Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
OK, so there's no room for jobs and wages as it stands now? A tax break is required?
Why don't we raise taxes and add more regulations on business.
That'll increase jobs for sure!!!
No answer? Go figure.
Well, if taxes and regulations cost $10 billion here and $5 billion elsewhere, there will be a tendency to move to the less expensive location.
Now you can bitch and whine when a company moves, or you can make it more attractive to remain here.
I know which of those actions will result in more American jobs.
Unless they made more by selling more to offset the costs. Since they've raped wage earners for decades, they kind of screwed themselves out of that possibility.
Unless they made more by selling more to offset the costs.
Or they can move and still sell more.
Complying with federal regulations costs Americans $2.028 trillion in lost economic growth annually, or roughly equivalent to 12 percent of total GDP that could be invested back into our nation’s businesses, according to a new study commissioned by the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM). - See more at: Pay Up: Federal Regulations Cost U.S. Economy More Than $2 Trillion Annually | NAM
Look at that, their study shows that the cost of regulations is close to the level of corporate profits shown in your post #331.
Look at that, the current level of corporate profits and their growth from my post #331 went right over your head. Why aren't they reinvesting back into business now?
As far as federal business income taxes go , yep make them zero, IMHO flat consumption based taxation makes more sense, consumers end up paying the taxes anyways (in the form of higher prices along with lower wages for employees and lower returns for shareholders) and with consumption based the taxes aren't hidden and the cost of doing business is far less from an accounting/legal standpoint, not to mention it's cheaper from an enforcement standpoint.Ummm.. you want to give a hell of a lot more to government than I do, I'm arguing that we need to reduce the tax and regulatory burden to create a more business friendly climate, you're arguing to keep the status quo, how's that status quo working out so far?I said nothing about giving more to the govt.
Apparently NOT otherwise businesses wouldn't be moving to greener pastures and that 22% is nonsense since you are completely ignoring all the other (local, state and federal) taxes that businesses pay and all the regulatory burden that they carry.I said 22% was a reasonable rate. It's not?
So what's a reasonable rate,zero?
Of course that's still leaves a plethora of other business taxes that need to be reformed along with the enormous regulatory burden they face.
The taxation and regulatory burden on U.S. Companies in general is far worse now than it has ever been historically (and it's only getting worse as government debt and the national registry continue to grow unabated) and it's at the worst possible time since the global economy has never been more competitive than it is right now, that's why we're seeing companies move to greener pastures overseas.What have they been historically? Are they better or worse now?
I want companies BEGGING to move here to the United States and I want the companies that are here right now to stay here but in the current business climate that's just not going to happen in the aggregate.
The reality is that all of the business activity in America is only at any time 10-20% of GDP
Shit you're clueless.
The government spending part of GDP is government buying goods and services produced by business.
The consumer spending part of GDP is consumers buying goods and services produced by business.
No wonder why you're a liberal, you're too dumb to be anything else.
Shit you're clueless.
That you are amigo. That you are.
I'm happy to give you lessons on economics.
And I'm happy to mock your ignorance.
Too funny. The only lesson you have given is how to show your ass on a public forum.
I know I own you, but you're not really my ass.
You own nothing. Your view is simplistic and without merit.
Look, I didn't create economics. I didn't decide how each component of the economy contributes and is measured. I only use what's already there. I use what's taught in universities and learned by everyone who passes through including lawmakers and business leaders. You aren't arguing that at all. You have the view, however you derived it, that business runs the show and that simply isn't true. If it were, it would be measured and reported that way.
Look at that, the current level of corporate profits and their growth from my post #331 went right over your head. Why aren't they reinvesting back into business now?
Probably because it is their money and they have that choice.
With the current climate of societal affairs ... And the proliferation of individuals who deem themselves the moral arbiters who shall be obeyed ... It is rather easy to determine what an individual can choose to do with what they actually have control over.
If you would like them to invest more in the economy and society as a whole ... I would suggest you stop telling them what they owe you.
Because otherwise ... They will show you what they owe you ... Which is nothing.
.
Look at that, the current level of corporate profits and their growth from my post #331 went right over your head. Why aren't they reinvesting back into business now?
Probably because it is their money and they have that choice.
With the current climate of societal affairs ... And the proliferation of individuals who deem themselves the moral arbiters who shall be obeyed ... It is rather easy to determine what an individual can choose to do with what they actually have control over.
If you would like them to invest more in the economy and society as a whole ... I would suggest you stop telling them what they owe you.
Because otherwise ... They will show you what they owe you ... Which is nothing.
.
And this philosophy is good for America and it's economic well being going forward?
No answer? Go figure.
Well, if taxes and regulations cost $10 billion here and $5 billion elsewhere, there will be a tendency to move to the less expensive location.
Now you can bitch and whine when a company moves, or you can make it more attractive to remain here.
I know which of those actions will result in more American jobs.
Unless they made more by selling more to offset the costs. Since they've raped wage earners for decades, they kind of screwed themselves out of that possibility.
Unless they made more by selling more to offset the costs.
Or they can move and still sell more.
Complying with federal regulations costs Americans $2.028 trillion in lost economic growth annually, or roughly equivalent to 12 percent of total GDP that could be invested back into our nation’s businesses, according to a new study commissioned by the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM). - See more at: Pay Up: Federal Regulations Cost U.S. Economy More Than $2 Trillion Annually | NAM
Look at that, their study shows that the cost of regulations is close to the level of corporate profits shown in your post #331.
Look at that, the current level of corporate profits and their growth from my post #331 went right over your head. Why aren't they reinvesting back into business now?
Yeah, increase regulatory costs, what could go wrong? Durr.
I notice your chart doesn't break out which corporate profits are from US production and which are from offshore production.
View attachment 73767
Hmmmmm......our biggest companies get about one-third of sales overseas.
Why aren't they reinvesting back into business now?
They'll invest where they're treated well. Tax 'em some more, see what they do. Durr.
That you are amigo. That you are.
I'm happy to give you lessons on economics.
And I'm happy to mock your ignorance.
Too funny. The only lesson you have given is how to show your ass on a public forum.
I know I own you, but you're not really my ass.
You own nothing. Your view is simplistic and without merit.
Look, I didn't create economics. I didn't decide how each component of the economy contributes and is measured. I only use what's already there. I use what's taught in universities and learned by everyone who passes through including lawmakers and business leaders. You aren't arguing that at all. You have the view, however you derived it, that business runs the show and that simply isn't true. If it were, it would be measured and reported that way.
Your view is simplistic
My simplistic and correct view is better than your simplistic and incorrect view.
You have the view, however you derived it, that business runs the show and that simply isn't true.
Business doesn't run the show, they do produce our Gross Domestic Product.
Look at that, the current level of corporate profits and their growth from my post #331 went right over your head. Why aren't they reinvesting back into business now?
Probably because it is their money and they have that choice.
With the current climate of societal affairs ... And the proliferation of individuals who deem themselves the moral arbiters who shall be obeyed ... It is rather easy to determine what an individual can choose to do with what they actually have control over.
If you would like them to invest more in the economy and society as a whole ... I would suggest you stop telling them what they owe you.
Because otherwise ... They will show you what they owe you ... Which is nothing.
.
And this philosophy is good for America and it's economic well being going forward?
Being competitive is good for America.
How did your philosophy work out for Venezuela?
I'm happy to give you lessons on economics.
And I'm happy to mock your ignorance.
Too funny. The only lesson you have given is how to show your ass on a public forum.
I know I own you, but you're not really my ass.
You own nothing. Your view is simplistic and without merit.
Look, I didn't create economics. I didn't decide how each component of the economy contributes and is measured. I only use what's already there. I use what's taught in universities and learned by everyone who passes through including lawmakers and business leaders. You aren't arguing that at all. You have the view, however you derived it, that business runs the show and that simply isn't true. If it were, it would be measured and reported that way.
Your view is simplistic
My simplistic and correct view is better than your simplistic and incorrect view.
You have the view, however you derived it, that business runs the show and that simply isn't true.
Business doesn't run the show, they do produce our Gross Domestic Product.
Show me where the GDP is measured and reported and taught in that way. I hate to get down on you but you continue to make assertions that the rest of the world doesn't make.
Look at that, the current level of corporate profits and their growth from my post #331 went right over your head. Why aren't they reinvesting back into business now?
Probably because it is their money and they have that choice.
With the current climate of societal affairs ... And the proliferation of individuals who deem themselves the moral arbiters who shall be obeyed ... It is rather easy to determine what an individual can choose to do with what they actually have control over.
If you would like them to invest more in the economy and society as a whole ... I would suggest you stop telling them what they owe you.
Because otherwise ... They will show you what they owe you ... Which is nothing.
.
And this philosophy is good for America and it's economic well being going forward?
Being competitive is good for America.
How did your philosophy work out for Venezuela?
Competing for $2/hr wages is progress to you?
And this philosophy is good for America and it's economic well being going forward?
I'm happy to give you lessons on economics.
And I'm happy to mock your ignorance.
Too funny. The only lesson you have given is how to show your ass on a public forum.
I know I own you, but you're not really my ass.
You own nothing. Your view is simplistic and without merit.
Look, I didn't create economics. I didn't decide how each component of the economy contributes and is measured. I only use what's already there. I use what's taught in universities and learned by everyone who passes through including lawmakers and business leaders. You aren't arguing that at all. You have the view, however you derived it, that business runs the show and that simply isn't true. If it were, it would be measured and reported that way.
Your view is simplistic
My simplistic and correct view is better than your simplistic and incorrect view.
You have the view, however you derived it, that business runs the show and that simply isn't true.
Business doesn't run the show, they do produce our Gross Domestic Product.
Show me where the GDP is measured and reported and taught in that way. I hate to get down on you but you continue to make assertions that the rest of the world doesn't make.
Too funny. The only lesson you have given is how to show your ass on a public forum.
I know I own you, but you're not really my ass.
You own nothing. Your view is simplistic and without merit.
Look, I didn't create economics. I didn't decide how each component of the economy contributes and is measured. I only use what's already there. I use what's taught in universities and learned by everyone who passes through including lawmakers and business leaders. You aren't arguing that at all. You have the view, however you derived it, that business runs the show and that simply isn't true. If it were, it would be measured and reported that way.
Your view is simplistic
My simplistic and correct view is better than your simplistic and incorrect view.
You have the view, however you derived it, that business runs the show and that simply isn't true.
Business doesn't run the show, they do produce our Gross Domestic Product.
Show me where the GDP is measured and reported and taught in that way. I hate to get down on you but you continue to make assertions that the rest of the world doesn't make.
Show me where the GDP is measured and reported and taught in that way.
Gross Domestic Product.
Do you understand product or not?
And this philosophy is good for America and it's economic well being going forward?
Of course the philosophy of the wealthy having enough confidence in the American economy and society that they are willing to invest in both would benefit us all.
They currently don't ... And if you continue to make demands ... They will continue to remind you that you have no say-so over where they choose to do business.
You can make things difficult and unpleasant for them ... But that isn't going to help you out much.
There are a lot of places on the face of the Earth that are far more hospitable to those willing to invest ... And if you want to get at the back of that line ... Knock yourself out.
.
Dude, there are more billionaires per capita in America now than at any other time in history. Corporate profits are higher than ever. It's really difficult for you to argue that the climate in America is hostile. The only thing it's hostile to is unmitigated greed.
Dude, there are more billionaires per capita in America now than at any other time in history. Corporate profits are higher than ever. It's really difficult for you to argue that the climate in America is hostile. The only thing it's hostile to is unmitigated greed.
You aren't telling me anything I don't know ... And you continue to think you are making some kind of point (no matter how irrelevant it may be).
If you want to ask me who is intent on making the economic climate in America hostile ... That is easy enough to answer.
It is the people who have no grounds or authority to enslave the rich to their own personal desires ... And that keep making demands they don't have the intelligence to understand are shackling them to certain doom.
It isn't the greed of the rich that is destroying America ... It is the stupid people who keep thinking they are owed something they aren't.
The rich have their money ... And can go anywhere and do whatever they want with it.
If you keep telling them they owe you something ... They will keep saying ... "Who the **** do you think you are?"
.
.... which, of course, is absolutely false, as you well know.
You pay for most public services through taxes which is placing money in a pot, or a socialist ideal.
Obtuse, don't you think? It makes no sense whatsoever. In fact, it demonstrates a shallow and simplistic understanding of macro economics.
Obtuse, don't you think? It makes no sense whatsoever. In fact, it demonstrates a shallow and simplistic understanding of macro economics.
Thanks for your uneducated opinion. If you'd like to state fact as to where I'm wrong, go ahead.
You purport to support "socialist ideals" without supporting socialism. Further, you refuse to answer challenges to your position, but rather attack the challenger. Your one-liners carry no intelligent, supporting, discussion, but rather, serve as "pronouncements from on high" - pronouncements that you seem incapable to defend.
You purport to support "socialist ideals" without supporting socialism. Further, you refuse to answer challenges to your position, but rather attack the challenger. Your one-liners carry no intelligent, supporting, discussion, but rather, serve as "pronouncements from on high" - pronouncements that you seem incapable to defend.
All taxed based services are socialist ideals through social ownership.
Which 'challenge' did I refuse to answer?
Careful - your ignorance is showing.
Taxation is NOT a socialist concept. For you to even suggest such is indicative of your lack of understanding of the sociopolitical differentiation between the types of government.
Now, if you would like to be embarrassed in public, and your ignorance exposed for all to see, please explain to everybody why you think taxation is a socialist concept.
I'll wait here - while you make a fool out of yourself.
Well now, instead of flap yapping, why don't you post those numbers? You know, what a Congressman makes, a Senator, and compare it to what industry pays people to influence those politicians? And use that influence to hold down wages.Yeah and? Do you actually have any idea what mechanisms are in play to determine CEO compensation and what "ordinary workers" make? and while you're figuring that out perhaps you'll do a bit of research into how "ordinary workers" compensation has fared in comparison to the politicians, bureaucrats and cronies inhabiting the halls of the government that you so love to worship and keep in mind the drones in gub'mint TAKE from society instead of having to compete to produce goods and services that people willingly buy.
Lastly while your little charts are certainly good for a laugh or two, perhaps you might want to go out and find one that overlays the growth of the federal gub'mint over the same time period; surprise, surprise it's gone from simply gigantic to HOLY FUCK MONSTROUS over the same time period, think that fact might have anything to do with the stagnation of "ordinary worker" wages ? Perhaps big daddy gub'mint sucking resources out of the productive economy at an ever increasing rate might have something to do with stagnating worker productivity and thus wages?
compare it to what industry pays people to influence those politicians? And use that influence to hold down wages.
What does the government do to hold down wages?
It makes it harder and more expensive to operate a business in this country so businesses leave therefore wages are supressed
It makes it harder and more expensive to operate a business in this country so businesses leave therefore wages are supressed
I own five businesses and Angel Invest two others, I haven't seen 'harder and more expensive.' Businesses leave for two reasons; 1) To walk away from taxes owed. 2) Do to investor/share holder demand.
Ludicrous.
It makes it harder and more expensive to operate a business in this country so businesses leave therefore wages are supressed
It makes it harder and more expensive to operate a business in this country so businesses leave therefore wages are supressed
I own five businesses and Angel Invest two others, I haven't seen 'harder and more expensive.' Businesses leave for two reasons; 1) To walk away from taxes owed. 2) Do to investor/share holder demand.
uh huh that's why Pfizer moved it's HQ to walk away from taxes owed
Business move when the profit margin increase outweighs the expense and inconvenience of moving
Their effective tax rate was reasonable last year. Certainly not a profit killer. They're just getting on board the douchey, anti American business train.
Pfizer Inc. (PFE) | Income Taxes
Pfizer Inc., effective income tax rate (EITR) reconciliation
Effective tax rate for income from continuing operations 22.20%
Their effective tax rate was reasonable last year. Certainly not a profit killer. They're just getting on board the douchey, anti American business train.
Pfizer Inc. (PFE) | Income Taxes
Pfizer Inc., effective income tax rate (EITR) reconciliation
Effective tax rate for income from continuing operations 22.20%
So they paid what, 3% of total revenue in federal tax?
You own a business you say and you don't know the difference between revenue and profit?
You do realize that most businesses run on single digit to less than 20% profit margins don't you?
So why would a business pay 30% of it's relatively small profit margin in taxes when it can pay 10% somewhere else?
It makes it harder and more expensive to operate a business in this country so businesses leave therefore wages are supressed
I own five businesses and Angel Invest two others, I haven't seen 'harder and more expensive.' Businesses leave for two reasons; 1) To walk away from taxes owed. 2) Do to investor/share holder demand.
uh huh that's why Pfizer moved it's HQ to walk away from taxes owed
Business move when the profit margin increase outweighs the expense and inconvenience of moving
Their effective tax rate was reasonable last year. Certainly not a profit killer. They're just getting on board the douchey, anti American business train.
Pfizer Inc. (PFE) | Income Taxes
Pfizer Inc., effective income tax rate (EITR) reconciliation
Effective tax rate for income from continuing operations 22.20%
Their effective tax rate was reasonable last year. Certainly not a profit killer. They're just getting on board the douchey, anti American business train.
Pfizer Inc. (PFE) | Income Taxes
Pfizer Inc., effective income tax rate (EITR) reconciliation
Effective tax rate for income from continuing operations 22.20%
So they paid what, 3% of total revenue in federal tax?
You own a business you say and you don't know the difference between revenue and profit?
You do realize that most businesses run on single digit to less than 20% profit margins don't you?
So why would a business pay 30% of it's relatively small profit margin in taxes when it can pay 10% somewhere else?
You own a business you say and you don't know the difference between revenue and profit?
Sure I do. But I'm comparing what businesses pay in federal tax vs. you. You pay a higher percentage of your income than any business does of their revenue.
You do realize that most businesses run on single digit to less than 20% profit margins don't you?
More importantly, what happens before the profit is taken?
For instance, I drive a new car every two years, but I haven't made a car payment since 1979. Who do you think paid for the car? Vacation homes, airplanes, Sugar Babies. Businesses pay for many things.
So why would a business pay 30% of it's relatively small profit margin in taxes when it can pay 10% somewhere else?
I never wrote 'pay.'
If a company had a total revenue of $1M and employee expenses of $300k, the companies federal tax liability would be zero. If the employee expenses are $400K, the company would pay zero in federal tax and receive a check from the government for $100k.
