• 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!

U.S. Corporate Tax Rate Is 2nd Highest in Industrialized World

apdst said:
That's the last thing the current administration wants.
Click to expand...

Goes without saying. Only someone that hates America would deny that tax cuts spur growth and proclaim that trillion dollar deficits are helpful.
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
Goes without saying. Only someone that hates America would deny that tax cuts spur growth and proclaim that trillion dollar deficits are helpful.
Click to expand...

This is a repeat of the Weimar Government, only this time, it's intentional.
 
MrVicchio said:
Loopholes or are they incentives to spur some sort of activity? Generally increasing productivity?

Personally, I'm glad for each and every chance a business gets to save money, cause if they can't, they pass that on to their customers.

Why do people like to pay more for things??
Click to expand...
If we want companies to be more profitable I'd prefer to see it done with lower rates rather than loopholes. Loopholes sound too much like favors and favors sound too much like corruption.
 
PeteEU said:
Companies do not pay VAT in most countries.
Click to expand...

Well, not directly...but it certainly affects their profits, regardless of whether the tax is actually paid by the company or the consumer. I think it's similar to a corporate tax, in that they're both regressive and both make businesses less competitive.

Ideally, I think nations should derive most of their revenue from income taxes...and a few other user fees, like a gasoline tax, auto licensing fees, pollution-related taxes on companies, etc.

Things like VATs or corporate taxes or sales taxes hurt the poorest people the most.
 
Kandahar said:
Well, not directly...but it certainly affects their profits, regardless of whether the tax is actually paid by the company or the consumer. I think it's similar to a corporate tax, in that they're both regressive and both make businesses less competitive.

Ideally, I think nations should derive most of their revenue from income taxes...and a few other user fees, like a gasoline tax, auto licensing fees, pollution-related taxes on companies, etc.

Things like VATs or corporate taxes or sales taxes hurt the poorest people the most.
Click to expand...

Pollution taxes, as a from of permanent revenue wouldn't do anything but kill jobs.
 
apdst said:
Pollution taxes, as a from of permanent revenue wouldn't do anything but kill jobs.
Click to expand...

Sure it would. It would force the people who CAUSE the pollution to pay to clean it up, instead of forcing the public as a whole to pay to clean it up.
 
Kandahar said:
Sure it would. It would force the people who CAUSE the pollution to pay to clean it up, instead of forcing the public as a whole to pay to clean it up.
Click to expand...

Yeah, screw all those working folks. Who needs jobs, since there aren't any income taxes. Right? They can get on welfare, instead of working.
 
apdst said:
Yeah, screw all those working folks. Who needs jobs, since there aren't any income taxes. Right? They can get on welfare, instead of working.
Click to expand...

So you're in favor of taxing the public to clean up someone's mess, instead of making the person responsible clean it up? Whatever happened to conservatives who were in favor of personal responsibility instead of publicly funded big government?
 
Last edited:
Kandahar said:
Sure it would. It would force the people who CAUSE the pollution to pay to clean it up, instead of forcing the public as a whole to pay to clean it up.
Click to expand...

Assuming that those taxes actually go to cleaning up that pollution. Given government's track record, I don't have much confidence in that being the case.
 
Kandahar said:
Sure it would. It would force the people who CAUSE the pollution to pay to clean it up, instead of forcing the public as a whole to pay to clean it up.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't it be better to fine the polluters instead of taxing everyone?

Oh, wait, there's already laws against pollution, with fines. I guess there's absolutely no practical need for a special tax, too.
 
Scarecrow Akhbar said:
Wouldn't it be better to fine the polluters instead of taxing everyone?

Oh, wait, there's already laws against pollution, with fines. I guess there's absolutely no practical need for a special tax, too.
Click to expand...

You say potato, I say po-tah-to. You can call it a fine or you can call it a tax. In either case, money is flowing out of the pockets of the polluters and into the pocket of the government.

This is the way it should be, so that the public doesn't have to absorb the cost of the environmental damage associated with specific acts by specific people/companies.
 
Kandahar said:
You say potato, I say po-tah-to. You can call it a fine or you can call it a tax. In either case, money is flowing out of the pockets of the polluters and into the pocket of the government.

This is the way it should be, so that the public doesn't have to absorb the cost of the environmental damage associated with specific acts by specific people/companies.
Click to expand...

No, I'm saying "potato", you're saying "kumquat".
 
Kandahar said:
So you're in favor of taxing the public to clean up someone's mess, instead of making the person responsible clean it up? Whatever happened to conservatives who were in favor of personal responsibility instead of publicly funded big government?
Click to expand...

Killing jobs, just to make the companies clean up whatever pollution they are alleged to have created is like shooting yourself in the foot.

How about we put everybody to work, stop wasting money of entitlement programs and use that money to clean up whatever pollution there is? Or, would that make too much sense?
 
apdst said:
Killing jobs, just to make the companies clean up whatever pollution they are alleged to have created is like shooting yourself in the foot.
Click to expand...

That doesn't make sense. If Acme Widgets breaks into the state treasury and steals a lot of money from the public, should they be allowed to get away with it as long as they use that money to create jobs? Of course not.

Your attitude that companies should be allowed to harm the public as long as they are creating jobs is bizarre to say the least. Fortunately, I know that MOST conservatives still support small government and personal responsibility, even if you don't.

apdst said:
How about we put everybody to work, stop wasting money of entitlement programs and use that money to clean up whatever pollution there is? Or, would that make too much sense?
Click to expand...

The public would still be footing the bill for some individual's/company's actions, which means that there would be no incentive for the offender not to do it again.
 
apdst said:
Yeah, screw all those working folks.
Click to expand...

So screw everyone who lives in the area where the work is done? By your reasoning, we should just dumb radioactive waste anywhere we please because proper storage costs jobs. Do I assume rightly that you have no problem with a nuclear power company dumping 10 tons of highly radioactive waste of your front law?

Who needs jobs, since there aren't any income taxes. Right? They can get on welfare, instead of working.
Click to expand...

Who can go to work when they are suffering from various diseases due to improper pollution controls?

Unless you're one of the people who thinks that 50 parts per thousand of arsenic in your water is okay!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom