Should we make the corporate tax rate 0%?

[rdean]

Record profits simply aren't enough.

 

[bripat9643]

You have absolutely no clue what you are talking about. If you had just the smallest clue you would be speechless for days. You can't even imagine.

What is that supposed to prove?

That you have no idea the vast hoards of wealth just lying around the world locked up in vaults or invested in illiquid assets doing no one any good.

You actually believe wealthy people have big piles of cash stashed away in a vault?

Talk about someone who is naïve about the rich.

I could spend all day dissecting the idiocies in that statement, but that alone is sufficient to prove my point.

 

[HelenaHandbag]

You have absolutely no clue what you are talking about. If you had just the smallest clue you would be speechless for days. You can't even imagine.

What is that supposed to prove?

That you have no idea the vast hoards of wealth just lying around the world locked up in vaults or invested in illiquid assets doing no one any good.

What good are a bunch of expensive antique muscle cars supposed to do for the general society?

Do you realize that a rich person liquidated a large sum of his liquid assets to accumulate such a collection?

If anyone here has no clue, it's you, sport.

 

[HelenaHandbag]

What is that supposed to prove?

That you have no idea the vast hoards of wealth just lying around the world locked up in vaults or invested in illiquid assets doing no one any good.

You actually believe wealthy people have big piles of cash stashed away in a vault?

Talk about someone who is naïve about the rich.

I could spend all day dissecting the idiocies in that statement, but that alone is sufficient to prove my point.

Yet he claims to be amongst the "one percent"!

Maybe if he inherited it. There is no way on God's green Earth that he earned it.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Asshole businesses are already making John Q public pay there expenses and now you want them to pay more...This is the reason no one who has not had a business should be allowed to hold public office----Zero understanding of how business works, Christ.

I have zero understanding of what you're talking about.

Come on as I said if you do not understand this you should not vote.

Simply put
1.a business decides it wants to make and sell widgets.
2 it must find out what materials it needs
3. it then figures what fixed overhead is (Rent,Lights,Phones,loans ETC.)
4 employee expenses--Wages, social security matching, unemployment insurance, state tax, federal tax, workers compensation insurance, liability insurance, rental insurance ,auto insurance. Osha expense, regulation expenses, fines.

You see everything that a business has to spend to get its product to John Q Public is an expense. And taxes are a business expense understand this yet.

Taxes are NOT a business expense. They are extortion

 

[occupied]

What is that supposed to prove?

That you have no idea the vast hoards of wealth just lying around the world locked up in vaults or invested in illiquid assets doing no one any good.

What good are a bunch of expensive antique muscle cars supposed to do for the general society?

Do you realize that a rich person liquidated a large sum of his liquid assets to accumulate such a collection?

If anyone here has no clue, it's you, sport.

It's in the fact that an economy would be better served by 1000 millionaires than 1 billionaire. A wealthy person is only going to buy so many houses, jets, cars, etc. and then the rest just gets put on the pile. With wealth being concentrated in fewer hands it is a fact that a large percentage of the world's wealth is locked up and never allowed to circulate in the economy as purchases, investments and wages.

 

[kaz]

You have moved to the hypothetical. Can we stay with the actual for now?

I don't follow, large governments are inherently corrupt. Doesn't that lead to the logical conclusion that governments need to be smaller?

As far as I know no government is inherently corrupt. I will agree a large government is probably easier to corrupt than a small one. The problem is one can not simply decide that because a large government is corrupt and a smaller, non-corrupt government would be better that one can wish the transformation to occur. You and I, and anyone else who would like to, need to decide how to make this happen.

I said that in theory large governments are not necessarily corrupt in theory, but in reality they all are. We seem to be going in circles. Large governments ARE always corrupt. Look at ours, it's the Borg, spending a larger percent of our economy than any time since WWII and we're not even in a war. And yet government is greedy for more, more, more, more than ever.

 

[kaz]

You have moved to the hypothetical. Can we stay with the actual for now?

I don't follow, large governments are inherently corrupt. Doesn't that lead to the logical conclusion that governments need to be smaller?

The goal should be for smart and efferent government. One that funds the research, science, r@d and strives to reform the problem areas.

What your movement wants to do is simply throw our lead in science away. No solutions at all besides sitting on your porch jacking off.

What your movement wants to do is teach turtles to fly. No solutions at all besides jerking off to the idiot Obama and his lies.

LOL, you think we "lead in science" because of government. We lead in science in spite of government. They waste massive amounts of money, and it all comes from productive companies that would have done far more with the money.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Record profits simply aren't enough.

You, pretending to have a brain simply isn't enough

 

[kaz]

I don't follow, large governments are inherently corrupt. Doesn't that lead to the logical conclusion that governments need to be smaller?

As far as I know no government is inherently corrupt. I will agree a large government is probably easier to corrupt than a small one. The problem is one can not simply decide that because a large government is corrupt and a smaller, non-corrupt government would be better that one can wish the transformation to occur. You and I, and anyone else who would like to, need to decide how to make this happen.

At least we vote for the government...Unlike the corporations they want running wild.

Now I am a huge supporter of corporations as they bring innovation and we simply couldn't feed our population without them. The government part comes in when you're talking about regulations and keeping them moral.

Yes, comrade, it's all about government. Corporations just want to oppress the people. LOL, Marxist.

That you believe that people with the unilateral power to give you one choice and enforce it with guns makes you freer than getting to deal with whatever business you want to shows what a lazy, mindless dumbass you are.

 

[Clementine]

NYC city is trying to lure businesses there by eliminating taxes. They know it will create jobs, yet liberals won't admit that reasonable taxes across the country would result in more jobs.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

As far as I know no government is inherently corrupt. I will agree a large government is probably easier to corrupt than a small one. The problem is one can not simply decide that because a large government is corrupt and a smaller, non-corrupt government would be better that one can wish the transformation to occur. You and I, and anyone else who would like to, need to decide how to make this happen.

At least we vote for the government...Unlike the corporations they want running wild.

Now I am a huge supporter of corporations as they bring innovation and we simply couldn't feed our population without them. The government part comes in when you're talking about regulations and keeping them moral.

Yes, comrade, it's all about government. Corporations just want to oppress the people. LOL, Marxist.

That you believe that people with the unilateral power to give you one choice and enforce it with guns makes you freer than getting to deal with whatever business you want to shows what a lazy, mindless dumbass you are.

Matthew is a low educated low information voter. He has soundbites and nothing more. If it wasn't for the internet and bsnbc he wouldn't even have that. Best just to mock him and move on.

 

[HelenaHandbag]

That you have no idea the vast hoards of wealth just lying around the world locked up in vaults or invested in illiquid assets doing no one any good.

What good are a bunch of expensive antique muscle cars supposed to do for the general society?

Do you realize that a rich person liquidated a large sum of his liquid assets to accumulate such a collection?

If anyone here has no clue, it's you, sport.

It's in the fact that an economy would be better served by 1000 millionaires than 1 billionaire. A wealthy person is only going to buy so many houses, jets, cars, etc. and then the rest just gets put on the pile. With wealth being concentrated in fewer hands it is a fact that a large percentage of the world's wealth is locked up and never allowed to circulate in the economy as purchases, investments and wages.

Locked up and never allowed to circulate into the economy? To what end? To sit around like Scrooge McDuck and bathe in piles of money?

Your entire jaundiced view toward wealth accumulation presumes that wealth is finite. Nothing could be further from the truth.

 

[RandomVariable]

That you have no idea the vast hoards of wealth just lying around the world locked up in vaults or invested in illiquid assets doing no one any good.

What good are a bunch of expensive antique muscle cars supposed to do for the general society?

Do you realize that a rich person liquidated a large sum of his liquid assets to accumulate such a collection?

If anyone here has no clue, it's you, sport.

It's in the fact that an economy would be better served by 1000 millionaires than 1 billionaire. A wealthy person is only going to buy so many houses, jets, cars, etc. and then the rest just gets put on the pile. With wealth being concentrated in fewer hands it is a fact that a large percentage of the world's wealth is locked up and never allowed to circulate in the economy as purchases, investments and wages.

Yeah, what occupied said. My point was that Redfish said if one had a Benz one would drive a Benz. It is the idea that if you are poor you drive a '76 Cutlass and if you are rich you drive an S series that causes 80% of the miscommunications. The rich and powerful we are referring to are in a different universe than those two, not that the rich and powerful want you to realize that. Next time your in a big city, if you are not in one now, walk into a really expensive clothing store and look at the price of a shirt, or a pair of socks. And that is not even the really expensive stuff. No one is saying people shouldn't be allowed to pay that kind of money for a tie they might wear once but it is the fact that their Republican Congressman manipulated the tax code so they pay half as much tax as you do that "libtards" have a problem with. If you understood as much you would too.

 

[william the wie]

Meredith Whitney based her so far unfulfilled prediction of multiple muni-bankruptcies on the 3 to 1 growth advantage of predominantly red, low tax states.

And it is not publicly traded corporations that store and trade collectibles in Free Ports.

 

[Toro]

So why not compare and contrast my plan with Argentina, or will that moot your post?

Large arbitrary increases in wages, large increases in pensions, government trying to hold down costs by fiat and capital controls are exactly what basket cases like Argentina and Venezuela have tried today and in the past, and the results are always the same. They are populist failures. In fact, capital controls are usually implemented because of your other policies as a response to the economic incompetence as capital flees the country.

In 1900, Argentina was the seventh largest economy in the world and Canada is the eighth. Both are economies are at the end of the hemisphere, both rely heavily on natural resources, both border large neighbors, and both had large influxes of immigration in the 19th and early 20th centuries. In fact, Argentina was a solid economy until 1930. Then, it slid into populism and autarky, turning inward to populist demagogues who promised "fairness" to "the people." Instead, they destroyed their economies with inflation and capital flight. Compare that to Canada, which is today the 10th largest economy in the world, with a per capita income more than double Argentina. It's fascinating.

Economic populists know neither history nor economics.

With only 30 million people. One thing the Canadian federal govt never did was monetize their federal debt. Plus, The Canadian govt never involved itself in the domestic real estate marketplace.

The Canadian government is very much involved in the domestic real estate market through CMHC.

Argentina monetized it's debt. Canada did not.

 

[NightFox]

I have zero understanding of what you're talking about.

Come on as I said if you do not understand this you should not vote.

Simply put
1.a business decides it wants to make and sell widgets.
2 it must find out what materials it needs
3. it then figures what fixed overhead is (Rent,Lights,Phones,loans ETC.)
4 employee expenses--Wages, social security matching, unemployment insurance, state tax, federal tax, workers compensation insurance, liability insurance, rental insurance ,auto insurance. Osha expense, regulation expenses, fines.

You see everything that a business has to spend to get its product to John Q Public is an expense. And taxes are a business expense understand this yet.

Taxes are NOT a business expense. They are extortion

Actually from a business perspective they're really neither, since businesses don't pay 'em they just collect 'em and pass the costs along to consumers (higher prices), employees (lower wages) and shareholders (lower returns). That's of course not counting all the rent seekers in business that thanks to government favoritism are actually able to buy their way into negative effective tax rates... gotta love the good ole Corporatist States of America.

 

[editec]

This shall be paid for eliminating useless leftist government programs.

The good things from this?

Many MANY Jobs will be created in America, since companies will return to their homeland.

Above we have a perfect example of MAGICAL THINKING conservative style

 

[natstew]

....."but it is the fact that their Republican Congressman manipulated the tax code so they pay half as much tax as you do that "libtards" have a problem with. If you understood as much you would too."

The Democrats had control both Houses and the White House, with a super majority in the Senate and did nothing about this "unfair" tax code.

 

[bripat9643]

That you have no idea the vast hoards of wealth just lying around the world locked up in vaults or invested in illiquid assets doing no one any good.

What good are a bunch of expensive antique muscle cars supposed to do for the general society?

Do you realize that a rich person liquidated a large sum of his liquid assets to accumulate such a collection?

If anyone here has no clue, it's you, sport.

It's in the fact that an economy would be better served by 1000 millionaires than 1 billionaire. A wealthy person is only going to buy so many houses, jets, cars, etc. and then the rest just gets put on the pile. With wealth being concentrated in fewer hands it is a fact that a large percentage of the world's wealth is locked up and never allowed to circulate in the economy as purchases, investments and wages.

No, that is not a fact. This is idea that spending is good for the economy but savings and investment aren't is pure idiocy. It's an idea promoted by propagandists on the government payroll who call themselves "economists." It's just another rationalization for government to plunder our income and property and turn it over to useless parasites on the ass of society.