• 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

Glen Contrarian said:
How about you prove that last statement? The Dems are the ones who want to end that set of tax breaks...and it's the GOP that wants to extend them.
Click to expand...

I think you need to read what I wrote one more time with an eye for trying to comprehend what I'm actually saying.

This bill gives tax breaks to companies INSHORING (opposite of offshoring). It gave tax breaks and incentives to companies closing foreign facilities and moving them back to the US. Now isn't that exactly the kind of thing the pinko left has been bitching about? Giving corporations "welfare"? Providing tax abatements and special deductions? Shouldn't you be glad that's not going to happen?
 
Gimmesometruth said:
You just said you had no problem with tax incentives, ie, picking winners and losers....but previously you argued govt should NOT pick winners and losers.....ergo, you are contradicting yourself.
Click to expand...

Do you know what a tax incentive is? it is businesses keeping more of what they earn. You seem to have a problem with that
 
Gimmesometruth said:
Wait, you asked WHY there is support for this bill. You are not addressing the response.




Ergo, you support this govt.....duh.Let see....Texas has more illegals...yet is doing well.....ergo...illegals are not the problem.

If we just had large petro deposits....gee wiz.
Click to expand...

California has huge shale reserves.

But their economy sucks and that States home to 1/3 of America's welfare recipients even though they only account for 1/8 of the Nation's population.

So its not the existence of Oil is it ?

No, its the policies that allow that oil to be accessed.
 
Conservative said:
Do you know what a tax incentive is? it is businesses keeping more of what they earn. You seem to have a problem with that
Click to expand...

And tax incentives were part of this bill, so liberals should be quite happy that it was killed. Why should we give tax incentives for companies to relocate back to the US to use our precious infrastructure? Damned if you do and damned if you don't with the libs.
 
Conservative said:
Arizona has 6 million people and TX has 27 million, TX is more than double the size of Arizona and that is what you want to ignore. Your problems are indeed the results of illegals, there is more room here and much of the growth is well away from the border.
Click to expand...
It's interesting to imagine that you are an expert on AZ economics, but the issue here is not one of too many workers (or illegals), it is one of lack of job creation, primarily, like CA, driven by a massive loss of household wealth....along with poor education (low funding) and low state investment. We have LOTS of open space......but laughably, that is not a driver of economics.

You really must be in that 40% who still supports Obama in spite of the economic results.
Click to expand...
You still need any and all forms of baiting to distract from your failed arguments.

This bill has an increase in the deficit (which is what you want, less revenue). What you lose sight of is that "net", this would cause more US jobs and ultimately decrease the deficit.
 
Fenton said:
California has huge shale reserves.

But their economy sucks and that States home to 1/3 of America's welfare recipients even though they only account for 1/8 of the Nation's population.

So its not the existence of Oil is it ?

No, its the policies that allow that oil to be accessed.
Click to expand...
LOL....you are still defeating your argument on petro NOT being a major component of the Texas economy!

What other dancing can you do before you finally admit to that simple fact?
 
Conservative said:
Show me a corporation driving on those roads and using the infrastructure? Show me a corporation in line at the grocery store? Corporations are run by people and it is the people that use that infrastructure so why tax a corporation who passes those taxes on to the people?
Click to expand...

Here's a news flash for you: the only tax dollars that are actually wasted - that do not directly benefit the American economy - are those that go outside our borders. Yes, there are ways that tax dollars can be more wisely spent within our borders...but every single one of those dollars that are spent inside our borders are used in ways that stimulate our economy. Not a single one of those tax dollars spent within our borders (except perhaps for any used to buy stock which then tanks) somehow goes *poof* and disappears. All those tax dollars are spent in ways that stimulate our economy (which is a major reason why why Keynesian economics works).

Now think about that for a moment: our tax dollars that go outside our borders are often (though not always) wasted. Right? Right.

And when the government spends our tax dollars on infrastructure that supports multinational corporations, those multinational corporations not only use our taxpayer-funded infrastructure, but the profits they make using our infrastructure go outside our borders...and so a significant amount of the dollars that we spend on those multinational corporations leaves our borders and are - as far as the American economy is concerned - wasted.

There is no good reason why we should not tax corporations, since pretty much all the large corporations are effectively multinational in operation, if not on paper.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
It's interesting to imagine that you are an expert on AZ economics, but the issue here is not one of too many workers (or illegals), it is one of lack of job creation, primarily, like CA, driven by a massive loss of household wealth....along with poor education (low funding) and low state investment. We have LOTS of open space......but laughably, that is not a driver of economics.

You still need any and all forms of baiting to distract from your failed arguments.

This bill has an increase in the deficit (which is what you want, less revenue). What you lose sight of is that "net", this would cause more US jobs and ultimately decrease the deficit.
Click to expand...

No, the fact is Obama supports the bill and after being in office for 6 years has yet to have one of his economic proposals successful. He is as incompetent as his supporters totally lacking in basic understanding of a free market private sector economy.

We don't need more revenue, we need less govt. interference and micro management of the economy which of course would hurt people like you
 
Conservative said:
Do you know what a tax incentive is? it is businesses keeping more of what they earn. You seem to have a problem with that
Click to expand...
It is the SELECTIVE lowering of a tax....ie, picking a "winner".

You DEFINITELY have a problem admitting to your CONTRADICTIONS.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Here's a news flash for you: the only tax dollars that are actually wasted - that do not directly benefit the American economy - are those that go outside our borders. Yes, there are ways that tax dollars can be more wisely spent within our borders...but every single one of those dollars that are spent inside our borders are used in ways that stimulate our economy. Not a single one of those tax dollars spent within our borders (except perhaps for any used to buy stock which then tanks) somehow goes *poof* and disappears. All those tax dollars are spent in ways that stimulate our economy (which is a major reason why why Keynesian economics works).

Now think about that for a moment: our tax dollars that go outside our borders are often (though not always) wasted. Right? Right.

And when the government spends our tax dollars on infrastructure that supports multinational corporations, those multinational corporations not only use our taxpayer-funded infrastructure, but the profits they make using our infrastructure go outside our borders...and so a significant amount of the dollars that we spend on those multinational corporations leaves our borders and are - as far as the American economy is concerned - wasted.

There is no good reason why we should not tax corporations, since pretty much all the large corporations are effectively multinational in operation, if not on paper.
Click to expand...

Nice rant, totally ignoring the reality of what taxes fund, what taxes are collected, and who pays those taxes. Corporations don't drive roads, buy groceries, need defense, people do and it is the people who are paying those corporate taxes along with their own. We currently have a 17.6 trillion dollar debt that exceeds our yearly GDP and your answer is more spending and more tax revenue. When does it stop? How many times do you want to tax the individual?

We have three governments, Federal, State, and local. Let the states manage their own social problems and revenue issues, let the Federal Govt. do what it is supposed to do, protect us. To do that we don't need a 3.9 trillion dollar govt.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
It is the SELECTIVE lowering of a tax....ie, picking a "winner".

You DEFINITELY have a problem admitting to your CONTRADICTIONS.
Click to expand...

Selectively? Tax incentives go to any business that meets that classification, you seem to be the one trying to level the playing field without knowing what you are talking about. I have no contradictions, only people like you who don't understand our economy or even how private business works, including your own.
 
Papa bull said:
I think you need to read what I wrote one more time with an eye for trying to comprehend what I'm actually saying.

This bill gives tax breaks to companies INSHORING (opposite of offshoring). It gave tax breaks and incentives to companies closing foreign facilities and moving them back to the US. Now isn't that exactly the kind of thing the pinko left has been bitching about? Giving corporations "welfare"? Providing tax abatements and special deductions? Shouldn't you be glad that's not going to happen?
Click to expand...

My bad - I mistook the 'to' for 'from'. Got to be more careful.

But why would we possibly not want to give tax breaks to companies inshoring jobs in addition to taxing those who are outshoring jobs? What's wrong with that?
 
Conservative said:
No, the fact is Obama supports the bill ....
Click to expand...
Again...you asked "why?"....and you still cannot address the response to the "why?".

That is sad.

We don't need more revenue
Click to expand...
I know, you are still in the "starve the beast" mode....got it.


we need less govt.
Click to expand...
Like...."tax incentives"....right? You have no problem granting tax breaks to some....via legislation.....but are against.....a Dem plan t do just that.

Weird.


interference and micro management of the economy which of course would hurt people like you
Click to expand...
again, you are good with "tax incentives".....which is "micro-managing".

Weird!
 
Conservative said:
Selectively? Tax incentives go to any business that meets that classification.....
Click to expand...
LOL...suddenly, classification....is not selective!

FFS con.....seriously....are you going to argue that classification is NOT "selecting"?

Good grief.
 
Conservative said:
Nice rant, totally ignoring the reality of what taxes fund, what taxes are collected, and who pays those taxes. Corporations don't drive roads, buy groceries, need defense, people do and it is the people who are paying those corporate taxes along with their own. We currently have a 17.6 trillion dollar debt that exceeds our yearly GDP and your answer is more spending and more tax revenue. When does it stop? How many times do you want to tax the individual?

We have three governments, Federal, State, and local. Let the states manage their own social problems and revenue issues, let the Federal Govt. do what it is supposed to do, protect us. To do that we don't need a 3.9 trillion dollar govt.
Click to expand...

Really? "Corporations don't drive roads"? I'll try to remember that the next time I see a Wal-Mart truck rumbling down the road. And "Corporations don't...need defense"? Make sure you tell Exxon that the next time their tanker is going through the Straits of Hormuz.

It's like you're saying corporations - including the people who represent those corporations - should never, ever be held accountable for anything at all.

Or do you somehow think that there is no such thing as "corporate inertia"?
 
Gimmesometruth said:
Again...you asked "why?"....and you still cannot address the response to the "why?".

That is sad.

I know, you are still in the "starve the beast" mode....got it.


Like...."tax incentives"....right? You have no problem granting tax breaks to some....via legislation.....but are against.....a Dem plan t do just that.

Weird.


again, you are good with "tax incentives".....which is "micro-managing".

Weird!
Click to expand...

This really has to be an act. Why does he support the bill? because it increases tax revenue and he is a dumbass community agitator.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
My bad - I mistook the 'to' for 'from'. Got to be more careful.

But why would we possibly not want to give tax breaks to companies inshoring jobs in addition to taxing those who are outshoring jobs? What's wrong with that?
Click to expand...

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)?
 
Gimmesometruth said:
LOL...suddenly, classification....is not selective!

FFS con.....seriously....are you going to argue that classification is NOT "selecting"?

Good grief.
Click to expand...

Sure it is, tell me how many small businesses like the corner dry cleaner move out of the country? They don't pay the same taxes as large corporations . Any company that is considering moving overseas gets the same treatment regardless of size.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
Really? "Corporations don't drive roads"? I'll try to remember that the next time I see a Wal-Mart truck rumbling down the road. And "Corporations don't...need defense"? Make sure you tell Exxon that the next time their tanker is going through the Straits of Hormuz.

It's like you're saying corporations - including the people who represent those corporations - should never, ever be held accountable for anything at all.

Or do you somehow think that there is no such thing as "corporate inertia"?
Click to expand...

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.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
So you agree that it does this ultimately by increasing the level of employment, jobs, and US corporations.
Click to expand...

How do you know that bill will increase jobs since none of his policies have worked so far?
 
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...
So you argument is that when the employee drives the vehicle on public roads, the vehicle and profits derived from such activity....suddenly become those of the driver, the employee....and therefore the impact upon the roads should be born by that employee?
 
Gimmesometruth said:
So you argument is that when the employee drives the vehicle on public roads, the vehicle and profits derived from such activity....suddenly become those of the driver, the employee....and therefore the impact upon the roads should be born by that employee?
Click to expand...

LOL, I can see why you are an Obama supporter, bye, done dealing with your circular baiting posts.
 
Conservative said:
How do you know that bill will increase jobs since none of his policies have worked so far?
Click to expand...

From YOUR assumption that the bill will increase revenue......

Are we not arguing that the bill will have its intended effect, did you NOT just do that?
 
Conservative said:
LOL, I can see why you are an Obama supporter, bye, done dealing with your circular baiting posts.
Click to expand...

Sure, explaining to you your "logic" on what is the corporation and how their use of public roads impacts the infrastructure....is "baiting".

Don't let the door hit you...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom