Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

So Democrats are just bad and Republicans are just good, then? 

So Gleeful Gator, you've got nothing.

Edited by 3rdnlng
  • Replies 7.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted
1 minute ago, 3rdnlng said:

So Gleeful Gator, you've got nothing.

Nothing is still more than you have, because you are a negative. Just admit it, if its a Democrat it is bad, and a Republican is just good. So Clinton was bad, and poor little Bushie was done in by liberals. Bad Liberals! 

Posted
12 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Nothing is still more than you have, because you are a negative. Just admit it, if its a Democrat it is bad, and a Republican is just good. So Clinton was bad, and poor little Bushie was done in by liberals. Bad Liberals! 

You have no way to refute what I say so you spew nonsense instead.

Posted
5 minutes ago, TPS said:

Usually it's the guys on the right who declare the deficit sky is falling. Yawwwnnnnnn........Reagan proved deficits don't matter.....

 

Deficits don't matter? That's good to know. I was a little concerned they'd be slashing entitlements to pay for the trillion dollar corporate welfare program. That would seem to be a bad idea for a country with an expanding wealth gap the likes of which the world has never seen.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
11 minutes ago, TPS said:

Usually it's the guys on the right who declare the deficit sky is falling. Yawwwnnnnnn........Reagan proved deficits don't matter.....

 So you fell for the troll account too?

 

Tell me how corporate profits and spending translate to the Federal deficits?

Posted
15 minutes ago, LSHMEAB said:

 

Deficits don't matter? That's good to know. I was a little concerned they'd be slashing entitlements to pay for the trillion dollar corporate welfare program. That would seem to be a bad idea for a country with an expanding wealth gap the likes of which the world has never seen.

 

I love how not taxing a company out of business is somehow considered "welfare" by the dipschiffs on the left.

Posted
14 minutes ago, GG said:

 So you fell for the troll account too?

 

Tell me how corporate profits and spending translate to the Federal deficits?

You remember, it's a pretty simple identity from the national income accounts: S-I = G-T + CAB (current account)

Assuming CAB =0, the public sector's deficit (G>T) creates a private sector surplus (S>I). The Household and Corporate sector's savings (yes, profits tend to rise) are increased by the size of the deficit. 

 

26 minutes ago, LSHMEAB said:

 

Deficits don't matter? That's good to know. I was a little concerned they'd be slashing entitlements to pay for the trillion dollar corporate welfare program. That would seem to be a bad idea for a country with an expanding wealth gap the likes of which the world has never seen.

You are referring to the use of deficits to scare people into believing "social programs need to be cut because we can't afford them." 

Deficits can matter, but not in the way most people believe. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
20 minutes ago, TPS said:

You remember, it's a pretty simple identity from the national income accounts: S-I = G-T + CAB (current account)

Assuming CAB =0, the public sector's deficit (G>T) creates a private sector surplus (S>I). The Household and Corporate sector's savings (yes, profits tend to rise) are increased by the size of the deficit. 

 

You are referring to the use of deficits to scare people into believing "social programs need to be cut because we can't afford them." 

Deficits can matter, but not in the way most people believe. 

 

Two separate concepts, especially since I asked about the Federal deficit

Posted
6 hours ago, TPS said:

In case anyone was wondering what corporations are doing with all of those "overseas" profits being "repatriated"....

https://itep.org/new-study-confirms-offshore-earnings-are-flowing-into-stock-buybacks-not-jobs-and-investments/

 

 

 

 

If they are missing EPS targets or if they think that their stock price is too low, it is natural to do the stock repurchases. I would want to know why they are doing it. The data does not show that information. Also from the primary source material: "evidence of an increase in investment is less clear at this stage, as it is likely too early to detect given that the effects may take time to materialize." Of the $300 billion repatriated, there was only an increase in $32 billion in stock repurchases. What about the other $268 billion?

 

Also, from the article:

"There are several steps lawmakers should take to fix the new incentives that the TCJA creates to shift future profits and even real jobs offshore. Lawmakers should push legislation to equalize the tax rate on foreign and domestic income, crack down on inversions, and create transparency by requiring companies to report financial information on a country-by-country basis. Taken together such legislation could end offshore tax avoidance once and for all."

 

Equalizing Tax Rates: Doesn't create incentive to keep money in the U.S. It also doesn't incentivize companies to keep jobs here.

Inversions: It doesn't prevent companies from merging with another company for re-incorporation.

Transparency: Most of the 10k's I have seen report money by country. Asking (because I do not know): Are there no regulations that 10k's need to contain financial breakdowns by country/region?

 

To me, their prescription to solve the problem really doesn't solve the problem. What am I missing?

  • Like (+1) 1
×
×
  • Create New...