Just to stir things up, but an even larger percentage of corporations don't pay taxes either.
Well, mine is certainly not in that category.
Just to stir things up, but an even larger percentage of corporations don't pay taxes either.
If that were true, business would not spend millions of dollars a year trying to avoid taxes and trying to convince you they could not be taxed. Let me say this again since it seems to be what you think makes something true, BUSINESS WOULDN'T SPEND MILLIONS EVERY YEAR TRYING TO BEND TAX RULES IF THEY COULD NOT BE TAXED.
Taxes and or costs are not what determines the price you pay for any thing. The cost the public is willing to pay is what set's the price a business charges.
Nothing in that article contradicts anything dross said. It doesn't matter who hands the check to the tax man, the consumer is the one that ultimately pays it.
allow me to clarify and appologize to dross. not everything dross has said i disagree with. i mearly think that saying we cannot tax a corporation is severely misunderstood. in the article i posted it spoke of direct and indirect taxes. direct taxes are unconstitutional to be handed to the citizen, only the states have that power. so, a federal income tax imposed on you and me is unconstitutional..
Are you saying you're in favor of protectionism?
by websters definition i could be a fan. Protection - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary
the government should be watching over these corporations making sure the tax-paying citizen is protected, not exploited. unfortunately, our system works in the opposite and in MHO its killing us, look at the value of the dollar. if the government wants to dabble in someones business i would rather it be done while looking out for us instead of finding ways to fleece the working people.
by websters definition i could be a fan. Protection - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary
the government should be watching over these corporations making sure the tax-paying citizen is protected, not exploited. unfortunately, our system works in the opposite and in MHO its killing us, look at the value of the dollar. if the government wants to dabble in someones business i would rather it be done while looking out for us instead of finding ways to fleece the working people.
I'm still not very clear on exactly how you think the working people are being exploited/fleeced through some kind of Faustian bargain with corporations. And what does the value of the dollar have to do with any of this discussion? The dollar's value has dropped entirely due to government, via the Federal Reserve, inflating the currency without regard for reality.
Protectionism only helps SOME working people at the expense of all the others. For instance, if we protect the steel business, we help those workers in the short run, but we hurt the auto workers because they now buy their steel at artificially high prices, which puts them at a competitive disadvantage with foreign auto makers. I
If we protect the textile workers, it just means all the working folks who could spend less on clothes now spend more.
Protectionism is the politicians game of being able to show you the people he's helped by high import taxes, but doesn't show you all the people hurt by higher prices.
Protectionism in the long run hurts everyone at the expense of helping a few in the short run.
first, why should we have to "bail out" a corporation?
i see your point, thats why i said i could be a fan if worked in properly. for this to work we would have to change our whole economic system, from the tax structure to the way we manufacture. instead of buying gym shoes made in taiwan, buy shoes made here in america by american workers. the government mearly makes sure that any material imported is taxed correctly. if the coroporation doesn't want to pay the higher tax, they should produce the material here for a tax break. i could see how this would level the price of goods and keep people working. otherwise, with special intrests and lobbyist working hard to corrupt these principles, this protectionism would never have a chance. it definately would hurt us.
first, why should we have to "bail out" a corporation?
secondly, why is the dollar next to worthless? our national debt is huge due to all the spending and therefore we've had to sell bonds to china and everyone else. those bonds appear to be wothless therefore our dollar loses value making the government work harder to find money to account for all the debt. so, where is the burden placed, on the taxpayer. thats how i see it adding up.
If you believe this, then it should be OK with you to impose a 1000% tax on every firearm produced by any company, so long as it's paid by the company, because that means the price of guns won't go up.
Hey, it's win-win. Let's call Chuckie Schumer together and see if we can convince him it's a good idea.
You can see some of the pieces, but you don't know how to tie them together.
They won't go up if no one will pay it.
If you believe it's impossible to tax corporations then you shouldn't mind a 100% tax on them either. They'll just raise their prices and go on their merry way business as usual.
If no one will pay it, the company goes out of business. The corporate entity cares about one thing and one thing only: having a positive cash flow at the end of the day. If it does not have that, it dies. Congrats, you just ended gun manufacturing.
Why shouldn't I mind? Of course I should mind... the rising prices affect my ability to purchase goods and services. That's the whole point we've been trying to make to you -- every tax you propose on corporations raises the cost to the consumer... the working man... the people of America.
Taxes on corporations are taxes on the people. If you propose to levy a "windfall profits" (or whatever other cockamamie tax you care to imagine) on any given corporation or sector of the economy, you are in effect proposing a tax on the people who purchase their goods or services. Tax insurance companies, the cost of insurance goes up. Tax gun companies, the cost of guns goes up. Tax agribusiness, the cost of food goes up. If the final profitable price rises above what the market will bear, the company goes out of business, its products and services are no longer available, and society as a whole is relatively impoverished. None of this is a good thing.
Kid you are the one with his string in a tangle. You saying it doesn't make if fact, even if Rush told it to you.
No, it's not. You should do it, and this comes from a libertarian.
You've paid in, you've served your country, and the cost of all this crap has been imposed on you, and will be imposed on you and your childrent for the rest of your lives. I deplore these programs, yet I'll take advantage shamelessly of any for which I am eligible. This is the game they've set up, and you can take personal advantage of it, even while you fight the concept. Look at it as getting back some of what has been stolen from you.
And people on here mopped the floor with me when I said we got back a crap load from the EITC on our tax return, yet NO one bashed you even a little bit for this. That's just absolutely amazing.