- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Mnuchin: The upcoming Trump tax will propose decreasing Corporate Tax to 15%
Posted on 4/26/17 at 9:16 am to Tigerdev
Posted on 4/26/17 at 9:16 am to Tigerdev
Tax receipts as a percentage of GDP is something you should look at. Go to the St. Louis Fed site (FRED). Take a look at the historic percentages and educate yourself to the tax policies in place during the highs and lows (by the way 2010 was the lowest it has been since 1941).
1
Posted on 4/26/17 at 9:22 am to BBONDS25
Please walk me through your treatise on trickle down economics and cite the examples you want considered. Never heard it before I assure you. 
Posted on 4/26/17 at 9:28 am to Tigerdev
quote:Hauser's law.
Please walk me through your treatise on trickle down economics and cite the examples you want considered. Never heard it before I assure you.
OTOH, perhaps you can address this post.
quote:
So hypothetically, a publicly traded company with pretax earnings of $1B/yr currently pays $390,000,000.00 of that $1B in tax. Under Trump's proposal, the payment would be reduced by $240M.
Where does that $240,000,000.00 go?
What are the tax ramifications?
The company's P/E would increase dramatically.
An increased P/E drives stock prices.
What are the tax ramifications?
There is an estimated $1T in US corporate cash locked overseas.
What are the tax ramifications of repatriation?
15% Corporate tax in the US system will be attractive to foreign business and for US business growth.
What are the tax ramifications?
Posted on 4/26/17 at 9:29 am to Tigerdev
I did not mention trickle down economics once. I simply pointed you to statistics. Then asked you to consider what they meant. Aren't you a math guy? I don't understand the point of battling arguments I never made.
Of course you don't know the difference between public and private unions...asking you to do anything other than regurgitate trite talking points was a lofty goal of mine. Forgive me.
Of course you don't know the difference between public and private unions...asking you to do anything other than regurgitate trite talking points was a lofty goal of mine. Forgive me.
Posted on 4/26/17 at 9:31 am to Revelator
quote:
It's good in theory, but the increase in new or expanded businesses because of this tax cut won't create enough new tax revenue to offset the loss taxes, meaning that either we will have to increase the debt or make cuts to make up for the losses.
I'm going to need to see the empirical papers that support the above statement.
Posted on 4/26/17 at 9:32 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
Says it will be the largest overall proposed tax cut in history
Sounds great. Wonder who's paying for it
Posted on 4/26/17 at 9:32 am to BBONDS25
You didn't point to shite. Lay out your point. Don't cop out like usual. I would prefer to pick it apart line by line.
Posted on 4/26/17 at 9:35 am to Tigerdev
My point is that the Fred has the exact receipts as a percentage of GDP year by year. It is interesting to go look at those and consider tax policy and other criteria that may contribute to the numbers.
I am not making an argument for policy one way or another. Just pointing out the facts that are available.
If you are looking for something to pick apart....start with Hauser's law.
What have you based your tax policy position upon?
I am not making an argument for policy one way or another. Just pointing out the facts that are available.
If you are looking for something to pick apart....start with Hauser's law.
What have you based your tax policy position upon?
This post was edited on 4/26/17 at 9:37 am
Posted on 4/26/17 at 9:41 am to Tigerdev
quote:
Tigerdev
Why are you so worried about revenue to the federal government? Don't you want to keep more of your labor?
Posted on 4/26/17 at 9:47 am to BBONDS25
I post here from my phone in between meetings, bursts of coding, and traveling from site to site. I generally don't take people up on requests for research projects.
Posted on 4/26/17 at 9:49 am to GumboPot
quote:
Don't you want to keep more of your labor?
Posted on 4/26/17 at 9:53 am to Tigerdev
quote:
I post here from my phone in between meetings, bursts of coding, and traveling from site to site. I generally don't take people up on requests for research projects.
Well that's a cop out if I ever heard one if you're wanting to engage in a conversation that is fact based.
Posted on 4/26/17 at 9:55 am to NC_Tigah
This corporate tax cut would mean more revenue for the company that I work for. More revenue means better raises and bonuses for employees. Trickle down economics, people.
Posted on 4/26/17 at 9:55 am to Revelator
quote:
It's good in theory, but the increase in new or expanded businesses because of this tax cut won't create enough new tax revenue to offset the loss taxes, meaning that either we will have to increase the debt or make cuts to make up for the losses.
Using logic for the basis of an argument--interesting approach.
Why are corporations getting the break first? Last I checked, they're still shipping jobs overseas, stock market is at record highs (evidence that profits are rising), we still give companies corporate welfare handouts, and the middle class is still getting slammed. You have to close holes, set new regulations etc. before we start giving corporate tax cuts. And what about the people?
Posted on 4/26/17 at 9:56 am to Tigerdev
and you told me "don't cop out like usual"? I wouldn't want to get into a debate about bursts of coding with you...probably good you "copped out" of this debate. Stick to the trite talking points. Those are your forte.
Posted on 4/26/17 at 9:57 am to jrodLSUke
Uuuummmm or more revenue for capital expenditures and things that actually grow the business. More revenue doesn't equate to wealth being spread.
Posted on 4/26/17 at 9:57 am to BBONDS25
quote:Multiple non-partisan research organizations have concluded that reducing the corporate tax rate (and personal tax rates to the degree that Trump suggests) would result in "non-negligible" revenue loss.
What have you based your tax policy position upon?
Since we don't seem to be linking any actual data in this thread I assume you will take my word for it.
Posted on 4/26/17 at 9:57 am to InTheDetails
The vast majority of corporations are not huge multinationals.
Posted on 4/26/17 at 9:58 am to BBONDS25
You want me to research YOUR POINT for you. You aren't saying anything other than "look it up".
frick yourself.
frick yourself.
Page 3 of 6
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News