Fair taxation.

[Boss]

plowed back into the business, where, hopefully, they will result in greater revenues, profits, or activities, all of which generate taxes of one kind or another.

So the money gets plowed back into the business generating revenues and proffits... even if the corporation decides to open an office offshore ? Yes, I can see the picture... clearly . Chinese have certainly seen the beneffit of this situation.

Extrapolating your example one would conclude that the only valid tax is the payroll tax.

Again... The problem of corporations moving offshore is directly related to more constraint being applied to the capitalist. Trying to apply more left-wing policies is not going to bring back those jobs. The only hope is to ease the constraints on capitalists and make it more attractive for them to remain stateside. I would do two things... Eliminate all corporate income tax for the next 10 years and also declare a tax moratorium on all wealth brought back to the US and invested in expansion. This literally would cost nothing to do.

As for personal income tax, I think we should repeal it with an amendment and replace it with a consumption tax (sales tax). We are probably the largest consumer-driven nation on the planet. A tax on consumption at a time of great economic expansion would generate more revenue than we could imagine. If you're poor, you get an ATM card with $5k to more than cover the taxes you would pay for basic needs.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Now my point on this thread : put a low and competitive tax on global corporate income (e.g 15%) and have the rest of the 30 largest economies agree to have the same tax.

1) they won't agree nor should they

2) a corporate tax is idiotic since it is passed on to customers in the form of higher prices and since it distracts business from conducting business efficiently. GE for example has 1000 full time tax professionals whose salaries raise the price of all GE products. Their tax return weighs 314 LBS.

 

[Dad2three]

No because they will simply offshore and produce elsewhere.

The world is not the same as it was 40 years ago, don't try and make it so.

They don't ALREADY do that at the lowest effective rate on Corps in 40+ years? lol

 

[Dad2three]

Those gosh darn corporations.

U.S. Corporate Tax Rates Are the Highest in the Developed World

DON'T KNOW THE DIFFERENCE ON TAX RATES VERSUS EFFECTIVE RATES ACTUALLY PAID? US IS ONLY BEATEN BY CHILE AND MEXICO IN THE DEVELOPED WORLD


http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/02/27/432749/buffett-corporate-tax-myth/
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/02/27/432749/buffett-corporate-tax-myth/
Warren Buffett: ‘It Is A Myth’ That U.S. Corporate Taxes Are High

The interesting thing about the corporate rate is that corporate profits, as a percentage of GDP last year were the highest or just about the highest in the last 50 years. They were ten and a fraction percent of GDP. That’s higher than we’ve seen in 50 years. The corporate taxes as a percentage of GDP were 1.2 percent, $180 billion. That’s just about the lowest we’ve seen. So our corporate tax rate last year, effectively, in terms of taxes paid for the United States, was around 12 percent, which is well below those existing in most of the industrialized countries around the world. So it is a myth that American corporations are paying 35 percent or anything like it…Corporate taxes are not strangling American competitiveness.

 

[Dad2three]

Those gosh darn corporations.

U.S. Corporate Tax Rates Are the Highest in the Developed World

And yet tax revenue is decreasing.


I KNOW I KNOW - reality is actually incorrect. Just raise the tax some more because 'fair share.' One of the most vapid phrases this past decade.

I am not here to rant against corporations. Just, how was it that the income from corporate taxes was 2 or 3 times higher 40 years ago ?

...relative to GDP.

This is another one of those fail threads.

AS economists measure it? Talk about fail

The interesting thing about the corporate rate is that corporate profits, as a percentage of GDP last year were the highest or just about the highest in the last 50 years. They were ten and a fraction percent of GDP. That’s higher than we’ve seen in 50 years. The corporate taxes as a percentage of GDP were 1.2 percent, $180 billion. That’s just about the lowest we’ve seen. So our corporate tax rate last year, effectively, in terms of taxes paid for the United States, was around 12 percent, which is well below those existing in most of the industrialized countries around the world. So it is a myth that American corporations are paying 35 percent or anything like it…Corporate taxes are not strangling American competitiveness.

Warren Buffett: ‘It Is A Myth’ That U.S. Corporate Taxes Are High

 

[Dad2three]

Well no, this concept of "perfect competition" is certainly not part of Economics 101, which I have actually taken.

Different teachers ... I guess. I did review the topic.
Regarding healthcare, no , it is not the best : Cuba has lower infant mortality, sweedes and europeans in general live longer as well as japanese. Part of this is due to the eating habits, but also part is due to their healthcare system.
I had a long discussion on another forum regarding the healthcare system. There are many variables, but the main one is that as insurance companies and the government pour money into the system prices go up very quickly. The only state that has been saved from cycle is Maryland due to the policy they adopted long ago.

Jeesh... how did this turn into a 10 year-old debate over Obamacare?

One of the biggest problems with our health care system is that it's a bureaucratic hot mess... light on the hot, heavy on the mess. And all these commercials you see.... "If you or a loved one took Dudrex, you may be entitled to a compensation.... our lawyers want to hear from you!" Where do you think the money comes from all of that? Someone has to pay for all these million dollar settlements. Ultimately, it is the consumer.

You see, we live in a rather spoiled society who wants to be coddled and protected at any cost. We want to be able to sue that mean old pharmaceutical company for giving us bad meds or that doctor who botched our surgery and caused us pain and suffering. Whenever all of that becomes under the control of Federal government, it's a completely different story.

Mortality rates simply don't mean better health care. In the US, the infant mortality rate is high because US doctors attempt every effort to save lives. A newborn who would have been a stillborn statistic in another country becomes part of our infant mortality rate because of better health care. Life expectancy is higher in Scandinavian countries because they are largely an immobile society for most of the year. They stay in their frigid little villages and towns, don't venture out much in winter, and they don't have millions of illegals flooding over their borders bringing new diseases in.

Boss,
I agree with you in the lawyers part. Nevertheless, malpractice must be pursued when it occurs.
I get your point on the illegals and I kind of agree( see below), but your point on infant mortality rates being lower in Cuba is laughable. Their pediatric care is good period, and the part on Scandinavia , oh!! that did give me a good laugh at least.Jajaja.
Ok now seriously, scandinavia is the most notable case, but there are many countries which beat the USA... including Costa Rica , which guess what , receives thousands of Nicaraguan inmigrants ( they don't like them much ).

List of countries by life expectancy - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Take a good look at the list... they have good healthcare systems, yes , they pay more taxes , in some cases, but they are put to good use.

You are talking about completely different cultures. Here, we are a spoiled litigious minded society who will exploit any circumstance to our advantage whenever possible. Screw you, I've got mine! Whereas, in Scandinavian countries the people are much more familial. The culture is closer-knit than our 'vast melting pot'. They don't tend to abuse their public health care because it belongs to their neighbors and friends, it's communal. So these 'socialist' systems of health care appear to work well in isolated close-knit communities of that region.

Examples like Costa Rica and Cuba are pathetic. You honestly believe those places have superior health care to the United States of America? Really?

Let me share a personal story here since I know the natives love them so much... Several years ago, I worked with a Russian woman named Svetlana. She was very smart and well-educated, and she had been part of the ruling class in Russia growing up. All the negative propaganda we learned through the Cold War, Svetlana heard the opposite from the Russian perspective. She didn't like it here, she often lamented on how great she had it back home, and how much more expensive it was to live in America.

So one day I asked her, "if it was so great there, why are you here?"
She sort of paused and started to tear up, and I felt like I had maybe overstepped in my query, but it just bugged me. She fought back her emotions and said... "it's my daughter."

She had a baby girl who was about 14 months old and the doctors in Russia had discovered a heart abnormality which would eventually lead to death without a particular surgical procedure. Their recommendation for the surgery was UAB in Alabama.

YET you can't find ONE poll EVER where UHC nations want US style H/C!

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

DON'T KNOW THE DIFFERENCE ON TAX RATES VERSUS EFFECTIVE RATES ACTUALLY PAID? US IS ONLY BEATEN BY CHILE AND MEXICO IN THE DEVELOPED WORLD

Most importantly , USA is at very top in pushing corporations, jobs, and investment capital off shore with taxes that collects little revenue but do provide incentives to move off shore.

It is pure liberal stupidity. We have the tax only to pander to the pure ignorance of marxist liberals who are brainwashed to imagine they need to punish corportions.

 

[Boss]

Think about what you just said for a moment and then think about who has been in power for the past decade? Has it been the Reagan-style free market capitalist conservatives or has it been the radical left wing socialist liberals? The policies we have been getting are clearly from the left, clearly more socialist than capitalist, and clearly not conservative free market capitalist. Yet... Record corporate profits and stagnant wages. Why do you suppose that is?

Hold your horses.
The current problems started with Dubya's war on Iraq and Dubya's crisis, who, lets remember was in charge for eight years.
That said, I do agree with republicans in some issues:
The way in which medicare and medicaid are set up is not the correct one and are probably making the healthcare more expensive, the same goes for student loans.
Nevertheless, there has to be a mechanism to provide for healthcare and education for poor people . In Japan the government covers 70% and the person covers the remainder. This forces the person to do "shopping". Also the hospitals are strictly non profit organizations ... now you might not like this other solution, but I find it better than the current state of things.

Putting all the blame on either republicans or democrats is not completely fair. Its an oversimplification, both parties have played a role.

Now, why I am so disquited with the earnigs of the corporations ? Simply because those great fortunes seem to be floating around in the ficticious economy, the one that plays to the casino with derivatives, and doesn't actually increases production.

Now my point on this thread : put a low and competitive tax on global corporate income (e.g 15%) and have the rest of the 30 largest economies agree to have the same tax.

Neither of the Bush presidents were Reagan-style free market capitalist conservatives. As a matter of fact, Clinton was actually closer to Reagan's economics aside from NAFTA. But none of them were Reaganites. Even the current establishment GOP is not in line with free market capitalism. It needs to be made clear, there is a difference between a corporatist and a free market capitalist. The corporatist is someone who wants to exploit the power of government to benefit capitalistically. These people are not free market capitalists.

Now you rattled off a bunch of other issues not related to the thread topic, but I can address those as well. Hospitals and health care is not charity work. Doctors and nurses do not volunteer their services. The best health care will always be the most expensive health care. The best system is a private sector system where competitive forces drive the market. This gives the consumer more choices and more options and we can still have adequate health care available for everyone. Medicare and Social Security are on life support, they will not survive as currently structured. The Democrats are content to continue using them as political weapons to battle the evil rich white men who want to take old people's checks away and push them off a cliff. Republicans keep making proposals as to how we can salvage the system and make it viable for the future, but the emotive rhetoric from the left squelches what they are trying to convey. Student Loans... another failed liberal policy that is now somehow being dumped in our laps to fix with total incredulity.

 

[CultureCitizen]

Even the current establishment GOP is not in line with free market capitalism. It needs to be made clear, there is a difference between a corporatist and a free market capitalist. The corporatist is someone who wants to exploit the power of government to benefit capitalistically. These people are not free market capitalists.

Ok Boss,
I agree with you on that. We need a free market, and I am not happy with the current corporatocracy ( that's why I want them to be taxed... not excesively taxed but they need to pay their fair share and keep their hands out of the government... ja).

 

[Dad2three]

DON'T KNOW THE DIFFERENCE ON TAX RATES VERSUS EFFECTIVE RATES ACTUALLY PAID? US IS ONLY BEATEN BY CHILE AND MEXICO IN THE DEVELOPED WORLD

Most importantly , USA is at very top in pushing corporations, jobs, and investment capital off shore with taxes that collects little revenue but do provide incentives to move off shore.

It is pure liberal stupidity. We have the tax only to pander to the pure ignorance of marxist liberals who are brainwashed to imagine they need to punish corportions.

More right wing nonsense. Shocking that it comes from you, lol

Neo-Liberalism/Conservatives is/has destroyed the American Economy in favor of the so called "Job Creator"... In reality are "Job Exporters"...

The Republican sham of lower taxes and less regulation doesn't help anyone but the richest Americans and Big Business and kill jobs and opportunity for almost everyone, especially in the middle class and poor.


The jobs lost in the recession were lost BECAUSE of Republican Policies, lies and fallacies- Can we say Trickle Down (Voodoo!) Economics? Hell, even Dubya's Dad knew that stuff was, uh, Bunk!

Now they want you to believe them when they claim they know what's best for the rest of us?

 

[Dad2three]

Think about what you just said for a moment and then think about who has been in power for the past decade? Has it been the Reagan-style free market capitalist conservatives or has it been the radical left wing socialist liberals? The policies we have been getting are clearly from the left, clearly more socialist than capitalist, and clearly not conservative free market capitalist. Yet... Record corporate profits and stagnant wages. Why do you suppose that is?

Hold your horses.
The current problems started with Dubya's war on Iraq and Dubya's crisis, who, lets remember was in charge for eight years.
That said, I do agree with republicans in some issues:
The way in which medicare and medicaid are set up is not the correct one and are probably making the healthcare more expensive, the same goes for student loans.
Nevertheless, there has to be a mechanism to provide for healthcare and education for poor people . In Japan the government covers 70% and the person covers the remainder. This forces the person to do "shopping". Also the hospitals are strictly non profit organizations ... now you might not like this other solution, but I find it better than the current state of things.

Putting all the blame on either republicans or democrats is not completely fair. Its an oversimplification, both parties have played a role.

Now, why I am so disquited with the earnigs of the corporations ? Simply because those great fortunes seem to be floating around in the ficticious economy, the one that plays to the casino with derivatives, and doesn't actually increases production.

Now my point on this thread : put a low and competitive tax on global corporate income (e.g 15%) and have the rest of the 30 largest economies agree to have the same tax.

Neither of the Bush presidents were Reagan-style free market capitalist conservatives. As a matter of fact, Clinton was actually closer to Reagan's economics aside from NAFTA. But none of them were Reaganites. Even the current establishment GOP is not in line with free market capitalism. It needs to be made clear, there is a difference between a corporatist and a free market capitalist. The corporatist is someone who wants to exploit the power of government to benefit capitalistically. These people are not free market capitalists.

Now you rattled off a bunch of other issues not related to the thread topic, but I can address those as well. Hospitals and health care is not charity work. Doctors and nurses do not volunteer their services. The best health care will always be the most expensive health care. The best system is a private sector system where competitive forces drive the market. This gives the consumer more choices and more options and we can still have adequate health care available for everyone. Medicare and Social Security are on life support, they will not survive as currently structured. The Democrats are content to continue using them as political weapons to battle the evil rich white men who want to take old people's checks away and push them off a cliff. Republicans keep making proposals as to how we can salvage the system and make it viable for the future, but the emotive rhetoric from the left squelches what they are trying to convey. Student Loans... another failed liberal policy that is now somehow being dumped in our laps to fix with total incredulity.

"Clinton was actually closer to Reagan's economics aside from NAFTA. But none of them were Reaganites"

You mean Heritage idea that Ronnie Reagan announced the day he ran for Prez in 1979???

Ronald Reagan on Free Trade


(Re-)Introducing: The American School of Economics

When the United States became independent from Britain it also rebelled against the British System of economics, characterized by Adam Smith, in favor of the American School based on protectionism and infrastructure and prospered under this system for almost 200 years to become the wealthiest nation in the world. Unrestrained free trade resurfaced in the early 1900s culminating in the Great Depression and again in the 1970s culminating in the current Economic Meltdown.

Closely related to mercantilism, it can be seen as contrary to classical economics. It consisted of these three core policies:

1. protecting industry through selective high tariffs (especially 1861–1932) and through subsidies (especially 1932–70)
2. government investments in infrastructure creating targeted internal improvements (especially in transportation)
3. a national bank with policies that promote the growth of productive enterprises rather than speculation

Frank Bourgin's 1989 study of the Constitutional Convention shows that direct government involvement in the economy was intended by the Founders.

The goal, most forcefully articulated by Hamilton, was to ensure that dearly won political independence was not lost by being economically and financially dependent on the powers and princes of Europe. The creation of a strong central government able to promote science, invention, industry and commerce, was seen as an essential means of promoting the general welfare and making the economy of the United States strong enough for them to determine their own destiny.


American School of Economics

 

[Boss]

Even the current establishment GOP is not in line with free market capitalism. It needs to be made clear, there is a difference between a corporatist and a free market capitalist. The corporatist is someone who wants to exploit the power of government to benefit capitalistically. These people are not free market capitalists.

Ok Boss,
I agree with you on that. We need a free market, and I am not happy with the current corporatocracy ( that's why I want them to be taxed... not excesively taxed but they need to pay their fair share and keep their hands out of the government... ja).

LOL.. You'll never make a corporatist pay their fair share, they will always exploit the system to get around any such effort. You are punishing the free market capitalist and the corporatist is happy you are. The more you tax anything, the less you get.... so when you tax corporations you will have less corporations. The corporatist considers a small tax increase a good investment in competition elimination under the law. Why do you think George Soros has these views?

Again, eliminate corporate tax! Encourage new upstart business and entrepreneurial spirit will prevail. You will see businesses from all over the world wanting to come to the US and open up shop. Millions and millions of brand new well-paying jobs created through the private sector. Go after that $20 trillion in offshore US wealth by declaring a tax moratorium on it if you bring it back home and use it to create new business or expand existing enterprise.

You see, it is the vibrant free market capitalist system being allowed to flourish and prosper, which will bring us out of the jobless funk we're currently in and return us to economic prosperity. Not only that, but it also mitigates the corporatist because there is nothing more to manipulate. You don't have the government picking winners and losers, forming policies to help certain corporatists while shunning others.

 

[Dad2three]

Even the current establishment GOP is not in line with free market capitalism. It needs to be made clear, there is a difference between a corporatist and a free market capitalist. The corporatist is someone who wants to exploit the power of government to benefit capitalistically. These people are not free market capitalists.

Ok Boss,
I agree with you on that. We need a free market, and I am not happy with the current corporatocracy ( that's why I want them to be taxed... not excesively taxed but they need to pay their fair share and keep their hands out of the government... ja).

LOL.. You'll never make a corporatist pay their fair share, they will always exploit the system to get around any such effort. You are punishing the free market capitalist and the corporatist is happy you are. The more you tax anything, the less you get.... so when you tax corporations you will have less corporations. The corporatist considers a small tax increase a good investment in competition elimination under the law. Why do you think George Soros has these views?

Again, eliminate corporate tax! Encourage new upstart business and entrepreneurial spirit will prevail. You will see businesses from all over the world wanting to come to the US and open up shop. Millions and millions of brand new well-paying jobs created through the private sector. Go after that $20 trillion in offshore US wealth by declaring a tax moratorium on it if you bring it back home and use it to create new business or expand existing enterprise.

You see, it is the vibrant free market capitalist system being allowed to flourish and prosper, which will bring us out of the jobless funk we're currently in and return us to economic prosperity. Not only that, but it also mitigates the corporatist because there is nothing more to manipulate. You don't have the government picking winners and losers, forming policies to help certain corporatists while shunning others.

Weird, so money just sits under beds? Taxes aren't paid AFTER profits? US Corps have record profits, lowest tax 'burden' in 40+ years and for the first time EVER, costs for labor less than 50%?

'Free market'? ANOTHER tax holiday like Dubya gave the Corps in 2004 (5%) and cost US jobs?

Competition? lol


The US corporate business model has changed: It used to be based on sharing profits with workers to incentivize them and generate loyalty. Now, the model has shifted to rewarding not workers, but shareholders and upper management.. So, as corporate profits soar, the rich get richer and workers are told they are lucky to even have a job so stop whining about income disparity.

 

[CultureCitizen]

sharing profits with workers to incentivize them and generate loyalty.

I like that idea! Somewhere I read that in Germany companies with certain amount of employees must give shares to their employees by law ... might be worth searching for the article.

 

[Dad2three]

sharing profits with workers to incentivize them and generate loyalty.

I like that idea! Somewhere I read that in Germany companies with certain amount of employees must give shares to their employees by law ... might be worth searching for the article.

Workers could receive a bigger share of their companies’ profits under a series of measures adopted by the German government on Wednesday aimed at raising the low rate of equity ownership among employees to the level of that in other large European economies.

Peer Steinbrück, finance minister, presented the measures as a contribution to “social justice” and “equity” against a backdrop of rapid divergence between fast-rising corporate profits and stagnating wages.




Olaf Scholz, labour minister, said: “Germany has been lagging behind in this area. With these steps, we will ensure workers get their fair share of the success of their companies.”

Incomes from labour and capital have been diverging in recent years. Corporate profits rose by 37 per cent between 2003 and 2007 while wages grew by only 4.3 per cent. Yet German workers have had little opportunity to share in the profits of their employers, largely because more than 80 per cent of German businesses are private or family owned and do not have freely traded shares – a higher proportion than in the UK or neighbouring France.


http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/0b94556c-744b-11dd-bc91-0000779fd18c.html#axzz3PQXEpUE0



Financial Participation
Various forms of employee financial participation are already in operation in a number of German companies. However, as a proportion of all German companies, the incidence is low. An exact figure on employee financial participation incidence is not available for Germany. However, there are regular annual estimates. The most recent estimates come from the IAB company survey.1 The IAB company survey 2011 puts the incidence of employee share ownership in German companies at 2% and of profit-sharing at 10%.


Basic Data on Profit-Sharing Employee Share Ownership Financial Participation Germany Countries National Industrial Relations Home - WORKER PARTICIPATION.eu


GERMANY HAS NEAR 40% UNIONIZED WORKFORCE, MIN 5 WEEKS VACATION, UNIVERSITY COSTS ABOUT $1,000 A YEAR TO THE STUDENTS, EXPORTS ALMOST AS MUCH AS THE US, THOUGH ONLY 40% OF US SIZED ECONOMY. But the US needs to create more billionaires, lol

 

[Boss]

Even the current establishment GOP is not in line with free market capitalism. It needs to be made clear, there is a difference between a corporatist and a free market capitalist. The corporatist is someone who wants to exploit the power of government to benefit capitalistically. These people are not free market capitalists.

Ok Boss,
I agree with you on that. We need a free market, and I am not happy with the current corporatocracy ( that's why I want them to be taxed... not excesively taxed but they need to pay their fair share and keep their hands out of the government... ja).

LOL.. You'll never make a corporatist pay their fair share, they will always exploit the system to get around any such effort. You are punishing the free market capitalist and the corporatist is happy you are. The more you tax anything, the less you get.... so when you tax corporations you will have less corporations. The corporatist considers a small tax increase a good investment in competition elimination under the law. Why do you think George Soros has these views?

Again, eliminate corporate tax! Encourage new upstart business and entrepreneurial spirit will prevail. You will see businesses from all over the world wanting to come to the US and open up shop. Millions and millions of brand new well-paying jobs created through the private sector. Go after that $20 trillion in offshore US wealth by declaring a tax moratorium on it if you bring it back home and use it to create new business or expand existing enterprise.

You see, it is the vibrant free market capitalist system being allowed to flourish and prosper, which will bring us out of the jobless funk we're currently in and return us to economic prosperity. Not only that, but it also mitigates the corporatist because there is nothing more to manipulate. You don't have the government picking winners and losers, forming policies to help certain corporatists while shunning others.

Weird, so money just sits under beds? Taxes aren't paid AFTER profits? US Corps have record profits, lowest tax 'burden' in 40+ years and for the first time EVER, costs for labor less than 50%?

'Free market'? ANOTHER tax holiday like Dubya gave the Corps in 2004 (5%) and cost US jobs?

Competition? lol


The US corporate business model has changed: It used to be based on sharing profits with workers to incentivize them and generate loyalty. Now, the model has shifted to rewarding not workers, but shareholders and upper management.. So, as corporate profits soar, the rich get richer and workers are told they are lucky to even have a job so stop whining about income disparity.

Nope, money doesn't just sit under beds. It is at work all around the globe earning more money for those who hold it. Taxes are paid ON profits. However, if their wealth is sent to Belize to help stimulate their economy, it can't be working to produce taxable profits here.

The only thing that has shifted in the model is more and more Mondale-Carteresque policies on free market capitalism which simply don't work. On Bush, I've already explained he wasn't a free market capitalist and his "tax holiday" had very little impact. I am talking about a tax moratorium, not a holiday. A lifting of all federal income on wealth brought home to the US from abroad for the purpose of creating new business or expanding existing enterprise. This would last for 10 years in conjunction with 0% corporate taxation.

This "income disparity" charge is a ruse, and you are a dupe to believe in such nonsense. It begins with the premise that wealth is finite, only a certain amount exists and more is going to the top at a faster rate than the rest can maintain. This is an invalid perspective. Wealth is created, through invention, imagination, labor and talent.

There is disparity for the same reason you would find disparity in a marathon race between seasoned marathon runners and couch potatoes. The solution is not to hobble the runners so the couch potatoes can have a fair shot, it is to train the couch potatoes to be seasoned runners. There may always be a disparity between the wealthiest and poorest, but the free market capitalist system, when allowed to function as intended, will produce more millionaires and billionaires than any system devised by man.

 

[Dad2three]

Even the current establishment GOP is not in line with free market capitalism. It needs to be made clear, there is a difference between a corporatist and a free market capitalist. The corporatist is someone who wants to exploit the power of government to benefit capitalistically. These people are not free market capitalists.

Ok Boss,
I agree with you on that. We need a free market, and I am not happy with the current corporatocracy ( that's why I want them to be taxed... not excesively taxed but they need to pay their fair share and keep their hands out of the government... ja).

LOL.. You'll never make a corporatist pay their fair share, they will always exploit the system to get around any such effort. You are punishing the free market capitalist and the corporatist is happy you are. The more you tax anything, the less you get.... so when you tax corporations you will have less corporations. The corporatist considers a small tax increase a good investment in competition elimination under the law. Why do you think George Soros has these views?

Again, eliminate corporate tax! Encourage new upstart business and entrepreneurial spirit will prevail. You will see businesses from all over the world wanting to come to the US and open up shop. Millions and millions of brand new well-paying jobs created through the private sector. Go after that $20 trillion in offshore US wealth by declaring a tax moratorium on it if you bring it back home and use it to create new business or expand existing enterprise.

You see, it is the vibrant free market capitalist system being allowed to flourish and prosper, which will bring us out of the jobless funk we're currently in and return us to economic prosperity. Not only that, but it also mitigates the corporatist because there is nothing more to manipulate. You don't have the government picking winners and losers, forming policies to help certain corporatists while shunning others.

Weird, so money just sits under beds? Taxes aren't paid AFTER profits? US Corps have record profits, lowest tax 'burden' in 40+ years and for the first time EVER, costs for labor less than 50%?

'Free market'? ANOTHER tax holiday like Dubya gave the Corps in 2004 (5%) and cost US jobs?

Competition? lol


The US corporate business model has changed: It used to be based on sharing profits with workers to incentivize them and generate loyalty. Now, the model has shifted to rewarding not workers, but shareholders and upper management.. So, as corporate profits soar, the rich get richer and workers are told they are lucky to even have a job so stop whining about income disparity.

Nope, money doesn't just sit under beds. It is at work all around the globe earning more money for those who hold it. Taxes are paid ON profits. However, if their wealth is sent to Belize to help stimulate their economy, it can't be working to produce taxable profits here.

The only thing that has shifted in the model is more and more Mondale-Carteresque policies on free market capitalism which simply don't work. On Bush, I've already explained he wasn't a free market capitalist and his "tax holiday" had very little impact. I am talking about a tax moratorium, not a holiday. A lifting of all federal income on wealth brought home to the US from abroad for the purpose of creating new business or expanding existing enterprise. This would last for 10 years in conjunction with 0% corporate taxation.

This "income disparity" charge is a ruse, and you are a dupe to believe in such nonsense. It begins with the premise that wealth is finite, only a certain amount exists and more is going to the top at a faster rate than the rest can maintain. This is an invalid perspective. Wealth is created, through invention, imagination, labor and talent.

There is disparity for the same reason you would find disparity in a marathon race between seasoned marathon runners and couch potatoes. The solution is not to hobble the runners so the couch potatoes can have a fair shot, it is to train the couch potatoes to be seasoned runners. There may always be a disparity between the wealthiest and poorest, but the free market capitalist system, when allowed to function as intended, will produce more millionaires and billionaires than any system devised by man.

"if their wealth is sent to Belize to help stimulate their economy, it can't be working to produce taxable profits here. "


When they bring the money back, is it taxed? IS there a need of capital in the US I'm unaware of?


"The only thing that has shifted in the model is more and more Mondale-Carteresque policies on free market capitalism which simply don't work."


Oh you mean Carter the guy who started deregulation that Ronnie took credit for and had 9+ million private sector jobs in 4 years to Ronnie's 14 million?


SERIOUSLY? WHY THE FUCK DO YOU THINK CORPS OR 'JOB CREATORS'; NEED MORE BLOW JOBS FROM CONS TO CREATE JOBS IN THE US?

THE ONLY REASON THE US SHOULD CONSIDER IT IS IF, AND ONLY IF, THE US CAN'T ATTRACT CAPITAL. IN CASE YOU HAVEN'T NOTICED, IT DOES QUITE WELL. OF COURSE CORPS AND 'JOB CREATORS' SHIP JOBS AND MONEY OFFSHORE, TO GO FOR THE LOWEST WAGES AND TO HIDE THEIR MONIES!


1945-1980 THE TOP 1% HAD ONLY 6%-9% OF ALL US INCOME.

WERE THEY LESS EDUCATED? LESS MOTIVATED? LESS INNOVATIVE? LOL



In 1980 the top 1% earned 8.5% of total income. In 2007 they earned 23%.

In 1980 the bottom 90% earned 68% of total income. In 2007 they earned 53%.

Summary of Latest Federal Income Tax Data Tax Foundation

GOV'T POLICY MATTERS !!!


Yes the capitalist system, much like the game monopoly, has a few winners and MANY, MANY, MANY losers. You've never played huh?

Non-Partisan Congressional Tax Report Debunks Core Conservative Economic Theory


The conclusion?

Lowering the tax rates on the wealthy and top earners in America do not appear to have any impact on the nation’s economic growth.

This paragraph from the report says it all—

“The reduction in the top tax rates appears to be uncorrelated with saving, investment and productivity growth. The top tax rates appear to have little or no relation to the size of the economic pie. However, the top tax rate reductions appear to be associated with the increasing concentration of income at the top of the income distribution.”

Non-Partisan Congressional Tax Report Debunks Core Conservative Economic Theory-GOP Suppresses Study - Forbes


From 1992 to 2007 the top 400 earners in the U.S. saw their income increase 392% and their average tax rate reduced by 37%

A 2011 study by the CBO found that the top earning 1 percent of households gained about 275% after federal taxes and income transfers over a period between 1979 and 2007


Trends in the Distribution of Household Income Between 1979 and 2007 Congressional Budget Office



STUDY: These Charts Show There's Almost No Correlation Between Tax Rates and GDP

These Charts Show There s Probably No Correlation Between Tax Rates and GDP - Business Insider


Capital Gains Tax Rates and Economic Growth (or not)

If you read the editorial page of the Wall Street Journal (or surf around the nether regions of Forbes.com), you may come to the conclusion that no aspect of tax policy is more important for economic growth than the way we tax capital gains. You’d be wrong

Capital Gains Tax Rates and Economic Growth or not - Forbes

Myth #3: Lower taxes are the best way to grow the economy.


If a Tax Rate Falls...

Will the Economy Notice?

Myth #6: If you unshackle the rich, they'll rev up the economy.

Think of this as the supermyth—the one underlying so many other fallacies. But here's a pesky fact neither corporate America nor the GOP establishment is trumpeting: After-tax corporate profits are currently at an all-time high. The problem businesses face isn't lack of cash but rather a lack of confidence that consumer demand will pick up in the future. So they're not expanding or hiring at the rate they should be.

Wall Street's Gain...

Main Street's Pain

Charts 6 Big Economic Myths Debunked Mother Jones

 

[CultureCitizen]

A lifting of all federal income on wealth brought home to the US from abroad for the purpose of creating new business or expanding existing enterprise. This would last for 10 years in conjunction with 0% corporate taxation.

For the sake of discussion let's assume I agree on having corporate taxes dropped to zero.
How do you bring the money out of the derivatives and stock-market casino ... and please considere that there are stock markets all around the world.

Now my point of view is that corporations are quite happy playing in the derivatives market and moving their money all around the stock markets around the world. So even with a zero tax, there is not that much incentive to make actual investments... Ah , yes small businesses might be helped with such a policy, but will it be enough?

 

[Boss]

"if their wealth is sent to Belize to help stimulate their economy, it can't be working to produce taxable profits here. "

When they bring the money back, is it taxed? IS there a need of capital in the US I'm unaware of?

Yep, when they bring it back it is taxed... which is why there is currently $20 trillion in offshore US wealth.

Yes, there is a need for capital... that's why they charge interest to borrow it.

"The only thing that has shifted in the model is more and more Mondale-Carteresque policies on free market capitalism which simply don't work."

Oh you mean Carter the guy who started deregulation that Ronnie took credit for and had 9+ million private sector jobs in 4 years to Ronnie's 14 million?

LMFAOOoooo... Carter and Mondale advocated and tried to implement price caps! Deregulation? Where? When? No, Carter didn't start anything but the Carter Malaise.

I deleted the rest of your propaganda copy-n-paste because it's all been addressed before and I don't have time to go through all of it again.

 

[Dad2three]

"if their wealth is sent to Belize to help stimulate their economy, it can't be working to produce taxable profits here. "

When they bring the money back, is it taxed? IS there a need of capital in the US I'm unaware of?

Yep, when they bring it back it is taxed... which is why there is currently $20 trillion in offshore US wealth.

Yes, there is a need for capital... that's why they charge interest to borrow it.

"The only thing that has shifted in the model is more and more Mondale-Carteresque policies on free market capitalism which simply don't work."

Oh you mean Carter the guy who started deregulation that Ronnie took credit for and had 9+ million private sector jobs in 4 years to Ronnie's 14 million?

LMFAOOoooo... Carter and Mondale advocated and tried to implement price caps! Deregulation? Where? When? No, Carter didn't start anything but the Carter Malaise.

I deleted the rest of your propaganda copy-n-paste because it's all been addressed before and I don't have time to go through all of it again.

"Yep, when they bring it back it is taxed... which is why there is currently $20 trillion in offshore US wealth."

You do realize ONLY Corps can hide money offshore and not pay taxes on it? YOU want amnesty for the lawbreakers?



"LMFAOOoooo... Carter and Mondale advocated and tried to implement price caps! Deregulation? Where? When? No, Carter didn't start anything but the Carter Malaise."


Oh you mean Nixon/Ford wage and price controls? lol


Malaise? Oh right Nixon/Ford and OPEC



RIGHT WING MISES ON REAGAN:



Deregulation. Another crucial aspect of freeing the market and getting government off our backs is deregulation, and the administration and its Reaganomists have been very proud of its deregulation record. However, a look at the record reveals a very different picture. In the first place, the most conspicuous examples of deregulation; the ending of oil and gasoline price controls and rationing, the deregulation of trucks and airlines, were all launched by the Carter administration, and completed just in time for the Reagan administration to claim the credit. Meanwhile, there were other promised deregulations that never took place; for example, abolition of natural gas controls and of the Department of Energy.

Overall, in fact, there has probably been not deregulation, but an increase in regulation. Thus, Christopher De Muth, head of the American Enterprise Institute and a former top official of Reagan's Office of Management and the Budget, concludes that "the President has not mounted a broad offensive against regulation. There hasn't been much total change since 1981. There has been more balanced administration of regulatory agencies than we had become used to in the 1970s, but many regulatory rules have been strengthened."

I come to bury Reaganomics, not to praise it.

Mises Daily Mises Institute