestation whose best interest is automatically aligned with that of the nation. 

[Phi for All]

6 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

When the argument is about rights the right's position is that corporations are people. Businesses have the right to lobby the govt, finance campaign propaganda during elections, refuse service based on religious beliefs, and etc. Yet when it comes to taxation corporations cease to be people and become some sort of deity totem manifestation whose best interest is automatically aligned with that of the nation. 

This is more extremist capitalism. These days, it's all about disparity. Anything a corporation does or makes for you is considered valuable, while anything the consumer does is practically worthless. The money you spend is negligible, but the money they spend is dear. Your time is inconsequential, their time is gold. The products are fabulous and worth every penny, until you buy it and then they hammer you about replacing it with a new one. You're worth whatever they want to sell you, but you aren't worth paying corporate taxes to support healthcare that might keep you alive. You should pamper yourself and build a swimming pool while they skip out on taxes that might pay for a public pool that many could use. 

For corporations, you have to force them to participate in the non-profitable side of their businesses. They benefit heavily from being allowed to operate a charter. Regulation isn't a dirty word.

[StringJunky]

37 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

... ..The products are fabulous and worth every penny, until you buy it and then they hammer you about replacing it with a new one.

A beautiful example of this is Apple slowing down the phone as the battery loses capacity and you can't easily replace the battery. An Apple has a built-in 3 or 4 year life, which is about the useful life of a LiPo battery. They are making the phone appear to maintain useful battery by reducing the demand on the battery by slowing it down. This is nothing more than designed obsolescence.

Edited December 27, 2017 by StringJunky

[Phi for All]

16 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

A beautiful example of this is Apple slowing down the phone as the battery loses capacity and you can't easily replace the battery. An Apple has a built-in 3 or 4 year life, which is about the useful life of a LiPo battery.

And this is just one example of something we weren't supposed to know about. There are thousands of them in our daily lives. It's why we pay more for EVERYTHING in the US, whether it's healthcare, an office building, or something simple like sugar. 

And it's getting worse all the time. As the extremists look for fractions of a percent more profit for themselves, capitalism chokes us all with this disparity. Time is critical when it's about paying more for convenience, but time means nothing if it's you waiting for the cable guy. Even our lives are considered cheap when the cost-analysis folks sharpen their pencils. Life is precious when you're paying to protect it, but it's pretty cheap if it's just another capital resource. 

[StringJunky]

2 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

And this is just one example of something we weren't supposed to know about. There are thousands of them in our daily lives. It's why we pay more for EVERYTHING in the US, whether it's healthcare, an office building, or something simple like sugar. 

And it's getting worse all the time. As the extremists look for fractions of a percent more profit for themselves, capitalism chokes us all with this disparity. Time is critical when it's about paying more for convenience, but time means nothing if it's you waiting for the cable guy. Even our lives are considered cheap when the cost-analysis folks sharpen their pencils. Life is precious when you're paying to protect it, but it's pretty cheap if it's just another resource. 

Yes, you Americans pay a lot for your healthcare. I saw a graph recently of annual per capita medical costs and the UK was about $4000, which was middling amongst the rest of the world plus/minus $2000,  and the US was all on it's own at $9000. I'll see if I can find it again. 

[Phi for All]

5 minutes ago, StringJunky said:

Yes, you Americans pay a lot for your healthcare. I saw a graph recently of annual per capita medical costs and the UK was about $4000, which was middling amongst the rest of the world plus/minus $2000,  and the US was all on it's own at $9000. I'll see if I can find it again. 

Healthcare is one of the worst. We also pay more for infrastructure projects and construction in general, mainly due to nationalists like Butch insisting we only use American companies, which removes the competition that might lower the price. From what I've read, foreign firms have been bidding on US construction projects and consistently coming in as low bidders, but they lose out to more expensive US firms. 

And I can't tell you how much money we'd save if we stopped driving on asphalt the day it's put down. Germany knows this, most of Europe as well, and they pay less for better roads. Our roads are almost always in some state of "shit" and need repairs every two years.

Our corporations and many of the most ruthless wealthy folk think tax revenue is for them to play with to create more opportunities for wealth. At what point are we going to realize that tax revenues do more good being used for the other 98%, and that giving it to the wealthy hasn't worked out at all, not even a little bit?

[iNow]

27 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

And this is just one example of something we weren't supposed to know about. There are thousands of them in our daily lives. It's why we pay more for EVERYTHING in the US, whether it's healthcare, an office building, or something simple like sugar. 

And it's getting worse all the time. As the extremists look for fractions of a percent more profit for themselves, capitalism chokes us all with this disparity. Time is critical when it's about paying more for convenience, but time means nothing if it's you waiting for the cable guy. Even our lives are considered cheap when the cost-analysis folks sharpen their pencils. Life is precious when you're paying to protect it, but it's pretty cheap if it's just another capital resource. 

Uh oh. You’re hitting a bit too close to home here. Looks like it’s time to insert another wedge social issue into the discussion; a distraction about black lives matter, gun rights, kneeling during the national anthem, or saying merry Christmas instead of happy holidays, perhaps. 

[Phi for All]

6 minutes ago, iNow said:

Uh oh. You’re hitting a bit too close to home here. Looks like it’s time to insert another wedge social issue into the discussion; a distraction about black lives matter, gun rights, kneeling during the national anthem, or saying merry Christmas instead of happy holidays, perhaps. 

This is where Trump starts tweeting.

As Patton Oswalt says, he's the master of distraction. Trump shits on the sidewalk, and just as everyone figures out an appropriate response, he takes the shit and makes a sombrero out of it.

[Butch]

7 hours ago, iNow said:

You prefer making poor people even poorer and forcing them to suffer more than they already do, while making rich people even richer and crumbling the social infrastructure poor and rick folks all depend on?

A tax on business is just another cost passed on to the consumer... 

6 hours ago, Phi for All said:

More brainwashing. Corporations have lots of costs of doing business, including wages. They pass along costs they can get away with, but even when Eisenhower set the highest marginal rate in the 90% region, it didn't suddenly mean consumer goods became unaffordable. In fact, the 50s were about rampant consumerism and competitive pricing. So I don't understand why you preach the GOP garbage instead of seeing with your own eyes what really happens.

It's like the arguments against increasing the minimum wage to $15/hour because it would make the hamburgers cost too much. In reality, it would cost about 17 cents more for a Big Mac, but would allow employees to earn a living wage from a single job. Similar increases could happen in a number of industries without seriously affecting market share. 

Part of the problem is the Trump Effect, but I also think many too many people only listen to sources that agree with them. Reinforcement is critical to propaganda campaigns, and these algorithms that only feed us what we like to hear have become legion. I think 50 years from now we'll look back on this time as one of tremendous manipulation by those with the wealth to buy all the spin they want. Lots of maneuvering by those with the most money. We'll see if the other 98% of us have anything left when they finish looting the treasuries.

A tax on business is just another cost passed on to the consumer...

If a boat has a ladder on its side that comes up short of the water by 3.7 meters, how far would the tide have to come in for the ladder to reach the water?

5 hours ago, Ten oz said:

Why shouldn't a business pay taxes? Do businesses not use public funded services? Uber and FedEx benefit directly from roads, streets lights, police & fire departments, and etc just like common citizens do. Business lobby the govt. Why should businesses be able to use public funded services for free? 

A tax on business is just another cost passed on to the consumer...

I am anti-lobbiest.

3 hours ago, Phi for All said:

Healthcare is one of the worst. We also pay more for infrastructure projects and construction in general, mainly due to nationalists like Butch insisting we only use American companies, which removes the competition that might lower the price. From what I've read, foreign firms have been bidding on US construction projects and consistently coming in as low bidders, but they lose out to more expensive US firms. 

And I can't tell you how much money we'd save if we stopped driving on asphalt the day it's put down. Germany knows this, most of Europe as well, and they pay less for better roads. Our roads are almost always in some state of "shit" and need repairs every two years.

Our corporations and many of the most ruthless wealthy folk think tax revenue is for them to play with to create more opportunities for wealth. At what point are we going to realize that tax revenues do more good being used for the other 98%, and that giving it to the wealthy hasn't worked out at all, not even a little bit?

A tax on business is just another cost passed on to the consumer...

I am strictly against protectionism, even when Trump thinks it is a good idea... I am pro free market capitalism, globally!

Edited December 28, 2017 by Butch
Spelling

[zapatos]

20 minutes ago, Butch said:

A tax on business is just another cost passed on to the consumer... 

So why not have no taxes on individuals and just tax corporations? 

[Butch]

2 minutes ago, zapatos said:

So why not have no taxes on individuals and just tax corporations? 

You don't get it, a tax on business is a tax on individuals! If I am making widgets I must figure all costs into pricing, including taxes... So must my competition, unless of course they get a break by doing business in another country... And there is the rub!

Edited December 28, 2017 by Butch

[swansont]

16 minutes ago, Butch said:

You don't get it, a tax on business is a tax on individuals!

Repeating this is not a substitute for a substantive argument.

16 minutes ago, Butch said:

If I am making widgets I must figure all costs into pricing, including taxes... So must my competition, unless of course they get a break by doing business in another country... And there is the rub!

As well as the wages you pay (which are tax-deductible). You have more incentive to raise wages if there is a tax in place.

 

[Ten oz]

47 minutes ago, Butch said:

A tax on business is just another cost passed on to the consumer...

And your sales tax proposal wouldn't be?

47 minutes ago, Butch said:

I am anti-lobbiest.

The corporations you don't think should pay taxes aren't.

[zapatos]

26 minutes ago, Butch said:

You don't get it, a tax on business is a tax on individuals! If I am making widgets I must figure all costs into pricing, including taxes... So must my competition, unless of course they get a break by doing business in another country... And there is the rub!

I get it. I would have to figure tax into everything I buy.

But what's the difference? The government gets the same amount of tax revenue whether they get it from individuals or businesses, and it is a lot simpler to get it from the much smaller number of businesses.

Similarly, I don't know why we would give a tax break to businesses to stimulate the economy. If you want to stimulate the economy, give that $1.6 trillion to the tax payers. They will spend most of it, which will cause businesses to have to hire more people and pay higher wages. Trickle Up Economics!