• 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!

Left warns, CEOs laud Gang of Six on overseas tax

RStringfield said:
He certainly misunderstood. We ARE running a capital surplus. The capital surplus and trade deficit balance out. Our capital surplus has declined as has the trade deficit since the recession. That always happens.
Click to expand...

The arguement is that there is a lot of money off shore that companies would like to bring back on shore.

You people have no fing clue about international trade or the economics involved.
Click to expand...

What you said had nothing to do with what is being discussed.

A capital surplus is DEFINITELY a good thing, but I doubt you understand why as you are also bitching about the trade deficit. You can't have one without the other.
Click to expand...

I'm going to bet that this request is skipped. Please copy for me where I mentioned the trade deficit.
 
1Perry said:
The arguement is that there is a lot of money off shore that companies would like to bring back on shore.

What you said had nothing to do with what is being discussed.
Click to expand...

What?! Trade has nothing to do with capital surpluses?

I'm going to bet that this request is skipped. Please copy for me where I mentioned the trade deficit.
Click to expand...

You did not say anything about the trade deficit, specifically. However, you are complaining about low taxes on money earned in foreign markets that comes back to the US. When that money returns it increases the capital surpluses which will then increase the trade deficit. I assumed that was the motive of your complaint but it seems you are confused about what we are taxing.
 
StillBallin75 said:
If you want to cut spending and solve the debt/deficit, it's a good place to start. And it's not like the territorial tax system is what this plan is all about.
Click to expand...

But the problem here is those tax dollars aren't being added to our country's revenue base. To me, that's a problem.

Pundits keep saying we have a spending problem; I say that's true if you take into account what much of the spending was for between 2003 and 2008: tons of defense spending, nation building primarily in Iraq and Afghanistan, TARP and 5-years of tax cuts with little tax revenue coming in to pay for it all. Now, add to that the Stimulus, the extension of the Bush tax cuts, unemployment benefits and health care benefits to veterans (which I totally agree with) and it's very easy to see how quickly it all added up. But regardless of which side of the political divide you're on, you're not being honest about how this country got into its economic mess if you refuse to acknowledge that this time of spending had been going on for the last 8-year, five of which was out of control (in my view); the last 3 out of desparation (keeping the economy from going into total free-fall) and necessity (helping to prop up the consumer base). If you can't be honest about this, then we really have nothing to discuss.

So, the way I see it we didn't begin to have a spending problem until we had a revenue problem first! To that, I blame:

1) Treasury for not doing their due diligence to keep watch over these commercial entities that were "too big to fail".

2) Congress for continuing to write legislation that appropriated funds for which Treasury could not afford.

3) Both finance committees in Congress - House: Weighs and Means; Senate: Finance Committee. They are the entities within Congress who are suppose to review the reports coming out of Treasury and ensure the money was there.

4) Congressional Budget Office for at times providing conflicting reports covering specific legislation.

5) The President (GWB and Obama) for signing legislation that kept the spending going WITHOUT insisting on raising revenue and cutting spending. (Although I give Obama some credit in this area because he has called for ending the Bush tax cuts and has tried to inject revenue back into Treasury.)

If folks would be honest and look at our nation's economic problems objectively, they'd know the truth of it.
 
RStringfield said:
You did not say anything about the trade deficit, specifically. However, you are complaining about low taxes on money earned in foreign markets that comes back to the US. When that money returns it increases the capital surpluses which will then increase the trade deficit. I assumed that was the motive of your complaint but it seems you are confused about what we are taxing.
Click to expand...

Now granted my trade surplus/deficit expertise is very rusty but if I recall this only applies to "foriegn" money, not money from American companies they are holding off shore. No?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom