Dad2three
Gold Member
Yes, but neither get get the GOP to agree to get rid of ALL of Reagan's tax cuts for the rich! Since the EFFECTIVE rates for the top 1/10th of 1% 1% is about 1/3rd of what it was 1932-1980. You know the underpinning of "supply side" Give the "job creators" tax cuts and it trickles down? lol
So where is your proof that it didn't trickle down? You think jobs moving overseas is bad now, what do you suppose it would be like if we increased taxes back to pre-Reagan years?
REALLY? You mean GOOD GOV'T POLICY wouldn't stop that? Having tax policy that punishes off shoring jobs but rewards creating US jobs?
Seems LOTS of jobs off shored even though tax rates on the top 1/10th of 1% "make" over half of capital gains/dividends WHILE their effective tax rate has been cut by 1/3rd!!!!
WHAT DOES TAX POLICY MATTER ON OFF SHORING JOBS ANYWAYS? RECORD CORP PROFITS, LOWEST LABOR COSTS EVER RECORDED IN THE US AND LOWEST CORP TAX BURDEN IN 40+ YEARS, WHERE ARE THOSE "JOBS, JOBS, JOBS" GOP/DUBYA PROMISED?
Jul 30, 2014 - Senate Republicans blocked a bill that would end tax breaks for companies that send jobs overseas
Senate Republicans block bill to end tax breaks for outsourcing
![]()
FULL QUESTION:
When Democratic presidential candidates talk about tax breaks for corporations that ship our jobs overseas and tax breaks and subsidies for oil companies, what are they referring to and are they accurate?
FULL ANSWER:
It’s true that Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have associated the transfer of U.S. jobs overseas with tax breaks, or loopholes, for companies that practice off-shoring:
Obama, Nov. 3, 2007: When I am president, I will end the tax giveaways to companies that ship our jobs overseas, and I will put the money in the pockets of working Americans, and seniors, and homeowners who deserve a break.
Clinton, Nov. 19, 2007: And we are going to finally close the tax loopholes and stop giving tax breaks to companies that ship jobs overseas. Enough with outsourcing American jobs using taxpayer dollars.
Both candidates are referring to a feature of the U.S. tax code that allows domestic companies to defer taxes on “unrepatriated income.” In other words, revenue that companies earn through their overseas subsidiaries goes untaxed by the IRS as long as it stays off the company’s U.S. books.
But economists, including left-leaning ones, do not agree that eliminating this provision will bring an end to off-shoring. And here’s why: In the U.S., companies are taxed 35 percent on earnings of $10 million to $15 million or on all earnings over $18.3 million. That’s one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world, making an overseas move somewhat attractive to companies that wish to avoid the U.S. tax rate. But that’s not the leading reason companies send jobs overseas. According to a 2005 report by the Government Accountability Office, global technological advancement, increased openness of countries such as China and India, the higher education level of foreign workers in technological fields, and the reduced cost per foreign worker are all contributing factors to off-shoring.
We first addressed this popular theme in 2004, when we reported on a John Kerry campaign ad in which he blamed President George W. Bush for providing tax incentives to companies “outsourcing” jobs overseas. At the time we found that such tax breaks, which do exist, pre-dated the Bush administration and that even Democratic-leaning economists did not support the idea that changing the corporate tax code would end the movement of jobs overseas.
Three years later, in Dec. 2007, we reported on an ad launched by a labor group in support of John Edwards. The ad implied that corporate tax breaks were responsible for the shipment of jobs overseas from an Iowa Maytag plant. We found that the jobs were actually sent to Ohio and that, again, eliminating such tax breaks would not go far in stanching the flow of jobs overseas.
Oil and Gas Company Tax Breaks
OIL AND GAS ARE THE ONLY INDUSTRIES THAT "OFF SHORE" JOBS? LOL
THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT, WHY ARE WE GIVING TAX BREAKS TO AN INDUSTRY WITH RECORD PROFITS. You think they need it?
You missed the point entirely.
Tax breaks, tax incentives, rich getting richer are all BS excuses for why there are less jobs in this country. We've out-priced ourselves in labor many years ago thanks to unions.
As this report points out, it has nothing to do with taxes with the exception that we have the highest corporate tax rate in the world. It has to do with labor costs, education, and consumer demand.
US companies don't offshore because it's a trend, they offshore because they need to supply American consumers with cheap products. Those who didn't offshore invested in technology such as automation. There are even McDonald's restaurants that are now experimenting with employee-less outlets. Machines will now make your Big Mac combo.
You can't blame this on Reagan, Republicans or any single entity. This has been in the making for a long time now, and now that it's here, we are looking for excuses why it is.
You want to take away tax breaks from oil companies, then don't complain when gasoline increases 20 cents per gallon more, because industry always finds a way to make up for their losses.
MORE right wing nonsense. Share of US being in unions has shrunk by over half the last 35 years, but it's unions fault?
Hint GOOD GOV'T POLICY (something the GOP has been against since Reagan's "GOV'T IS THE PROBLEM" BS!!!)
Yeah, Corps CAN'T make less money, Corps (and the rich) CAN'T pay more taxes. My fukkn gawd, grow up, grow a brain!
Reaganomics killed America’s middle class
There’s nothing “normal” about having a middle class. Having a middle class is a choice that a society has to make, and it’s a choice we need to make again in this generation, if we want to stop the destruction of the remnants of the last generation’s middle class.
Despite what you might read in the Wall Street Journal or see on Fox News, capitalism is not an economic system that produces a middle class. In fact, if left to its own devices, capitalism tends towards vast levels of inequality and monopoly. The natural and most stable state of capitalism actually looks a lot like the Victorian England depicted in Charles Dickens’ novels.
....Reagan began deregulating and cutting taxes on capitalism in 1981, and today, with more classical “raw capitalism,” what we call “Reaganomics,” or “supply side economics,” our nation’s largest employer is WalMart and they pay around $10 an hour.
Reaganomics killed America’s middle class
Reagan Set Up The Death Of The Middle Class, But China Was The Clincher
Our 2010 Reagan Revolution Home To Roost series, especially the post Reagan Revolution Home To Roost — In Charts described the beginning of the great decoupling of the American economy from the middle class.
The summary:
![4700723674_f1171437b0.jpg](/proxy.php?image=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm5.static.flickr.com%2F4041%2F4700723674_f1171437b0.jpg&hash=dca679b640d3d0b82187f46a4895357c)
Conservative policies transformed the United States from the largest creditor nation to the largest debtor nation in just a few years, and it has only gotten worse since then.
![4700012209_18276d0c46.jpg](/proxy.php?image=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm5.static.flickr.com%2F4022%2F4700012209_18276d0c46.jpg&hash=6f49c5c891e79be811f2d0b3f4e9a30a)
Working people’s share of the benefits from increased productivity took a sudden turn down.
![4700060215_0477b289de.jpg](/proxy.php?image=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm5.static.flickr.com%2F4048%2F4700060215_0477b289de.jpg&hash=7079b870e25cd624b6df96e1393fe245)
This resulted in intense concentration of wealth at the top.
Reagan Set Up The Death Of The Middle Class, But China Was The Clincher