Do Republicans Think Corporations should pay no taxes?

[Hutch Starskey]

A non-answer, go figure.

A simple answer to it you can't succeed in life paying debt with more debt… Simple as that LOL

Unable to articulate a clear answer I see.

Lol
What's not shitty about it?
Overwhelming UN-payable debt is game over...
The direction career politicians and their federal government are taking this country in - it has already been tried hundreds of times over history, it leads to a 100% fail rate.
You do know what the definition of insanity is? LOL

Still nothing but mutterings of debt and career politicians?

Show us some of that inherent conservative economic prowess we hear so much about here at USMB.

Only a control freak socialist like yourself would think that good economics include debt… LOL

I've said nothing about debt.
You keep saying it's a shitty economy.
What in your mind is shitty about it?
What do you believe the main driver for economic growth is?

 

[SuperDemocrat]

The stated theory is not even a theory, it is reflected in the cost of production on every balance sheet in the world. Cutting the cost of production is awesome for the owners but it is theft from the working class economy in jobs and wages. American productivity is still among the best in the world but it has done very little for those who actually produce.

No, it's a theory, and a real shitty one at that. Sorry, you won't get Marxist theory of value popping out of balance sheets.

Cutting costs is what makes economies thrive and the middle class rich. Claiming otherwise is again more Marxist nonsense.

Also you might want to reconsider your definition of theft.

This is not Marxist theory, it is econ 101. There are two ways for a company to make a profit, cutting costs and increasing sales. The first makes money flow up and the other down to the working class. It is far easier to show the stockholders a quarterly profit by wringing more productivity from the workers than to increase sales and for the last twenty years this has been the go-to method to remain profitable. The downside to this is stagnant wages and fewer jobs.

Companies tend to not invest in shitty economies. And liberals create shitty economies.

Yet American companies are eager to invest in China now that they've become more economically liberal.

Why is that, Professor?

Their arguments for free trade don't sound like their pro trump tariffs argument. Sounds like cognitive dissonance to me

That sound you hear is your own thoughts bouncing off the hollow walls of your skull.

 

[Indeependent]

Why would a corporation pass on tax savings to its employees or customers? Before doing such a thing I might expect them to buy out competition, especially start ups, expand operations overseas, give raises to the CEO, CFO, etc. and maybe toss a penny or two to common stock holders.

Because of competitions. When other firms have more resources they will try to hire the best and thus wages must come up.

It's simple if only you aren't subscribed to the Marxist version of economics, also known as fairy tales.

"The labor theory of value is a major pillar of traditional Marxian economics, which is evident in Marx's masterpiece, Capital (1867). The theory's basic claim is simple: the value of a commodity can be objectively measured by the average number of labor hours required to produce that commodity."

Now, consider if there is some truth to his theory, why would a corporation higher more and better workers and pay them more when technology & robotics can replace people?

Where do you think robots come from? Are they not produced by employees that need to be hired? The more money corporations have, the more work they need done... and thus the higher the wage offered.


So the solution is simple, once you consider that there is no truth to Marx's theory.

A theory is just that, when you offer a rebuttal I promise to read it, but for now lets skip it.

Robots can work 24-7-365, never get sick and when they do they are tossed into the recycle bin and replaced. They are never late to work, never need breaks and never leave early. So let's leave old Karl out of the issue and then you can respond as to why an industry would hire hundreds of skilled workers when a few can design a robot to be put together with plans not much different than those that came with an erector set.

The problem with automation is a thorny one and not really covered by any traditional economic model/philosophy. Are probably going to be forced to institute some sort of guaranteed income scheme just to keep fluidity in the greater economy.

If automation was the issue, every Immigration Bill wouldn't be requesting nearly 2 million Business Visas a year.

 

[Rustic]

A simple answer to it you can't succeed in life paying debt with more debt… Simple as that LOL

Unable to articulate a clear answer I see.

Lol
What's not shitty about it?
Overwhelming UN-payable debt is game over...
The direction career politicians and their federal government are taking this country in - it has already been tried hundreds of times over history, it leads to a 100% fail rate.
You do know what the definition of insanity is? LOL

Still nothing but mutterings of debt and career politicians?

Show us some of that inherent conservative economic prowess we hear so much about here at USMB.

Only a control freak socialist like yourself would think that good economics include debt… LOL

I've said nothing about debt.
You keep saying it's a shitty economy.
What in your mind is shitty about it?
What do you believe the main driver for economic growth is?

A tiny starved federal government… it's quite the opposite now. LOL

 

[Yousaidwhat]

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.

The USSC & IRS considers a corporation a person. A less friendly approach might be to place a very high tariff on any product made in nation XYZ, once made in the US. That would open the door for new entrepreneurs to build start up companies with US Labor here at home. Said money collected by the tariff to be distributed to the retirees harmed by said company. Also, the assets left by said company should be taken and sold by under an act of Congress and revenue from the sale of real property, furniture and equipment given to those whose jobs were shipped to XYZ.

You want to seize assets from companies who move over seas. Companies that are offered incentive to move to these countries by giving them tax breaks and a more friendly climate to do business.

I would think it wiser to bring this revenue home by offering them a better incentive and a friendlier climate to do business in.

How are you going to seize these assets? Military intervention?

You can't sell here if you don't make it here.

Isolationist?

Any Entity that made it big here and transferred operations overseas gets shit canned for a year.
That's Adjustment, not Isolationist.
It's also subtle...Conservatives don't understand subtle.

An adjustment, not isolationist? OK.

Smells like isolationism to me.

 

[sealybobo]

Taxing a man's labor, be it individual income tax or from a group of people as in a corporation, is immoral and antithetical to a free society. Besides, if the Federal government lived on the revenue we produced just a decade or so ago, we wouldn't need an income tax.

Is that you Aaron Russo?

 

[sealybobo]

Yet another inane simple minded poll conducted by lefties.

I'm either trying to get you to admit or realize what you are advocating for. Shifting the tax burden more on to yourself. Do you think you can pay off the debt by yourself?

Do you think that all people are like you and do not own a stock portfolio for retirement?

Are you 13 years old?


The more profits companies can generate the better the retirement portfolios or house savings or in fact any form of insurance does.

Are you working class or investor class?

There was a time you were a worker, right? You got to investor class because you didn't have to compete with mexico and china.

But what do you care you got yours right? You climbed the opportunity ladder now want to pull it up on the people who come after you.

In the America you grew up in corporations paid their fair share so your daddy could provide for you. Now you want to shift the burden on us?

Everyone who has a job should belong into both the investor class and the working class.

Only a spendaholic liberal can't realize this.

No, we understand that ya dope.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Unable to articulate a clear answer I see.

Lol
What's not shitty about it?
Overwhelming UN-payable debt is game over...
The direction career politicians and their federal government are taking this country in - it has already been tried hundreds of times over history, it leads to a 100% fail rate.
You do know what the definition of insanity is? LOL

Still nothing but mutterings of debt and career politicians?

Show us some of that inherent conservative economic prowess we hear so much about here at USMB.

Only a control freak socialist like yourself would think that good economics include debt… LOL

I've said nothing about debt.
You keep saying it's a shitty economy.
What in your mind is shitty about it?
What do you believe the main driver for economic growth is?

A tiny starved federal government… it's quite the opposite now. LOL

So the economy has never been strong since the govt became large?

 

[Yousaidwhat]

Yet another inane simple minded poll conducted by lefties.

I'm either trying to get you to admit or realize what you are advocating for. Shifting the tax burden more on to yourself. Do you think you can pay off the debt by yourself?

Do you think that all people are like you and do not own a stock portfolio for retirement?

Are you 13 years old?


The more profits companies can generate the better the retirement portfolios or house savings or in fact any form of insurance does.

Are you working class or investor class?

There was a time you were a worker, right? You got to investor class because you didn't have to compete with mexico and china.

But what do you care you got yours right? You climbed the opportunity ladder now want to pull it up on the people who come after you.

In the America you grew up in corporations paid their fair share so your daddy could provide for you. Now you want to shift the burden on us?

You're having trouble understanding economics, an massive overbearing federal government can never be good "economics" meaning it never can consume/take enough of others… LOL

You're speaking to someone who says" we have bills, and they have the money, so we must take it!"

 

[Clementine]

Does taxing the corporation somehow stop the progress of automation?

Good point considering automation is looked at to save money. We see fast food places looking at it more seriously with minimum wage increases. Taxing them more might prompt them to install computers to replace people.

 

[2aguy]

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.

15% is fair. Less is better but I could live with 15%.....and that goes for everyone. Yes...they will pass that 15% on to customers...so they will still pay no taxes...but trying to explain that to you lefties is just not worth the typing........

 

[occupied]

Because of competitions. When other firms have more resources they will try to hire the best and thus wages must come up.

It's simple if only you aren't subscribed to the Marxist version of economics, also known as fairy tales.

"The labor theory of value is a major pillar of traditional Marxian economics, which is evident in Marx's masterpiece, Capital (1867). The theory's basic claim is simple: the value of a commodity can be objectively measured by the average number of labor hours required to produce that commodity."

Now, consider if there is some truth to his theory, why would a corporation higher more and better workers and pay them more when technology & robotics can replace people?

Where do you think robots come from? Are they not produced by employees that need to be hired? The more money corporations have, the more work they need done... and thus the higher the wage offered.


So the solution is simple, once you consider that there is no truth to Marx's theory.

A theory is just that, when you offer a rebuttal I promise to read it, but for now lets skip it.

Robots can work 24-7-365, never get sick and when they do they are tossed into the recycle bin and replaced. They are never late to work, never need breaks and never leave early. So let's leave old Karl out of the issue and then you can respond as to why an industry would hire hundreds of skilled workers when a few can design a robot to be put together with plans not much different than those that came with an erector set.

The problem with automation is a thorny one and not really covered by any traditional economic model/philosophy. Are probably going to be forced to institute some sort of guaranteed income scheme just to keep fluidity in the greater economy.

If automation was the issue, every Immigration Bill wouldn't be requesting nearly 2 million Business Visas a year.

It is a problem that has been coming on slowly since the beginning of the industrial revolution but is about to undergo exponential expansion in the next twenty years as automation invades the service industry. No one can say how we will keep money flowing through the economy as our unstable service based economy is automated like our industrial economy once was. We are entering uncharted territory and the private sector is offering no solutions.

 

[sealybobo]

Taxing a man's labor, be it individual income tax or from a group of people as in a corporation, is immoral and antithetical to a free society. Besides, if the Federal government lived on the revenue we produced just a decade or so ago, we wouldn't need an income tax.

True, an income tax goes against everything this country was founded on. Leave it to career politicians and their federal government to punish the successful. That's what socialism is all about - envy... Lol

You guys have become freedom to fascism Aaron Russo Ron Paul conspiracy theorist nuts. I love it because I agree. Good luck convincing everyone else the bankers pulled off a coup in 1913 when they took over the federal reserve.

 

[sealybobo]

A non-answer, go figure.

A simple answer to it you can't succeed in life paying debt with more debt… Simple as that LOL

Unable to articulate a clear answer I see.

Lol
What's not shitty about it?
Overwhelming UN-payable debt is game over...
The direction career politicians and their federal government are taking this country in - it has already been tried hundreds of times over history, it leads to a 100% fail rate.
You do know what the definition of insanity is? LOL

Still nothing but mutterings of debt and career politicians?

Show us some of that inherent conservative economic prowess we hear so much about here at USMB.

Only a control freak socialist like yourself would think that good economics include debt… LOL

Didn't dick Chaney say debt doesn't matter? Back when he said it I remember usmb Republicans were arguing how debt is no biggy

Be honest. When Republicans are in power debt doesn't matter to you.

 

[Norman]

"The labor theory of value is a major pillar of traditional Marxian economics, which is evident in Marx's masterpiece, Capital (1867). The theory's basic claim is simple: the value of a commodity can be objectively measured by the average number of labor hours required to produce that commodity."

Now, consider if there is some truth to his theory, why would a corporation higher more and better workers and pay them more when technology & robotics can replace people?

Where do you think robots come from? Are they not produced by employees that need to be hired? The more money corporations have, the more work they need done... and thus the higher the wage offered.


So the solution is simple, once you consider that there is no truth to Marx's theory.

A theory is just that, when you offer a rebuttal I promise to read it, but for now lets skip it.

Robots can work 24-7-365, never get sick and when they do they are tossed into the recycle bin and replaced. They are never late to work, never need breaks and never leave early. So let's leave old Karl out of the issue and then you can respond as to why an industry would hire hundreds of skilled workers when a few can design a robot to be put together with plans not much different than those that came with an erector set.

The problem with automation is a thorny one and not really covered by any traditional economic model/philosophy. Are probably going to be forced to institute some sort of guaranteed income scheme just to keep fluidity in the greater economy.

If automation was the issue, every Immigration Bill wouldn't be requesting nearly 2 million Business Visas a year.

It is a problem that has been coming on slowly since the beginning of the industrial revolution but is about to undergo exponential expansion in the next twenty years as automation invades the service industry. No one can say how we will keep money flowing through the economy as our unstable service based economy is automated like our industrial economy once was. We are entering uncharted territory and the private sector is offering no solutions.

Nice fairytales, did you read them from your overlord's: Karl Marx's offerings?

Automation is a wonderful thing and makes us rich. Marxism is not the answer.

 

[Rustic]

Lol
What's not shitty about it?
Overwhelming UN-payable debt is game over...
The direction career politicians and their federal government are taking this country in - it has already been tried hundreds of times over history, it leads to a 100% fail rate.
You do know what the definition of insanity is? LOL

Still nothing but mutterings of debt and career politicians?

Show us some of that inherent conservative economic prowess we hear so much about here at USMB.

Only a control freak socialist like yourself would think that good economics include debt… LOL

I've said nothing about debt.
You keep saying it's a shitty economy.
What in your mind is shitty about it?
What do you believe the main driver for economic growth is?

A tiny starved federal government… it's quite the opposite now. LOL

So the economy has never been strong since the govt became large?

A large federal government and its byproduct unpayable debt... Is not only a drain on the freedoms of people - it's an absolute drain on economic success...

 

[Indeependent]

Where do you think robots come from? Are they not produced by employees that need to be hired? The more money corporations have, the more work they need done... and thus the higher the wage offered.


So the solution is simple, once you consider that there is no truth to Marx's theory.

A theory is just that, when you offer a rebuttal I promise to read it, but for now lets skip it.

Robots can work 24-7-365, never get sick and when they do they are tossed into the recycle bin and replaced. They are never late to work, never need breaks and never leave early. So let's leave old Karl out of the issue and then you can respond as to why an industry would hire hundreds of skilled workers when a few can design a robot to be put together with plans not much different than those that came with an erector set.

The problem with automation is a thorny one and not really covered by any traditional economic model/philosophy. Are probably going to be forced to institute some sort of guaranteed income scheme just to keep fluidity in the greater economy.

If automation was the issue, every Immigration Bill wouldn't be requesting nearly 2 million Business Visas a year.

It is a problem that has been coming on slowly since the beginning of the industrial revolution but is about to undergo exponential expansion in the next twenty years as automation invades the service industry. No one can say how we will keep money flowing through the economy as our unstable service based economy is automated like our industrial economy once was. We are entering uncharted territory and the private sector is offering no solutions.

Nice fairytales, did you read them from your overlord's: Karl Marx's offerings?

Automation is a wonderful thing and makes us rich. Marxism is not the answer.

ad hominem, immature one.
I live in Nassau County and neither the County nor NYC is going hog wild over automation.

 

[sealybobo]

Actually Trump thinks the middle class shouldn't pay any income taxes....

You'll believe anything the guy says. His cum tastes like chocolate too

 

[Rustic]

A simple answer to it you can't succeed in life paying debt with more debt… Simple as that LOL

Unable to articulate a clear answer I see.

Lol
What's not shitty about it?
Overwhelming UN-payable debt is game over...
The direction career politicians and their federal government are taking this country in - it has already been tried hundreds of times over history, it leads to a 100% fail rate.
You do know what the definition of insanity is? LOL

Still nothing but mutterings of debt and career politicians?

Show us some of that inherent conservative economic prowess we hear so much about here at USMB.

Only a control freak socialist like yourself would think that good economics include debt… LOL

Didn't dick Chaney say debt doesn't matter? Back when he said it I remember usmb Republicans were arguing how debt is no biggy

Be honest. When Republicans are in power debt doesn't matter to you.

He was and is a career politician what do you expect? LOL

 

[Wry Catcher]

Why would a corporation pass on tax savings to its employees or customers? Before doing such a thing I might expect them to buy out competition, especially start ups, expand operations overseas, give raises to the CEO, CFO, etc. and maybe toss a penny or two to common stock holders.

Because of competitions. When other firms have more resources they will try to hire the best and thus wages must come up.

It's simple if only you aren't subscribed to the Marxist version of economics, also known as fairy tales.

"The labor theory of value is a major pillar of traditional Marxian economics, which is evident in Marx's masterpiece, Capital (1867). The theory's basic claim is simple: the value of a commodity can be objectively measured by the average number of labor hours required to produce that commodity."

Now, consider if there is some truth to his theory, why would a corporation higher more and better workers and pay them more when technology & robotics can replace people?

Where do you think robots come from? Are they not produced by employees that need to be hired? The more money corporations have, the more work they need done... and thus the higher the wage offered.


So the solution is simple, once you consider that there is no truth to Marx's theory.

A theory is just that, when you offer a rebuttal I promise to read it, but for now lets skip it.

Robots can work 24-7-365, never get sick and when they do they are tossed into the recycle bin and replaced. They are never late to work, never need breaks and never leave early. So let's leave old Karl out of the issue and then you can respond as to why an industry would hire hundreds of skilled workers when a few can design a robot to be put together with plans not much different than those that came with an erector set.

The problem with automation is a thorny one and not really covered by any traditional economic model/philosophy. Are probably going to be forced to institute some sort of guaranteed income scheme just to keep fluidity in the greater economy.

It is a problem, but one which needs no theory to explain how it will impact jobs - it will reduce or eliminate them, and open up new careers for tech savvy engineers and entrepreneurs. Will it mean more unemployment, or will some social engineering need to take place, such as reducing the work week to 24 hours? making two 'week ends' in a week and creating more jobs in hobby areas, recreation, sports, art, music, etc.