Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Do you know what happens when you lower the corporate tax? Corporations have more money. They can hire more people, they can innovate, they can do things that are impossible when they are shackled by regulations and government.
Apparently you don't do your own taxes, or you would know this.. When taxes are high, corporations reinvest money into expansion, hiring, production, and R&D, because all those things are deductible. When taxes are low, they pay taxes on the profit, and do not invest in those things.
When taxes are high, corporations reinvest money into expansion, hiring, production, and R&D, because all those things are deductible. When taxes are low, they pay taxes on the profit, and do not invest in those things.
When taxes are high, people prefer not to start new businesses, because they won't have as much profit to take out of their business.
Because that's the reason businesses are started, to make money you can take out.
If all the money you make has to be reinvested, you'd be stupid to even bother.
Wrong again, patriotbreath. A person who starts a business who expects to take a profit in the first 2 to 3 years, instead of investing in growth, advertisement, R&D, expansion, marketing, etc. is a person who will be back to looking for a job within 3 years.
A person who starts a business who expects to take a profit in the first 2 to 3 years,
What about in 5 years? 10 years?
A person who thinks a higher corporate tax rate encourages business formation, or growth, is a moron.
...and yet, you can not explain why a corporation should not reinvest in itself, taking advantage of deductible investment expenses, in times of higher taxes, unless they are just too damn stupid, and would rather pay taxes, than to spend on expansionary planning, instead.
Apparently you don't do your own taxes, or you would know this.. When taxes are high, corporations reinvest money into expansion, hiring, production, and R&D, because all those things are deductible. When taxes are low, they pay taxes on the profit, and do not invest in those things.
When taxes are high, corporations reinvest money into expansion, hiring, production, and R&D, because all those things are deductible. When taxes are low, they pay taxes on the profit, and do not invest in those things.
When taxes are high, people prefer not to start new businesses, because they won't have as much profit to take out of their business.
Because that's the reason businesses are started, to make money you can take out.
If all the money you make has to be reinvested, you'd be stupid to even bother.
Wrong again, patriotbreath. A person who starts a business who expects to take a profit in the first 2 to 3 years, instead of investing in growth, advertisement, R&D, expansion, marketing, etc. is a person who will be back to looking for a job within 3 years.
A person who starts a business who expects to take a profit in the first 2 to 3 years,
What about in 5 years? 10 years?
A person who thinks a higher corporate tax rate encourages business formation, or growth, is a moron.
...and yet, you can not explain why a corporation should not reinvest in itself, taking advantage of deductible investment expenses, in times of higher taxes, unless they are just too damn stupid, and would rather pay taxes, than to spend on expansionary planning, instead.
...and yet, you can not explain why a corporation should not reinvest in itself, taking advantage of deductible investment expenses, in times of higher taxes,
Of course it makes sense to reinvest while rates are 35% before they are cut to 20%.
Now, which corporation do you prefer to invest in,
the one that keeps 65% of earnings or the one that keeps 80%?
When taxes are high, corporations reinvest money into expansion, hiring, production, and R&D, because all those things are deductible. When taxes are low, they pay taxes on the profit, and do not invest in those things.
When taxes are high, people prefer not to start new businesses, because they won't have as much profit to take out of their business.
Because that's the reason businesses are started, to make money you can take out.
If all the money you make has to be reinvested, you'd be stupid to even bother.
Wrong again, patriotbreath. A person who starts a business who expects to take a profit in the first 2 to 3 years, instead of investing in growth, advertisement, R&D, expansion, marketing, etc. is a person who will be back to looking for a job within 3 years.
A person who starts a business who expects to take a profit in the first 2 to 3 years,
What about in 5 years? 10 years?
A person who thinks a higher corporate tax rate encourages business formation, or growth, is a moron.
...and yet, you can not explain why a corporation should not reinvest in itself, taking advantage of deductible investment expenses, in times of higher taxes, unless they are just too damn stupid, and would rather pay taxes, than to spend on expansionary planning, instead.
...and yet, you can not explain why a corporation should not reinvest in itself, taking advantage of deductible investment expenses, in times of higher taxes,
Of course it makes sense to reinvest while rates are 35% before they are cut to 20%.
Now, which corporation do you prefer to invest in,
the one that keeps 65% of earnings or the one that keeps 80%?
I used to be a republican, so i remain pragmatic, and look after my own best interests instead of worrying about other people, so I invest in companies that don't pay anywhere near 35%. In fact, here is an example of the taxes on profit paid by the 10 most profitable corporations in the USA:
GE 5%
Conoco 8%
IBM 1%
Wells fargo 14%
Walmart 19%
J. P. Morgan 14%
microsoft 11%
Apple 11%
Chevron 4%
Exxon 2%
In fact, all of these corporations paid less in tax than I did before I retired. My heart bleeds for their plight!
10 Most Profitable U.S. Corporations Paid Average Tax Rate Of Just 9 Percent Last Year: Report | HuffPost
Wrong again, patriotbreath. A person who starts a business who expects to take a profit in the first 2 to 3 years, instead of investing in growth, advertisement, R&D, expansion, marketing, etc. is a person who will be back to looking for a job within 3 years.
A person who starts a business who expects to take a profit in the first 2 to 3 years,
What about in 5 years? 10 years?
A person who thinks a higher corporate tax rate encourages business formation, or growth, is a moron.
...and yet, you can not explain why a corporation should not reinvest in itself, taking advantage of deductible investment expenses, in times of higher taxes, unless they are just too damn stupid, and would rather pay taxes, than to spend on expansionary planning, instead.
...and yet, you can not explain why a corporation should not reinvest in itself, taking advantage of deductible investment expenses, in times of higher taxes,
Of course it makes sense to reinvest while rates are 35% before they are cut to 20%.
Now, which corporation do you prefer to invest in,
the one that keeps 65% of earnings or the one that keeps 80%?
I used to be a republican, so i remain pragmatic, and look after my own best interests instead of worrying about other people, so I invest in companies that don't pay anywhere near 35%. In fact, here is an example of the taxes on profit paid by the 10 most profitable corporations in the USA:
GE 5%
Conoco 8%
IBM 1%
Wells fargo 14%
Walmart 19%
J. P. Morgan 14%
microsoft 11%
Apple 11%
Chevron 4%
Exxon 2%
In fact, all of these corporations paid less in tax than I did before I retired. My heart bleeds for their plight!
10 Most Profitable U.S. Corporations Paid Average Tax Rate Of Just 9 Percent Last Year: Report | HuffPost
The tax on business profit is 35%.
So explain in your own words how WalMart pays 19% and Exxon pays 2%.
A person who starts a business who expects to take a profit in the first 2 to 3 years,
What about in 5 years? 10 years?
A person who thinks a higher corporate tax rate encourages business formation, or growth, is a moron.
...and yet, you can not explain why a corporation should not reinvest in itself, taking advantage of deductible investment expenses, in times of higher taxes, unless they are just too damn stupid, and would rather pay taxes, than to spend on expansionary planning, instead.
...and yet, you can not explain why a corporation should not reinvest in itself, taking advantage of deductible investment expenses, in times of higher taxes,
Of course it makes sense to reinvest while rates are 35% before they are cut to 20%.
Now, which corporation do you prefer to invest in,
the one that keeps 65% of earnings or the one that keeps 80%?
I used to be a republican, so i remain pragmatic, and look after my own best interests instead of worrying about other people, so I invest in companies that don't pay anywhere near 35%. In fact, here is an example of the taxes on profit paid by the 10 most profitable corporations in the USA:
GE 5%
Conoco 8%
IBM 1%
Wells fargo 14%
Walmart 19%
J. P. Morgan 14%
microsoft 11%
Apple 11%
Chevron 4%
Exxon 2%
In fact, all of these corporations paid less in tax than I did before I retired. My heart bleeds for their plight!
10 Most Profitable U.S. Corporations Paid Average Tax Rate Of Just 9 Percent Last Year: Report | HuffPost
The tax on business profit is 35%.
So explain in your own words how WalMart pays 19% and Exxon pays 2%.
Todd, you are definitely not ready for prime time tax courses. Everything I posted is fact. There are tax dodges that you have never heard of. There are offshore accounts. There are loss carry forwards (which trump enjoys, when he is not erasing the losses all together with bankruptcy filings). There used to be a loophole that if you bought a breeding bull, for say, half a million dollars, all the stud fees were tax free. John Lennon owned one. Google, "Corporate tax on percent of profits". You will find hundreds of posts ion the subject.
Great News. My company paid for my relocation. Happy now?
But will your "company" continue paying for your stay at the mental institution? LOL
If lowering taxes makes it cheaper for the corporation to stay where they are, as opposed to going to another State or nation that would be more expensive, what reason would that company have to leave? Do you have a clear answer for that Nat?
Come on, tell us what job is created by raising Federal taxes?
Employee salaries are a business expense. Say the corporation has a dollar in profit. If they want, they can spend that dollar on creating a new job. If not, well they can pay the tax on that dollar and keep the rest. The tax rate is thirty five percent. That means they can spend a dollar on a new job or keep sixty five cents. Now the tax rate is lowered. They can spend the dollar on a new job or they can keep eighty cents. The "opportunity cost" of creating a job instead of booking a profit INCREASES as the tax rate declines. Now, you want to tell me why corporations will create more jobs when the cost of doing so increases as the tax rate declines.
I mean this is some simple ass shit. Like the decline of our manufacturing base. Everyone wants to blame outsourcing, shifting jobs overseas. But it is not the "cause", it is just a symptom. The declining tax rate is the cause. In the early1950's the "effective corporate tax rate" was north of fifty percent. That means if a company saved a dollar by shifting production abroad they could only keep a little less than fifty cents. Now the EFFECTIVE corporate tax rate is closer to twenty percent. They save that dollar now they get to keep damn near eighty cents. Hell some companies, like say, GE, with an effective tax rate of less than three percent over the last decade, get to keep damn near the WHOLE DOLLAR. Now, it's one thing to close down a factory, layoff workers, implement a transpacific shipping arrangement, lose community and employee allegiance, and adopt a far flung supply chain to manage, if you only get to keep fifty cents on the dollar. It is quite another if you get to keep it all.
I mean I don't know where you people live, and I don't know where you work, but if you are looking it is damn easy to see the ramifications of this declining effective corporate tax rate. No companies invest in their people anymore, they attempt to steal them from somewhere else or they bitch and moan and look to the GOVERNMENT to fund their employees training, at say a community college. Sneak in to the backroom of your local Walmart. Check out the mops. Yeah, the damn mops. They are filled with grease, nasty as hell, because they can't even invest in a new mop-head. It's freakin comical. Companies look to cut corners at every turn, packaging sucks ass. The trucking fleets are comprised of dinosaurs that spew out toxic gases, break down constantly, and require an entire staff of mechanics to keep them going. Farmers don't own combines anymore, they RENT THEM.
In a nutshell, when corporate taxes are high companies are forced to look and plan for the long term. When they are low, they are encouraged to "cash out", to seek short term gains at the expense of long term growth. They are discouraged from investing in everything from people to mop-heads, and instead encouraged to take the money and run. Look the fawk around. It is precisely what is happening, precisely what has been happening, and cutting corporate tax rates further will only add gasoline to the fire that is already burning down this nation. Only a sheer fool would believe otherwise.
Except, when a company pays a lower tax rate, that also means that leaves more of their own money to invest in themselves. Not every company simply walks in one day at the start with billions of dollars that they can simply afford to risk and spend on themselves. Risk means finding investors that will share in the idea of your product, but not every small company starting out is able to find that. You have to remember that the main driving force of a vibrant economy is in the creation and risk that begins with small business, with the ability of that business to be able to compete. That means as that business grows and takes on more “risk”, with more of their own money at their disposal, they can be able to afford to turn around and invest in themselves.
1) expansion to build another facility. Maybe now they can OWN another distribution center by having one built off that extra money they have at their disposal. Perhaps instead of paying a rental fee to store their product, they are now able to have one built that they now own.
2) As a company retains more of their own revenue, they can now afford to look into ways they can be more competitive. Now we are talking about advancements in technology, like robotics, that can help grow and increase their business’s efficiency in ways they could not previously afford to meet up with that higher demand while producing at a level that helps them to become more competitive. Robotics and higher technology means restructuring that shell of a facility to accommodate with the changes. Plans and newer construction, comes with the ability to afford the cost associated with attaining these higher more advanced pieces of equipment. Now obviously higher technology means you need to pay a higher wage, because your basic electrician is not going to have the necessary skill level in robotics that’s associated with troubleshooting and maintaining that particular piece of equipment, should the system go down. Higher skill levels and higher wages can also mean higher incentives, in drawing those kinds of employees to work in your plant as opposed to working at another facility.
3) Education. Maybe with more of your own money to spend you can invest in internships and reinbursement programs on help retain that higher skill level. Aircraft engineers is just one example comes to mind here, the testing of newer technology that comes out of the “research and development”.
4) That brings “research and development”, which is another cost that can benefit a business into becoming more competitive and efficient as it grows. This can be applied in several different ways depending on the scale and the kind of market you happen to be competing in.
This is just a very brief overview of how a smaller company can grow and build with more of their own money to be able to invest in themselves. You see there are several factors that come with allowing a small business to first be able to initially establish themselves in a market, then take on greater risk to invest in themselves to meet up with the demand as their business grows, while lower federal taxes will afford them the added ability to keep more of their own money to be able to expand and afford ways to be more cost efficient.
All that effort and yet a total waste of time. Every single "investment" you mentioned is done with BEFORE TAX DOLLARS. The key phrase, "as a company retains more of their revenue". You are speaking of retained earnings.
Pure unmitigated nonsense completely devoid of reality and business acumen.Great News. My company paid for my relocation. Happy now?
But will your "company" continue paying for your stay at the mental institution? LOL
If lowering taxes makes it cheaper for the corporation to stay where they are, as opposed to going to another State or nation that would be more expensive, what reason would that company have to leave? Do you have a clear answer for that Nat?
Come on, tell us what job is created by raising Federal taxes?
Employee salaries are a business expense. Say the corporation has a dollar in profit. If they want, they can spend that dollar on creating a new job. If not, well they can pay the tax on that dollar and keep the rest. The tax rate is thirty five percent. That means they can spend a dollar on a new job or keep sixty five cents. Now the tax rate is lowered. They can spend the dollar on a new job or they can keep eighty cents. The "opportunity cost" of creating a job instead of booking a profit INCREASES as the tax rate declines. Now, you want to tell me why corporations will create more jobs when the cost of doing so increases as the tax rate declines.
I mean this is some simple ass shit. Like the decline of our manufacturing base. Everyone wants to blame outsourcing, shifting jobs overseas. But it is not the "cause", it is just a symptom. The declining tax rate is the cause. In the early1950's the "effective corporate tax rate" was north of fifty percent. That means if a company saved a dollar by shifting production abroad they could only keep a little less than fifty cents. Now the EFFECTIVE corporate tax rate is closer to twenty percent. They save that dollar now they get to keep damn near eighty cents. Hell some companies, like say, GE, with an effective tax rate of less than three percent over the last decade, get to keep damn near the WHOLE DOLLAR. Now, it's one thing to close down a factory, layoff workers, implement a transpacific shipping arrangement, lose community and employee allegiance, and adopt a far flung supply chain to manage, if you only get to keep fifty cents on the dollar. It is quite another if you get to keep it all.
I mean I don't know where you people live, and I don't know where you work, but if you are looking it is damn easy to see the ramifications of this declining effective corporate tax rate. No companies invest in their people anymore, they attempt to steal them from somewhere else or they bitch and moan and look to the GOVERNMENT to fund their employees training, at say a community college. Sneak in to the backroom of your local Walmart. Check out the mops. Yeah, the damn mops. They are filled with grease, nasty as hell, because they can't even invest in a new mop-head. It's freakin comical. Companies look to cut corners at every turn, packaging sucks ass. The trucking fleets are comprised of dinosaurs that spew out toxic gases, break down constantly, and require an entire staff of mechanics to keep them going. Farmers don't own combines anymore, they RENT THEM.
In a nutshell, when corporate taxes are high companies are forced to look and plan for the long term. When they are low, they are encouraged to "cash out", to seek short term gains at the expense of long term growth. They are discouraged from investing in everything from people to mop-heads, and instead encouraged to take the money and run. Look the fawk around. It is precisely what is happening, precisely what has been happening, and cutting corporate tax rates further will only add gasoline to the fire that is already burning down this nation. Only a sheer fool would believe otherwise.
Amazing.
But will your "company" continue paying for your stay at the mental institution? LOL
If lowering taxes makes it cheaper for the corporation to stay where they are, as opposed to going to another State or nation that would be more expensive, what reason would that company have to leave? Do you have a clear answer for that Nat?
Come on, tell us what job is created by raising Federal taxes?
Employee salaries are a business expense. Say the corporation has a dollar in profit. If they want, they can spend that dollar on creating a new job. If not, well they can pay the tax on that dollar and keep the rest. The tax rate is thirty five percent. That means they can spend a dollar on a new job or keep sixty five cents. Now the tax rate is lowered. They can spend the dollar on a new job or they can keep eighty cents. The "opportunity cost" of creating a job instead of booking a profit INCREASES as the tax rate declines. Now, you want to tell me why corporations will create more jobs when the cost of doing so increases as the tax rate declines.
I mean this is some simple ass shit. Like the decline of our manufacturing base. Everyone wants to blame outsourcing, shifting jobs overseas. But it is not the "cause", it is just a symptom. The declining tax rate is the cause. In the early1950's the "effective corporate tax rate" was north of fifty percent. That means if a company saved a dollar by shifting production abroad they could only keep a little less than fifty cents. Now the EFFECTIVE corporate tax rate is closer to twenty percent. They save that dollar now they get to keep damn near eighty cents. Hell some companies, like say, GE, with an effective tax rate of less than three percent over the last decade, get to keep damn near the WHOLE DOLLAR. Now, it's one thing to close down a factory, layoff workers, implement a transpacific shipping arrangement, lose community and employee allegiance, and adopt a far flung supply chain to manage, if you only get to keep fifty cents on the dollar. It is quite another if you get to keep it all.
I mean I don't know where you people live, and I don't know where you work, but if you are looking it is damn easy to see the ramifications of this declining effective corporate tax rate. No companies invest in their people anymore, they attempt to steal them from somewhere else or they bitch and moan and look to the GOVERNMENT to fund their employees training, at say a community college. Sneak in to the backroom of your local Walmart. Check out the mops. Yeah, the damn mops. They are filled with grease, nasty as hell, because they can't even invest in a new mop-head. It's freakin comical. Companies look to cut corners at every turn, packaging sucks ass. The trucking fleets are comprised of dinosaurs that spew out toxic gases, break down constantly, and require an entire staff of mechanics to keep them going. Farmers don't own combines anymore, they RENT THEM.
In a nutshell, when corporate taxes are high companies are forced to look and plan for the long term. When they are low, they are encouraged to "cash out", to seek short term gains at the expense of long term growth. They are discouraged from investing in everything from people to mop-heads, and instead encouraged to take the money and run. Look the fawk around. It is precisely what is happening, precisely what has been happening, and cutting corporate tax rates further will only add gasoline to the fire that is already burning down this nation. Only a sheer fool would believe otherwise.
Except, when a company pays a lower tax rate, that also means that leaves more of their own money to invest in themselves. Not every company simply walks in one day at the start with billions of dollars that they can simply afford to risk and spend on themselves. Risk means finding investors that will share in the idea of your product, but not every small company starting out is able to find that. You have to remember that the main driving force of a vibrant economy is in the creation and risk that begins with small business, with the ability of that business to be able to compete. That means as that business grows and takes on more “risk”, with more of their own money at their disposal, they can be able to afford to turn around and invest in themselves.
1) expansion to build another facility. Maybe now they can OWN another distribution center by having one built off that extra money they have at their disposal. Perhaps instead of paying a rental fee to store their product, they are now able to have one built that they now own.
2) As a company retains more of their own revenue, they can now afford to look into ways they can be more competitive. Now we are talking about advancements in technology, like robotics, that can help grow and increase their business’s efficiency in ways they could not previously afford to meet up with that higher demand while producing at a level that helps them to become more competitive. Robotics and higher technology means restructuring that shell of a facility to accommodate with the changes. Plans and newer construction, comes with the ability to afford the cost associated with attaining these higher more advanced pieces of equipment. Now obviously higher technology means you need to pay a higher wage, because your basic electrician is not going to have the necessary skill level in robotics that’s associated with troubleshooting and maintaining that particular piece of equipment, should the system go down. Higher skill levels and higher wages can also mean higher incentives, in drawing those kinds of employees to work in your plant as opposed to working at another facility.
3) Education. Maybe with more of your own money to spend you can invest in internships and reinbursement programs on help retain that higher skill level. Aircraft engineers is just one example comes to mind here, the testing of newer technology that comes out of the “research and development”.
4) That brings “research and development”, which is another cost that can benefit a business into becoming more competitive and efficient as it grows. This can be applied in several different ways depending on the scale and the kind of market you happen to be competing in.
This is just a very brief overview of how a smaller company can grow and build with more of their own money to be able to invest in themselves. You see there are several factors that come with allowing a small business to first be able to initially establish themselves in a market, then take on greater risk to invest in themselves to meet up with the demand as their business grows, while lower federal taxes will afford them the added ability to keep more of their own money to be able to expand and afford ways to be more cost efficient.
All that effort and yet a total waste of time. Every single "investment" you mentioned is done with BEFORE TAX DOLLARS. The key phrase, "as a company retains more of their revenue". You are speaking of retained earnings.
Pure unmitigated nonsense completely devoid of reality and business acumen.But will your "company" continue paying for your stay at the mental institution? LOL
If lowering taxes makes it cheaper for the corporation to stay where they are, as opposed to going to another State or nation that would be more expensive, what reason would that company have to leave? Do you have a clear answer for that Nat?
Come on, tell us what job is created by raising Federal taxes?
Employee salaries are a business expense. Say the corporation has a dollar in profit. If they want, they can spend that dollar on creating a new job. If not, well they can pay the tax on that dollar and keep the rest. The tax rate is thirty five percent. That means they can spend a dollar on a new job or keep sixty five cents. Now the tax rate is lowered. They can spend the dollar on a new job or they can keep eighty cents. The "opportunity cost" of creating a job instead of booking a profit INCREASES as the tax rate declines. Now, you want to tell me why corporations will create more jobs when the cost of doing so increases as the tax rate declines.
I mean this is some simple ass shit. Like the decline of our manufacturing base. Everyone wants to blame outsourcing, shifting jobs overseas. But it is not the "cause", it is just a symptom. The declining tax rate is the cause. In the early1950's the "effective corporate tax rate" was north of fifty percent. That means if a company saved a dollar by shifting production abroad they could only keep a little less than fifty cents. Now the EFFECTIVE corporate tax rate is closer to twenty percent. They save that dollar now they get to keep damn near eighty cents. Hell some companies, like say, GE, with an effective tax rate of less than three percent over the last decade, get to keep damn near the WHOLE DOLLAR. Now, it's one thing to close down a factory, layoff workers, implement a transpacific shipping arrangement, lose community and employee allegiance, and adopt a far flung supply chain to manage, if you only get to keep fifty cents on the dollar. It is quite another if you get to keep it all.
I mean I don't know where you people live, and I don't know where you work, but if you are looking it is damn easy to see the ramifications of this declining effective corporate tax rate. No companies invest in their people anymore, they attempt to steal them from somewhere else or they bitch and moan and look to the GOVERNMENT to fund their employees training, at say a community college. Sneak in to the backroom of your local Walmart. Check out the mops. Yeah, the damn mops. They are filled with grease, nasty as hell, because they can't even invest in a new mop-head. It's freakin comical. Companies look to cut corners at every turn, packaging sucks ass. The trucking fleets are comprised of dinosaurs that spew out toxic gases, break down constantly, and require an entire staff of mechanics to keep them going. Farmers don't own combines anymore, they RENT THEM.
In a nutshell, when corporate taxes are high companies are forced to look and plan for the long term. When they are low, they are encouraged to "cash out", to seek short term gains at the expense of long term growth. They are discouraged from investing in everything from people to mop-heads, and instead encouraged to take the money and run. Look the fawk around. It is precisely what is happening, precisely what has been happening, and cutting corporate tax rates further will only add gasoline to the fire that is already burning down this nation. Only a sheer fool would believe otherwise.
Amazing.
Did you even read my post?
In case you never realized, that formula you just spouted out specifically deals with how a business is expected to compensate for its many investments and investors who have choaen to invest in the business. This investment can be achieved through corporate stocks or bonds.
This has nothing to do with my previous post of small business making a business decision, that comes with having more of their OWN money though lower taxes, to make their own investment through (1) improvements in efficiency (2) giving business to those who sell them the more advanced equipment that aids in making the business more efficient (3) choosing to buy a storage facility instead of renting (4) gaining opportunities to require more skilled workers as a result of maintaining and repairing a more automated efficient system ... etc.
AGAIN, as I’ve said before, the vast majority of the private sector is made up of small business and those who wish to establish their own business with (a best) a small business Bank loan - not corporate stocks and bonds. It’s that simple, it’s not complicated.
You have NOT come close to proving how a raise in corporate taxes helps to create more jobs, I’d suggest you give up now while you can.
Pure unmitigated nonsense completely devoid of reality and business acumen.Great News. My company paid for my relocation. Happy now?
But will your "company" continue paying for your stay at the mental institution? LOL
If lowering taxes makes it cheaper for the corporation to stay where they are, as opposed to going to another State or nation that would be more expensive, what reason would that company have to leave? Do you have a clear answer for that Nat?
Come on, tell us what job is created by raising Federal taxes?
Employee salaries are a business expense. Say the corporation has a dollar in profit. If they want, they can spend that dollar on creating a new job. If not, well they can pay the tax on that dollar and keep the rest. The tax rate is thirty five percent. That means they can spend a dollar on a new job or keep sixty five cents. Now the tax rate is lowered. They can spend the dollar on a new job or they can keep eighty cents. The "opportunity cost" of creating a job instead of booking a profit INCREASES as the tax rate declines. Now, you want to tell me why corporations will create more jobs when the cost of doing so increases as the tax rate declines.
I mean this is some simple ass shit. Like the decline of our manufacturing base. Everyone wants to blame outsourcing, shifting jobs overseas. But it is not the "cause", it is just a symptom. The declining tax rate is the cause. In the early1950's the "effective corporate tax rate" was north of fifty percent. That means if a company saved a dollar by shifting production abroad they could only keep a little less than fifty cents. Now the EFFECTIVE corporate tax rate is closer to twenty percent. They save that dollar now they get to keep damn near eighty cents. Hell some companies, like say, GE, with an effective tax rate of less than three percent over the last decade, get to keep damn near the WHOLE DOLLAR. Now, it's one thing to close down a factory, layoff workers, implement a transpacific shipping arrangement, lose community and employee allegiance, and adopt a far flung supply chain to manage, if you only get to keep fifty cents on the dollar. It is quite another if you get to keep it all.
I mean I don't know where you people live, and I don't know where you work, but if you are looking it is damn easy to see the ramifications of this declining effective corporate tax rate. No companies invest in their people anymore, they attempt to steal them from somewhere else or they bitch and moan and look to the GOVERNMENT to fund their employees training, at say a community college. Sneak in to the backroom of your local Walmart. Check out the mops. Yeah, the damn mops. They are filled with grease, nasty as hell, because they can't even invest in a new mop-head. It's freakin comical. Companies look to cut corners at every turn, packaging sucks ass. The trucking fleets are comprised of dinosaurs that spew out toxic gases, break down constantly, and require an entire staff of mechanics to keep them going. Farmers don't own combines anymore, they RENT THEM.
In a nutshell, when corporate taxes are high companies are forced to look and plan for the long term. When they are low, they are encouraged to "cash out", to seek short term gains at the expense of long term growth. They are discouraged from investing in everything from people to mop-heads, and instead encouraged to take the money and run. Look the fawk around. It is precisely what is happening, precisely what has been happening, and cutting corporate tax rates further will only add gasoline to the fire that is already burning down this nation. Only a sheer fool would believe otherwise.
Amazing.
...and yet, you can not explain why a corporation should not reinvest in itself, taking advantage of deductible investment expenses, in times of higher taxes, unless they are just too damn stupid, and would rather pay taxes, than to spend on expansionary planning, instead.
...and yet, you can not explain why a corporation should not reinvest in itself, taking advantage of deductible investment expenses, in times of higher taxes,
Of course it makes sense to reinvest while rates are 35% before they are cut to 20%.
Now, which corporation do you prefer to invest in,
the one that keeps 65% of earnings or the one that keeps 80%?
I used to be a republican, so i remain pragmatic, and look after my own best interests instead of worrying about other people, so I invest in companies that don't pay anywhere near 35%. In fact, here is an example of the taxes on profit paid by the 10 most profitable corporations in the USA:
GE 5%
Conoco 8%
IBM 1%
Wells fargo 14%
Walmart 19%
J. P. Morgan 14%
microsoft 11%
Apple 11%
Chevron 4%
Exxon 2%
In fact, all of these corporations paid less in tax than I did before I retired. My heart bleeds for their plight!
10 Most Profitable U.S. Corporations Paid Average Tax Rate Of Just 9 Percent Last Year: Report | HuffPost
The tax on business profit is 35%.
So explain in your own words how WalMart pays 19% and Exxon pays 2%.
Todd, you are definitely not ready for prime time tax courses. Everything I posted is fact. There are tax dodges that you have never heard of. There are offshore accounts. There are loss carry forwards (which trump enjoys, when he is not erasing the losses all together with bankruptcy filings). There used to be a loophole that if you bought a breeding bull, for say, half a million dollars, all the stud fees were tax free. John Lennon owned one. Google, "Corporate tax on percent of profits". You will find hundreds of posts ion the subject.
Everything I posted is fact.
Facts that you can't explain.
There are offshore accounts.
True. Thanks to our highest in the 1st world corporate rates, it makes sense for corporations to hold cash in a nation with a lower rate. If they earn, and keep, profits in a nation with a 20% rate, for example, it lowers their average rate.
There are loss carry forwards
So you're complaining that a snapshot in a single year may appear lower than the statutory rate because they had losses in a prior year? Well, duh, corporations and individuals sometimes have losses. Aren't they allowed to write off those losses in a future, profitable year?
Sounds like your complaint comes from ignorance.
Google, "Corporate tax on percent of profits". You will find hundreds of posts ion the subject
Thanks.
Usually the posts involve people ignorant of the difference between the statutory tax rate and the effective rate.
/——/ You don’t have to pay for tax cuts. Letting people keep more of their own money costs nothing. You Socialist tool.the only place this bill is gonna create a job is in China! we're borrowing money from China to give a tax cut to the wealthiest Americans!
...and yet, you can not explain why a corporation should not reinvest in itself, taking advantage of deductible investment expenses, in times of higher taxes,
Of course it makes sense to reinvest while rates are 35% before they are cut to 20%.
Now, which corporation do you prefer to invest in,
the one that keeps 65% of earnings or the one that keeps 80%?
I used to be a republican, so i remain pragmatic, and look after my own best interests instead of worrying about other people, so I invest in companies that don't pay anywhere near 35%. In fact, here is an example of the taxes on profit paid by the 10 most profitable corporations in the USA:
GE 5%
Conoco 8%
IBM 1%
Wells fargo 14%
Walmart 19%
J. P. Morgan 14%
microsoft 11%
Apple 11%
Chevron 4%
Exxon 2%
In fact, all of these corporations paid less in tax than I did before I retired. My heart bleeds for their plight!
10 Most Profitable U.S. Corporations Paid Average Tax Rate Of Just 9 Percent Last Year: Report | HuffPost
The tax on business profit is 35%.
So explain in your own words how WalMart pays 19% and Exxon pays 2%.
Todd, you are definitely not ready for prime time tax courses. Everything I posted is fact. There are tax dodges that you have never heard of. There are offshore accounts. There are loss carry forwards (which trump enjoys, when he is not erasing the losses all together with bankruptcy filings). There used to be a loophole that if you bought a breeding bull, for say, half a million dollars, all the stud fees were tax free. John Lennon owned one. Google, "Corporate tax on percent of profits". You will find hundreds of posts ion the subject.
Everything I posted is fact.
Facts that you can't explain.
There are offshore accounts.
True. Thanks to our highest in the 1st world corporate rates, it makes sense for corporations to hold cash in a nation with a lower rate. If they earn, and keep, profits in a nation with a 20% rate, for example, it lowers their average rate.
There are loss carry forwards
So you're complaining that a snapshot in a single year may appear lower than the statutory rate because they had losses in a prior year? Well, duh, corporations and individuals sometimes have losses. Aren't they allowed to write off those losses in a future, profitable year?
Sounds like your complaint comes from ignorance.
Google, "Corporate tax on percent of profits". You will find hundreds of posts ion the subject
Thanks.
Usually the posts involve people ignorant of the difference between the statutory tax rate and the effective rate.
Todd, it took me 5 years to earn my ChFC designation,after earning my Bachelor of Business Administration and I don't educate fools for free. Get back to me when you have earned yours. In the meantime, just pick any one of my 10 above referenced companies, and pull up their tax data on the internet. It is available on line for the benefit of all their shareholders. If you can not read a financial statement, there are remedial courses available.
I used to be a republican, so i remain pragmatic, and look after my own best interests instead of worrying about other people, so I invest in companies that don't pay anywhere near 35%. In fact, here is an example of the taxes on profit paid by the 10 most profitable corporations in the USA:
GE 5%
Conoco 8%
IBM 1%
Wells fargo 14%
Walmart 19%
J. P. Morgan 14%
microsoft 11%
Apple 11%
Chevron 4%
Exxon 2%
In fact, all of these corporations paid less in tax than I did before I retired. My heart bleeds for their plight!
10 Most Profitable U.S. Corporations Paid Average Tax Rate Of Just 9 Percent Last Year: Report | HuffPost
The tax on business profit is 35%.
So explain in your own words how WalMart pays 19% and Exxon pays 2%.
Todd, you are definitely not ready for prime time tax courses. Everything I posted is fact. There are tax dodges that you have never heard of. There are offshore accounts. There are loss carry forwards (which trump enjoys, when he is not erasing the losses all together with bankruptcy filings). There used to be a loophole that if you bought a breeding bull, for say, half a million dollars, all the stud fees were tax free. John Lennon owned one. Google, "Corporate tax on percent of profits". You will find hundreds of posts ion the subject.
Everything I posted is fact.
Facts that you can't explain.
There are offshore accounts.
True. Thanks to our highest in the 1st world corporate rates, it makes sense for corporations to hold cash in a nation with a lower rate. If they earn, and keep, profits in a nation with a 20% rate, for example, it lowers their average rate.
There are loss carry forwards
So you're complaining that a snapshot in a single year may appear lower than the statutory rate because they had losses in a prior year? Well, duh, corporations and individuals sometimes have losses. Aren't they allowed to write off those losses in a future, profitable year?
Sounds like your complaint comes from ignorance.
Google, "Corporate tax on percent of profits". You will find hundreds of posts ion the subject
Thanks.
Usually the posts involve people ignorant of the difference between the statutory tax rate and the effective rate.
Todd, it took me 5 years to earn my ChFC designation,after earning my Bachelor of Business Administration and I don't educate fools for free. Get back to me when you have earned yours. In the meantime, just pick any one of my 10 above referenced companies, and pull up their tax data on the internet. It is available on line for the benefit of all their shareholders. If you can not read a financial statement, there are remedial courses available.
pick any one of my 10 above referenced companies, and pull up their tax data on the internet.
If their earnings were $1,000,000 and they should have owed $350,000, but they had depreciation of $300,000 and so only owed $245,000....should I worry that they only paid 24.5%?
Would you complain about their lower effective rate in that case?
But will your "company" continue paying for your stay at the mental institution? LOL
If lowering taxes makes it cheaper for the corporation to stay where they are, as opposed to going to another State or nation that would be more expensive, what reason would that company have to leave? Do you have a clear answer for that Nat?
Come on, tell us what job is created by raising Federal taxes?
Employee salaries are a business expense. Say the corporation has a dollar in profit. If they want, they can spend that dollar on creating a new job. If not, well they can pay the tax on that dollar and keep the rest. The tax rate is thirty five percent. That means they can spend a dollar on a new job or keep sixty five cents. Now the tax rate is lowered. They can spend the dollar on a new job or they can keep eighty cents. The "opportunity cost" of creating a job instead of booking a profit INCREASES as the tax rate declines. Now, you want to tell me why corporations will create more jobs when the cost of doing so increases as the tax rate declines.
I mean this is some simple ass shit. Like the decline of our manufacturing base. Everyone wants to blame outsourcing, shifting jobs overseas. But it is not the "cause", it is just a symptom. The declining tax rate is the cause. In the early1950's the "effective corporate tax rate" was north of fifty percent. That means if a company saved a dollar by shifting production abroad they could only keep a little less than fifty cents. Now the EFFECTIVE corporate tax rate is closer to twenty percent. They save that dollar now they get to keep damn near eighty cents. Hell some companies, like say, GE, with an effective tax rate of less than three percent over the last decade, get to keep damn near the WHOLE DOLLAR. Now, it's one thing to close down a factory, layoff workers, implement a transpacific shipping arrangement, lose community and employee allegiance, and adopt a far flung supply chain to manage, if you only get to keep fifty cents on the dollar. It is quite another if you get to keep it all.
I mean I don't know where you people live, and I don't know where you work, but if you are looking it is damn easy to see the ramifications of this declining effective corporate tax rate. No companies invest in their people anymore, they attempt to steal them from somewhere else or they bitch and moan and look to the GOVERNMENT to fund their employees training, at say a community college. Sneak in to the backroom of your local Walmart. Check out the mops. Yeah, the damn mops. They are filled with grease, nasty as hell, because they can't even invest in a new mop-head. It's freakin comical. Companies look to cut corners at every turn, packaging sucks ass. The trucking fleets are comprised of dinosaurs that spew out toxic gases, break down constantly, and require an entire staff of mechanics to keep them going. Farmers don't own combines anymore, they RENT THEM.
In a nutshell, when corporate taxes are high companies are forced to look and plan for the long term. When they are low, they are encouraged to "cash out", to seek short term gains at the expense of long term growth. They are discouraged from investing in everything from people to mop-heads, and instead encouraged to take the money and run. Look the fawk around. It is precisely what is happening, precisely what has been happening, and cutting corporate tax rates further will only add gasoline to the fire that is already burning down this nation. Only a sheer fool would believe otherwise.
Except, when a company pays a lower tax rate, that also means that leaves more of their own money to invest in themselves. Not every company simply walks in one day at the start with billions of dollars that they can simply afford to risk and spend on themselves. Risk means finding investors that will share in the idea of your product, but not every small company starting out is able to find that. You have to remember that the main driving force of a vibrant economy is in the creation and risk that begins with small business, with the ability of that business to be able to compete. That means as that business grows and takes on more “risk”, with more of their own money at their disposal, they can be able to afford to turn around and invest in themselves.
1) expansion to build another facility. Maybe now they can OWN another distribution center by having one built off that extra money they have at their disposal. Perhaps instead of paying a rental fee to store their product, they are now able to have one built that they now own.
2) As a company retains more of their own revenue, they can now afford to look into ways they can be more competitive. Now we are talking about advancements in technology, like robotics, that can help grow and increase their business’s efficiency in ways they could not previously afford to meet up with that higher demand while producing at a level that helps them to become more competitive. Robotics and higher technology means restructuring that shell of a facility to accommodate with the changes. Plans and newer construction, comes with the ability to afford the cost associated with attaining these higher more advanced pieces of equipment. Now obviously higher technology means you need to pay a higher wage, because your basic electrician is not going to have the necessary skill level in robotics that’s associated with troubleshooting and maintaining that particular piece of equipment, should the system go down. Higher skill levels and higher wages can also mean higher incentives, in drawing those kinds of employees to work in your plant as opposed to working at another facility.
3) Education. Maybe with more of your own money to spend you can invest in internships and reinbursement programs on help retain that higher skill level. Aircraft engineers is just one example comes to mind here, the testing of newer technology that comes out of the “research and development”.
4) That brings “research and development”, which is another cost that can benefit a business into becoming more competitive and efficient as it grows. This can be applied in several different ways depending on the scale and the kind of market you happen to be competing in.
This is just a very brief overview of how a smaller company can grow and build with more of their own money to be able to invest in themselves. You see there are several factors that come with allowing a small business to first be able to initially establish themselves in a market, then take on greater risk to invest in themselves to meet up with the demand as their business grows, while lower federal taxes will afford them the added ability to keep more of their own money to be able to expand and afford ways to be more cost efficient.
All that effort and yet a total waste of time. Every single "investment" you mentioned is done with BEFORE TAX DOLLARS. The key phrase, "as a company retains more of their revenue". You are speaking of retained earnings.
Pure unmitigated nonsense completely devoid of reality and business acumen.But will your "company" continue paying for your stay at the mental institution? LOL
If lowering taxes makes it cheaper for the corporation to stay where they are, as opposed to going to another State or nation that would be more expensive, what reason would that company have to leave? Do you have a clear answer for that Nat?
Come on, tell us what job is created by raising Federal taxes?
Employee salaries are a business expense. Say the corporation has a dollar in profit. If they want, they can spend that dollar on creating a new job. If not, well they can pay the tax on that dollar and keep the rest. The tax rate is thirty five percent. That means they can spend a dollar on a new job or keep sixty five cents. Now the tax rate is lowered. They can spend the dollar on a new job or they can keep eighty cents. The "opportunity cost" of creating a job instead of booking a profit INCREASES as the tax rate declines. Now, you want to tell me why corporations will create more jobs when the cost of doing so increases as the tax rate declines.
I mean this is some simple ass shit. Like the decline of our manufacturing base. Everyone wants to blame outsourcing, shifting jobs overseas. But it is not the "cause", it is just a symptom. The declining tax rate is the cause. In the early1950's the "effective corporate tax rate" was north of fifty percent. That means if a company saved a dollar by shifting production abroad they could only keep a little less than fifty cents. Now the EFFECTIVE corporate tax rate is closer to twenty percent. They save that dollar now they get to keep damn near eighty cents. Hell some companies, like say, GE, with an effective tax rate of less than three percent over the last decade, get to keep damn near the WHOLE DOLLAR. Now, it's one thing to close down a factory, layoff workers, implement a transpacific shipping arrangement, lose community and employee allegiance, and adopt a far flung supply chain to manage, if you only get to keep fifty cents on the dollar. It is quite another if you get to keep it all.
I mean I don't know where you people live, and I don't know where you work, but if you are looking it is damn easy to see the ramifications of this declining effective corporate tax rate. No companies invest in their people anymore, they attempt to steal them from somewhere else or they bitch and moan and look to the GOVERNMENT to fund their employees training, at say a community college. Sneak in to the backroom of your local Walmart. Check out the mops. Yeah, the damn mops. They are filled with grease, nasty as hell, because they can't even invest in a new mop-head. It's freakin comical. Companies look to cut corners at every turn, packaging sucks ass. The trucking fleets are comprised of dinosaurs that spew out toxic gases, break down constantly, and require an entire staff of mechanics to keep them going. Farmers don't own combines anymore, they RENT THEM.
In a nutshell, when corporate taxes are high companies are forced to look and plan for the long term. When they are low, they are encouraged to "cash out", to seek short term gains at the expense of long term growth. They are discouraged from investing in everything from people to mop-heads, and instead encouraged to take the money and run. Look the fawk around. It is precisely what is happening, precisely what has been happening, and cutting corporate tax rates further will only add gasoline to the fire that is already burning down this nation. Only a sheer fool would believe otherwise.
Amazing.
Did you even read my post?
In case you never realized, that formula you just spouted out specifically deals with how a business is expected to compensate for its many investments and investors who have choaen to invest in the business. This investment can be achieved through corporate stocks or bonds.
This has nothing to do with my previous post of small business making a business decision, that comes with having more of their OWN money though lower taxes, to make their own investment through (1) improvements in efficiency (2) giving business to those who sell them the more advanced equipment that aids in making the business more efficient (3) choosing to buy a storage facility instead of renting (4) gaining opportunities to require more skilled workers as a result of maintaining and repairing a more automated efficient system ... etc.
AGAIN, as I’ve said before, the vast majority of the private sector is made up of small business and those who wish to establish their own business with (a best) a small business Bank loan - not corporate stocks and bonds. It’s that simple, it’s not complicated.
You have NOT come close to proving how a raise in corporate taxes helps to create more jobs, I’d suggest you give up now while you can.
If lowering taxes makes it cheaper for the corporation to stay where they are, as opposed to going to another State or nation that would be more expensive, what reason would that company have to leave? Do you have a clear answer for that Nat?
Come on, tell us what job is created by raising Federal taxes?
Employee salaries are a business expense. Say the corporation has a dollar in profit. If they want, they can spend that dollar on creating a new job. If not, well they can pay the tax on that dollar and keep the rest. The tax rate is thirty five percent. That means they can spend a dollar on a new job or keep sixty five cents. Now the tax rate is lowered. They can spend the dollar on a new job or they can keep eighty cents. The "opportunity cost" of creating a job instead of booking a profit INCREASES as the tax rate declines. Now, you want to tell me why corporations will create more jobs when the cost of doing so increases as the tax rate declines.
I mean this is some simple ass shit. Like the decline of our manufacturing base. Everyone wants to blame outsourcing, shifting jobs overseas. But it is not the "cause", it is just a symptom. The declining tax rate is the cause. In the early1950's the "effective corporate tax rate" was north of fifty percent. That means if a company saved a dollar by shifting production abroad they could only keep a little less than fifty cents. Now the EFFECTIVE corporate tax rate is closer to twenty percent. They save that dollar now they get to keep damn near eighty cents. Hell some companies, like say, GE, with an effective tax rate of less than three percent over the last decade, get to keep damn near the WHOLE DOLLAR. Now, it's one thing to close down a factory, layoff workers, implement a transpacific shipping arrangement, lose community and employee allegiance, and adopt a far flung supply chain to manage, if you only get to keep fifty cents on the dollar. It is quite another if you get to keep it all.
I mean I don't know where you people live, and I don't know where you work, but if you are looking it is damn easy to see the ramifications of this declining effective corporate tax rate. No companies invest in their people anymore, they attempt to steal them from somewhere else or they bitch and moan and look to the GOVERNMENT to fund their employees training, at say a community college. Sneak in to the backroom of your local Walmart. Check out the mops. Yeah, the damn mops. They are filled with grease, nasty as hell, because they can't even invest in a new mop-head. It's freakin comical. Companies look to cut corners at every turn, packaging sucks ass. The trucking fleets are comprised of dinosaurs that spew out toxic gases, break down constantly, and require an entire staff of mechanics to keep them going. Farmers don't own combines anymore, they RENT THEM.
In a nutshell, when corporate taxes are high companies are forced to look and plan for the long term. When they are low, they are encouraged to "cash out", to seek short term gains at the expense of long term growth. They are discouraged from investing in everything from people to mop-heads, and instead encouraged to take the money and run. Look the fawk around. It is precisely what is happening, precisely what has been happening, and cutting corporate tax rates further will only add gasoline to the fire that is already burning down this nation. Only a sheer fool would believe otherwise.
Except, when a company pays a lower tax rate, that also means that leaves more of their own money to invest in themselves. Not every company simply walks in one day at the start with billions of dollars that they can simply afford to risk and spend on themselves. Risk means finding investors that will share in the idea of your product, but not every small company starting out is able to find that. You have to remember that the main driving force of a vibrant economy is in the creation and risk that begins with small business, with the ability of that business to be able to compete. That means as that business grows and takes on more “risk”, with more of their own money at their disposal, they can be able to afford to turn around and invest in themselves.
1) expansion to build another facility. Maybe now they can OWN another distribution center by having one built off that extra money they have at their disposal. Perhaps instead of paying a rental fee to store their product, they are now able to have one built that they now own.
2) As a company retains more of their own revenue, they can now afford to look into ways they can be more competitive. Now we are talking about advancements in technology, like robotics, that can help grow and increase their business’s efficiency in ways they could not previously afford to meet up with that higher demand while producing at a level that helps them to become more competitive. Robotics and higher technology means restructuring that shell of a facility to accommodate with the changes. Plans and newer construction, comes with the ability to afford the cost associated with attaining these higher more advanced pieces of equipment. Now obviously higher technology means you need to pay a higher wage, because your basic electrician is not going to have the necessary skill level in robotics that’s associated with troubleshooting and maintaining that particular piece of equipment, should the system go down. Higher skill levels and higher wages can also mean higher incentives, in drawing those kinds of employees to work in your plant as opposed to working at another facility.
3) Education. Maybe with more of your own money to spend you can invest in internships and reinbursement programs on help retain that higher skill level. Aircraft engineers is just one example comes to mind here, the testing of newer technology that comes out of the “research and development”.
4) That brings “research and development”, which is another cost that can benefit a business into becoming more competitive and efficient as it grows. This can be applied in several different ways depending on the scale and the kind of market you happen to be competing in.
This is just a very brief overview of how a smaller company can grow and build with more of their own money to be able to invest in themselves. You see there are several factors that come with allowing a small business to first be able to initially establish themselves in a market, then take on greater risk to invest in themselves to meet up with the demand as their business grows, while lower federal taxes will afford them the added ability to keep more of their own money to be able to expand and afford ways to be more cost efficient.
All that effort and yet a total waste of time. Every single "investment" you mentioned is done with BEFORE TAX DOLLARS. The key phrase, "as a company retains more of their revenue". You are speaking of retained earnings.
Pure unmitigated nonsense completely devoid of reality and business acumen.If lowering taxes makes it cheaper for the corporation to stay where they are, as opposed to going to another State or nation that would be more expensive, what reason would that company have to leave? Do you have a clear answer for that Nat?
Come on, tell us what job is created by raising Federal taxes?
Employee salaries are a business expense. Say the corporation has a dollar in profit. If they want, they can spend that dollar on creating a new job. If not, well they can pay the tax on that dollar and keep the rest. The tax rate is thirty five percent. That means they can spend a dollar on a new job or keep sixty five cents. Now the tax rate is lowered. They can spend the dollar on a new job or they can keep eighty cents. The "opportunity cost" of creating a job instead of booking a profit INCREASES as the tax rate declines. Now, you want to tell me why corporations will create more jobs when the cost of doing so increases as the tax rate declines.
I mean this is some simple ass shit. Like the decline of our manufacturing base. Everyone wants to blame outsourcing, shifting jobs overseas. But it is not the "cause", it is just a symptom. The declining tax rate is the cause. In the early1950's the "effective corporate tax rate" was north of fifty percent. That means if a company saved a dollar by shifting production abroad they could only keep a little less than fifty cents. Now the EFFECTIVE corporate tax rate is closer to twenty percent. They save that dollar now they get to keep damn near eighty cents. Hell some companies, like say, GE, with an effective tax rate of less than three percent over the last decade, get to keep damn near the WHOLE DOLLAR. Now, it's one thing to close down a factory, layoff workers, implement a transpacific shipping arrangement, lose community and employee allegiance, and adopt a far flung supply chain to manage, if you only get to keep fifty cents on the dollar. It is quite another if you get to keep it all.
I mean I don't know where you people live, and I don't know where you work, but if you are looking it is damn easy to see the ramifications of this declining effective corporate tax rate. No companies invest in their people anymore, they attempt to steal them from somewhere else or they bitch and moan and look to the GOVERNMENT to fund their employees training, at say a community college. Sneak in to the backroom of your local Walmart. Check out the mops. Yeah, the damn mops. They are filled with grease, nasty as hell, because they can't even invest in a new mop-head. It's freakin comical. Companies look to cut corners at every turn, packaging sucks ass. The trucking fleets are comprised of dinosaurs that spew out toxic gases, break down constantly, and require an entire staff of mechanics to keep them going. Farmers don't own combines anymore, they RENT THEM.
In a nutshell, when corporate taxes are high companies are forced to look and plan for the long term. When they are low, they are encouraged to "cash out", to seek short term gains at the expense of long term growth. They are discouraged from investing in everything from people to mop-heads, and instead encouraged to take the money and run. Look the fawk around. It is precisely what is happening, precisely what has been happening, and cutting corporate tax rates further will only add gasoline to the fire that is already burning down this nation. Only a sheer fool would believe otherwise.
Amazing.
Did you even read my post?
In case you never realized, that formula you just spouted out specifically deals with how a business is expected to compensate for its many investments and investors who have choaen to invest in the business. This investment can be achieved through corporate stocks or bonds.
This has nothing to do with my previous post of small business making a business decision, that comes with having more of their OWN money though lower taxes, to make their own investment through (1) improvements in efficiency (2) giving business to those who sell them the more advanced equipment that aids in making the business more efficient (3) choosing to buy a storage facility instead of renting (4) gaining opportunities to require more skilled workers as a result of maintaining and repairing a more automated efficient system ... etc.
AGAIN, as I’ve said before, the vast majority of the private sector is made up of small business and those who wish to establish their own business with (a best) a small business Bank loan - not corporate stocks and bonds. It’s that simple, it’s not complicated.
You have NOT come close to proving how a raise in corporate taxes helps to create more jobs, I’d suggest you give up now while you can.
He thinks people won't make an investment with a higher cost of capital because their expected return is higher.....LOL!
