Taxing the wealthy more will have little to no impact on your life or anyone around you

[francoHFW]

$10,000? Try four million dollars.

'Shrimp On A Treadmill': The Politics Of 'Silly' Studies

..Take the case of the "shrimp on a treadmill." Burnett says the senator's report linked that work to a half-million-dollar research grant. But that money actually went to a lot of different research that he and his colleagues did on this economically important seafood species.

The treadmills were just a small part of it, a way to measure how shrimp respond to changes in water quality. Burnett says the first treadmill was built by a colleague from scraps and was basically free, and the second was fancier and cost about $1,000. The senator's report was misleading, says Burnett, "and it suggests that much money was spent on seeing how long a shrimp can run on a treadmill, which was totally out of context."

'Shrimp On A Treadmill' And The Politics Of 'Silly' Science Studies

It amazes me that brain washed conservatives still bring this up as an example of taxpayer waste. Even if the story was debunked years ago

To Conservatives, it is scientists saying...Let's put shrimp on a treadmill and see what happens

To scientists, it was a low cost method to find out at what point water contamination begins to impact shrimp

Republicans and science....it totally baffles them

The only thing baffling is your complete ignorance when it comes to frivolous spending.

You dumbasses bitch CONSTANTLY about not having enough money to spend on everything from social services to education to foodstamps. Yet somehow you defend shit like this.
It just goes to show that no amount of taxation will ever be enough for you greedy scumbags.

We DEFINITELY want to only tax the rich more. The amount for science studies is tiny compared to giveaways to big oil, etc etc. Pubs are WORSE at big gov't and spending. GREAT CON MEN,

What "give aways" are those?

This article shows EVIDENCE. lol
How Big Oil clings to billions in government giveaways

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

The fact that Republicans still bring up that $10,000 shrimp experiment shows how little they know about science

$10,000? Try four million dollars.

'Shrimp On A Treadmill': The Politics Of 'Silly' Studies

..Take the case of the "shrimp on a treadmill." Burnett says the senator's report linked that work to a half-million-dollar research grant. But that money actually went to a lot of different research that he and his colleagues did on this economically important seafood species.

The treadmills were just a small part of it, a way to measure how shrimp respond to changes in water quality. Burnett says the first treadmill was built by a colleague from scraps and was basically free, and the second was fancier and cost about $1,000. The senator's report was misleading, says Burnett, "and it suggests that much money was spent on seeing how long a shrimp can run on a treadmill, which was totally out of context."

'Shrimp On A Treadmill' And The Politics Of 'Silly' Science Studies

It amazes me that brain washed conservatives still bring this up as an example of taxpayer waste. Even if the story was debunked years ago

To Conservatives, it is scientists saying...Let's put shrimp on a treadmill and see what happens

To scientists, it was a low cost method to find out at what point water contamination begins to impact shrimp

Republicans and science....it totally baffles them

The only thing baffling is your complete ignorance when it comes to frivolous spending.

You dumbasses bitch CONSTANTLY about not having enough money to spend on everything from social services to education to foodstamps. Yet somehow you defend shit like this.
It just goes to show that no amount of taxation will ever be enough for you greedy scumbags.

We DEFINITELY want to only tax the rich more. The amount for science studies is tiny compared to giveaways to big oil, etc etc. Pubs are WORSE at big gov't and spending. GREAT CON MEN,

Derp alert

 

[bripat9643]

'Shrimp On A Treadmill': The Politics Of 'Silly' Studies

..Take the case of the "shrimp on a treadmill." Burnett says the senator's report linked that work to a half-million-dollar research grant. But that money actually went to a lot of different research that he and his colleagues did on this economically important seafood species.

The treadmills were just a small part of it, a way to measure how shrimp respond to changes in water quality. Burnett says the first treadmill was built by a colleague from scraps and was basically free, and the second was fancier and cost about $1,000. The senator's report was misleading, says Burnett, "and it suggests that much money was spent on seeing how long a shrimp can run on a treadmill, which was totally out of context."

'Shrimp On A Treadmill' And The Politics Of 'Silly' Science Studies

It amazes me that brain washed conservatives still bring this up as an example of taxpayer waste. Even if the story was debunked years ago

To Conservatives, it is scientists saying...Let's put shrimp on a treadmill and see what happens

To scientists, it was a low cost method to find out at what point water contamination begins to impact shrimp

Republicans and science....it totally baffles them

The only thing baffling is your complete ignorance when it comes to frivolous spending.

You dumbasses bitch CONSTANTLY about not having enough money to spend on everything from social services to education to foodstamps. Yet somehow you defend shit like this.
It just goes to show that no amount of taxation will ever be enough for you greedy scumbags.

We DEFINITELY want to only tax the rich more. The amount for science studies is tiny compared to giveaways to big oil, etc etc. Pubs are WORSE at big gov't and spending. GREAT CON MEN,

What "give aways" are those?

This article shows EVIDENCE. lol
How Big Oil clings to billions in government giveaways

Drilling expenses are legitimate business costs. All businesses are allowed to deduct their costs from their revenues. Government is allowed to tax "income" which is defined as revenue minus expenses. Calling a legitimate business expense a "giveaway" is an exercise in propaganda. Aside from the oil depletion allowance, all these so-called "giveaways" are deductions that every business is entitled to.

Your article is 100% bullshit, but then what else can you expect from MotherJones?

 

[francoHFW]

$10,000? Try four million dollars.

'Shrimp On A Treadmill': The Politics Of 'Silly' Studies

..Take the case of the "shrimp on a treadmill." Burnett says the senator's report linked that work to a half-million-dollar research grant. But that money actually went to a lot of different research that he and his colleagues did on this economically important seafood species.

The treadmills were just a small part of it, a way to measure how shrimp respond to changes in water quality. Burnett says the first treadmill was built by a colleague from scraps and was basically free, and the second was fancier and cost about $1,000. The senator's report was misleading, says Burnett, "and it suggests that much money was spent on seeing how long a shrimp can run on a treadmill, which was totally out of context."

'Shrimp On A Treadmill' And The Politics Of 'Silly' Science Studies

It amazes me that brain washed conservatives still bring this up as an example of taxpayer waste. Even if the story was debunked years ago

To Conservatives, it is scientists saying...Let's put shrimp on a treadmill and see what happens

To scientists, it was a low cost method to find out at what point water contamination begins to impact shrimp

Republicans and science....it totally baffles them

The only thing baffling is your complete ignorance when it comes to frivolous spending.

You dumbasses bitch CONSTANTLY about not having enough money to spend on everything from social services to education to foodstamps. Yet somehow you defend shit like this.
It just goes to show that no amount of taxation will ever be enough for you greedy scumbags.

We DEFINITELY want to only tax the rich more. The amount for science studies is tiny compared to giveaways to big oil, etc etc. Pubs are WORSE at big gov't and spending. GREAT CON MEN,

Derp alert

^^ Conned man.

 

[francoHFW]

It amazes me that brain washed conservatives still bring this up as an example of taxpayer waste. Even if the story was debunked years ago

To Conservatives, it is scientists saying...Let's put shrimp on a treadmill and see what happens

To scientists, it was a low cost method to find out at what point water contamination begins to impact shrimp

Republicans and science....it totally baffles them

The only thing baffling is your complete ignorance when it comes to frivolous spending.

You dumbasses bitch CONSTANTLY about not having enough money to spend on everything from social services to education to foodstamps. Yet somehow you defend shit like this.
It just goes to show that no amount of taxation will ever be enough for you greedy scumbags.

We DEFINITELY want to only tax the rich more. The amount for science studies is tiny compared to giveaways to big oil, etc etc. Pubs are WORSE at big gov't and spending. GREAT CON MEN,

What "give aways" are those?

This article shows EVIDENCE. lol
How Big Oil clings to billions in government giveaways

Drilling expenses are legitimate business costs. All businesses are allowed to deduct their costs from their revenues. Government is allowed to tax "income" which is defined as revenue minus expenses. Calling a legitimate business expense a "giveaway" is an exercise in propaganda. Aside from the oil depletion allowance, all these so-called "giveaways" are deductions that every business is entitled to.

Your article is 100% bullshit, but then what else can you expect from MotherJones?

55% OF GIANT CORPS pay no taxes. Corps paid 40% of taxes in the 50%, now less than 10, dupe.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The only thing baffling is your complete ignorance when it comes to frivolous spending.

You dumbasses bitch CONSTANTLY about not having enough money to spend on everything from social services to education to foodstamps. Yet somehow you defend shit like this.
It just goes to show that no amount of taxation will ever be enough for you greedy scumbags.

We DEFINITELY want to only tax the rich more. The amount for science studies is tiny compared to giveaways to big oil, etc etc. Pubs are WORSE at big gov't and spending. GREAT CON MEN,

There are no "giveaways" to big oil. Oil companies are taxed like any other company.

OMG Read something.

I've read a lot. Would you care to see what I read?

I didn't think so.

Absolutely. But I'm afraid it's Pubcrappe. I'm always asking for links. Links?

JUL 7, 2013 @ 10:00 AM 6,904 VIEWS
It's Time To Sequester Green Energy Subsidies, Not Mythical Oil And Gas Tax Breaks

"Using a very broad definition applied by Oil Change International, the term “subsidies” refers to: “any government action that lowers the cost of fossil fuel energy production, raises the price received by energy producers, or lowers the price paid by consumers.” So based upon the first of these criteria, let’s assume that the president is referring to three types of oil and gas company tax “loopholes”: 1) an oil depletion allowance; 2) expensing drilling costs; and 3), a credit for taxes paid to foreign nations during foreign operations (a foreign tax credit). Yet in one form or another, these same advantages are extended to other industries as well, and often with more generous benefits.

Oil depletion allowances, the first category, principally apply to small independent producers, with similar benefits available for all mineral extraction, timber industries, etc., allowing them to pass the depletion on to individual investors. Large integrated corporations haven’t been eligible for these since the mid-1970s. Expensing indirect drilling costs involves writing off expenses in the year incurred rather than capitalizing them and writing them off over several years. Closing this “loophole” would only change the timing of taking he expense, not the total amounts of the so-called “subsidy”. The third category, a tax credit for taxes paid to foreign nations, is available for all international companies. This provides an offset to foreign taxes, often paid as royalties, so that the companies aren’t taxed twice on the same income.

The oil and gas extraction and refining has already been singled out to receive even fewer tax breaks than other industries. Whereas Section 199 of the “American Job Creation Act of 2004” provides a 9% deduction from net income for businesses engaged in “qualified production activities”, oil and gas was penalized and limited to a 6% deduction. Passed with strong bipartisan congressional support, the intent was to provide a competitive advantage to domestic companies engaged in product manufacturing, sales, leasing or licensing, and production-related software activities.

Many manufacturing industries, including farm equipment, appliances and pharmaceuticals take advantage of the full Section 199 deduction. Even highly profitable companies like Microsoft and Apple get those breaks, as do some foreign companies that operate factories in the U.S."

It's Time To Sequester Green Energy Subsidies, Not Mythical Oil And Gas Tax Breaks

 

[Sallow]

We DEFINITELY want to only tax the rich more. The amount for science studies is tiny compared to giveaways to big oil, etc etc. Pubs are WORSE at big gov't and spending. GREAT CON MEN,

There are no "giveaways" to big oil. Oil companies are taxed like any other company.

OMG Read something.

I've read a lot. Would you care to see what I read?

I didn't think so.

Absolutely. But I'm afraid it's Pubcrappe. I'm always asking for links. Links?

JUL 7, 2013 @ 10:00 AM 6,904 VIEWS
It's Time To Sequester Green Energy Subsidies, Not Mythical Oil And Gas Tax Breaks

"Using a very broad definition applied by Oil Change International, the term “subsidies” refers to: “any government action that lowers the cost of fossil fuel energy production, raises the price received by energy producers, or lowers the price paid by consumers.” So based upon the first of these criteria, let’s assume that the president is referring to three types of oil and gas company tax “loopholes”: 1) an oil depletion allowance; 2) expensing drilling costs; and 3), a credit for taxes paid to foreign nations during foreign operations (a foreign tax credit). Yet in one form or another, these same advantages are extended to other industries as well, and often with more generous benefits.

Oil depletion allowances, the first category, principally apply to small independent producers, with similar benefits available for all mineral extraction, timber industries, etc., allowing them to pass the depletion on to individual investors. Large integrated corporations haven’t been eligible for these since the mid-1970s. Expensing indirect drilling costs involves writing off expenses in the year incurred rather than capitalizing them and writing them off over several years. Closing this “loophole” would only change the timing of taking he expense, not the total amounts of the so-called “subsidy”. The third category, a tax credit for taxes paid to foreign nations, is available for all international companies. This provides an offset to foreign taxes, often paid as royalties, so that the companies aren’t taxed twice on the same income.

The oil and gas extraction and refining has already been singled out to receive even fewer tax breaks than other industries. Whereas Section 199 of the “American Job Creation Act of 2004” provides a 9% deduction from net income for businesses engaged in “qualified production activities”, oil and gas was penalized and limited to a 6% deduction. Passed with strong bipartisan congressional support, the intent was to provide a competitive advantage to domestic companies engaged in product manufacturing, sales, leasing or licensing, and production-related software activities.

Many manufacturing industries, including farm equipment, appliances and pharmaceuticals take advantage of the full Section 199 deduction. Even highly profitable companies like Microsoft and Apple get those breaks, as do some foreign companies that operate factories in the U.S."

It's Time To Sequester Green Energy Subsidies, Not Mythical Oil And Gas Tax Breaks

We need to get off oil.

Like yesterday.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

There are no "giveaways" to big oil. Oil companies are taxed like any other company.

OMG Read something.

I've read a lot. Would you care to see what I read?

I didn't think so.

Absolutely. But I'm afraid it's Pubcrappe. I'm always asking for links. Links?

JUL 7, 2013 @ 10:00 AM 6,904 VIEWS
It's Time To Sequester Green Energy Subsidies, Not Mythical Oil And Gas Tax Breaks

"Using a very broad definition applied by Oil Change International, the term “subsidies” refers to: “any government action that lowers the cost of fossil fuel energy production, raises the price received by energy producers, or lowers the price paid by consumers.” So based upon the first of these criteria, let’s assume that the president is referring to three types of oil and gas company tax “loopholes”: 1) an oil depletion allowance; 2) expensing drilling costs; and 3), a credit for taxes paid to foreign nations during foreign operations (a foreign tax credit). Yet in one form or another, these same advantages are extended to other industries as well, and often with more generous benefits.

Oil depletion allowances, the first category, principally apply to small independent producers, with similar benefits available for all mineral extraction, timber industries, etc., allowing them to pass the depletion on to individual investors. Large integrated corporations haven’t been eligible for these since the mid-1970s. Expensing indirect drilling costs involves writing off expenses in the year incurred rather than capitalizing them and writing them off over several years. Closing this “loophole” would only change the timing of taking he expense, not the total amounts of the so-called “subsidy”. The third category, a tax credit for taxes paid to foreign nations, is available for all international companies. This provides an offset to foreign taxes, often paid as royalties, so that the companies aren’t taxed twice on the same income.

The oil and gas extraction and refining has already been singled out to receive even fewer tax breaks than other industries. Whereas Section 199 of the “American Job Creation Act of 2004” provides a 9% deduction from net income for businesses engaged in “qualified production activities”, oil and gas was penalized and limited to a 6% deduction. Passed with strong bipartisan congressional support, the intent was to provide a competitive advantage to domestic companies engaged in product manufacturing, sales, leasing or licensing, and production-related software activities.

Many manufacturing industries, including farm equipment, appliances and pharmaceuticals take advantage of the full Section 199 deduction. Even highly profitable companies like Microsoft and Apple get those breaks, as do some foreign companies that operate factories in the U.S."

It's Time To Sequester Green Energy Subsidies, Not Mythical Oil And Gas Tax Breaks

We need to get off oil.

Like yesterday.

I'm with you on that. Now all we have to do is find a replacement that has the same power, the same availability, the same price as oil and you have a deal. But mind you, we will never be totally off of oil. After all, what would you make your roof shingles out of, the tires on your car, asphalt for your driveway or roads?

 

[francoHFW]

We DEFINITELY want to only tax the rich more. The amount for science studies is tiny compared to giveaways to big oil, etc etc. Pubs are WORSE at big gov't and spending. GREAT CON MEN,

There are no "giveaways" to big oil. Oil companies are taxed like any other company.

OMG Read something.

I've read a lot. Would you care to see what I read?

I didn't think so.

Absolutely. But I'm afraid it's Pubcrappe. I'm always asking for links. Links?

JUL 7, 2013 @ 10:00 AM 6,904 VIEWS
It's Time To Sequester Green Energy Subsidies, Not Mythical Oil And Gas Tax Breaks

"Using a very broad definition applied by Oil Change International, the term “subsidies” refers to: “any government action that lowers the cost of fossil fuel energy production, raises the price received by energy producers, or lowers the price paid by consumers.” So based upon the first of these criteria, let’s assume that the president is referring to three types of oil and gas company tax “loopholes”: 1) an oil depletion allowance; 2) expensing drilling costs; and 3), a credit for taxes paid to foreign nations during foreign operations (a foreign tax credit). Yet in one form or another, these same advantages are extended to other industries as well, and often with more generous benefits.

Oil depletion allowances, the first category, principally apply to small independent producers, with similar benefits available for all mineral extraction, timber industries, etc., allowing them to pass the depletion on to individual investors. Large integrated corporations haven’t been eligible for these since the mid-1970s. Expensing indirect drilling costs involves writing off expenses in the year incurred rather than capitalizing them and writing them off over several years. Closing this “loophole” would only change the timing of taking he expense, not the total amounts of the so-called “subsidy”. The third category, a tax credit for taxes paid to foreign nations, is available for all international companies. This provides an offset to foreign taxes, often paid as royalties, so that the companies aren’t taxed twice on the same income.

The oil and gas extraction and refining has already been singled out to receive even fewer tax breaks than other industries. Whereas Section 199 of the “American Job Creation Act of 2004” provides a 9% deduction from net income for businesses engaged in “qualified production activities”, oil and gas was penalized and limited to a 6% deduction. Passed with strong bipartisan congressional support, the intent was to provide a competitive advantage to domestic companies engaged in product manufacturing, sales, leasing or licensing, and production-related software activities.

Many manufacturing industries, including farm equipment, appliances and pharmaceuticals take advantage of the full Section 199 deduction. Even highly profitable companies like Microsoft and Apple get those breaks, as do some foreign companies that operate factories in the U.S."

It's Time To Sequester Green Energy Subsidies, Not Mythical Oil And Gas Tax Breaks

Forbes is Murdoch- this guy is a bought off POS

1. Forbes, Larry Bell, and the Climate of Corruption...
   thinkprogress.org/.../07/207304/forbes-larry-bell-and-the...
   Jan 06, 2011 · Architecture professor and columnist Larry Bell has a new book of climate science disinformation out, Climate of Corruption. You can save yourself the tro
   
   
2. Larry Bell - SourceWatch
   www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Larry_Bell
   Nov 09, 2011 · Larry Bell is a weekly columnist for Forbes Magazine with no evident climate expertise who writes columns dismissing climate science, . He is listed as ...
   

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

There are no "giveaways" to big oil. Oil companies are taxed like any other company.

OMG Read something.

I've read a lot. Would you care to see what I read?

I didn't think so.

Absolutely. But I'm afraid it's Pubcrappe. I'm always asking for links. Links?

JUL 7, 2013 @ 10:00 AM 6,904 VIEWS
It's Time To Sequester Green Energy Subsidies, Not Mythical Oil And Gas Tax Breaks

"Using a very broad definition applied by Oil Change International, the term “subsidies” refers to: “any government action that lowers the cost of fossil fuel energy production, raises the price received by energy producers, or lowers the price paid by consumers.” So based upon the first of these criteria, let’s assume that the president is referring to three types of oil and gas company tax “loopholes”: 1) an oil depletion allowance; 2) expensing drilling costs; and 3), a credit for taxes paid to foreign nations during foreign operations (a foreign tax credit). Yet in one form or another, these same advantages are extended to other industries as well, and often with more generous benefits.

Oil depletion allowances, the first category, principally apply to small independent producers, with similar benefits available for all mineral extraction, timber industries, etc., allowing them to pass the depletion on to individual investors. Large integrated corporations haven’t been eligible for these since the mid-1970s. Expensing indirect drilling costs involves writing off expenses in the year incurred rather than capitalizing them and writing them off over several years. Closing this “loophole” would only change the timing of taking he expense, not the total amounts of the so-called “subsidy”. The third category, a tax credit for taxes paid to foreign nations, is available for all international companies. This provides an offset to foreign taxes, often paid as royalties, so that the companies aren’t taxed twice on the same income.

The oil and gas extraction and refining has already been singled out to receive even fewer tax breaks than other industries. Whereas Section 199 of the “American Job Creation Act of 2004” provides a 9% deduction from net income for businesses engaged in “qualified production activities”, oil and gas was penalized and limited to a 6% deduction. Passed with strong bipartisan congressional support, the intent was to provide a competitive advantage to domestic companies engaged in product manufacturing, sales, leasing or licensing, and production-related software activities.

Many manufacturing industries, including farm equipment, appliances and pharmaceuticals take advantage of the full Section 199 deduction. Even highly profitable companies like Microsoft and Apple get those breaks, as do some foreign companies that operate factories in the U.S."

It's Time To Sequester Green Energy Subsidies, Not Mythical Oil And Gas Tax Breaks

Forbes is Murdoch- this guy is a bought off POS

1. Forbes, Larry Bell, and the Climate of Corruption...
   thinkprogress.org/.../07/207304/forbes-larry-bell-and-the...
   Jan 06, 2011 · Architecture professor and columnist Larry Bell has a new book of climate science disinformation out, Climate of Corruption. You can save yourself the tro
   
   
2. Larry Bell - SourceWatch
   www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Larry_Bell
   Nov 09, 2011 · Larry Bell is a weekly columnist for Forbes Magazine with no evident climate expertise who writes columns dismissing climate science, . He is listed as ...

Oh, so you don't like Forbes now do ya?

Well I'll go further left. How about FactCheck?

Oil Company Tax Breaks?

Both leading Democratic candidates have referred to tax breaks to oil companies:

Clinton, July 23, 2007: First of all, I have proposed a strategic energy fund that I would fund by taking away the tax break for the oil companies, which have gotten much greater under Bush and Cheney.

Obama, June 22, 2007: In the face of furious lobbying, Congress brushed aside incentives for the production of more renewable fuels in favor of more tax breaks for the oil and gas companies.

Both candidates are referring to H.R. 6, the 2005 energy bill that contained $14.3 billion in subsidies for energy companies. However, as we’ve reported numerous times, a vast majority of those subsidies (all but $2.8 billion) were for nuclear power, energy-efficient cars and buildings, and renewable fuels research. In addition, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service, the tax changes in the 2005 energy bill produced a net tax increase for the oil and gas companies, as we’ve reported time and time and time again. They did get some breaks, but they had more taken away.

Oil and Gas Company Tax Breaks

When you mess with the best, you die like the rest.

 

[JonK]

They don't need to, but HONESTY dictates YOU admitting they didn't "earn" $40 billion in Ireland, lol


INTELLECTUAL profits are counted in low tax nations. Cool right? JUST DON'T TRY TO BRING IT BACK WITHOUT PAYING US TAXES ON IT!!

Honesty doesn't dictate anything of the sort. If the IRS could prove they didn't earn the money in Ireland, don't you think the IRS would have audited Apple and charged them for any taxes they owed?

Tax Dodge: Apple, Pfizer Among Top Companies That Added Nearly $90B To Their Offshore Cash Hoards Through Tax Inversion In 2014


...Last year, U.S. companies added $154.5 billion to their cash hoard in subsidiaries established in well-known tax haven countries like the Cayman Islands and Luxembourg, according to company data compiled by Bloomberg in a report published Wednesday. A little more than $2.09 trillion from hundreds of U.S. companies now sits outside of the reach of the Internal Revenue Service in countries that charge little to no taxes on corporate earnings made outside their borders.



Companies with substantial international operations or that earn money from intellectual property are more likely to take advantage of the tax loophole. Global industrial heavyweight General Electric has long held the top slot as the biggest tax inverter, at $119 billion. The company uses this cash to reinvest in its massive global business operations, including oil and gas equipment, home appliances and power and water systems.

Tax Dodge: Apple, Pfizer Among Top Companies That Added Nearly $90B To Their Offshore Cash Hoards Through Tax Inversion In 2014

Only a stupid company would want to pay the tax set by this federal government...

Yep, REAL patriots you CONS are

So patriotism is acting stupidly against your own interests?

Right, I'm the liberal brand of patriot.

Liberal Dictionary:
=====================================
Patriot - Sucker

Yeah those rich guys are hurting since conservative/GOP policy has pushed US debt to $18 trillion right?

 

[bripat9643]

Honesty doesn't dictate anything of the sort. If the IRS could prove they didn't earn the money in Ireland, don't you think the IRS would have audited Apple and charged them for any taxes they owed?

Tax Dodge: Apple, Pfizer Among Top Companies That Added Nearly $90B To Their Offshore Cash Hoards Through Tax Inversion In 2014


...Last year, U.S. companies added $154.5 billion to their cash hoard in subsidiaries established in well-known tax haven countries like the Cayman Islands and Luxembourg, according to company data compiled by Bloomberg in a report published Wednesday. A little more than $2.09 trillion from hundreds of U.S. companies now sits outside of the reach of the Internal Revenue Service in countries that charge little to no taxes on corporate earnings made outside their borders.



Companies with substantial international operations or that earn money from intellectual property are more likely to take advantage of the tax loophole. Global industrial heavyweight General Electric has long held the top slot as the biggest tax inverter, at $119 billion. The company uses this cash to reinvest in its massive global business operations, including oil and gas equipment, home appliances and power and water systems.

Tax Dodge: Apple, Pfizer Among Top Companies That Added Nearly $90B To Their Offshore Cash Hoards Through Tax Inversion In 2014

Only a stupid company would want to pay the tax set by this federal government...

Yep, REAL patriots you CONS are

So patriotism is acting stupidly against your own interests?

Right, I'm the liberal brand of patriot.

Liberal Dictionary:
=====================================
Patriot - Sucker

Yeah those rich guys are hurting since conservative/GOP policy has pushed US debt to $18 trillion right?

What does that have to do with anything?

 

[JonK]

Yes the old far left drone "Tax the rich more, that will solve all our problems"..

No it will not, America has a spending problem, not a revenue problem..

Taxing the rich 90% will not solve much of anything, it may run the federal government for about 18 more hours..

After that where do you go?

They taxing Wall street is the next step, Wall street is already taxed via Capital Gains tax. Even if that was raised to 90% we may get another 20 hours of running the government..

Now that you have taxed everyone and everything the far left wants taxed where do you go to make up the rest of the money?

Far left math is not good for anything!

Taxing the rich 90% would solve ALOT of problems.

Only if you think the problem is we have too many rich people in the US.

Right, tax them at 90% Then state, county and city or town taxes take the rest. Yeah, that will make me want to create wealth and jobs.

Why don't we just buy an airplane so we can fly all the wealthy people out of the country right now? After all, taxing them at 90% will produce the exact same results.

Non-Partisan Congressional Tax Report Debunks Core Conservative Economic Theory


The conclusion?

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

This paragraph from the report says it all—

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

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



HISTORICAL effective tax rates

 

[JonK]

Yes the old far left drone "Tax the rich more, that will solve all our problems"..

No it will not, America has a spending problem, not a revenue problem..

Taxing the rich 90% will not solve much of anything, it may run the federal government for about 18 more hours..

After that where do you go?

They taxing Wall street is the next step, Wall street is already taxed via Capital Gains tax. Even if that was raised to 90% we may get another 20 hours of running the government..

Now that you have taxed everyone and everything the far left wants taxed where do you go to make up the rest of the money?

Far left math is not good for anything!

Taxing the rich 90% would solve ALOT of problems.

Only if you think the problem is we have too many rich people in the US.

Right, tax them at 90% Then state, county and city or town taxes take the rest. Yeah, that will make me want to create wealth and jobs.

Why don't we just buy an airplane so we can fly all the wealthy people out of the country right now? After all, taxing them at 90% will produce the exact same results.

No one actually paid a 90% rate..

I've explained that over and over again.

By the way, when it was 90%? None of them left.

Where were they going to go?

Businesses up and move on a heartbeat today. Unlike years ago when travel was dangerous and moving businesses overseas was not profitable, people had no choice but to put up with taxation.

Because we outpaced ourselves in wages, people in other countries work for far less money. Businesses can operate using our internet and computer systems. Companies no longer have to fly VIP's across the country or world to have meetings. They have meetings over the internet on one of our dozens of services--some even for free.

So for me to move my widget business is a no brainer if the government here is going to take all my money anyway. What do I have to lose? I have everything to gain by leaving the US.

YOU DO REALIZE IF YOU WANT TO DO BUSINESS IN THE US, REGARDLESS OF WHERE YOU ARE H/Q, YOU WOULD OWE US TAXES RIGHT?

 

[JonK]

It will only enable the government to spend more money on stupid ass senseless projects like shrimp on treadmills.
You stupid liberals will vote for it and see NONE OF IT. It will be blown on wasteful spending just like the vast majority of your taxes

Tax bracket and taxesa ctually pair are very different things. Higher the tax bracket is, less taxes will be collected due to financial wizardry and concealing assets. Make the rate flat and reasonable and it'll be paid being more cost-efficient than paying some super accountant to find all the loopholes.

No credible economist thinks the US has gotten more since Reagan/Bush tax cuts for the rich. None. Studies show Laffers curve is between 60%-70% EFFECTIVE rates

 

[JonK]

Your replies are nothing..You don't get to reply with "bullshit" and have that be the gospel.
Either offer up some kind of factual rebuttal or shut your trap...

Here's the thing.

Sitting behind your keyboard in your mom's basement telling me to "shut my trap" isn't very effective.

In fact?

It's a laugh riot.

No basement here. Own my own home. And I provided facts. You provided "bullshit"...
The facts counter your shitty narrative. Your LIE.....

You got no "facts". Just a bunch of racist crapola that says that non-white people pulled the government down because lily white bankers were "Forced" to loan them money.

That's not what the CRA did at all.

What it did was to stop the practice of "red lining".

The bogus loans were actually made in large part by predatory lending outfits that had the backing of big firms like Goldman Sachs.

Many of these outfits lied to and about the applicants. They lied to them about the terms of the loan and the lied to the loan backers by ginning up the data on the loan applications.

Additionally many of these loans were some folks actually refinancing to start businesses or do home improvement.

Several things happened. Businesses failed, there was a financial collapse which led to massive job loss which led to loans defaulting which led to Mortgage backed securities going south which led to panic in the insurance industry, namely AIG.

But don't let the facts get in the way of your fucking racist meme.

The main goal that caused the bubble and bust was to put minorities and poor into houses of their own. Government lowered the standards several times because these people were not credit worthy.

It eventually came down to 0% down and no credit checks for applicants who were put on ARM loans. These uneducated people didn't know or care about ARM loans and what it meant to them.

If it wasn't bad enough they could barely make the house payments (if they were making them at all) interest rates went up. Banks began foreclosing on all those homes and the collapse began.

RIGHT WING CRAP


Examining the big lie: How the facts of the economic crisis stack up


•The boom and bust was global. Proponents of the Big Lie ignore the worldwide nature of the housing boom and bust.

>

The housing boom and bust was global — Source: McKinsey Quarterly
>

A McKinsey Global Institute report noted “from 2000 through 2007, a remarkable run-up in global home prices occurred.” It is highly unlikely that a simultaneous boom and bust everywhere else in the world was caused by one set of factors (ultra-low rates, securitized AAA-rated subprime, derivatives) but had a different set of causes in the United States. Indeed, this might be the biggest obstacle to pushing the false narrative


•Private lenders not subject to congressional regulations collapsed lending standards. Taking up that extra share were nonbanks selling mortgages elsewhere, not to the GSEs. Conforming mortgages had rules that were less profitable than the newfangled loans. Private securitizers — competitors of Fannie and Freddie — grew from 10 percent of the market in 2002 to nearly 40 percent in 2006. As a percentage of all mortgage-backed securities, private securitization grew from 23 percent in 2003 to 56 percent in 2006

>
Subprime Lenders were (Primarily) Private

Only one of the top 25 subprime lenders in 2006 was directly subject to the housing laws overseen by either Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac or the Community Reinvestment Act — Source: McClatchy
>

These firms had business models that could be called “Lend-in-order-to-sell-to-Wall-Street-securitizers.” They offered all manner of nontraditional mortgages — the 2/28 adjustable rate mortgages, piggy-back loans, negative amortization loans. These defaulted in huge numbers, far more than the regulated mortgage writers did.

 

[JonK]

Your replies are nothing..You don't get to reply with "bullshit" and have that be the gospel.
Either offer up some kind of factual rebuttal or shut your trap...

Here's the thing.

Sitting behind your keyboard in your mom's basement telling me to "shut my trap" isn't very effective.

In fact?

It's a laugh riot.

No basement here. Own my own home. And I provided facts. You provided "bullshit"...
The facts counter your shitty narrative. Your LIE.....

You got no "facts". Just a bunch of racist crapola that says that non-white people pulled the government down because lily white bankers were "Forced" to loan them money.

That's not what the CRA did at all.

What it did was to stop the practice of "red lining".

The bogus loans were actually made in large part by predatory lending outfits that had the backing of big firms like Goldman Sachs.

Many of these outfits lied to and about the applicants. They lied to them about the terms of the loan and the lied to the loan backers by ginning up the data on the loan applications.

Additionally many of these loans were some folks actually refinancing to start businesses or do home improvement.

Several things happened. Businesses failed, there was a financial collapse which led to massive job loss which led to loans defaulting which led to Mortgage backed securities going south which led to panic in the insurance industry, namely AIG.

But don't let the facts get in the way of your fucking racist meme.

Racist crap? Where did I mention race?
You are the racist because you assume most sub prime loans were made to minorities. You are DEAD WRONG....
Red lining as it is told by the left never existed.....Your side wanted banks to have different lower standards for people just because they were members of minority groups. That in an of itself is racism. In fact most of the sub prime loans went to people who had NO BUSINESS buying a home.
The banking industry warned the government that this was a very bad idea. And as it turned out, they were right. So now we're right back where we started. Those financially ill equipped to purchase a home are still ill equipped.
Oh, the term "predatory lending" is a farce. It only came about as part of a narrative to cover for the libs who mad these loans possible. No one ever wanted to touch the fact that while there was irresponsible lending practices, mainly from tract builders eager to sell starter homes, the fact that there was just as much irresponsible borrowing.
You calling me a racist when I never mentioned race makes you look like a hysterical idiot.
BTW, genius, right in your backyard are literally thousands of expensive homes, some valued at over one million dollars lost to foreclosure due to these same government lending mandates.
So please, you can pull the wool over the eyes of some with your elitist liberal New York attitude, but you have a lot of catching up to even figure out where I've been.
At the end of the day, some in the federal government decided owning a home was a "right" rather than an accomplishment of financial responsibility and then proceeded to screw up the entire housing marketplace.
So yeah, bring some facts or shut up.

BUSH FOUGHT ALL 50 STATE AG'S IN 2003, INVOKING A CIVIL WAR ERA RULE SAYING FEDS RULE ON "PREDATORY" LENDERS!



Predatory Lenders' Partner in Crime

Predatory lending was widely understood to present a looming national crisis.

What did the Bush administration do in response? Did it reverse course and decide to take action to halt this burgeoning scourge?

Not only did the Bush administration do nothing to protect consumers, it embarked on an aggressive and unprecedented campaign to prevent states from protecting their residents from the very problems to which the federal government was turning a blind eye

In 2003, during the height of the predatory lending crisis, the OCC invoked a clause from the 1863 National Bank Act to issue formal opinions preempting all state predatory lending laws, thereby rendering them inoperative


Eliot Spitzer - Predatory Lenders' Partner in Crime



Examining the big lie: How the facts of the economic crisis stack up

 

[bripat9643]

Yes the old far left drone "Tax the rich more, that will solve all our problems"..

No it will not, America has a spending problem, not a revenue problem..

Taxing the rich 90% will not solve much of anything, it may run the federal government for about 18 more hours..

After that where do you go?

They taxing Wall street is the next step, Wall street is already taxed via Capital Gains tax. Even if that was raised to 90% we may get another 20 hours of running the government..

Now that you have taxed everyone and everything the far left wants taxed where do you go to make up the rest of the money?

Far left math is not good for anything!

Taxing the rich 90% would solve ALOT of problems.

Only if you think the problem is we have too many rich people in the US.

Right, tax them at 90% Then state, county and city or town taxes take the rest. Yeah, that will make me want to create wealth and jobs.

Why don't we just buy an airplane so we can fly all the wealthy people out of the country right now? After all, taxing them at 90% will produce the exact same results.

Non-Partisan Congressional Tax Report Debunks Core Conservative Economic Theory


The conclusion?

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

This paragraph from the report says it all—

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

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



HISTORICAL effective tax rates

You're posting spam again D23.

 

[my2¢]

"Taxing the wealthy more will have little to no impact on your life or anyone around you"

I've held my tongue long enough but I can take it no more. Each time this tread makes it to the top of the list I see you all heartlessly stomped my dreams of winning the lottery. Of course it would help if I bought a ticket now and then but hoo-de-doo that doesn't excuse your evil intentions. Please someone, feel my pain.

 

[JonK]

See all the folks flying in first class on the plane?

Most of them are doing it on your dime.

Alright you stupid fuck, you really don't know what you are talking about, and now I'm going to school you...

What do you know about airline operations? What do you know about pricing strategies? Answer: You don't know shit. On the other hand, I know quite a damn bit. See, when it comes to rates and inventory management airlines operate in a nearly identical fashion as hotels. I happen to work in the hotel industry, and I know exactly what goes on in these scenarios and I can tell you that you are so far off the fucking mark it's downright shameful that you've even opened your mouth.

My credentials:
Eight years of extensive hotel experience with primary emphasis in rooms and operations; have traversed multiple properties among some of the top companies in the world, and internationally established brands; primary emphasis on full service Four Diamond properties, though also have participated in the select service markets as well; a documented history of progressive development while also taking on inter-divisional responsibility; inter-property departmental management; divisional supervisory experience; current position as Assistant General Manager with a medium sized hotel directly overseeing Front Office and Housekeeping departments while liaising with corporate revenue management.

A hotel's inventory is composed of room nights; a room night is one room for one night. If a person books one room over three nights, they are purchasing a total of three room nights. If a person books three rooms over two nights, they are purchasing six room nights.

A hotel's inventory is perishable. If a hotel has 10 rooms that go vacant on a given night, then the hotel has lost 10 room nights that it will never again have the opportunity to sell. The ultimate goal of the hotel is to sell out every single night. Of course, this is not likely to happen. So the next goal is to sell as many room nights as possible, and to sell each room night at the highest rate at which you can convince people to buy. The main challenge here is that different people will be willing to buy at different prices. This is where yield management comes into play. In determining the optimum rates at which to sell, a hotel must forecast market demand at specific times and attempt to capitalize on that demand for each room night.

Thus, rates for a given room night are always variant. If the rates for a given room night are set too high, fewer people will buy and it will become necessary for the hotel to lower rates to solicit additional customers in order to increase occupancy as the specified date approaches. If rates are too low, the hotel will leave revenue on the table. Successful yield management requires operations and revenue managers to employ accurate estimations on the likelihood that new reservations will continue to be made when rates are set at a certain point.

This is where room class comes in. John may be willing to pay $200 for a room night, but Bill may only be willing to pay $150 for the same room night. Meanwhile, Frank may be willing to pay $250 for a room on the same night, but only if he receives a higher level of product that than what John and Bill are looking for. Therefore, hotels offer a diversity of room types, some of which constitute higher and lower room classes. So John buys a $200 room night in a standard room, Frank buys a $250 room night in a suite. Bill doesn't buy a room night because he's not willing to pay the advertised rate. Eventually the hotel realizes that the chances of rooms going empty is increasing as the date of interest approaches, and they begin advertising lower rates. Bill eventually buys a room night at $175, because as time has elapsed he has become more willing to pay more instead of risking not finding anything at all and having to sleep in his car.

On the other hand, there are also times when there will not be enough market demand to fill room nights in room classes that are priced higher than standard rooms. This is where room class overbooking comes into play. If all standard rooms have been booked for a certain day, but there are still several upgraded rooms that are available, the hotel will typically play both sides of the fence by continuing to advertise both room categories as available, at their respective rates. There is still a chance that someone may be willing to buy the room night at the higher rate. But in case nobody is willing, the hotel will continue to offer room nights at the lower class rate as long as the overbooking can be balanced against whatever higher class rooms go unbought. The hotel will simply provide complimentary upgrades to a few lucky customers. Often times, the recipients of complimentary upgrades will be pre-selected based on multiple criteria, such as total duration of stay (it's easier to upgrade a one-nighter because tomorrow night the higher room class might be sold out already). But one of the key factors that is taken into account is their rate. The more money I'm making from you, the greater preference you receive when I hand out complimentary upgrades.

And that brings us to the issue of customer loyalty. Modern business practices have recognized that keeping customers is cheaper than finding new customers (at least, smart businesses have realized this; some industries such as cell phone service providers seem to have not figured this out very well). In a free market where there is ample competition, promotions that encourage loyalty generally produce a better return on investment than promotions that solicit new customers. Thus, loyalty rewards programs have become common place in our modern world. These programs encourage loyalty, and reward those who demonstrate the greatest degrees of loyalty. One of the easiest and cheapest ways to reward higher tier loyalty members is to give them first preference for upgrades. It's not just cheap, it's actually completely free because the hotel doesn't forgo any opportunities to sell higher rated rooms. If someone is willing to buy the room class that has a higher rate they will have the opportunity to do so. If not, we will give high loyalty customers a complimentary upgrade and in doing so reemphasize to them why they should remain loyal to us.

So your wild idea that people who are in lower class accommodations are somehow subsidizing those who are in higher class accommodations is absolute horseshit. It's born of your complete and total ignorance. The only thing that prevents your notion from being absolutely laughable, is just how pathetically sad it is.

Pfft.

I owned my own bar and have worked for the financial industry for over 15 years. That includes New York Stock Exchange, Sungard and Bloomberg.

Don't try to pull the wool over my eyes, sonny boy.

So....you went from Wall Street to bartending? That's not exactly a success story pal!

And what does that have to do with understanding how airline rates work?

Sallow ids an elitist liberal. They think they know everything...And when presented with facts that counter their self proclaimed knowledge, they quickly turn the discussion into a pissing contest by using deflections and name calling.
These are the people who will get into a car crash and try to lie their way out of responsibility.
"Sir, you were on the wrong side of the road and crashed into this other car"
No I wasn't. Besides, who is to say what is "wrong"....
I think that damage was there already.
Or this...
Sirma'am, you borrowed the money, You have to pay it back.
"Why should I. He has plenty of other money"
"I am a single mom"
"I haven't been working much lately"..
"He said "pay me back whenever"...Sir/ma'am, it's been 5 years...."Yeah, in my mind, that is still whenever"
These fucking libs are long on excuses and short on owning up to any responsibilities

Banks — not borrowers — are the ones who actually make the loan decision.



Conservatives just ignore facts and reality. They have "faith" that their ideology is correct.

Wall street banks freed to wheel and deal on main street got into the mortgage business because they could invest 1 dollar in the purchase of a mortgage and then magically change it into negotiable paper that produced 30 dollars of profit.

Available mortgages were quickly absorbed, so in an effort to produce more mortgages, Wall Street banks lowered their standards in order to produce more mortgages to be chopped up and sold as "investment paper" that would continue to produce unsustainable and totally fraudulent profits for the banks.

When investors started to get weary, Wall Street created the credit default swap which was insurance on the investments, this kept the machine rolling - W Bush tried to turn over Social Security funds to keep the pyramid alive, but he was rebuffed by the people.

Greed accompanied by Bush's regulator failure caused the crash


Anyone that fails to recognize the facts is either ignorant or blatantly cynical.


Examining the big lie: How the facts of the economic crisis stack up