Do Republicans Think Corporations should pay no taxes?

[Brain357]

I think a reasonable and straight-forward tax is justified, requiring on-going adjustments to serve the economy. You'll never convince me Bezos should go scott-free. For all I care tax him 75% until the feds break-up the monopoly. Problem for DC is Bezos already has far too much power.

You'll never convince me Bezos should go scott-free.

Scott-free? From what?

For all I care tax him 75% until the feds break-up the monopoly.

Can't just tax somebody at 75% because you don't like them.

These idiots don't realize that Amazon could go bankrupt and they would not see one more penny in their pay

But they all think that corporations are somehow taking money from them

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

BS.................Amazon is responsible for MANY MANY closures, and all that money is going to one place. Where's the competition? Word is they treat their employees like shit. The risk is borderline communism, because everyone ends up working for the same fucking employer. They also exploit business still in operation, such as Fed. Express. Keep this up they'll control all goods and services.

If Jeff Bezos went broke tomorrow you wouldn't see your income go up would you?

One of the mainstays of this ridiculous argument about what CEOs make is that if they were paid less then everyone else would be paid more or if they were taxed more you'd be taxed less

It's flat out untrue

And FYI for every business that closed because they couldn't keep up with the times there are hundreds more people making money through Amazon's FBO business model

Couldn’t keep up with the times or didn’t get enough corporate welfare?

 

[Brain357]

If not, what tax on every dollar in profits is fair? And what do they pay now?

My belief is Republicans don't think corporations should pay any taxes. That's what their arguments suggest.

Well, I'm a registered Republican and I favor a sales tax instead of an income tax. I don't see taxing corporations as a good thing myself. Corporation create jobs. Were corporations not taxed and regulated so harshly, they might create more jobs from which personal income taxes could be gained. Corporation are also the source for many of the investments paying the retirement expenses of many of our elderly. A more friendly tax structure would tend to keep corporations from moving abroad and encourage their own reinvestment into capital equipment and expansion.

Sales taxes unfairly tax the poor who use the least government services, in favour of corporations who use the most government services.

Corporations use more government resources and services than individuals and as such, they should pay fair taxes. They need an educated workforce, protections for their intellectual property and international trade. All of these things are expensive.

They also need communications systems, transportation systems, and a lot of infrastructure, all of which is expensive. EVERYONE should pay their fair share of the costs of running and living in a first world country.

Why should the workers, who reap the smallest benefits from these corporations, be taxed more to pay for their roads, utilties, courts and intellectual property protections. Those who need the services should pay the expenses to pay for them.



The system of incorporations, and corporate governance is an expensive process. As are intellectual property rights.

Great post. They'll argue that if you tax the corporation, they'll pass it on to their workers and consumers.

American corporations have been awash with cash since W was President. That's the impetus to all of the mergers and acquisitions of the past decade. That and the depressed stock market prices after the 2008 crash.

The mere fact that stock buy-backs were at record levels in 2018 and 2019 shows how unnecessary the tax cuts really are. I'd be interested in knowing how much of the increased stock market value is being driven by those tax cut funded buy-backs. Of course it's always the smaller, non-institutional shareholders who are bought out, further concentrating the wealth at the top.

As for the taxes being passed on to workers and customers, well I notice that none of these companies dropped their prices when those taxes were cut, did they?

They didn't cut prices when they off-shored manufacturing either. They just pocketed the additional profits. If Americans stopped buying imported clothing, they'd be naked because they've off-shored the mills which manufacture fabric, and the manufacturing of the clothing. American facilities do exist but only on a small basis. Osh Kosh/Carters still manufactures in the USA. 99% of Levis - the all American blue jean, are now off-shored.

Why should they drop their prices if people keep paying them?

If you want some corporation to lower prices then get 100 million people to stop using their products or services

Not many options with all these near monopolies.

 

[Blues Man]

I think a reasonable and straight-forward tax is justified, requiring on-going adjustments to serve the economy. You'll never convince me Bezos should go scott-free. For all I care tax him 75% until the feds break-up the monopoly. Problem for DC is Bezos already has far too much power.

You'll never convince me Bezos should go scott-free.

Scott-free? From what?

For all I care tax him 75% until the feds break-up the monopoly.

Can't just tax somebody at 75% because you don't like them.

These idiots don't realize that Amazon could go bankrupt and they would not see one more penny in their pay

But they all think that corporations are somehow taking money from them

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

BS.................Amazon is responsible for MANY MANY closures, and all that money is going to one place. Where's the competition? Word is they treat their employees like shit. The risk is borderline communism, because everyone ends up working for the same fucking employer. They also exploit business still in operation, such as Fed. Express. Keep this up they'll control all goods and services.

If Jeff Bezos went broke tomorrow you wouldn't see your income go up would you?

One of the mainstays of this ridiculous argument about what CEOs make is that if they were paid less then everyone else would be paid more or if they were taxed more you'd be taxed less

It's flat out untrue

And FYI for every business that closed because they couldn't keep up with the times there are hundreds more people making money through Amazon's FBO business model

Couldn’t keep up with the times or didn’t get enough corporate welfare?

Amazon was one of the first companies to exploit internet retail to its fullest potential

businesses that don't keep up go out of business like Sears

 

[Blues Man]

Well, I'm a registered Republican and I favor a sales tax instead of an income tax. I don't see taxing corporations as a good thing myself. Corporation create jobs. Were corporations not taxed and regulated so harshly, they might create more jobs from which personal income taxes could be gained. Corporation are also the source for many of the investments paying the retirement expenses of many of our elderly. A more friendly tax structure would tend to keep corporations from moving abroad and encourage their own reinvestment into capital equipment and expansion.

Sales taxes unfairly tax the poor who use the least government services, in favour of corporations who use the most government services.

Corporations use more government resources and services than individuals and as such, they should pay fair taxes. They need an educated workforce, protections for their intellectual property and international trade. All of these things are expensive.

They also need communications systems, transportation systems, and a lot of infrastructure, all of which is expensive. EVERYONE should pay their fair share of the costs of running and living in a first world country.

Why should the workers, who reap the smallest benefits from these corporations, be taxed more to pay for their roads, utilties, courts and intellectual property protections. Those who need the services should pay the expenses to pay for them.



The system of incorporations, and corporate governance is an expensive process. As are intellectual property rights.

Great post. They'll argue that if you tax the corporation, they'll pass it on to their workers and consumers.

American corporations have been awash with cash since W was President. That's the impetus to all of the mergers and acquisitions of the past decade. That and the depressed stock market prices after the 2008 crash.

The mere fact that stock buy-backs were at record levels in 2018 and 2019 shows how unnecessary the tax cuts really are. I'd be interested in knowing how much of the increased stock market value is being driven by those tax cut funded buy-backs. Of course it's always the smaller, non-institutional shareholders who are bought out, further concentrating the wealth at the top.

As for the taxes being passed on to workers and customers, well I notice that none of these companies dropped their prices when those taxes were cut, did they?

They didn't cut prices when they off-shored manufacturing either. They just pocketed the additional profits. If Americans stopped buying imported clothing, they'd be naked because they've off-shored the mills which manufacture fabric, and the manufacturing of the clothing. American facilities do exist but only on a small basis. Osh Kosh/Carters still manufactures in the USA. 99% of Levis - the all American blue jean, are now off-shored.

Why should they drop their prices if people keep paying them?

If you want some corporation to lower prices then get 100 million people to stop using their products or services

Not many options with all these near monopolies.

Sure there are

You can get anything sold on Amazon from another retailer

There is nothing you use that is provided by a monopoly

 

[Bob Blaylock]

If not, what tax on every dollar in profits is fair? And what do they pay now?

My belief is Republicans don't think corporations should pay any taxes. That's what their arguments suggest.

Not to speak for Republicans as a whole, bu here's my take on it.

Taxing corporations is a way to hide the burden of that taxation from the people on whom that burden is ultimately imposed, which includes the owners or stockholders of those corporations, the employees of those corporations, and the consumers who buy the goods or services offered by those corporations. I consider this to be dishonest and unethical.

Taxes, in my opinion, should only ever be directly imposed on those who will bear the burden thereof, in a manner that makes it clear to them how much of a tax burden they are actually bearing, and not hidden in ways that subtly increase the costs to them in ways that they cannot clearly see.

 

[Dick Foster]

I think a reasonable and straight-forward tax is justified, requiring on-going adjustments to serve the economy. You'll never convince me Bezos should go scott-free. For all I care tax him 75% until the feds break-up the monopoly. Problem for DC is Bezos already has far too much power.

And how many in the employ of Bezos lose their jobs and become liabilities instead of assets to the state and the rest of us?
If Bezos leaves it in the business it goes to work tax free. However if he takes any home in any form whatsoever, he pays the tax on it.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

If not, what tax on every dollar in profits is fair? And what do they pay now?

My belief is Republicans don't think corporations should pay any taxes. That's what their arguments suggest.

Well, I'm a registered Republican and I favor a sales tax instead of an income tax. I don't see taxing corporations as a good thing myself. Corporation create jobs. Were corporations not taxed and regulated so harshly, they might create more jobs from which personal income taxes could be gained. Corporation are also the source for many of the investments paying the retirement expenses of many of our elderly. A more friendly tax structure would tend to keep corporations from moving abroad and encourage their own reinvestment into capital equipment and expansion.

Sales taxes unfairly tax the poor who use the least government services, in favour of corporations who use the most government services.

Corporations use more government resources and services than individuals and as such, they should pay fair taxes. They need an educated workforce, protections for their intellectual property and international trade. All of these things are expensive.

They also need communications systems, transportation systems, and a lot of infrastructure, all of which is expensive. EVERYONE should pay their fair share of the costs of running and living in a first world country.

Why should the workers, who reap the smallest benefits from these corporations, be taxed more to pay for their roads, utilties, courts and intellectual property protections. Those who need the services should pay the expenses to pay for them.



The system of incorporations, and corporate governance is an expensive process. As are intellectual property rights.

Great post. They'll argue that if you tax the corporation, they'll pass it on to their workers and consumers.

American corporations have been awash with cash since W was President. That's the impetus to all of the mergers and acquisitions of the past decade. That and the depressed stock market prices after the 2008 crash.

The mere fact that stock buy-backs were at record levels in 2018 and 2019 shows how unnecessary the tax cuts really are. I'd be interested in knowing how much of the increased stock market value is being driven by those tax cut funded buy-backs. Of course it's always the smaller, non-institutional shareholders who are bought out, further concentrating the wealth at the top.

As for the taxes being passed on to workers and customers, well I notice that none of these companies dropped their prices when those taxes were cut, did they?

They didn't cut prices when they off-shored manufacturing either. They just pocketed the additional profits. If Americans stopped buying imported clothing, they'd be naked because they've off-shored the mills which manufacture fabric, and the manufacturing of the clothing. American facilities do exist but only on a small basis. Osh Kosh/Carters still manufactures in the USA. 99% of Levis - the all American blue jean, are now off-shored.

Of course it's always the smaller, non-institutional shareholders who are bought out

They buy stock in the open market.
They don't solicit shares from "smaller, non-institutional shareholders"

who are bought out, further concentrating the wealth at the top.

It my stock gets bought, how does that "further concentrate the wealth at the top"?

 

[Brain357]

You'll never convince me Bezos should go scott-free.

Scott-free? From what?

For all I care tax him 75% until the feds break-up the monopoly.

Can't just tax somebody at 75% because you don't like them.

These idiots don't realize that Amazon could go bankrupt and they would not see one more penny in their pay

But they all think that corporations are somehow taking money from them

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

BS.................Amazon is responsible for MANY MANY closures, and all that money is going to one place. Where's the competition? Word is they treat their employees like shit. The risk is borderline communism, because everyone ends up working for the same fucking employer. They also exploit business still in operation, such as Fed. Express. Keep this up they'll control all goods and services.

If Jeff Bezos went broke tomorrow you wouldn't see your income go up would you?

One of the mainstays of this ridiculous argument about what CEOs make is that if they were paid less then everyone else would be paid more or if they were taxed more you'd be taxed less

It's flat out untrue

And FYI for every business that closed because they couldn't keep up with the times there are hundreds more people making money through Amazon's FBO business model

Couldn’t keep up with the times or didn’t get enough corporate welfare?

Amazon was one of the first companies to exploit internet retail to its fullest potential

businesses that don't keep up go out of business like Sears

They also collect lots and lots of corporate welfare.

 

[Blues Man]

These idiots don't realize that Amazon could go bankrupt and they would not see one more penny in their pay

But they all think that corporations are somehow taking money from them

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

BS.................Amazon is responsible for MANY MANY closures, and all that money is going to one place. Where's the competition? Word is they treat their employees like shit. The risk is borderline communism, because everyone ends up working for the same fucking employer. They also exploit business still in operation, such as Fed. Express. Keep this up they'll control all goods and services.

If Jeff Bezos went broke tomorrow you wouldn't see your income go up would you?

One of the mainstays of this ridiculous argument about what CEOs make is that if they were paid less then everyone else would be paid more or if they were taxed more you'd be taxed less

It's flat out untrue

And FYI for every business that closed because they couldn't keep up with the times there are hundreds more people making money through Amazon's FBO business model

Couldn’t keep up with the times or didn’t get enough corporate welfare?

Amazon was one of the first companies to exploit internet retail to its fullest potential

businesses that don't keep up go out of business like Sears

They also collect lots and lots of corporate welfare.

Blame that on our corrupt politicians

 

[Indeependent]

Corporations are us. The fact that lefties use the word "corporations" as a cliche is indicative of their ignorance.[/QUOTE

Corporations are us. The fact that lefties use the word "corporations" as a cliche is indicative of their ignorance.

No, corporations are not people. They only care about profits. They don't care about clean air

To Restore Democracy: First Abolish Corporate Personhood

Because dead consumers are good for business!

 

[Brain357]

Sales taxes unfairly tax the poor who use the least government services, in favour of corporations who use the most government services.

Corporations use more government resources and services than individuals and as such, they should pay fair taxes. They need an educated workforce, protections for their intellectual property and international trade. All of these things are expensive.

They also need communications systems, transportation systems, and a lot of infrastructure, all of which is expensive. EVERYONE should pay their fair share of the costs of running and living in a first world country.

Why should the workers, who reap the smallest benefits from these corporations, be taxed more to pay for their roads, utilties, courts and intellectual property protections. Those who need the services should pay the expenses to pay for them.



The system of incorporations, and corporate governance is an expensive process. As are intellectual property rights.

Great post. They'll argue that if you tax the corporation, they'll pass it on to their workers and consumers.

American corporations have been awash with cash since W was President. That's the impetus to all of the mergers and acquisitions of the past decade. That and the depressed stock market prices after the 2008 crash.

The mere fact that stock buy-backs were at record levels in 2018 and 2019 shows how unnecessary the tax cuts really are. I'd be interested in knowing how much of the increased stock market value is being driven by those tax cut funded buy-backs. Of course it's always the smaller, non-institutional shareholders who are bought out, further concentrating the wealth at the top.

As for the taxes being passed on to workers and customers, well I notice that none of these companies dropped their prices when those taxes were cut, did they?

They didn't cut prices when they off-shored manufacturing either. They just pocketed the additional profits. If Americans stopped buying imported clothing, they'd be naked because they've off-shored the mills which manufacture fabric, and the manufacturing of the clothing. American facilities do exist but only on a small basis. Osh Kosh/Carters still manufactures in the USA. 99% of Levis - the all American blue jean, are now off-shored.

Why should they drop their prices if people keep paying them?

If you want some corporation to lower prices then get 100 million people to stop using their products or services

Not many options with all these near monopolies.

Sure there are

You can get anything sold on Amazon from another retailer

There is nothing you use that is provided by a monopoly

So you are saying everything goes through amazon but we have no monopoly problem?

 

[Brain357]

BS.................Amazon is responsible for MANY MANY closures, and all that money is going to one place. Where's the competition? Word is they treat their employees like shit. The risk is borderline communism, because everyone ends up working for the same fucking employer. They also exploit business still in operation, such as Fed. Express. Keep this up they'll control all goods and services.

If Jeff Bezos went broke tomorrow you wouldn't see your income go up would you?

One of the mainstays of this ridiculous argument about what CEOs make is that if they were paid less then everyone else would be paid more or if they were taxed more you'd be taxed less

It's flat out untrue

And FYI for every business that closed because they couldn't keep up with the times there are hundreds more people making money through Amazon's FBO business model

Couldn’t keep up with the times or didn’t get enough corporate welfare?

Amazon was one of the first companies to exploit internet retail to its fullest potential

businesses that don't keep up go out of business like Sears

They also collect lots and lots of corporate welfare.

Blame that on our corrupt politicians

Blame corrupt politicians on campaign finance. They are easily bought.

 

[SmokeALib]

Those damn corporations. How dare they hire all them there taxpayers.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Great post. They'll argue that if you tax the corporation, they'll pass it on to their workers and consumers.

American corporations have been awash with cash since W was President. That's the impetus to all of the mergers and acquisitions of the past decade. That and the depressed stock market prices after the 2008 crash.

The mere fact that stock buy-backs were at record levels in 2018 and 2019 shows how unnecessary the tax cuts really are. I'd be interested in knowing how much of the increased stock market value is being driven by those tax cut funded buy-backs. Of course it's always the smaller, non-institutional shareholders who are bought out, further concentrating the wealth at the top.

As for the taxes being passed on to workers and customers, well I notice that none of these companies dropped their prices when those taxes were cut, did they?

They didn't cut prices when they off-shored manufacturing either. They just pocketed the additional profits. If Americans stopped buying imported clothing, they'd be naked because they've off-shored the mills which manufacture fabric, and the manufacturing of the clothing. American facilities do exist but only on a small basis. Osh Kosh/Carters still manufactures in the USA. 99% of Levis - the all American blue jean, are now off-shored.

Why should they drop their prices if people keep paying them?

If you want some corporation to lower prices then get 100 million people to stop using their products or services

Not many options with all these near monopolies.

Sure there are

You can get anything sold on Amazon from another retailer

There is nothing you use that is provided by a monopoly

So you are saying everything goes through amazon but we have no monopoly problem?

So you are saying everything goes through amazon but we have no monopoly problem?

Amazon had 2018 FY revenue of about $233 billion.
Just how much stuff do American's buy that $233 billion is a monopoly?

 

[Brain357]

America Has A Monopoly Problem

 

[Blues Man]

Great post. They'll argue that if you tax the corporation, they'll pass it on to their workers and consumers.

American corporations have been awash with cash since W was President. That's the impetus to all of the mergers and acquisitions of the past decade. That and the depressed stock market prices after the 2008 crash.

The mere fact that stock buy-backs were at record levels in 2018 and 2019 shows how unnecessary the tax cuts really are. I'd be interested in knowing how much of the increased stock market value is being driven by those tax cut funded buy-backs. Of course it's always the smaller, non-institutional shareholders who are bought out, further concentrating the wealth at the top.

As for the taxes being passed on to workers and customers, well I notice that none of these companies dropped their prices when those taxes were cut, did they?

They didn't cut prices when they off-shored manufacturing either. They just pocketed the additional profits. If Americans stopped buying imported clothing, they'd be naked because they've off-shored the mills which manufacture fabric, and the manufacturing of the clothing. American facilities do exist but only on a small basis. Osh Kosh/Carters still manufactures in the USA. 99% of Levis - the all American blue jean, are now off-shored.

Why should they drop their prices if people keep paying them?

If you want some corporation to lower prices then get 100 million people to stop using their products or services

Not many options with all these near monopolies.

Sure there are

You can get anything sold on Amazon from another retailer

There is nothing you use that is provided by a monopoly

So you are saying everything goes through amazon but we have no monopoly problem?

I never said everything goes through Amazon. I said you can get just about everything through Amazon but Amazon is not the only place you can get any of those things

You can get anything sold on Amazon from some other retailer

so how do they have a monopoly?

tell me one thing you buy that is only available from one place and one place only

 

[Blues Man]

America Has A Monopoly Problem

So change the definition .

I haven't bought anything at Walmart in years so I guess they don't have a monopoly on anything

So tell me what specific product(s) does Amazon have a monopoly on

 

[sealybobo]

Those damn corporations. How dare they hire all them there taxpayers.

They only hired who they needed to get the job done. And if they were conservatives they paid as little as possible. Do you think they deserve a metal? They needed the person. They didn't do it out of kindness and the minute they don't need them anymore they are gone.

 

[SmokeALib]

Those damn corporations. How dare they hire all them there taxpayers.

They only hired who they needed to get the job done. And if they were conservatives they paid as little as possible. Do you think they deserve a metal? They needed the person. They didn't do it out of kindness and the minute they don't need them anymore they are gone.

Huh? Should they hire more people than they need? I don't think you quite got all your groceries bagged...

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Those damn corporations. How dare they hire all them there taxpayers.

They only hired who they needed to get the job done. And if they were conservatives they paid as little as possible. Do you think they deserve a metal? They needed the person. They didn't do it out of kindness and the minute they don't need them anymore they are gone.

And if they were conservatives they paid as little as possible.

Liberals pay people extra?

Glass ceiling at the Obama White House? Female staffers earn $8,270 (and 10.75%) less than their male counterparts | American Enterprise Institute - AEI

Maybe they just pay the men extra?