Screw "Tax The Poor" Capitalism.

[Slashsnake]

Trump, as I expected, is talking giving companies tax breaks to create jobs here. Well if you give them tax breaks, then guess who pays the taxes. The Poor! Slavery in action. The more that things change, the more they stay the same.

Here is the way things work in the U.S. Capitalism-Corporations = Society = Government = AMERICA! We are "supposed" to live in a democracy. But the business world rules your lives. How many people in business did you vote for. Do you vote for business or government. People in business who aren't elected shouldn't be directing how people live. That is the government's job.

I say to hell with bribing companies with tax breaks or outright corporate welfare to create jobs. If the private sector can't create jobs, I say that the government should just cut away that that dead weight and start doing the job themselves. Also, want to see something interesting? Go to the internet and look up any year in the last 50 years and see the number of companies in whatever year paid no taxes at all.

So you're against companies creating more jobs?

We don't live in a democracy, you might want to educate yourself on the American lifestyle... We live in a democratic republic; neither which has to do with the economy, but with the way we elect our representatives, either directly or indirectly. If the American people didn't elect people who took bribes from businesses, this country would be in a better position, but unfortunately, that's not how the people have voted, so blame the 99%, not the 1%.

Perfect, so let's take away capitalism and turn the country into a complete communist society. So when you work, the government pays you very little, but also controls everything you buy. So if I want to buy that big screen TV, well, sorry, but the government says I can't afford it. Yeah, right, dream on buddy. I'd rather have capitalism than a communist market.

Companies shouldn't be paying taxes. Shareholders are the owners of a company like GM, and they pay taxes on their earnings, which count as income. Employees who work for companies like GM also pay income tax. I think the corporate tax rate should be 0% for this reason.

 

[Never3ndr]

Companies shouldn't be paying taxes. Shareholders are the owners of a company like GM, and they pay taxes on their earnings, which count as income. Employees who work for companies like GM also pay income tax. I think the corporate tax rate should be 0% for this reason.

I'm highlighting this because of how radically insane this is. I don't think you fundamentally understand the reason why there are taxes or what corporations are for you to assert this claim. Your knowledge base is seriously lacking in a critical place somewhere.

 

[Slashsnake]

Companies shouldn't be paying taxes. Shareholders are the owners of a company like GM, and they pay taxes on their earnings, which count as income. Employees who work for companies like GM also pay income tax. I think the corporate tax rate should be 0% for this reason.

I'm highlighting this because of how radically insane this is. I don't think you fundamentally understand the reason why there are taxes or what corporations are for you to assert this claim. Your knowledge base is seriously lacking in a critical place somewhere.

Hardly, I understand taxes pretty well.

For instance, I know sales tax is bull shit because it's essentially double taxation. You're taxed once when you get paid, and then taxed again when you buy something... Complete thievery by the local and state government right there.

The only people who should be paying a tax within a company are its owners and employees. The NFL doesn't pay a tax because the owners and players pay taxes, but the NFL itself doesn't. The same concept should be used for other companies... The shareholders should be taxed on their earnings (which is all the profit), while the operating costs (used to buy materials, etc, is sales taxed), while the employees who make an income who profit from working there pay income tax. Not really a hard concept to understand what I'm talking about.

 

[Never3ndr]

Companies shouldn't be paying taxes. Shareholders are the owners of a company like GM, and they pay taxes on their earnings, which count as income. Employees who work for companies like GM also pay income tax. I think the corporate tax rate should be 0% for this reason.

I'm highlighting this because of how radically insane this is. I don't think you fundamentally understand the reason why there are taxes or what corporations are for you to assert this claim. Your knowledge base is seriously lacking in a critical place somewhere.

Hardly, I understand taxes pretty well.

For instance, I know sales tax is bull shit because it's essentially double taxation. You're taxed once when you get paid, and then taxed again when you buy something... Complete thievery by the local and state government right there.

The only people who should be paying a tax within a company are its owners and employees. The NFL doesn't pay a tax because the owners and players pay taxes, but the NFL itself doesn't. The same concept should be used for other companies... The shareholders should be taxed on their earnings (which is all the profit), while the operating costs (used to buy materials, etc, is sales taxed), while the employees who make an income who profit from working there pay income tax. Not really a hard concept to understand what I'm talking about.

I'm not asking about the mechanics of tax...I'm saying you don't fundamentally understand the reasoning behind why we tax (basically the reasoning for government). You have to pass "Go" before you play the board. If you want to demonstrate your acknowledgement of why we have taxes in the first place, then we can debate about the implementation of those taxes referring to corporations...but you don't seem like you have that basic foundation.

 

[Slashsnake]

Companies shouldn't be paying taxes. Shareholders are the owners of a company like GM, and they pay taxes on their earnings, which count as income. Employees who work for companies like GM also pay income tax. I think the corporate tax rate should be 0% for this reason.

I'm highlighting this because of how radically insane this is. I don't think you fundamentally understand the reason why there are taxes or what corporations are for you to assert this claim. Your knowledge base is seriously lacking in a critical place somewhere.

Hardly, I understand taxes pretty well.

For instance, I know sales tax is bull shit because it's essentially double taxation. You're taxed once when you get paid, and then taxed again when you buy something... Complete thievery by the local and state government right there.

The only people who should be paying a tax within a company are its owners and employees. The NFL doesn't pay a tax because the owners and players pay taxes, but the NFL itself doesn't. The same concept should be used for other companies... The shareholders should be taxed on their earnings (which is all the profit), while the operating costs (used to buy materials, etc, is sales taxed), while the employees who make an income who profit from working there pay income tax. Not really a hard concept to understand what I'm talking about.

I'm not asking about the mechanics of tax...I'm saying you don't fundamentally understand the reasoning behind why we tax (basically the reasoning for government). You have to pass "Go" before you play the board. If you want to demonstrate your acknowledgement of why we have taxes in the first place, then we can debate about the implementation of those taxes referring to corporations...but you don't seem like you have that basic foundation.

The basic foundation of having taxes is corrupt. Imagine how companies would actually put money back into the company if they weren't paying a special corporate tax so our government can throw excess money down the drain.

 

[Never3ndr]

Companies shouldn't be paying taxes. Shareholders are the owners of a company like GM, and they pay taxes on their earnings, which count as income. Employees who work for companies like GM also pay income tax. I think the corporate tax rate should be 0% for this reason.

I'm highlighting this because of how radically insane this is. I don't think you fundamentally understand the reason why there are taxes or what corporations are for you to assert this claim. Your knowledge base is seriously lacking in a critical place somewhere.

Hardly, I understand taxes pretty well.

For instance, I know sales tax is bull shit because it's essentially double taxation. You're taxed once when you get paid, and then taxed again when you buy something... Complete thievery by the local and state government right there.

The only people who should be paying a tax within a company are its owners and employees. The NFL doesn't pay a tax because the owners and players pay taxes, but the NFL itself doesn't. The same concept should be used for other companies... The shareholders should be taxed on their earnings (which is all the profit), while the operating costs (used to buy materials, etc, is sales taxed), while the employees who make an income who profit from working there pay income tax. Not really a hard concept to understand what I'm talking about.

I'm not asking about the mechanics of tax...I'm saying you don't fundamentally understand the reasoning behind why we tax (basically the reasoning for government). You have to pass "Go" before you play the board. If you want to demonstrate your acknowledgement of why we have taxes in the first place, then we can debate about the implementation of those taxes referring to corporations...but you don't seem like you have that basic foundation.

The basic foundation of having taxes is corrupt. Imagine how companies would actually put money back into the company if they weren't paying a special corporate tax so our government can throw excess money down the drain.

And that is why your basic opinions lack relevancy. You don't even acknowledge the reasoning behind why they are put into place. Now, you could certainly acknowledge their reasoning...and then assert why you disagree with them...but you just seem to have a general mindset of "taxes = bad" instead of having a coherent argument against them (which would require you to know what the other side posits for the argument).

Since we have that understanding that you don't necessarily know the foundations you are arguing against, instead of being academic, I'll simply point towards a real-world example. Look at the Middle Eastern oil gurus or the drug cartels of Central / South America. These are big money businesses that operate outside the bounds of government control or taxation (unless you consider their grease payments a form of taxation). How beneficial is it for those businesses to operate in this manner? Do you really want to argue that they have a net positive benefit for the citizen base in the places in which they operate?

 

[Slashsnake]

Companies shouldn't be paying taxes. Shareholders are the owners of a company like GM, and they pay taxes on their earnings, which count as income. Employees who work for companies like GM also pay income tax. I think the corporate tax rate should be 0% for this reason.

I'm highlighting this because of how radically insane this is. I don't think you fundamentally understand the reason why there are taxes or what corporations are for you to assert this claim. Your knowledge base is seriously lacking in a critical place somewhere.

Hardly, I understand taxes pretty well.

For instance, I know sales tax is bull shit because it's essentially double taxation. You're taxed once when you get paid, and then taxed again when you buy something... Complete thievery by the local and state government right there.

The only people who should be paying a tax within a company are its owners and employees. The NFL doesn't pay a tax because the owners and players pay taxes, but the NFL itself doesn't. The same concept should be used for other companies... The shareholders should be taxed on their earnings (which is all the profit), while the operating costs (used to buy materials, etc, is sales taxed), while the employees who make an income who profit from working there pay income tax. Not really a hard concept to understand what I'm talking about.

I'm not asking about the mechanics of tax...I'm saying you don't fundamentally understand the reasoning behind why we tax (basically the reasoning for government). You have to pass "Go" before you play the board. If you want to demonstrate your acknowledgement of why we have taxes in the first place, then we can debate about the implementation of those taxes referring to corporations...but you don't seem like you have that basic foundation.

The basic foundation of having taxes is corrupt. Imagine how companies would actually put money back into the company if they weren't paying a special corporate tax so our government can throw excess money down the drain.

And that is why your basic opinions lack relevancy. You don't even acknowledge the reasoning behind why they are put into place. Now, you could certainly acknowledge their reasoning...and then assert why you disagree with them...but you just seem to have a general mindset of "taxes = bad" instead of having a coherent argument against them (which would require you to know what the other side posits for the argument).

Since we have that understanding that you don't necessarily know the foundations you are arguing against, instead of being academic, I'll simply point towards a real-world example. Look at the Middle Eastern oil gurus or the drug cartels of Central / South America. These are big money businesses that operate outside the bounds of government control or taxation (unless you consider their grease payments a form of taxation). How beneficial is it for those businesses to operate in this manner? Do you really want to argue that they have a net positive benefit for the citizen base in the places in which they operate?

No, wasting money = bad.
Double taxation = bad.
Taxes are good when used responsibly, but the rates are inflated because our government wastes money.

 

[there4eyeM]

Regressive taxes discriminate in favor of the wealthy.

 

[Never3ndr]

I'm highlighting this because of how radically insane this is. I don't think you fundamentally understand the reason why there are taxes or what corporations are for you to assert this claim. Your knowledge base is seriously lacking in a critical place somewhere.

Hardly, I understand taxes pretty well.

For instance, I know sales tax is bull shit because it's essentially double taxation. You're taxed once when you get paid, and then taxed again when you buy something... Complete thievery by the local and state government right there.

The only people who should be paying a tax within a company are its owners and employees. The NFL doesn't pay a tax because the owners and players pay taxes, but the NFL itself doesn't. The same concept should be used for other companies... The shareholders should be taxed on their earnings (which is all the profit), while the operating costs (used to buy materials, etc, is sales taxed), while the employees who make an income who profit from working there pay income tax. Not really a hard concept to understand what I'm talking about.

I'm not asking about the mechanics of tax...I'm saying you don't fundamentally understand the reasoning behind why we tax (basically the reasoning for government). You have to pass "Go" before you play the board. If you want to demonstrate your acknowledgement of why we have taxes in the first place, then we can debate about the implementation of those taxes referring to corporations...but you don't seem like you have that basic foundation.

The basic foundation of having taxes is corrupt. Imagine how companies would actually put money back into the company if they weren't paying a special corporate tax so our government can throw excess money down the drain.

And that is why your basic opinions lack relevancy. You don't even acknowledge the reasoning behind why they are put into place. Now, you could certainly acknowledge their reasoning...and then assert why you disagree with them...but you just seem to have a general mindset of "taxes = bad" instead of having a coherent argument against them (which would require you to know what the other side posits for the argument).

Since we have that understanding that you don't necessarily know the foundations you are arguing against, instead of being academic, I'll simply point towards a real-world example. Look at the Middle Eastern oil gurus or the drug cartels of Central / South America. These are big money businesses that operate outside the bounds of government control or taxation (unless you consider their grease payments a form of taxation). How beneficial is it for those businesses to operate in this manner? Do you really want to argue that they have a net positive benefit for the citizen base in the places in which they operate?

No, wasting money = bad.
Double taxation = bad.
Taxes are good when used responsibly, but the rates are inflated because our government wastes money.

So you are taking an argument of degrees. You think that, if used properly, taxes are beneficial.

Then the question becomes what is acceptable? What is waste? What is needed? Why is your opinion on waste more important than other American's opinion on what is wasted versus needed? I will also point out that if you don't have an issue with taxation, but have an issue with the levels of taxation, you shouldn't really have an issue with double taxation. You can tax somebody twice at 5% each time and have it be less than the ~30-40% tax the wealthy pay (without deductions).

I will go ahead and say that I believe that our government does waste a lot of money (coming from somebody in the military who has seen a lot of waste). However, i also feel that a lot of our programs are needed and, given our insane level of debt, we should actually be increasing our tax levels rather than decreasing them (unless large portions of government spending were cut).

 

[Slashsnake]

Hardly, I understand taxes pretty well.

For instance, I know sales tax is bull shit because it's essentially double taxation. You're taxed once when you get paid, and then taxed again when you buy something... Complete thievery by the local and state government right there.

The only people who should be paying a tax within a company are its owners and employees. The NFL doesn't pay a tax because the owners and players pay taxes, but the NFL itself doesn't. The same concept should be used for other companies... The shareholders should be taxed on their earnings (which is all the profit), while the operating costs (used to buy materials, etc, is sales taxed), while the employees who make an income who profit from working there pay income tax. Not really a hard concept to understand what I'm talking about.

I'm not asking about the mechanics of tax...I'm saying you don't fundamentally understand the reasoning behind why we tax (basically the reasoning for government). You have to pass "Go" before you play the board. If you want to demonstrate your acknowledgement of why we have taxes in the first place, then we can debate about the implementation of those taxes referring to corporations...but you don't seem like you have that basic foundation.

The basic foundation of having taxes is corrupt. Imagine how companies would actually put money back into the company if they weren't paying a special corporate tax so our government can throw excess money down the drain.

And that is why your basic opinions lack relevancy. You don't even acknowledge the reasoning behind why they are put into place. Now, you could certainly acknowledge their reasoning...and then assert why you disagree with them...but you just seem to have a general mindset of "taxes = bad" instead of having a coherent argument against them (which would require you to know what the other side posits for the argument).

Since we have that understanding that you don't necessarily know the foundations you are arguing against, instead of being academic, I'll simply point towards a real-world example. Look at the Middle Eastern oil gurus or the drug cartels of Central / South America. These are big money businesses that operate outside the bounds of government control or taxation (unless you consider their grease payments a form of taxation). How beneficial is it for those businesses to operate in this manner? Do you really want to argue that they have a net positive benefit for the citizen base in the places in which they operate?

No, wasting money = bad.
Double taxation = bad.
Taxes are good when used responsibly, but the rates are inflated because our government wastes money.

So you are taking an argument of degrees. You think that, if used properly, taxes are beneficial.

Then the question becomes what is acceptable? What is waste? What is needed? Why is your opinion on waste more important than other American's opinion on what is wasted versus needed? I will also point out that if you don't have an issue with taxation, but have an issue with the levels of taxation, you shouldn't really have an issue with double taxation. You can tax somebody twice at 5% each time and have it be less than the ~30-40% tax the wealthy pay (without deductions).

I will go ahead and say that I believe that our government does waste a lot of money (coming from somebody in the military who has seen a lot of waste). However, i also feel that a lot of our programs are needed and, given our insane level of debt, we should actually be increasing our tax levels rather than decreasing them (unless large portions of government spending were cut).

Well for starters, when you send $200 million to a different country hours before leaving the WH, I would say that's a waste of taxpayer money. I've never met anyone who doesn't think the government wastes tax dollars on other countries, unless you speak to Occupy Democrats members, though, who think a democrat president can do no wrong.

Why shouldn't I have an issue with double taxation? I am part of the double taxation bull shit... When I get paid, I pay federal and state income tax, and then the state and local government charges me sales tax when I buy something. I pay roughly 23% in state, federal, and local taxes and then another 8.25% in sales tax, so 31.25% of my money goes towards taxes... It seems like I'm better paying 10% more to get all of the goodies the Canadian socialist system offers me such as free college and healthcare.

 

[Never3ndr]

I'm not asking about the mechanics of tax...I'm saying you don't fundamentally understand the reasoning behind why we tax (basically the reasoning for government). You have to pass "Go" before you play the board. If you want to demonstrate your acknowledgement of why we have taxes in the first place, then we can debate about the implementation of those taxes referring to corporations...but you don't seem like you have that basic foundation.

The basic foundation of having taxes is corrupt. Imagine how companies would actually put money back into the company if they weren't paying a special corporate tax so our government can throw excess money down the drain.

And that is why your basic opinions lack relevancy. You don't even acknowledge the reasoning behind why they are put into place. Now, you could certainly acknowledge their reasoning...and then assert why you disagree with them...but you just seem to have a general mindset of "taxes = bad" instead of having a coherent argument against them (which would require you to know what the other side posits for the argument).

Since we have that understanding that you don't necessarily know the foundations you are arguing against, instead of being academic, I'll simply point towards a real-world example. Look at the Middle Eastern oil gurus or the drug cartels of Central / South America. These are big money businesses that operate outside the bounds of government control or taxation (unless you consider their grease payments a form of taxation). How beneficial is it for those businesses to operate in this manner? Do you really want to argue that they have a net positive benefit for the citizen base in the places in which they operate?

No, wasting money = bad.
Double taxation = bad.
Taxes are good when used responsibly, but the rates are inflated because our government wastes money.

So you are taking an argument of degrees. You think that, if used properly, taxes are beneficial.

Then the question becomes what is acceptable? What is waste? What is needed? Why is your opinion on waste more important than other American's opinion on what is wasted versus needed? I will also point out that if you don't have an issue with taxation, but have an issue with the levels of taxation, you shouldn't really have an issue with double taxation. You can tax somebody twice at 5% each time and have it be less than the ~30-40% tax the wealthy pay (without deductions).

I will go ahead and say that I believe that our government does waste a lot of money (coming from somebody in the military who has seen a lot of waste). However, i also feel that a lot of our programs are needed and, given our insane level of debt, we should actually be increasing our tax levels rather than decreasing them (unless large portions of government spending were cut).

Well for starters, when you send $200 million to a different country hours before leaving the WH, I would say that's a waste of taxpayer money. I've never met anyone who doesn't think the government wastes tax dollars on other countries, unless you speak to Occupy Democrats members, though, who think a democrat president can do no wrong.

Why shouldn't I have an issue with double taxation? I am part of the double taxation bull shit... When I get paid, I pay federal and state income tax, and then the state and local government charges me sales tax when I buy something. I pay roughly 23% in state, federal, and local taxes and then another 8.25% in sales tax, so 31.25% of my money goes towards taxes... It seems like I'm better paying 10% more to get all of the goodies the Canadian socialist system offers me such as free college and healthcare.

Deflecting to somebody else to justify Trump's actions means, at the base, you don't have a good argument. Who cares about Obama? I'm not here to talk about him nor defend him...he has no effect on America anymore.

I pointed out the reason why in a previous post. You can have an issue with the levels of taxes, but how you are taxed is largely irrelevant. You should also recognize that corporations are afforded a lot of legal protections which is the base reasoning for their taxation. If you want to remove their taxability status you should tax them as you tax a small business...which would mean that whomever the owners are have full liability, the company lives and dies with its owners (no ownership shares anymore, simply partnerships), they don't have the ability to bring cases to court nor defend them, etc.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

which is the base reasoning for their taxation. .

base reason is pure 100% ignorance of liberals. Corporate tax costs like all costs are passed on to us in form of higher prices. We pay the tax cost not the corporations. Liberals stupidly think they are making corporations pay their fair share when really they are encouraging them to move off shore and take jobs with them. America cant survive pure liberal ignorance forever.

 

[Never3ndr]

which is the base reasoning for their taxation. .

base reason is pure 100% ignorance of liberals. Corporate tax costs like all costs are passed on to us in form of higher prices. We pay the tax cost not the corporations. Liberals stupidly think they are making corporations pay their fair share when really they are encouraging them to move off shore and take jobs with them. America cant survive pure liberal ignorance forever.

I never said that their taxes were not passed down in the form of higher prices...I stated the core reasoning why we tax them in the first place, which is that they enjoy limited rights as an independent entity in our legal and governmental system.

I also never said they pay more or less than their fair share...and, if you would read more than one post, I repeated say that you can certainly debate the level of taxation that we currently maintain and whether or not it is healthy...as I have made no claims to affirm or disaffirm our current levels.

Knee jerk reactionism does not seem to suit you so well.

 

[EverCurious]

My issue with taxing the wealthy & thus businesses, the whole 'fair share' bullshit, is that the stats used by politicians to scare up more money for socialist programs /never/ looks at the 'other' taxes we wealthy already pay more in on, never looks at the benefits we give the economy in raw dollars and in services/products rendered. We pay taxes for our employees on the Fed side, on the State side we pay a shit ton more in on property taxes our homes and our business spaces, we also pay a crap ton more in on sales taxes for the shit we buy, personal items and stuff we need for our businesses. Then there's the economic effects of paying people to work for us.

Bah, I have to go so I can't finish my thought entirely.

 

[Slashsnake]

The basic foundation of having taxes is corrupt. Imagine how companies would actually put money back into the company if they weren't paying a special corporate tax so our government can throw excess money down the drain.

And that is why your basic opinions lack relevancy. You don't even acknowledge the reasoning behind why they are put into place. Now, you could certainly acknowledge their reasoning...and then assert why you disagree with them...but you just seem to have a general mindset of "taxes = bad" instead of having a coherent argument against them (which would require you to know what the other side posits for the argument).

Since we have that understanding that you don't necessarily know the foundations you are arguing against, instead of being academic, I'll simply point towards a real-world example. Look at the Middle Eastern oil gurus or the drug cartels of Central / South America. These are big money businesses that operate outside the bounds of government control or taxation (unless you consider their grease payments a form of taxation). How beneficial is it for those businesses to operate in this manner? Do you really want to argue that they have a net positive benefit for the citizen base in the places in which they operate?

No, wasting money = bad.
Double taxation = bad.
Taxes are good when used responsibly, but the rates are inflated because our government wastes money.

So you are taking an argument of degrees. You think that, if used properly, taxes are beneficial.

Then the question becomes what is acceptable? What is waste? What is needed? Why is your opinion on waste more important than other American's opinion on what is wasted versus needed? I will also point out that if you don't have an issue with taxation, but have an issue with the levels of taxation, you shouldn't really have an issue with double taxation. You can tax somebody twice at 5% each time and have it be less than the ~30-40% tax the wealthy pay (without deductions).

I will go ahead and say that I believe that our government does waste a lot of money (coming from somebody in the military who has seen a lot of waste). However, i also feel that a lot of our programs are needed and, given our insane level of debt, we should actually be increasing our tax levels rather than decreasing them (unless large portions of government spending were cut).

Well for starters, when you send $200 million to a different country hours before leaving the WH, I would say that's a waste of taxpayer money. I've never met anyone who doesn't think the government wastes tax dollars on other countries, unless you speak to Occupy Democrats members, though, who think a democrat president can do no wrong.

Why shouldn't I have an issue with double taxation? I am part of the double taxation bull shit... When I get paid, I pay federal and state income tax, and then the state and local government charges me sales tax when I buy something. I pay roughly 23% in state, federal, and local taxes and then another 8.25% in sales tax, so 31.25% of my money goes towards taxes... It seems like I'm better paying 10% more to get all of the goodies the Canadian socialist system offers me such as free college and healthcare.

Deflecting to somebody else to justify Trump's actions means, at the base, you don't have a good argument. Who cares about Obama? I'm not here to talk about him nor defend him...he has no effect on America anymore.

I pointed out the reason why in a previous post. You can have an issue with the levels of taxes, but how you are taxed is largely irrelevant. You should also recognize that corporations are afforded a lot of legal protections which is the base reasoning for their taxation. If you want to remove their taxability status you should tax them as you tax a small business...which would mean that whomever the owners are have full liability, the company lives and dies with its owners (no ownership shares anymore, simply partnerships), they don't have the ability to bring cases to court nor defend them, etc.

Pretty sure Obama still has an effect on our country... Dodd-Frank and Obamacare still exist.

 

[Never3ndr]

And that is why your basic opinions lack relevancy. You don't even acknowledge the reasoning behind why they are put into place. Now, you could certainly acknowledge their reasoning...and then assert why you disagree with them...but you just seem to have a general mindset of "taxes = bad" instead of having a coherent argument against them (which would require you to know what the other side posits for the argument).

Since we have that understanding that you don't necessarily know the foundations you are arguing against, instead of being academic, I'll simply point towards a real-world example. Look at the Middle Eastern oil gurus or the drug cartels of Central / South America. These are big money businesses that operate outside the bounds of government control or taxation (unless you consider their grease payments a form of taxation). How beneficial is it for those businesses to operate in this manner? Do you really want to argue that they have a net positive benefit for the citizen base in the places in which they operate?

No, wasting money = bad.
Double taxation = bad.
Taxes are good when used responsibly, but the rates are inflated because our government wastes money.

So you are taking an argument of degrees. You think that, if used properly, taxes are beneficial.

Then the question becomes what is acceptable? What is waste? What is needed? Why is your opinion on waste more important than other American's opinion on what is wasted versus needed? I will also point out that if you don't have an issue with taxation, but have an issue with the levels of taxation, you shouldn't really have an issue with double taxation. You can tax somebody twice at 5% each time and have it be less than the ~30-40% tax the wealthy pay (without deductions).

I will go ahead and say that I believe that our government does waste a lot of money (coming from somebody in the military who has seen a lot of waste). However, i also feel that a lot of our programs are needed and, given our insane level of debt, we should actually be increasing our tax levels rather than decreasing them (unless large portions of government spending were cut).

Well for starters, when you send $200 million to a different country hours before leaving the WH, I would say that's a waste of taxpayer money. I've never met anyone who doesn't think the government wastes tax dollars on other countries, unless you speak to Occupy Democrats members, though, who think a democrat president can do no wrong.

Why shouldn't I have an issue with double taxation? I am part of the double taxation bull shit... When I get paid, I pay federal and state income tax, and then the state and local government charges me sales tax when I buy something. I pay roughly 23% in state, federal, and local taxes and then another 8.25% in sales tax, so 31.25% of my money goes towards taxes... It seems like I'm better paying 10% more to get all of the goodies the Canadian socialist system offers me such as free college and healthcare.

Deflecting to somebody else to justify Trump's actions means, at the base, you don't have a good argument. Who cares about Obama? I'm not here to talk about him nor defend him...he has no effect on America anymore.

I pointed out the reason why in a previous post. You can have an issue with the levels of taxes, but how you are taxed is largely irrelevant. You should also recognize that corporations are afforded a lot of legal protections which is the base reasoning for their taxation. If you want to remove their taxability status you should tax them as you tax a small business...which would mean that whomever the owners are have full liability, the company lives and dies with its owners (no ownership shares anymore, simply partnerships), they don't have the ability to bring cases to court nor defend them, etc.

Pretty sure Obama still has an effect on our country... Dodd-Frank and Obamacare still exist.

This is what you said, "Well for starters, when you send $200 million to a different country hours before leaving the WH, I would say that's a waste of taxpayer money. I've never met anyone who doesn't think the government wastes tax dollars on other countries"

I'm not sure if you are new to this nation, but what you said here has nothing to do with Dodd-Frank nor Obamacare. Furthermore, Trump has stated and started moving towards rolling back both Dodd-Frank and Obamacare...so complaining about programs that are already in the initial phases of getting rolled back...is like a child whining that they aren't receiving their ice cream sundae immediately after it is bought because it has to get made first.

Getting back to the core discussion on taxes you seem to have ignored my question on why we should award special privileges to corporations and their owners without taxing them for those special privileges. We have a form of business where the company is taxed as the individual...the sole proprietorship. There is a reason why corporations are a separate form of business, how do you justify the privileges awarded to them without taxing them?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

why we should award special privileges to corporations and their owners without taxing them for those special privileges.

Most importantly , USA is at very top in terms of pushing corporations, jobs, and investment capital off shore with the highest tax rate in the world that, after off shore deductions, collects little revenue but does provide great incentive 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 and make them pay their fair share while having no clue whatsoever that any tax they do pay is merely passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices like any cost would be.



Corporations are tax collectors, not taxpayers. A corporate tax like any corporate expense is simply passed on to customers. Ever wonder why a Rolls Royce costs more than a VW?? Ans: the high costs of making it are passed on to customers.

A liberal wants higher corporate taxes only because he lacks the IQ to know he will paying them. What could be more absurd than a liberal.

We have corporate taxes only because liberal politicians pander to the free lunch crowd and the liberal Marxists crowd which has been brainwashed to hate the very corporations that provide our jobs, make us the richest people in human history, and sell us Ipods, surgical robots, and jet planes so we can vacation around the world.

See why we are 1000% positive a liberal will be slow, so very very slow. Is any other conclusion possible??







In a message dated 7/26/2012 9:23:47 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [email protected] writes:

We have corporate taxes only because liberals lack the ability to understand the business tax and so get some Marxist satisfaction in feeling they are getting even with corporations by taxing them. It is a blatant example of pandering to the perfect ignorance of liberals.

Common sense will tell you that corporate taxes are expenses like any other that are passed on to customers like any other expenses. A business is a tax collector , not a tax payer, but that is way way over a liberal's head. Hence, they should be eliminated as a huge waste of time and effort and efficiency. GE for example has 1000 tax professionals all of whom could be fired if the tax was eliminated allowing GE to lower its prices and become more competitive. Plus, most companies do whatever is necessary to avoid the tax like moving off shore and then keeping profits and jobs off shore to avoid the liberal tax man who should be there at all except to pander to the pure ignorance of liberals.


Corporation are tax collectors, not tax payers! It is a huge joke on the liberal mentality

Chairman Charles Rangel proposed cutting the federal corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 30.5 percent. While a 5 percentage point cut in the federal corporate tax rate may sound significant, it may not be sufficient to meaningfully improve the competitiveness of the United States.

Currently, the average combined federal and state corporate tax rate in the U.S. is 39.3 percent, second among OECD countries to Japan's combined rate of 39.5 percent.1 Lowering the federal rate to 30.5 percent would only lower the U.S.'s ranking to fifth highest among industrialized countries.

Many states impose state corporate income taxes at rates above the national average of 6.6 percent. Iowa, for example, imposes the highest corporate tax rate of 12 percent, followed by Pennsylvania's 9.99 percent rate and Minnesota's 9.8 percent rate. When added to the federal rate, these states tax their businesses at rates far in excess of all other OECD countries.

 

[Never3ndr]

why we should award special privileges to corporations and their owners without taxing them for those special privileges.

Most importantly , USA is at very top in terms of pushing corporations, jobs, and investment capital off shore with the highest tax rate in the world that, after off shore deductions, collects little revenue but does provide great incentive 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 and make them pay their fair share while having no clue whatsoever that any tax they do pay is merely passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices like any cost would be.



Corporations are tax collectors, not taxpayers. A corporate tax like any corporate expense is simply passed on to customers. Ever wonder why a Rolls Royce costs more than a VW?? Ans: the high costs of making it are passed on to customers.

A liberal wants higher corporate taxes only because he lacks the IQ to know he will paying them. What could be more absurd than a liberal.

We have corporate taxes only because liberal politicians pander to the free lunch crowd and the liberal Marxists crowd which has been brainwashed to hate the very corporations that provide our jobs, make us the richest people in human history, and sell us Ipods, surgical robots, and jet planes so we can vacation around the world.

See why we are 1000% positive a liberal will be slow, so very very slow. Is any other conclusion possible??





In a message dated 7/26/2012 9:23:47 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, [email protected] writes:

We have corporate taxes only because liberals lack the ability to understand the business tax and so get some Marxist satisfaction in feeling they are getting even with corporations by taxing them. It is a blatant example of pandering to the perfect ignorance of liberals.

Common sense will tell you that corporate taxes are expenses like any other that are passed on to customers like any other expenses. A business is a tax collector , not a tax payer, but that is way way over a liberal's head. Hence, they should be eliminated as a huge waste of time and effort and efficiency. GE for example has 1000 tax professionals all of whom could be fired if the tax was eliminated allowing GE to lower its prices and become more competitive. Plus, most companies do whatever is necessary to avoid the tax like moving off shore and then keeping profits and jobs off shore to avoid the liberal tax man who should be there at all except to pander to the pure ignorance of liberals.


Corporation are tax collectors, not tax payers! It is a huge joke on the liberal mentality

Chairman Charles Rangel proposed cutting the federal corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 30.5 percent. While a 5 percentage point cut in the federal corporate tax rate may sound significant, it may not be sufficient to meaningfully improve the competitiveness of the United States.

Currently, the average combined federal and state corporate tax rate in the U.S. is 39.3 percent, second among OECD countries to Japan's combined rate of 39.5 percent.1 Lowering the federal rate to 30.5 percent would only lower the U.S.'s ranking to fifth highest among industrialized countries.

Many states impose state corporate income taxes at rates above the national average of 6.6 percent. Iowa, for example, imposes the highest corporate tax rate of 12 percent, followed by Pennsylvania's 9.99 percent rate and Minnesota's 9.8 percent rate. When added to the federal rate, these states tax their businesses at rates far in excess of all other OECD countries.

The effective tax rate for some industries are as low as 5%. If you don't take deductions and subsidies into consideration, sure, we do have the highest tax rates. Taking those into consideration, it is more of a mixed bag. Before parroting information you heard on the internet, it would help if you had a bit of background knowledge beforehand so you didn't sound quite as uninformed. There is a reason why the largest and most prevalent corporations in the world make their home in America.

 

[Markle]

Trump, as I expected, is talking giving companies tax breaks to create jobs here. Well if you give them tax breaks, then guess who pays the taxes. The Poor! Slavery in action. The more that things change, the more they stay the same.

Here is the way things work in the U.S. Capitalism-Corporations = Society = Government = AMERICA! We are "supposed" to live in a democracy. But the business world rules your lives. How many people in business did you vote for. Do you vote for business or government. People in business who aren't elected shouldn't be directing how people live. That is the government's job.

I say to hell with bribing companies with tax breaks or outright corporate welfare to create jobs. If the private sector can't create jobs, I say that the government should just cut away that that dead weight and start doing the job themselves. Also, want to see something interesting? Go to the internet and look up any year in the last 50 years and see the number of companies in whatever year paid no taxes at all.

Trump, as I expected, is talking giving companies tax breaks to create jobs here. Well if you give them tax breaks, then guess who pays the taxes. The Poor!

If Trump cuts the corporate tax rate from 35% to 15%, the Poor have to pay taxes?

Walk thru the steps for me. Be as precise as you can.

Look at post #10.

Silly charts without a link back to their source are useless.

Useless? Well now you know there is a thing to search for on the internet. Just enter into your browser something like "Percentage of taxes paid based on income level." You will probably not only find that graph, but much more to support it.

The only reason you'd hide the source is that you have nothing. It comes from a garbage source which describes you post as well.

Try this, throw up a thread which is real. EVEN you cannot believe what you posted, you are just trying to stir the pot.

 

[Markle]

Trump, as I expected, is talking giving companies tax breaks to create jobs here. Well if you give them tax breaks, then guess who pays the taxes. The Poor!

If Trump cuts the corporate tax rate from 35% to 15%, the Poor have to pay taxes?

Walk thru the steps for me. Be as precise as you can.

Look at post #10.

Silly charts without a link back to their source are useless.

Useless? Well now you know there is a thing to search for on the internet. Just enter into your browser something like "Percentage of taxes paid based on income level." You will probably not only find that graph, but much more to support it.

Yes, useless.
It refers to sales, excise and property taxes in the state of Washington.
Who cares?

Is that supposed to back up your claim, "If Trump cuts the corporate tax rate from 35% to 15%, the Poor have to pay taxes"?

The same sort of thing probably applies to every state. Next, what is it you think the government is saying. "We can get by with less tax money." Sorry. It just doesn't work like that. If tax revenue falls short in one sector, they will just take more from another sector. Which sector is that? The poor.

Your problem stems from the fact that you, like most Progressives, believe that we live in a static economy when we actually live in a dynamic economy.