Tommy Callahan Posted March 7 Posted March 7 (edited) yes it's not working and hasn't for years as the wealth is being concentrated at the top and income inequality is at records. No one said unregulated. It's not a binary topic. The excess wealth from this difference in consumption is often invested, but we have seen more and more lately that the elites use that money to invest in themselves and maintaining their own positions. Corporations use more and more of their profits for stock buybacks to increase share prices and less in new training, technology, and innovation. And in turn they donate huge sums to tax exempt PACs vs taxes. As the PACs promote their needs and prop up corporate tools playing politician. Are you saying PACs should be taxed? And agree on the last part. For the most part they bought these politicians through said PACs. And it's kinda full circle as the largest share holders in most fortune 500 are investment funds that are also most people's 401k and pension funds. Tax cuts for corporations and the wealthiest Americans inevitably lower revenues and increase yearly deficits Most corps are under ten people and main Street. When their rate is low they hire and pay more. The big boys just offshore to avoid taxes. And it's basic that if the corporate rate is higher than other countries, they move. See Ireland and Panama Edited March 7 by Tommy Callahan 2
Capco Posted March 7 Posted March 7 (edited) 23 hours ago, Tommy Callahan said: personal tax cuts should come back. people spending creates less bubbles. Massive federal spending ends up at the top and the donors' pockets. Remove tax exempt from PACs and let the rich pay their fair share vs donating to PACS that then promote politicians and wedge topics that promote the system/spending that ends up right back in their pockets. the left talks of removing tax exempt from churches and doesn't want to cut cost. that would raise revenue. Many hear corporate, and they automatically go to the fortune 500. but 95% of corporations are small. like the coffee shop and mechanic on the corner. The global ones can avoid those cost by offshoring and moving HQ to places like Ireland and Panama. the mom and pop (majority), not so much. probably collect more revenue if the largest jump in our progressive tax quintiles was not right at the median household income level. Why does federal receipts jump from 12% to 22% right at median household income level? and was it always like this? https://www.irs.gov/filing/federal-income-tax-rates-and-brackets Tax rate on taxable income from minimum income up to the top. 10% $0$11,000 12% $11,001$44,725 22% $44,726$95,375 24% $95,376$182,100 32% $182,101$231,250 35% $231,251$578,125 37% $578,126And up The median household income is $74,580. The rich pay the majority of federal receipts. the middle gets squeezed. The poor, homeless, fixed income are just trying to survive with the dollar being worth less every day. Removing the cap on the debt back in 2023 was a horrible Idea. Oh my bad dude. Here I am preaching to the choir and we are already on the same page more than we are not. I didn't read this until just now (tbh when I first saw it, it looked like a copy/paste from a bot? Or at least that's the excuse I'm rolling with lol). Specifically in response to your corporate vs fortune 500 comparison, I initially included a bit about applying a progressive tax bracket to corporate taxes since a flat corporate tax rate hurts the smaller corporations' competitiveness disproportionately more than it does larger ones but dropped it for brevity. Busting up the big trusts and conglomerates becomes easier when there's a tax incentive for staying below the mega-threshold that can start to have negative effects on economies. The middle class absolutely does not need to be carrying any more of the burden than they already do. A thriving middle class is the hallmark for economic growth, and that can be achieved by both relieving pressure on the current middle class AND raising up others into the middle class. Edited March 7 by Capco 2
Tiberius Posted July 16 Posted July 16 $45 million a month? Wow, the plutocrats are uniting. Doesn't this guy love Putin, too?
Doc Posted October 4 Posted October 4 2 hours ago, B-Man said: A real administration would have ensured that this strike never happened during this devastating storm.
Starr-Bills Posted October 4 Posted October 4 2 minutes ago, Doc said: A real administration would have ensured that this strike never happened during this devastating storm. You mean like communism where the government controls the means of production?
Doc Posted October 4 Posted October 4 Just now, Starr-Bills said: You mean like communism where the government controls the means of production? Nope. 1
Recommended Posts