• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

GOP blocks bill that would curb tax breaks for firms moving operations overseas

Conservative said:
Sure it is
Click to expand...
Well, therefore you are admitting to your contradiction, tax incentives DO select winners......but supposedly you don't want govt selecting "winners".....but you are good with incentives.....that select winners.
 
Conservative said:
How do you know that bill will increase jobs since none of his policies have worked so far?
Click to expand...

Really?
The July Employment Situation report shows that we’ve now seen six consecutive months with job growth topping 200,000, and 53 consecutive months of private sector job growth – the longest streak on record. Businesses added 209,000 jobs in July, bringing us to a total of 9.9 million since February 2010. The unemployment rate was 6.2 percent, a slight increase from the previous month that was largely due to an increase in labor force participation. The unemployment rate was down significantly from 7.3 percent in July 2013
Click to expand...
http://social.dol.gov/blog/the-longest-job-growth-streak-since-1997/

3Month_07-14.png
 
Papa bull said:
So you aren't against subsidies? Isn't that "corporate welfare"? And don't all liberals hate "corporate welfare"? You may think it's a good idea - and maybe it is, but the next time there's a discussion about corporate welfare, any incentive for relocating in the US will be claimed as part of the evil "corporate welfare" that lefties constantly wail about.

I've said for quite some time that it would be smart to get competitive tax-wise with the global market and liberals always respond with whining about how corporations don't pay their fair share; didn't build that road; shouldn't be entitled to the benefits of our society and infrastructure without getting taxed unmercifully.

Do liberals really know what they want (aside from just wanting to bitch)?
Click to expand...

It is now a Right wing sin to encourage corporations to employee Americans. Could you get any lower or more distasteful? You guys sound more and more like you would be far happier in Russia. It's got everything you like.
 
Papa bull said:
So you aren't against subsidies? Isn't that "corporate welfare"? And don't all liberals hate "corporate welfare"?
Click to expand...

Yours is a wonderful examples of assumptions by the Right. You know all those terrible assumptions that the Left has of conservatives that you know are untrue? Same thing - the Right has a bunch of assumptions about liberals that are simply not true.

We are all human, remember.


You may think it's a good idea - and maybe it is, but the next time there's a discussion about corporate welfare, any incentive for relocating in the US will be claimed as part of the evil "corporate welfare" that lefties constantly wail about.
Click to expand...

It's not whether corporate welfare is ever a good thing or a bad thing, but how it is used. Big Oil is the most profitable industry in human history - why the heck should they get any subsidies at all? But when we're trying to build industries in America that are not yet thriving, what's wrong with giving them a hand so that they can grow and thrive?

If you'll think about it, isn't that sorta like the argument that we have about guns? Y'all think that we want to get rid of all guns...when in actuality it's a debate over who should have access to guns (specifically, violent felons, sex predators, terrorists, sociopaths, etc.).

I've said for quite some time that it would be smart to get competitive tax-wise with the global market and liberals always respond with whining about how corporations don't pay their fair share; didn't build that road; shouldn't be entitled to the benefits of our society and infrastructure without getting taxed unmercifully.
Click to expand...

What are the most successful democracies on the planet? The first-world democracies, of course...and every one of the first-world democracies have big governments, high effective taxes, and strong regulation...and have had such for over half a century.

Whereas conservatives are Absolutely Sure that big government, high effective taxes, and strong regulation is a sure path to the economic dustbin of history.

Why is that? Why is it that the most successful nations on the planet are the very ones that conservatives say SHOULD be failing miserably?

Why?

Do liberals really know what they want (aside from just wanting to bitch)?
Click to expand...

See that finger you're pointing at us? From the same hand, three fingers are pointing back at you.
 
Conservative said:
Remember the driver behind the wheel, he is a person, not a corporation, he is an employee of a company not THE company. He is the one paying those corporate taxes you want to levy when he purchases something from the store. Cannot believe our education system has gotten to this point.
Click to expand...

By the same token, then, one cannot blame THE government for anything, then, huh?

Again, do you believe there is no such thing as corporate inertia?
 
jamesrage said:
And many republicans favor outsourcing which allows a company to ship production overseas so that they can hire workers practically pennies on the dollar working 80 hour work weeks and ship those goods to the US with no or low tariffs.
Click to expand...
Both parties are opposing measures that would reduce the loss of jobs. In this case, it's the Republicans, but this is tiny compared to the tax rates problem, which the Dems refuse to fix.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Yours is a wonderful examples of assumptions by the Right. You know all those terrible assumptions that the Left has of conservatives that you know are untrue? Same thing - the Right has a bunch of assumptions about liberals that are simply not true.

We are all human, remember.




It's not whether corporate welfare is ever a good thing or a bad thing, but how it is used. Big Oil is the most profitable industry in human history - why the heck should they get any subsidies at all? But when we're trying to build industries in America that are not yet thriving, what's wrong with giving them a hand so that they can grow and thrive?

If you'll think about it, isn't that sorta like the argument that we have about guns? Y'all think that we want to get rid of all guns...when in actuality it's a debate over who should have access to guns (specifically, violent felons, sex predators, terrorists, sociopaths, etc.).



What are the most successful democracies on the planet? The first-world democracies, of course...and every one of the first-world democracies have big governments, high effective taxes, and strong regulation...and have had such for over half a century.

Whereas conservatives are Absolutely Sure that big government, high effective taxes, and strong regulation is a sure path to the economic dustbin of history.

Why is that? Why is it that the most successful nations on the planet are the very ones that conservatives say SHOULD be failing miserably?

Why?



See that finger you're pointing at us? From the same hand, three fingers are pointing back at you.
Click to expand...

Corporate welfare. Libs are for it except when they are against it.

I also wonder if your idea of success is a lot different than mine if you claim that the countries with the most socialism are the most "successful". Last I checked, they all depend on us to do all the heavy lifting militarily because we're the strongest and most successful, albeit not the most generous with freestuff for the freestuffers.
 
Liberal/progressive/Democrat philosophy concerning the tax code:

The tax code is not the means the government uses to fairly provide the funds it needs to operate. Rather, the tax code is the tool...sometimes the weapon...they use to coerce, manipulate, influence and punish various individuals, businesses and levels of government.
 
Conservative said:
You certainly have a different definition of tax reduction
Click to expand...

So you want to continue to give tax breaks to companies that ship jobs overseas?
From your link
Companies moving into the U.S. would have seen their tax bills drop by $357 million over the same period.
Click to expand...

Do you really believe that 143 is greater that 357?
 
Mycroft said:
Liberal/progressive/Democrat philosophy concerning the tax code:

The tax code is not the means the government uses to fairly provide the funds it needs to operate. Rather, the tax code is the tool...sometimes the weapon...they use to coerce, manipulate, influence and punish various individuals, businesses and levels of government.
Click to expand...

When you provide people with power, such the power to levy taxes, they will use it as a tool to push their will on others. It's not a matter of if they will, but only a matter of how they will go about doing it.
 
Mycroft said:
Liberal/progressive/Democrat philosophy concerning the tax code:

The tax code is not the means the government uses to fairly provide the funds it needs to operate. Rather, the tax code is the tool...sometimes the weapon...they use to coerce, manipulate, influence and punish various individuals, businesses and levels of government.
Click to expand...

We tax things we want less of. Maybe you would rather we just made those things illegal. I would gladly support a law forbidding corporations from moving overseas and selling here. Or maybe we should just forbid layoffs. That is done in other countries.
 
Last edited:
Mycroft said:
the tax code is the tool...sometimes the weapon...they use to coerce, manipulate, influence and punish ...... levels of government.
Click to expand...
LOL......I think the whole "starve the beast" aspect of "punishing govt" has ben the domain of conservatives for quite some time now, decades in fact.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
LOL......I think the whole "starve the beast" aspect of "punishing govt" has ben the domain of conservatives for quite some time now, decades in fact.
Click to expand...

Yeah, if you live your life by rhetoric and slogan, sure I can see how you might view it that way. But it's more like restrain and limit the beast. Unless you're libertarian, then it's choke the sucker til it dies and then light fire to the corpse. Oh and don't forget to salt the earth when finished.
 
clownboy said:
Unless you're libertarian, then it's choke the sucker til it dies and then light fire to the corpse. Oh and don't forget to salt the earth when finished.
Click to expand...
You're confusing libertarianism with anarchism.
 
mpg said:
You're confusing libertarianism with anarchism.
Click to expand...

I should have put a smilie after that. The bit about libertarians was tongue in cheek.
 
clownboy said:
Yeah, if you live your life by rhetoric and slogan, sure I can see how you might view it that way. But it's more like restrain and limit the beast. Unless you're libertarian, then it's choke the sucker til it dies and then light fire to the corpse. Oh and don't forget to salt the earth when finished.
Click to expand...
Um, no, I read on a daily basis a lot of cons going for the starvation. There are few, if any, moderate GOP's remaining......and those that exist don't dare to expose their views.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
Um, no, I read on a daily basis a lot of cons going for the starvation. There are few, if any, moderate GOP's remaining......and those that exist don't dare to expose their views.
Click to expand...

It's relativity in action. What you see is determined by the platform you are standing on.
 
iguanaman said:
Really?
http://social.dol.gov/blog/the-longest-job-growth-streak-since-1997/

3Month_07-14.png
Click to expand...

Got to love the passion of the left that promotes job creation that just got us back to the employment numbers of December 2007 when the recession began. Liberals like you will never change as you always have such low standards and expectations. To get us back to 146.3 million working Americans the debt was increased from 10.6 trillion to 17.6 trillion and you call that good news? You call it good news when we still have 7.5 million long term part time workers who want full time jobs? It is amazing what you people will buy and the question is why? What is it about liberalism that creates this kind of loyalty because it certainly isn't results.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
By the same token, then, one cannot blame THE government for anything, then, huh?

Again, do you believe there is no such thing as corporate inertia?
Click to expand...

The govt. sets the tone and the policies which is why Obama is a failure. You just don't seem to get it but will one day. I grew up as did millions of others. Not enough yet to prevent an incompetent from getting elected and re-elected although 4 million came to their senses. Hopefully one day you will too.
 
sangha said:
So you want to continue to give tax breaks to companies that ship jobs overseas?
From your link


Do you really believe that 143 is greater that 357?
Click to expand...

No, I want Obama/Biden fired and incentive given to companies to stay in this country, not a massive welfare socialist state like Europe.
 
Conservative said:
Got to love the passion of the left that promotes job creation that just got us back to the employment numbers of December 2007 when the recession began. Liberals like you will never change as you always have such low standards and expectations. To get us back to 146.3 million working Americans the debt was increased from 10.6 trillion to 17.6 trillion and you call that good news? You call it good news when we still have 7.5 million long term part time workers who want full time jobs? It is amazing what you people will buy and the question is why? What is it about liberalism that creates this kind of loyalty because it certainly isn't results.
Click to expand...

It IS results. More jobs have been consistently created by Democratic administrations than Republican ones. Those pesky facts again.

The Claim: Clinton said that over the past half century almost twice as many jobs had been created when Democrats were in the White House as under Republican administrations.

The Background: Republicans have used today’s weak job market as a club to beat President Obama. Clinton confronted the Republican charges by claiming long-term success for the Democrats’ “we’re all in this together” philosophy, which he contrasted with what he described as the Republicans’ “you’re on your own” approach. Since 1961, Republican presidents have served for 28 years while Democrats have been in office for about 23 years. Clinton said total job growth over that period amounted to 66 million. “What’s the jobs score?” he asked the crowd in Charlotte. “Republicans 24 million, Democrats 42 million!” he said.

The Facts: Clinton’s math is correct. Using Bureau of Labor Statistics figures for the month each president took office, Democratic presidents presided over the creation of 42.3 million jobs and Republican chief executives saw 23.9 million.
Click to expand...

Expanding Debt

The Claim: Clinton said that Republican policies quadrupled the national debt in the 12 years before he took office and doubled it again in the 8 years following his presidency.

The Background: At their convention in Tampa, Florida, Republicans prominently placed a digital display showing a continually updated total for the national debt, which passed $16 trillion as the Democrats opened their conclave. Romney has attacked Obama as a big spender who has lavished money on wasteful government programs.

The Facts: Clinton’s claim is largely true. The Treasury Department’s website, TreasuryDirect - Home, includes detailed historical data on the government’s public debt. Only annual fiscal year data is available for the period before 1997. Total public debt rose from $907.7 billion on Sept. 30, 1980, four months before President Reagan’s inauguration, to $4.1 trillion on Sept. 30, 1992, as the administration of President George H.W. Bush was coming to a close. Under Clinton, the rise slowed markedly, going to $5.7 trillion. On the second half of his claim, his math was a little off. Total debt rose from $5.7 trillion on Jan. 22, 2001, the first trading day after President George W. Bush was sworn in, to $10.6 trillion on Jan. 20, 2009, when Obama took over. That 86 percent jump isn’t quite the doubling Clinton
Click to expand...
Bill Clinton Asserts Democrats Create More Jobs: Reality Check - Bloomberg
 
clownboy said:
It's relativity in action. What you see is determined by the platform you are standing on.
Click to expand...
Yeah.....what they say is not what they say....but how I view it.

Your semantic games are really cute!
 
Gimmesometruth said:
Yeah.....what they say is not what they say....but how I view it.

Your semantic games are really cute!
Click to expand...

That's how slogans work ("starve the beast"). You should know that since you've chosen to follow along with so many of them yourself.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
And yet you have been shown time after time, the primary driver of debt is:

wapo_cbpp_debt.jpg
Click to expand...

No, the primary driver of debt is overspending. If we don't spend more than we take in there is no debt, if we do, there is, regardless of what we spend it on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom