Rob's House Posted December 1, 2010 Share Posted December 1, 2010 1. My infantile look on corporations? Really? I have been saying offer tax breaks for those who create jobs within the US. Don't reward those who ship jobs overseas. Is that hard to understand? 2. And if the corporations are looking to sit back... wait till they feel as though the economy is right for them then they shouldn't receive breaks, stimulus packages, nothing. OR we could follow your philosophy let give them more and more and hope they will do something... cause god forbid we don't bend over to them they may leave us. $%#$@& dumb. 1. It's easy to understand. However, it is so ridiculous that even the Dems have abandoned the idea. 2. Nobody's suggesting "giving" anyone anything. Merely lowering the corporate tax rates to a level that is more competetive in a global economy to encourage growth. This talk of them deserving this or that and being rewarded or punished just shows what a naive and childish understanding you have of the situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erynthered Posted December 1, 2010 Share Posted December 1, 2010 This is a perfect example of the entitlement mentality. No one is "giving" them anything, factually speaking it is TAKING away. No one is giving anything to them.. Until you can break through this mentality, you will always be on the losing end of this argument. He has been trained well by the wise union boss sage, I don't believe even waterboarding would work. The Libs sent their best and bightest to this board, connor, pbills,dave, bobby. Thats the best the have? Where are the rest of them that used to come here? Could it be that they see that this guy in the empty suit in the WH is exactly that? Where are the other defenders of this administration? Where did they go? Daily we have to read the idiocy of the afore mentioned. Oh, thats right, a couple of Tuesdays ago, that got their asses handed to them on a "Get the !@#$ out of Washington" platter. The mentallity of the loyle left is mind boggling, seriously. Seriously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 2, 2010 Share Posted December 2, 2010 My infantile look on corporations? Really? I have been saying offer tax breaks for those who create jobs within the US. Don't reward those who ship jobs overseas. Is that hard to understand? It's not like your tax breaks would have to be deep enough to cover the cost of hiring American workers over foreign ones, but they'd also have to cover the cost of either providing health insurance to American workers or the penalties for not doing so, versus having no obligation to foreign workers. Good plan...the revenue generated by the penalties in the health care bill would have to be completely offset by your tax breaks for your plan to be effective, meaning one or the other is completely ineffective. No, that's not infantile at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted December 2, 2010 Author Share Posted December 2, 2010 It's not like your tax breaks would have to be deep enough to cover the cost of hiring American workers over foreign ones, but they'd also have to cover the cost of either providing health insurance to American workers or the penalties for not doing so, versus having no obligation to foreign workers. Good plan...the revenue generated by the penalties in the health care bill would have to be completely offset by your tax breaks for your plan to be effective, meaning one or the other is completely ineffective. No, that's not infantile at all. Why not give incentive to companies who pride themselves on hiring within this great country? Is a company has outsourced it's jobs to India, China, etc... keep them at the rate they are at now. People talk about Americans that are on unemployment and giving them incentives, why not do the same to corporations. On to the high earners, I still say keep them at the level they are at now. No reason to lower their rates as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted December 2, 2010 Share Posted December 2, 2010 Why not give incentive to companies who pride themselves on hiring within this great country? Is a company has outsourced it's jobs to India, China, etc... keep them at the rate they are at now. People talk about Americans that are on unemployment and giving them incentives, why not do the same to corporations. On to the high earners, I still say keep them at the level they are at now. No reason to lower their rates as well. It's like talking to a wall.. Broadening the tax code by eliminating some of the loopholes will generate more revenues, that will be the third and last time I tell you this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted December 2, 2010 Author Share Posted December 2, 2010 It's like talking to a wall.. Broadening the tax code by eliminating some of the loopholes will generate more revenues, that will be the third and last time I tell you this. You can say it all you want. I understand that... AGAIN, keep the rate the same as it is now for corporations who ship jobs overseas. Those who create jobs here... they can receive lower rates. So then the revenues will increase due to companies wanting that lower rate and not shipping jobs overseas, hence more jobs created. Win / Win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted December 2, 2010 Share Posted December 2, 2010 You can say it all you want. I understand that... AGAIN, keep the rate the same as it is now for corporations who ship jobs overseas. Those who create jobs here... they can receive lower rates. So then the revenues will increase due to companies wanting that lower rate and not shipping jobs overseas, hence more jobs created. Win / Win. In regards to adding incentives for corporations that add jobs at home, I don't have a problem with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted December 2, 2010 Share Posted December 2, 2010 In regards to adding incentives for corporations that add jobs at home, I don't have a problem with that. I don't have a problem with it either, but as Tom described at greater length, it's about the equivalent of trying to lure free agents to your team by offering a free toaster with their signing bonus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted December 2, 2010 Share Posted December 2, 2010 I don't have a problem with it either, but as Tom described at greater length, it's about the equivalent of trying to lure free agents to your team by offering a free toaster with their signing bonus. I'm not disputing what Tom said, this does not mean I would penalize multi nationals for investing abroad, I'm just saying that ADDING incentives for domestic job growth is a plausible solution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted December 2, 2010 Share Posted December 2, 2010 I'm not disputing what Tom said, this does not mean I would penalize multi nationals for investing abroad, I'm just saying that ADDING incentives for domestic job growth is a plausible solution. I don't disagree, just poking a little fun at pBills for thinking a modest tax break (which I'm always for) will have a significant impact on outsourcing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted December 3, 2010 Share Posted December 3, 2010 Lets just push both parties out and start over. We all know that America doesn't have the will for that though. America wants everything to be easy and someone to blame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peace Posted December 3, 2010 Share Posted December 3, 2010 Love how Obama is proposing the idea to extend the Bush tax cuts if the Republicans also extend more benefits to jobless. That's right government: Lower taxes and spend more! HA HA HA HA HA HA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted December 3, 2010 Share Posted December 3, 2010 Love how Obama is proposing the idea to extend the Bush tax cuts if the Republicans also extend more benefits to jobless. That's right government: Lower taxes and spend more! HA HA HA HA HA HA Yes, all while the Deficit commission is laying out their proposals. Specially now with this surprisingly terrible jobs report (which honestly I didn't see coming), I imagine this will in somehow someway spur some sort of action that adds to the national debt. And if they approve some sort of other Keynesian solution, I am going to ballistic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TPS Posted December 3, 2010 Share Posted December 3, 2010 I don't disagree, just poking a little fun at pBills for thinking a modest tax break (which I'm always for) will have a significant impact on outsourcing. Hmmm...I thought conservatives believed that taxes changed behavior in a significant way? You mean cutting the marginal tax rate won't increase revenue? That's a laugher! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted December 3, 2010 Share Posted December 3, 2010 (edited) And if they approve some sort of other Keynesian solution, I am going to ballistic. It's impossible to imagine a scenario where the American public would in any way, shape or form support more government spending as an answer to what has already proven to be a disasterous previous attempt to throw money at the unemployment problem. Won't happen. Edited December 3, 2010 by LABillzFan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peace Posted December 3, 2010 Share Posted December 3, 2010 It's impossible to imagine a scenario where the American public would in any way, shape or form support more government spending as an answer to what has already proven to be a disasterous previous attempt to throw money at the unemployment problem. Won't happen. Dumbest post ever. And that's against some stiff competition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted December 3, 2010 Share Posted December 3, 2010 Dumbest post ever. And that's against some stiff competition. Why is it the dumbest post ever? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peace Posted December 3, 2010 Share Posted December 3, 2010 Why is it the dumbest post ever? Don't double down on stupidity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 3, 2010 Share Posted December 3, 2010 It's like talking to a wall.. Broadening the tax code by eliminating some of the loopholes will generate more revenues, that will be the third and last time I tell you this. Not only that, but would decrease the cost of collecting taxes. I've advocated that for quite some time for personal income tax - identify and eliminate the rarely-used but oft-audited loopholes and credits in the tax code, thus increasing revenues and decreasing costs. Probably wouldn't be much...but it's a start. (Of course, it's impossible to know what the savings is, since the IRS insists that their budget is secret and, besides, incomprehensible to mere mortals. But instead of leaking something useful like that, friggin' Assmange has to publish gossip. ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted December 3, 2010 Share Posted December 3, 2010 (edited) Don't double down on stupidity. Let me put it another way so you can help me see the error of my ways: do you believe right now the country wants the government to drop another $800 billion in "stimulus spending" in an effort to keep unemployment from going to, say, 10%? Because I'm suggesting they're not based on how the original stimulus fell embarrassingly short of keeping unemployment under 8%, and you're referring to that as the stupid comment ever, so please explain yourself so my dumb self will see the light. Edited December 3, 2010 by LABillzFan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts