Do Republicans Think Corporations should pay no taxes?

[Toddsterpatriot]

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?

What about the glass ceiling at all the corporations you worship? Or are you just going to point to Obama and ignore all the corporations who do this exact same thing.

PLEASE tell me you are for paying women more. I bet you are not. I bet except for Obama, you defend the fact that women make less. Ready, go.

Generally women make less because they have a better balance between work and homelife, and rightfully so.


Too many employers have unreasonable expectations of employees. More women say no. And good for them.


I've said no, in similar situations, and I think more people should.

Todd doesn't want to admit that yes liberal organizations do pay more. It's obvious just based on Republicans attitudes here.

And when I say a liberal org I mean a union shop where workers get a seat at the table.

Hey, I just found out today I'm upper class.

About one-fifth of American households, 19%, are considered upper class.

Household of one: Minimum of $78,281 to be upper-class
Household of two: Minimum of $110,706 to be upper-class
Household of three: Minimum of $135,586 to be upper-class
Household of four: Minimum of $156,561 to be upper-class
Household of five: Minimum of $175,041 to be upper-class

I live alone and made over $78,281 last year. I'm upper class. Why would an upper class guy like me not be voting GOP? Because I know they are going to fuck me just like they are going to fuck you soon.

Social Security: Trump budget aims cuts at disabled workers in program

While campaigning for the presidency in 2016, Donald Trump repeatedly vowed that he wouldn’t touch Social Security. But as the 2020 general election nears, his administration is signaling changes that could undermine his pledge.

But that does not mean Social Security will be gone by 2035. Instead, retirees at that point will see a 20% cut in their benefits, the trustees say.

That’s why politicians have proposed reforming Social Security. Fixes could include boosting the full retirement age – effectively, a cut to your benefits since you’d have fewer years to claim them

While Trump hasn’t proposed any changes for Social Security’s mainstay of providing retirement benefits, taxpayers may want to keep an eye on the issue if he’s elected to a second term. That’s because presidents traditionally tackle Social Security in their second term, such as President George Bush’s attempt to partially privatize the program in 2005.

yes liberal organizations do pay more.

Didn't pay women more......

You've been listening to fake news

Right-Wing Media Commemorate Equal Pay Day By Recycling Misleading Attacks On Progressives

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

I guess the Obama White House wasn't a liberal organization...….

 

[Osiris-ODS]

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.

Let me ask you....... when you need to change the oil in your car, do you go to the most expensive place? Or the cheapest? Do you use a coupon?

When you need to buy something, do you go to the place where it's the most expensive?

The irony with people like you, is that while you decry others paying out the lowest price, you do it yourself constantly.

When you bought the computer you have, did you get the most expensive? Or the lowest priced for the same specs?

Even if it was the absolute lowest price, I wager it was one of the cheaper stores. I wager it wasn't the $3,000 model.

Because whether you realize it or not, what you are paying for, is mostly labor. And when you buy the cheaper model, you are paying out less for labor.

The corporation is merely a reflection of the consumers choices. Namely, your choices.

Well put. These people crack me up. Now they're condemning businesses for only employing the number of people that are actually needed to run the business? Shame on businesses! That's mean! Businesses should hire and pay people they don't need because...well ... because it's the kind and charitable thing to do!

As Kevin Nealon so aptly stated in the movie Joe Dirt: "This is a business, this is not a charity. Maybe one day UNICEF will get into the impound business, but until then, we're the people to see"

 

[Papageorgio]

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

Then why do you work for a corporation? Why are you contributing to lining their pockets and keeping them in business so they can pollute more? Seems like you are supporting the very thing you claim is ruining America.

I've worked for companies where I was one of the 80% being paid shitty. Today I'm part of the 20% who are handsomely paid. The 80% should organize, or something.

And this fundamental shift of wealth doesn't bother me as much as it should other people who are first time home buyers, have kids going to school, have student debts.

I have no debt so fuck it. I'll survive even after they cut my social security 20%. Most of you will have to go back to work. I won't.

So others need to do it but not you. Corporations are evil except the one you work for. You work to make yourself a profit, you are no different than the corporations you hate.

You see everything black and white? Like I'm going to sit here and explain why what you are saying is nonsense.

I didn't say I work for the 1 good company. Most company treat their employees like shit. It's their business model. My brother is running one now. Trying to change the culture. It's hard since Reagan corporations like GE have been practicing how to best keep workers down.

"evil"? I didn't say they are all evil. But they do not care about anything but profit. Even when they do something good, its a PR move. Corporations are not people.

You only work for a profit, am I correct? You don't work for free and if you do work for free it is a PR move for you.

I never said corporations are people, I'm saying you are no different than a corporation.

 

[Dragonlady]

So why didn’t prices drop after the huge corporate tax cuts?

That's a stupid ass question and you know it.

Based on your claim its the perfect question. You have no answer eh? You might want to think about your claim.

Price hikes happen fasts. Price drops always happen slow. And the reason for this should be obvious to everyone.

If your company is needs money for a project, and you increase taxes... you can't just hold off. You can't wait until you are in bankruptcy. You have to pass on the cost immediately.

However, price drops, happen slowly over time. There is no rush to drop prices.

There is however, another reason prices have not fallen. Namely the increasing costs of required benefits.

By slowly you mean never when it comes to a decrease in taxes.

No, typically when costs do decrease, eventually it shakes out in lower prices, unless there are other cost effects... in which case you tend to see a slower increase in price, because lower taxes offsets the cost effects.

But typically, yes, all things being equal, the result is lower price.

Honestly, it's ridiculous to suggest otherwise.

Eventually someone is going to determine they can undercut the competition, by passing on lower prices. When that happens, the rest of the market has no choice by to lower prices as well.

Now if you keep the tax there, then that is impossible.

This is business 101 dude. It's not like it has not been practiced for thousands of years.

No it’s not. Business 101 is that you charge as much as the traffic will bear. I saw no drop in prices for clothing when manufacturing was offshored, but I did notice a steep drop in the quality of the fabrics used and the finishes. Of course the newer versions don’t last as long as North American made clothes used to which means you have to buy more often.

Some things have come down in price - consumer electronics for starters. I bought a 55” smart TV for under $400. My last big screen was just under $3000.

 

[Dick Foster]

L

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...

Point is, you act like they are doing some noble deed. Most people are underpaid and the corporation profits greatly from their efforts.

The point you missed is they need those employees to make a profit. So they aren't doing us a favor or being noble when they hire people.

LOL It's plain to see that you're a peon, have always been a peon and always will be a peon. Guess you'll never own or even manage much of anything.

 

[Dick Foster]

Do corporations really pay taxes, or is it people who pay the taxes in the form of higher prices so that desired corporate profit margins are realized? I have mixed feelings on the subject. They should but do they?

Yes. And they can pass it on to their consumers. I'm fine with that. I don't have to consume their shit. I don't think consumers would know if a blender costs $65 or $75. As long as the economy is working for everyone. That means the middle class too not just the corporations and 20% of the workers.

And I'm ok when Republicans change it so that corporations pay no taxes and we all pay more. Just remember this is one of the ways or reasons the gap between rich and middle class is getting wider. It's flat tax policies that Republicans pass. And then the cuts to social security and medicare to make up for their spending and lack of revenue. Wider Wider!!!

You are going to pay more tax, no matter how much the corporations pay.

Again... look at Europe. If your system worked, why are all the lower and middle class paying more tax?

If the theory that "if corporations pay more tax.... well.... then the rest of us will pay less tax!"... if that theory was true, then why hasn't a single country over in Europe, ever done that?

In fact, why has it not worked anywhere in the world?

You are screaming and yelling about Republicans, as if your system would work if not for Republicans. Open your eyes. Your system hasn't worked anywhere on the entire planet.

Not once has your system worked. Not even once.

So if you want more social security, and medicare and medicaid, and food stamps, and welfare, and education, and public housing, and free needles in San Fransico.... and on and on and on....

if you want all of that, then you need to except the fact, that you are going to pay for it whether republicans even exist or not.

If Republicans magically disappeared (likely taking their jobs and wealth with them) off the face of the Earth.... so there are no republicans anywhere in the US, and the US was run by the a one-party system of Democrats

YOU are still going to be the ones paying the taxes for all these programs. YOU. The lower and the middle class. The BS nonsense of "Corporations will pay for it!" and "The wealthy will pay for it!"... has never worked. If you want free health care, it's going to come out of your pocket in taxes. If you want free education, it's going to come out of your pocket in taxes. If you want public pensions, it's going to come out of your pocket in taxes.

You, the lower and middle class, the working people, are the ones who will lose 60% of your income in taxes, and be forced to live a more austere life, to pay for all these programs. That's how it is all throughout Europe, and how it is in Canada, and how it will be in the US, if we adopt your system.

Why are we going to pay more no matter how much the corporations pay? Explain that one to me andy. Doesn't make sense. If they were paying more we wouldn't have to.

• Corporate share of federal tax revenue has dropped by two-thirds in 60 years — from 32% in 1952 to 10% in 2013.
• General Electric, Boeing, Verizon and 23 other profitable Fortune 500 firms paid no federal income taxes from 2008 to 2012.
• Corporations used to pay almost one-third of federal taxes. Now it's one-tenth.

Chart: US corporations' shrinking tax burden

Again... look at Europe. If your system worked, then why has there not been one single example of it?

You want to know why people in Europe are paid less money for the same jobs? Can't be taxes, right? Or could it?

You can post all the stuff you want... that's fine. Show me an example where your system worked. Where is it?

Again... you don't have an example. None of those places that collect a slightly... and by slightly, I mean barely 1% difference in corporation tax revenue between the US and Sweden..... none of them, have a lower burden on their public, than the US. All have a much higher burden. Swedish people pay much more in tax, than we do in the US. Not less tax, with more corporate tax revenue... they pay MORE taxes with more corporate tax revenue.

There is not one... not one single example on the surface of the earth, where your system of more corporate tax revenue resulted in lower personal taxes.

Not one. If you care to list such an example, by all means.

Show me one country where a flat tax worked. Or where Libertarianism worked.

Show me just one example of socialism ever working. You can't simply because there aren't any. Further there never will be. It's against both human and mother nature.
Guess what all that's going on here is that you're being played for a sucker. Vote for me and I'll give you free stuff. Fact is your kind are the worst sort of greedy mother fuckers out there because you want to steal the fruits of someone else's labor for yourself because you're either too damned lazy or too damned stupid to do for yourself.
In short you're all deadbeat fucksticks.

 

[sealybobo]

So why didn’t prices drop after the huge corporate tax cuts?

That's a stupid ass question and you know it.

Based on your claim its the perfect question. You have no answer eh? You might want to think about your claim.

Price hikes happen fasts. Price drops always happen slow. And the reason for this should be obvious to everyone.

If your company is needs money for a project, and you increase taxes... you can't just hold off. You can't wait until you are in bankruptcy. You have to pass on the cost immediately.

However, price drops, happen slowly over time. There is no rush to drop prices.

There is however, another reason prices have not fallen. Namely the increasing costs of required benefits.

By slowly you mean never when it comes to a decrease in taxes.

No, typically when costs do decrease, eventually it shakes out in lower prices, unless there are other cost effects... in which case you tend to see a slower increase in price, because lower taxes offsets the cost effects.

But typically, yes, all things being equal, the result is lower price.

Honestly, it's ridiculous to suggest otherwise.

Eventually someone is going to determine they can undercut the competition, by passing on lower prices. When that happens, the rest of the market has no choice by to lower prices as well.

Now if you keep the tax there, then that is impossible.

This is business 101 dude. It's not like it has not been practiced for thousands of years.

Maybe the company keeps prices low but instead of $100,000 bonus’ the executives only get $50,000 bonus’

Because they do have competition and raising prices might hurt profits.

corporations got to pay taxes. Their trucks tear up our roads.

 

[sealybobo]

Yes. And they can pass it on to their consumers. I'm fine with that. I don't have to consume their shit. I don't think consumers would know if a blender costs $65 or $75. As long as the economy is working for everyone. That means the middle class too not just the corporations and 20% of the workers.

And I'm ok when Republicans change it so that corporations pay no taxes and we all pay more. Just remember this is one of the ways or reasons the gap between rich and middle class is getting wider. It's flat tax policies that Republicans pass. And then the cuts to social security and medicare to make up for their spending and lack of revenue. Wider Wider!!!

You are going to pay more tax, no matter how much the corporations pay.

Again... look at Europe. If your system worked, why are all the lower and middle class paying more tax?

If the theory that "if corporations pay more tax.... well.... then the rest of us will pay less tax!"... if that theory was true, then why hasn't a single country over in Europe, ever done that?

In fact, why has it not worked anywhere in the world?

You are screaming and yelling about Republicans, as if your system would work if not for Republicans. Open your eyes. Your system hasn't worked anywhere on the entire planet.

Not once has your system worked. Not even once.

So if you want more social security, and medicare and medicaid, and food stamps, and welfare, and education, and public housing, and free needles in San Fransico.... and on and on and on....

if you want all of that, then you need to except the fact, that you are going to pay for it whether republicans even exist or not.

If Republicans magically disappeared (likely taking their jobs and wealth with them) off the face of the Earth.... so there are no republicans anywhere in the US, and the US was run by the a one-party system of Democrats

YOU are still going to be the ones paying the taxes for all these programs. YOU. The lower and the middle class. The BS nonsense of "Corporations will pay for it!" and "The wealthy will pay for it!"... has never worked. If you want free health care, it's going to come out of your pocket in taxes. If you want free education, it's going to come out of your pocket in taxes. If you want public pensions, it's going to come out of your pocket in taxes.

You, the lower and middle class, the working people, are the ones who will lose 60% of your income in taxes, and be forced to live a more austere life, to pay for all these programs. That's how it is all throughout Europe, and how it is in Canada, and how it will be in the US, if we adopt your system.

Why are we going to pay more no matter how much the corporations pay? Explain that one to me andy. Doesn't make sense. If they were paying more we wouldn't have to.

• Corporate share of federal tax revenue has dropped by two-thirds in 60 years — from 32% in 1952 to 10% in 2013.
• General Electric, Boeing, Verizon and 23 other profitable Fortune 500 firms paid no federal income taxes from 2008 to 2012.
• Corporations used to pay almost one-third of federal taxes. Now it's one-tenth.

Chart: US corporations' shrinking tax burden

Again... look at Europe. If your system worked, then why has there not been one single example of it?

You want to know why people in Europe are paid less money for the same jobs? Can't be taxes, right? Or could it?

You can post all the stuff you want... that's fine. Show me an example where your system worked. Where is it?

Again... you don't have an example. None of those places that collect a slightly... and by slightly, I mean barely 1% difference in corporation tax revenue between the US and Sweden..... none of them, have a lower burden on their public, than the US. All have a much higher burden. Swedish people pay much more in tax, than we do in the US. Not less tax, with more corporate tax revenue... they pay MORE taxes with more corporate tax revenue.

There is not one... not one single example on the surface of the earth, where your system of more corporate tax revenue resulted in lower personal taxes.

Not one. If you care to list such an example, by all means.

Show me one country where a flat tax worked. Or where Libertarianism worked.

Show me just one example of socialism ever working. You can't simply because there aren't any. Further there never will be. It's against both human and mother nature.
Guess what all that's going on here is that you're being played for a sucker. Vote for me and I'll give you free stuff. Fact is your kind are the worst sort of greedy mother fuckers out there because you want to steal the fruits of someone else's labor for yourself because you're either too damned lazy or too damned stupid to do for yourself.
In short you're all deadbeat fucksticks.

Every country in Europe Australia and canada

 

[sealybobo]

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.

Do corporations really pay taxes, or is it people who pay the taxes in the form of higher prices so that desired corporate profit margins are realized? I have mixed feelings on the subject. They should but do they?

Yes. And they can pass it on to their consumers. I'm fine with that. I don't have to consume their shit. I don't think consumers would know if a blender costs $65 or $75. As long as the economy is working for everyone. That means the middle class too not just the corporations and 20% of the workers.

And I'm ok when Republicans change it so that corporations pay no taxes and we all pay more. Just remember this is one of the ways or reasons the gap between rich and middle class is getting wider. It's flat tax policies that Republicans pass. And then the cuts to social security and medicare to make up for their spending and lack of revenue. Wider Wider!!!

You are going to pay more tax, no matter how much the corporations pay.

Again... look at Europe. If your system worked, why are all the lower and middle class paying more tax?

If the theory that "if corporations pay more tax.... well.... then the rest of us will pay less tax!"... if that theory was true, then why hasn't a single country over in Europe, ever done that?

In fact, why has it not worked anywhere in the world?

You are screaming and yelling about Republicans, as if your system would work if not for Republicans. Open your eyes. Your system hasn't worked anywhere on the entire planet.

Not once has your system worked. Not even once.

So if you want more social security, and medicare and medicaid, and food stamps, and welfare, and education, and public housing, and free needles in San Fransico.... and on and on and on....

if you want all of that, then you need to except the fact, that you are going to pay for it whether republicans even exist or not.

If Republicans magically disappeared (likely taking their jobs and wealth with them) off the face of the Earth.... so there are no republicans anywhere in the US, and the US was run by the a one-party system of Democrats

YOU are still going to be the ones paying the taxes for all these programs. YOU. The lower and the middle class. The BS nonsense of "Corporations will pay for it!" and "The wealthy will pay for it!"... has never worked. If you want free health care, it's going to come out of your pocket in taxes. If you want free education, it's going to come out of your pocket in taxes. If you want public pensions, it's going to come out of your pocket in taxes.

You, the lower and middle class, the working people, are the ones who will lose 60% of your income in taxes, and be forced to live a more austere life, to pay for all these programs. That's how it is all throughout Europe, and how it is in Canada, and how it will be in the US, if we adopt your system.

Why are we going to pay more no matter how much the corporations pay? Explain that one to me andy. Doesn't make sense. If they were paying more we wouldn't have to.

• Corporate share of federal tax revenue has dropped by two-thirds in 60 years — from 32% in 1952 to 10% in 2013.
• General Electric, Boeing, Verizon and 23 other profitable Fortune 500 firms paid no federal income taxes from 2008 to 2012.
• Corporations used to pay almost one-third of federal taxes. Now it's one-tenth.

Chart: US corporations' shrinking tax burden

Again... look at Europe. If your system worked, then why has there not been one single example of it?

You want to know why people in Europe are paid less money for the same jobs? Can't be taxes, right? Or could it?

You can post all the stuff you want... that's fine. Show me an example where your system worked. Where is it?

Again... you don't have an example. None of those places that collect a slightly... and by slightly, I mean barely 1% difference in corporation tax revenue between the US and Sweden..... none of them, have a lower burden on their public, than the US. All have a much higher burden. Swedish people pay much more in tax, than we do in the US. Not less tax, with more corporate tax revenue... they pay MORE taxes with more corporate tax revenue.

There is not one... not one single example on the surface of the earth, where your system of more corporate tax revenue resulted in lower personal taxes.

Not one. If you care to list such an example, by all means.

Germany

 

[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.

Let me ask you....... when you need to change the oil in your car, do you go to the most expensive place? Or the cheapest? Do you use a coupon?

When you need to buy something, do you go to the place where it's the most expensive?

The irony with people like you, is that while you decry others paying out the lowest price, you do it yourself constantly.

When you bought the computer you have, did you get the most expensive? Or the lowest priced for the same specs?

Even if it was the absolute lowest price, I wager it was one of the cheaper stores. I wager it wasn't the $3,000 model.

Because whether you realize it or not, what you are paying for, is mostly labor. And when you buy the cheaper model, you are paying out less for labor.

The corporation is merely a reflection of the consumers choices. Namely, your choices.

Well put. These people crack me up. Now they're condemning businesses for only employing the number of people that are actually needed to run the business? Shame on businesses! That's mean! Businesses should hire and pay people they don't need because...well ... because it's the kind and charitable thing to do!

As Kevin Nealon so aptly stated in the movie Joe Dirt: "This is a business, this is not a charity. Maybe one day UNICEF will get into the impound business, but until then, we're the people to see"

Who condemned them? You’re hearing what you want to hear stupid

 

[sealybobo]

L

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...

Point is, you act like they are doing some noble deed. Most people are underpaid and the corporation profits greatly from their efforts.

The point you missed is they need those employees to make a profit. So they aren't doing us a favor or being noble when they hire people.

LOL It's plain to see that you're a peon, have always been a peon and always will be a peon. Guess you'll never own or even manage much of anything.

Yet Financially I’m upper class. Go figure.

 

[Bush92]

I'm a Conservative not a Republican however I believe all should have a stake in the game of paying taxes. That said, we need to cut spending across the board and keep the taxes until the debt is retired and then cut taxes for all.

And with 60% of the Federal budget for "Mandatory spending"... i.e. Medicare/SS/ etc.. how do you propose cutting the
Mandatory spending is estimated to be $2.841 trillion for FY 2020. The two largest mandatory programs are Social Security and Medicare. That's 60% of all federal spending. It's almost three times more than the military budget.
The Mandatory Federal Programs That Are Eating the Budget Alive

Where do you propose cutting that?
Then ...
The interest on the national debt is how much the federal government must pay on outstanding public debt each year.
The interest on the debt is $479 billion. (About 10% of the budget.)
That's from the federal budget for fiscal year 2020 that runs from October 1, 2019, through September 30, 2020.
4 Ways to Reduce the Interest on the National Debt

So where do you propose cutting the remaining 30% of Federal Budget?

Come on genius... tell me where you'd cut if 60% for Mandatory spending, 10% for debt interest... LEAVES 30% where to cut!!!
TELL ME PLEASE!!!
Facts really have a way of being a downer!

Corporations should get a HUGE reinvestment tax break.

 

[Thunk]

One problem.

Trump and Republicans passed large tax cuts to corporations. Did prices go down?

no. No they did not.

Yes...yes they did!

Take a 3 year old phone bill and a new one & compare the taxes you are being charged. Do it with any old bill Vs. a new one.

 

[Thunk]

One problem.

Trump and Republicans passed large tax cuts to corporations. Did prices go down?

no. No they did not.

Yes...yes they did!

Take a 3 year old phone bill and a new one & compare the taxes you are being charged. Do it with any old bill Vs. a new one.

 

[Bush92]

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.

They should be taxed on every dollar they invest overseas and on every job they ship to China or Mexico. Otherwise they should be left alone to create jobs in the United States of America.

 

[Bush92]

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.

In today's world where automation has replaced an incredible amount of labor your trickle down ideas are antiquated. What happens when a company uses their tax breaks to replace people with robots? It's a permanent tax loss for the government. The future looks bleak in this regard as automation stands to decimate the service sector as well.

Does taxing the corporation somehow stop the progress of automation?

Not at all, the argument that increased jobs and the income taxes offset corporate tax cuts can no longer be used because we are losing more jobs to automation than any possible trickle down effect could create.

Sure.

 

[LuckyDuck]

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.

In my humble opinion, if the head of a corporation and those on his or her board, are paying their fair share of personal income tax, they are in effect, paying the businesses taxes. And, quite frankly, whatever tax percentage your average individual would pay, that percentage should be the same for the corporate heads, as whatever percentage you've put in, the dollar figure they put in at the same percentage rate, far exceeds yours, as long as various loopholes are eliminated.

 

[Bush92]

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.

RepubliKans don't think, they emote.

Sure. Coming from a mindless socialist automaton that wants a world where Big Brother Washington DC can tell them how to think.

 

[Andylusion]

L

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...

Point is, you act like they are doing some noble deed. Most people are underpaid and the corporation profits greatly from their efforts.

The point you missed is they need those employees to make a profit. So they aren't doing us a favor or being noble when they hire people.

LOL It's plain to see that you're a peon, have always been a peon and always will be a peon. Guess you'll never own or even manage much of anything.

Yet Financially I’m upper class. Go figure.

That's also typical. Rich people, trying to convince poor people, that other rich people are to blame.

Hypocrisy is a hallmark of the left.

 

[Andylusion]

I'm a Conservative not a Republican however I believe all should have a stake in the game of paying taxes. That said, we need to cut spending across the board and keep the taxes until the debt is retired and then cut taxes for all.

And with 60% of the Federal budget for "Mandatory spending"... i.e. Medicare/SS/ etc.. how do you propose cutting the
Mandatory spending is estimated to be $2.841 trillion for FY 2020. The two largest mandatory programs are Social Security and Medicare. That's 60% of all federal spending. It's almost three times more than the military budget.
The Mandatory Federal Programs That Are Eating the Budget Alive

Where do you propose cutting that?
Then ...
The interest on the national debt is how much the federal government must pay on outstanding public debt each year.
The interest on the debt is $479 billion. (About 10% of the budget.)
That's from the federal budget for fiscal year 2020 that runs from October 1, 2019, through September 30, 2020.
4 Ways to Reduce the Interest on the National Debt

So where do you propose cutting the remaining 30% of Federal Budget?

Come on genius... tell me where you'd cut if 60% for Mandatory spending, 10% for debt interest... LEAVES 30% where to cut!!!
TELL ME PLEASE!!!
Facts really have a way of being a downer!

Corporations should get a HUGE reinvestment tax break.

Yes, exactly. It cracks me up when I see left-wingers scream and yell about tax breaks for business investment.... and then scream and yell when those businesses invest over seas where taxes are lower.

Hello left-wingers..... these two things are connected, you morons.