- Joined
- Nov 24, 2009
- Messages
- 5,758
- Reaction score
- 2,094
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
wouldnt this be government restricting individual freedom? something your against, right?Correct, if it is that harmful make it illegal.
wouldnt this be government restricting individual freedom? something your against, right?Correct, if it is that harmful make it illegal.
The nation as a whole should not suffer because 2% of the population does not want to pay 5% more in taxes. This should be common sense.
Tax revenue as a % of GDP needs to increase: fact or fiction?
So, we should not ask of corporations what we ask of others as they need special help, they need our money, our tax support, and cannot be seen as capable of carrying their fair load. And we should never be cncerned about anything that might be harmful?
I think you reach the wrong conclusions. From your link:
Whatever the outcome, industry is learning from the delays, the anger, the-zero tolerance for accidents, he says. It’s learning that the public has the right to be assured that infrastructure is safe and responsibly built and that projects will be battlegrounds for broader issues.
“The legitimate issues are public safety, reliability, environmental protection,” Mr. Girling said. “And so we had to up our game to improve on all of those fronts. Certainly the incidents that have occurred over the last year would suggest that there is room for improvement, and as an industry we are working to improve on all those fronts.”
I don't disagree that some tax increases are in order.
My sense is that the honest answer is that many support comprehensive corporate tax reform. Get rid of a bunch of deductions and then lower rates to make the US more competitive. The reason everyone says that they want this but it never happens is that what is a giveaway to certain people is essential to another group.
Do we need to allow corporations to deduct the cost of tickets to sporting events so that millionaire ballplayers and billionaire owners can charge hundreds of dollars to a ballgame. Should we give R&D tax credits to companies that then send the manufacturing to China. The reason the tax code is thousands of pages is because of all of the special deals that have been allowed into law over many years.
Clean up the whole thing, raise revenues, enhance growth. Stop with the scapgoating.
Its so easy to justify someone else getting tax increases
Nor do i disagree that many tax cuts are in order; timing is the essence of everything.
I'm not entirely in disagreement with you. I don't think taxes play that large a role in growth, and that even if there were no taxes at all, business would still be leaving, largely because we can't compete with low wages and lack of health compensation and benefits. But that's another issue.
However, I think step one would be to clean it up. Remove the breaks and loopholes, and then reassess. I would support that.
No one thing, including taxes is the panacea for all of our ills. We do need to get away from employer based health care. that is why we should all be disappointed that a single payer system was not instituted.
Taxes should not be minimized though. After all corporations care about after tax rather than pre tax profit. Why do you think Ireland ( yes I know they are a mess now also) got so many hi tech manufacturing jobs to move there. They lowered the corporate tax rate to 12% if I am not mistaken.
Like I said I could list a number of actions other than taxes that will spur growth. I am in the camp is that correctly it is one of several negatives, not the sole negative as some want to portray. But on the other hand to think it is of little or no consequence is equally wrong in my view.
No one thing, including taxes is the panacea for all of our ills. We do need to get away from employer based health care. that is why we should all be disappointed that a single payer system was not instituted.
Taxes should not be minimized though. After all corporations care about after tax rather than pre tax profit. Why do you think Ireland ( yes I know they are a mess now also) got so many hi tech manufacturing jobs to move there. They lowered the corporate tax rate to 12% if I am not mistaken.
Like I said I could list a number of actions other than taxes that will spur growth. I am in the camp is that correctly it is one of several negatives, not the sole negative as some want to portray. But on the other hand to think it is of little or no consequence is equally wrong in my view.
How low can you go though?
Tax increases are a certainty when a nation engages in deficit spending during periods of low unemployment. rof
shared sacrifice to the dems mean the rich pay more and no one else does
The poor already carry more of a tax burden via regressive taxes.
they pay far less of what they use than the rich do. What matters to me is how much money they pay, not their ability to pay which is based on the marxist nonsense of From Each according to their ability
and when it comes to income taxes which is what is at stake in this discussion you are absolutely and completely wrong-again
Okay Scrooge.
shared sacrifice to the dems mean the rich pay more and no one else does
You can attempt to politicize it as much as you desire. Increasing taxes on citizens with very low savings rates does not raise revenue. Does it appear logical to you that increasing taxes on people with very low savings rates will decrease overall consumption, and therefore both output and tax revenue will decrease as a result from such action?
How low can you go though?
According to the polls most people agree with him.
Poll: Raise taxes on wealthy, leave Medicare, Medicaid alone - The Hill's On The Money
Americans Want Higher Taxes On Wealthy, No Entitlement Reform In 'Super Committee' Deal
Poll: Taxing the rich favored over Medicare cuts - Jennifer Epstein - POLITICO.com
Daily Presidential Tracking Poll - Rasmussen Reports™The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Wednesday shows that 22% of the nation's voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as president. Thirty-nine percent (39%) Strongly Disapprove, giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -17.
increasing taxes on those who tend to vote for big spending politicians mightdissuade them from engaging in such idiocy in the future
This is pure conjecture. We do know that it will harm the economy more so than provide revenue necessary to reduce deficits (which only increase future tax liabilities). Starve the beast failed.
take a guess
who is likely to want more government spending
someone who does not suffer higher taxes when the government spends more
or those who do?
I find that hard to believe.
shared sacrifice to the dems mean the rich pay more and no one else does