Three months tax free?

[MrsSmith]

Our excessive tax on business is the exact reason so many build and invest overseas.  We'd have more jobs and more revenue with a lower tax rate.

[Lacarnut]

You'd also have to prove that the business GE does with the government could be done more cheaply some other way. 

You sure pick a crooked company like GE that is under investigation in NY and has been fined by the SEC for $50 million and then there is the 3 ex GE bankers indicted for bid rigging. Yep, when you have crooks and cheats, you can do things more cheaply I would assume. 

[Godot showed up]

Someone correct me if I'm wrong--I could be wrong--but all I heard floated was a proposal for a "tax holiday"--meaning we don't pay for 3 months, and have to pay that much more when we file by April 15, 2011. Big deal.

We all know Obama and any Dem is constitutionally--ha!--incapable of pushing for genuine tax cuts, even temporary ones--ie, a 3-month tax "holiday" in which the taxes are really eliminated.

[MrsSmith]

Someone correct me if I'm wrong--I could be wrong--but all I heard floated was a proposal for a "tax holiday"--meaning we don't pay for 3 months, and have to pay that much more when we file by April 15, 2011. Big deal.

We all know Obama and any Dem is constitutionally--ha!--incapable of pushing for genuine tax cuts, even temporary ones--ie, a 3-month tax "holiday" in which the taxes are really eliminated.

Like the much-touted tax break for first-time home buyers...that requires annual payments on your 1040?

[Allentownjake]

You'd also have to prove that the business GE does with the government could be done more cheaply some other way. 

GE has settled quite a few fraud cases with the government.  Lets stop pretending either group is more honest than the other.

[Ardent15]

Our excessive tax on business is the exact reason so many build and invest overseas.  We'd have more jobs and more revenue with a lower tax rate.

Is that why so many jobs have been outsourced since the tax rates have been reduced, starting in 1981?

[Allentownjake]

Is that why so many jobs have been outsourced since the tax rates have been reduced, starting in 1981?

Regulations mixed with a government unable to have a moral equivalency in trade policy.

You should tariff the hell out of any dictatorship.  Whether it is communist, fascist, or a kingdom.  We have some greedy people in the US who would love a dictatorship here.

[Ardent15]

Regulations mixed with a government unable to have a moral equivalency in trade policy.

You should tariff the hell out of any dictatorship.  Whether it is communist, fascist, or a kingdom.  We have some greedy people in the US who would love a dictatorship here.

Very true.

[gurn]

Is that why so many jobs have been outsourced since the tax rates have been reduced, starting in 1981?

This is typical Liberal Democrat ideology. No jobs were ever outsourced until Reagan came into office - right?

That is just stupid. You must be from HCPP.

US taxes are oppressive. Why? They're oppressive because of the nanny-state that began with Liberal Democrats & FDR.

[Ardent15]

This is typical Liberal Democrat ideology. No jobs were ever outsourced until Reagan came into office - right?

That is just stupid. You must be from HCPP.

US taxes are oppressive. Why? They're oppressive because of the nanny-state that began with Liberal Democrats & FDR.

No need to get hostile.

[Two Americas]

You are the one spouting a lot of nonsense about raising taxes. No country in the world has spent it's way into prosperity. So, higher taxes and more stimulus is not the answer. Obama has tried 800 billion dollars worth of stimulus and it has failed miserably.

Every country has spent its way into prosperity. The rise of the nation state and construction of a public infrastructure is the foundation for the expansion and success of modern economies everywhere. I can't see that this is even controversial. There could be no Capitalism without the nation state and the associated robust public infrastructure. The countries and regions that did not build public infrastructure, such as Spain, spoiled by easy colonial riches, remained economically backward. The modern nation state exits for the purpose of building and maintaining infrastructure, and the infrastructure exists for the purpose of supporting commerce.

No schools, no roads and public transportation, no communications infrastructure, no military to protect trade, no health boards, no weights and measures, no public research, no inspection and regulation of trade, no protection of natural resources  - that all equals no Capitalism and no economic prosperity. As I said, I can't see how there can be any controversy about that, as it is simply historical fact. No intelligent observers deny that, regardless of their political ideas or loyalties.

I agree that the Obama plan failed miserably.

[Lacarnut]

Every country has spent its way into prosperity. The rise of the nation state and construction of a public infrastructure is the foundation for the expansion and success of modern economies everywhere. I can't see that this is even controversial. There could be no Capitalism without the nation state and the associated robust public infrastructure. The countries and regions that did not build public infrastructure, such as Spain, spoiled by easy colonial riches, remained economically backward. The modern nation state exits for the purpose of building and maintaining infrastructure, and the infrastructure exists for the purpose of supporting commerce.

No schools, no roads and public transportation, no communications infrastructure, no military to protect trade, no health boards, no weights and measures, no public research, no inspection and regulation of trade, no protection of natural resources  - that all equals no Capitalism and no economic prosperity. As I said, I can't see how there can be any controversy about that, as it is simply historical fact. No intelligent observers deny that, regardless of their political ideas or loyalties.

I agree that the Obama plan failed miserably.

When you spend more than you take in, the day of reckoning comes knocking on your door. Going into enormous debt is a FAKE PROSPERITY. You see it with bankruptcies and home foreclosures. You see it with failed banks. You see it with failed auto companies, etc. etc. etc., and most of it did not have a damn thing to do with Obama getting those entities in that shape.

[TheSarge]

Every country has spent its way into prosperity. The rise of the nation state and construction of a public infrastructure is the foundation for the expansion and success of modern economies everywhere. I can't see that this is even controversial. There could be no Capitalism without the nation state and the associated robust public infrastructure. The countries and regions that did not build public infrastructure, such as Spain, spoiled by easy colonial riches, remained economically backward. The modern nation state exits for the purpose of building and maintaining infrastructure, and the infrastructure exists for the purpose of supporting commerce.

It wouldn't be controversial if the President would stand back and let the free enterprise system and free market ideals that have made us so great do their job.

But he can't and he won't because he beleives them to be inhearently unfair and are things he doesn't believe in.

So he's going to try and send Big Government^TM to the rescuse because like other Socialists in the Democrat party he believs tha ONLY the Government can fix the economy.

No schools, no roads and public transportation, no communications infrastructure, no military to protect trade, no health boards, no weights and measures, no public research, no inspection and regulation of trade, no protection of natural resources  - that all equals no Capitalism and no economic prosperity. As I said, I can't see how there can be any controversy about that, as it is simply historical fact. No intelligent observers deny that, regardless of their political ideas or loyalties.

Where the divide comes...and what you Libs can't seem to comprehend is when it comes to who is supposed to do what.  And given a couple of your above comments (military being used to protect trade0 you're confused yourself.

The Federal governments powers are very limited...for a reason.  Taxes...national defense...and a handful of others are the ONLY things they are supposed to do.

Everything else was purposely put into the hands of the individual states.

You are trying to tell us...and failing miserably I might add...that we OWE our prosperity to the Federal government and that just isn't the case.  We are prosperous as a nation DESPITE the meddling of the Federal Government.

But you Womb to Tomb Liberal/Socialists can't fathom that idea.  It's foreign to you.

I agree that the Obama plan failed miserably.
[/quote]

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

We have some greedy people in the US who would love a dictatorship here.

They're called liberals and they want to dictate every facet of everyone's life from prenatal care (assuming you pass the socio-economic prerequisites to be born) to schooling, to job training, to caloric, sodium and trans-fatty acid intakes, to what sort of light bulbs you have in your house, the car you drive and what kind of end-of-life/end-your-life care you receive.

And along they way their regulatory schemes punish anyone not savvy enough to come running to their office with piles of money.

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

Do you thing a three month (one quarter) suspension of federal taxes would be an effective kick start to the economy? It isn't a bailout as people would just be keeping more of what they earn.

Not really because it may cause a blip in consumer spending but that blip won't be enough to re-gas the productivity side of the economy. It'll clear out languishing surplus inventories and that's about it but it won't reach back into the manufacturing side.

Companies need a reason to hire.

[TheSarge]

Is that why so many jobs have been outsourced since the tax rates have been reduced, starting in 1981?

No more like the out of control growth of demands by labor unions and over regulation and taxiation anytime an anti-business Dem gets elected has forced companies to send their employees overseas just to survive.

ALl you have to do is look at what labor unions have done to the auto industry to understand why it's cheaper to outsource.

Or better yet...take a look at Hollywood.  There's a reason they use Toronto as a substitute for NYC these days.

[Godot showed up]

Every country has spent its way into prosperity. The rise of the nation state and construction of a public infrastructure is the foundation for the expansion and success of modern economies everywhere. I can't see that this is even controversial. There could be no Capitalism without the nation state and the associated robust public infrastructure.

The early creation of infrastructure that you're talking about was nearly all accomplished by private industry in the United States. It's more than a bit silly to concentrate on infrastructure buildout NOW as a primary reason for economic success, but even in your example, the success is all PRIVATELY achieved--NOT achieved by the government in question.

No one disagrees that the stable nation-state is a sine qua non for political stability and, following from that, the stability and public safety that fosters and allows PRIVATE industry, the exchange of goods and currency by private citizens with no other government intervention except the wonderfully spurring action of taxation.

You might as well say that all of human civilization is a consequent of earth having an atmosphere as part of the reason there's life at all on earth. Necessary but not even remotely sufficient--or proximate to the  actual result.

NO nation has ever spent itself into prosperity.

[Allentownjake]

The early creation of infrastructure that you're talking about was nearly all accomplished by private industry in the United States. It's more than a bit silly to concentrate on infrastructure buildout NOW as a primary reason for economic success, but even in your example, the success is all PRIVATELY achieved--NOT achieved by the government in question.

No one disagrees that the stable nation-state is a sine qua non for political stability and, following from that, the stability and public safety that fosters and allows PRIVATE industry, the exchange of goods and currency by private citizens with no other government intervention except the wonderfully spurring action of taxation.

You might as well say that all of human civilization is a consequent of earth having an atmosphere as part of the reason there's life at all on earth. Necessary but not even remotely sufficient--or proximate to the  actual result.

NO nation has ever spent itself into prosperity.

Rome, Great Britain, and the US

Infrastructure that facilitates trade and spending on forces to protect said trade routes.

That is how we and the other two spent our way into prosperity.

[MrsSmith]

GE has settled quite a few fraud cases with the government.  Lets stop pretending either group is more honest than the other.

No pretending...if you want to point at private businesses and suggest the government could spend less money doing the job a different way, you have to show HOW they could get it done for less. 

Personally, being in a business that has heavy government regulation, I've seen firsthand that the government not only wastes the taxpayer money it takes in, it also wastes the money of businesses by writing and enforcing regulations that do very little, if any, good.

[MrsSmith]

Is that why so many jobs have been outsourced since the tax rates have been reduced, starting in 1981?

Taxes in other countries are less.  Why would they invest in a country that costs them both higher taxes and higher wages?  Conversely, since we all know that businesses merely pass on the majority of their tax costs to consumers, so we pay it all in the end anyway, we d be better off with far lower corporate tax rates and more people working.

[Allentownjake]

No pretending...if you want to point at private businesses and suggest the government could spend less money doing the job a different way, you have to show HOW they could get it done for less. 

Personally, being in a business that has heavy government regulation, I've seen firsthand that the government not only wastes the taxpayer money it takes in, it also wastes the money of businesses by writing and enforcing regulations that do very little, if any, good.

Being an auditor for two large corporations I've seen some entities foolishly spend money as well, mostly on executive perks while the company was facing major problems, caused by said executives.

I'm not happy with either oligarchy going around right now.

We have a major cultural problem right now with entitlement and waste and being a penny wise and a pound foolish.

I will agree many government regulations can be absolutely foolish at times.  I for one hate HIPAA.

[MrsSmith]

Rome, Great Britain, and the US

Infrastructure that facilitates trade and spending on forces to protect said trade routes.

That is how we and the other two spent our way into prosperity.

Infrastructure?   

[Allentownjake]

Infrastructure?  

Did I say we are doing it.  Pull that chart up from 1958 when Ike was in the White House.
 

[MrsSmith]

Being an auditor for two large corporations I've seen some entities foolishly spend money as well, mostly on executive perks while the company was facing major problems, caused by said executives.

I'm not happy with either oligarchy going around right now.

We have a major cultural problem right now with entitlement and waste and being a penny wise and a pound foolish.

I will agree many government regulations can be absolutely foolish at times.  I for one hate HIPAA.

Corporations aren't perfect, they're just more efficient than government.  Corporations answer to their owners.  Government IS "the owner."  

I work in an area where changing government regulations have forced us to spend an additional $2000 every month for absolutely no benefit whatsoever.  Our income is also severely limited by regulation.  If regulations were written with the intent to allow businesses to make a reasonable profit or margin, say maybe 6 - 8 %, while enforcing "best practices," this would be fine.  However, by the time all the different agencies write their regulations, businesses are left trying to - like healthcare - pay their bills with income that covers 67% of the costs of doing business.   Arguing for even more taxes, regulation, and oversight...as liberals do...will cause the inevitable result of complete failure.

[MrsSmith]

Did I say we are doing it.  Pull that chart up from 1958 when Ike was in the White House.
 

Out of time...work calls.