• 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!

Study finds Corporate America avoided $60B in taxes (2010)

Lord Tammerlain said:
Nope

But they tend to have really horrible air quality and if they are working in coal mines, they also have a high mortality rate. Or if they work for Foxxcon a tendancy to commit suicide from poor working conditions. A rate high enough that safety nets were put up outside the corporate dormatories (yes dormatories which house tens of thousands of workers, rather then the workers having their own homes which they can go to after work )
Click to expand...

And yet, he seems to be arguing that we should want that.
 
The Prof said:
LOL!

ignorance exceeded only by its arrogance

why are so many companies leaving california?




. They are minor league at best. Again, as long as business can have slave labor elsewhere without having to contend with health insurance costs, they will move off shore.




Not enough to be of concern. In your world, it seems business should never pay a tax, never pay a wage, never pariticipate in anything other then complete profit of the labor of others. ONce you accept that they can't have 100%profit, that they have to pay in some form, that they hold a responsiblity to pay something, you will further away from your current position.




Not really. I'm only trying to get you to see that we could deregulate completely, do away with all taxes, and business woudl still leave. As their goal is, as you argue, to make the most profit, it is impossible for them to ever make as much profit here than they can elsewhere if they have to pay our salaries and provide health care. So, if you want jobs here, you either provide EVERYTHING they can get their, including low wages and lack of health care insurance, or you make it less profitable for them to go overseas. I don't see many other options, as they, according to your argument, have no concern other than profit.
Click to expand...
[/QUOTE]

Read, think for a change, and you should understand. I'll hope for the best anyway. :coffeepap
 
The Prof said:
but not enough to distinguish "there" and "their," fourth grade?

odd
Click to expand...

So, you divert from the discussion. Wish I could say I was surprised. :roll: :coffeepap
 
why is the epa driving five coal plants out of business, thousands of jobs, raising energy prices?

why are so many companies fleeing california and illinois?

why was immelt promoted to jobs czar, the posterboy of offshore profits?

questions all answered by FACTS

facts are formidable foes

have fun in the forums, folks
 
The Prof said:
why is the epa driving five coal plants out of business, thousands of jobs, raising energy prices?

why are so many companies fleeing california and illinois?

why was immelt promoted to jobs czar, the posterboy of offshore profits?

questions all answered by FACTS

facts are formidable foes

have fun in the forums, folks
Click to expand...

FActs are good to have, but you often show how easy it is to misinterpret them. You have to understand that what they mean, and even if regulation causes business to leave, that doesn't mean we want to be cChina, which might likely be worse. Throwing up stuff, links, is not equal to reasoned thought.
 
THAT's why companies are leaving california "in droves?"

LOL!

gdp was 1.3, q1 revised down to POINT FOUR

interpret THAT, thales
 
The Prof said:
THAT's why companies are leaving california "in droves?"

LOL!

gdp was 1.3, q1 revised down to POINT FOUR

interpret THAT, thales
Click to expand...

And somehow you think this is a rebuttal? :lamo :lamo :lamo
 
cpwill said:
it is a worthy point to bring in the draft. Like those who pay taxes, those who were drafted were doing something "for the country", but they weren't exactly doing it out of willingness or a desire to help. They were doing it because it was the law.

volunteers, however, could be said to have done something willingly for the country, and could perhaps be compared with those (few) souls who contribute extra to the pay-down-the-debt-fund that the Treasury accepts donations for.
Click to expand...

Come on cpwill, you are going to swoop to the level of insulting those whom served their nation through the draft v. volunteer armed forces? Both made the scarifice, and you're wrong, those that were drafted could have ran or been deferred or entered the National Guard to avoid the 'Nam; e.g., GW Bush, Clinton, Teddy Nudgent, Lee Greenwood, Muhamad Ali, thousands who went north to the maple leaf country, and those who could afford college. Prior to that, it was the draft that saved our arses from Nazis, Tojo, etc., and those that saved Korea from the chinese and north koreans.

I see that you are in Japan, are you serving, or is someone in your family in the military? if so, thank you.

Here is a poem for you to reflect on: The Razor » Blog Archive » It is the Soldier Poem

It is the Soldier, not the minister
Who has given us freedom of religion.

It is the Soldier, not the reporter
Who has given us freedom of the press.

It is the Soldier, not the poet
Who has given us freedom of speech.

It is the Soldier, not the campus organizer
Who has given us freedom to protest.

It is the Soldier, not the lawyer
Who has given us the right to a fair trial.

It is the Soldier, not the politician
Who has given us the right to vote.

It is the Soldier who salutes the flag,
Who serves beneath the flag,
And whose coffin is draped by the flag,
Who allows the protester to burn the flag.

(? Charles M. Province)
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
TBone said:
Really, I pay 33% of my income in Federal Income Tax, not to count FIDC and Medicare and State taxes. So you should be pissed that you are getting f'd by the gov't because Exxon doesn't pay their share, they pay 17% of federal income tax. I ain't saying they should raise your taxes, get rid of the crap Exxon gets from the gov't to lower them to 17%.
Click to expand...

you have an effective rate of 33%? Find that amazing given that the highest effective rate is those making between 380K to 5 million and their's is 24%
 
Boo Radley said:
taxes are not much of an incentive of deterent. They are minor league at best
Click to expand...

LOL!

you don't know what you're talking about

did you see that lt gub gavin newsom went to TEXAS

to consult with RICK PERRY

did you hear what THAT was all about

very revealing
 
SheWolf said:
But if they paid the same amount as you, you wouldn't have a job in the first place. So really, you should be kissing rich people's asses for paying a higher % than you, so you can get a tax break and have a job. Life isn't fair... for the rich.
Click to expand...

so how does GE or Exxon not paying their share of taxes help me keep my job, I don't work in retail or oil? Oh, I get it, by not having them pay their share, they create jobs in the US? Wait, they ship the jobs outside the USA, so tell me again how this works. No the tax code ain't fair for those of us who pay our share.
 
TBone said:
so how does GE or Exxon not paying their share of taxes help me keep my job, I don't work in retail or oil? Oh, I get it, by not having them pay their share, they create jobs in the US? Wait, they ship the jobs outside the USA, so tell me again how this works. No the tax code ain't fair for those of us who pay our share.
Click to expand...

Well from what I have gathered from other posters here... they ship jobs out because of high taxes, so tax rates need to be lowered on companies. That will keep there here, even though many of them don't pay taxes and are getting refunds. So wait, the real problem is the compliance costs with tax code, so we need to make it easier and less expensive for them to get refunds... then the 60B will finally trickle down to us all. :shrug:
 
SheWolf said:
You have, and it's been pointed out to you repeatedly in those threads... and you never once apologized. And one of the soldiers you insulted was my friend from high school, and I told you how I felt.
Click to expand...

And yet again, Apdst, you make no attempt to apologize, excuse or explain your offensive behavior... and that in itself is ****ing offensive, yet you're quick to jump up and condemn my actions and I was being sarcastic.

My respect for you... :thumbdown:thumbdown:thumbdown

And people wonder why our service members and public servants are being treated with little respect and honor, it's because people like you don't even wear your uniform with respect or honor..
 
TBone said:
Come on cpwill, you are going to swoop to the level of insulting those whom served their nation through the draft v. volunteer armed forces?
Click to expand...

nope, simply point out that - like those who pay what they owe in taxes - they are simply doing what we as a nation have forced them to do for us.

Both made the scarifice, and you're wrong, those that were drafted could have ran or been deferred or entered the National Guard to avoid the 'Nam; e.g., GW Bush, Clinton, Teddy Nudgent, Lee Greenwood, Muhamad Ali, thousands who went north to the maple leaf country, and those who could afford college. Prior to that, it was the draft that saved our arses from Nazis, Tojo, etc., and those that saved Korea from the chinese and north koreans.
Click to expand...

:shrug: you won't get an argument from me that a draft wasn't necessary in WWII. and you won't hear an argument from me that those who took steps to avoid such service deserve no credit for doing so, either.

I see that you are in Japan, are you serving, or is someone in your family in the military? if so, thank you.
Click to expand...

:) i see you're an army vet - did old reliable bring you here, or is that a coincidence? Feel free to wander on down to the military forum and poke your head in.

Here is a poem for you to reflect on: The Razor » Blog Archive » It is the Soldier Poem
Click to expand...

:D I Prefer Rudyard Kipling, myself :D
 
SheWolf said:
Well from what I have gathered from other posters here... they ship jobs out because of high taxes
Click to expand...

high taxes, high regulatory burdens, compliance costs and high labor costs and so on and so forth. there are plenty of costs that companies have to deal with, and when you raise any of them you increase the incentive for them to find a way to avoid that cost. you'll note that at the same time as Auto Manufacturing jobs were dying in Detroit, they were growing in Kentucky. Jobs have been fleeing California and moving to Texas. Even Canada has gotten into the act, slashing her corporate tax rate to less than half of ours to attract capital away from us.

so tax rates need to be lowered on companies. That will keep there here, even though many of them don't pay taxes and are getting refunds. So wait, the real problem is the compliance costs with tax code, so we need to make it easier and less expensive for them to get refunds... then the 60B will finally trickle down to us all. :shrug:
Click to expand...

no, they need to pay taxes. but we should strip out all of the special loopholes deductions and shelters while lowering the nominal rate to keep effective rates at rough parity. that way everyone pays the same rate (as opposed, for example, to the current huge tax advantage that Amazon has over Target) and competition is allowed to work; while at the same time ensuring that we do not increase the incentive for all of our businesses to move off-shore.
 
The Founders Did Not Intend For America to Be Run By Big Banks and Wall Street

 
Catawba said:
The Founders Did Not Intend For America to Be Run By Big Banks and Wall Street

Click to expand...


the founders didn't want the masses who had no property voting either
 
TurtleDude said:
the founders didn't want the masses who had no property voting either
Click to expand...

So are you saying its a good thing that America is ran by big banks, wall street, and the capitalist elite?
 
TheDemSocialist said:
So are you saying its a good thing that America is ran by big banks, wall street, and the capitalist elite?
Click to expand...


sure beats being run by bitter losers who want to use government to punish those who have down well in order to slake their envy and to salve their hurt of being failures
 
Catawba said:
Big surprise that is the part you support! :sun
Click to expand...

Yeah, if you have no skin in the game you really don't have much reason to vote responsibly. It would be like letting street bums vote for the management at some company merely because those bums piss on the front lawns of the company and sleep on the park benches in front of the main entryway
 
TurtleDude said:
sure
Click to expand...
So you would agree with monopolies? Child labor? Risky loans that ruin lives? Complete unregulation? Pure capitalism?

beats being run by bitter losers who want to use government to punish those who have down well in order to slake their envy and to salve their hurt of being failures
Click to expand...

Seriously? This is how your knowledge works? This is your process of thinking? Is this supposed to be a response?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom