- 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: NY basically admitting that low taxes create job opportunities..
Posted on 1/16/14 at 6:44 am to germandawg
Posted on 1/16/14 at 6:44 am to germandawg
quote:
I never did any such thing
Yes you did. When you say "the GOP wants X, y and Z" you are implying the democrats don't want that. in fact only republican candidates have pushed for simplification. You are flat wrong. it has never been a liberal campaign initiative. ever.
Posted on 1/16/14 at 6:48 am to ironsides
quote:
over regulated industries
This is huge because regulations function like taxes.
Posted on 1/16/14 at 7:44 am to germandawg
quote:
This is the problem....you have to believe in fantasy worlds to buy this shite. There is no "sarlacc pit"....it is make believe. So is the vacuum where tax dollars disappear out of the economy. Yes, the business that pays the tax would use the money to do whatever they chose but when it is remitted in the form of taxes it does not vanish. The only true effect, at current and even much higher levels, is psychological....it pisses folks off (at least some folks, most people understand it is a cost of doing business just like paying for lights and water).
This is true only if you exclude government inefficiency and redistribution ... Which is to say, it's not true.
Posted on 1/16/14 at 7:49 am to Antonio Moss
quote:
This is true only if you exclude government inefficiency and redistribution
He seems to think that it all works like some kind of financial perpetual motion machine, which is impossible because of friction.
The friction here is, as you say, government inefficiently where the energy is bled off.
Posted on 1/16/14 at 7:50 am to germandawg
quote:
If lower taxes created more jobs why aren't we swimming in jobs?
Because expansion of business requires consistent liabilities. Right now, we have a very unstable future regarding federal liabilities (taxes, regs, ACA, etc.) - mostly the fault of incompetent government.
Posted on 1/16/14 at 7:52 am to TrueTiger
quote:
He seems to think that it all works like some kind of financial perpetual motion machine, which is impossible because of friction.
It's just not understanding some basic economic principles.
Posted on 1/16/14 at 9:43 am to N.O. via West-Cal
quote:Exactly what I was thinking. A business gets established and could succeed without the high taxes. Then after 10 years, they get hit with the tax bill. By that time, they've established themselves and don't want to start over so they're stuck. Eventually, the taxes kill the business.
So, NY offers the entrepreneurs a 10 year freebie to get going and will then hope the ones that succeed - most will fail - get too ingrained to want to leave once the tax bills come due. Sort of a drug pusher's logic, but it makes sense!
Posted on 1/16/14 at 9:54 am to PanhandleTigah
quote:
Exactly what I was thinking. A business gets established and could succeed without the high taxes. Then after 10 years, they get hit with the tax bill. By that time, they've established themselves and don't want to start over so they're stuck. Eventually, the taxes kill the business.
Well also don't underestimate the importance to Venture Capital and Private Equity firms that get to sell the companies with tax-free cashflow.
Posted on 1/16/14 at 11:12 am to Antonio Moss
quote:
Because expansion of business requires consistent liabilities.
Ding ding ding.
quote:
mostly the fault of incompetent government.
Ding ding ding.
It isn't a phenomenon limited to 1 side of the aisle though. The D side tends to accelerate it more so than the R side, but both sides trend towards incompetent bureaucracy.
Posted on 1/16/14 at 11:27 am to AUin02
quote:
It isn't a phenomenon limited to 1 side of the aisle though. The D side tends to accelerate it more so than the R side, but both sides trend towards incompetent bureaucracy.
You are correct, sir. That said, it's all our fault because as a population, we don't do our homework and hold these idiots accountable by voting them out of office or ensuring they are punished when they do bad things. We care more about American Idol than how our representation is voting on any given issue.
Posted on 1/17/14 at 5:31 am to C
quote:
Yes you did. When you say "the GOP wants X, y and Z" you are implying the democrats don't want that. in fact only republican candidates have pushed for simplification. You are flat wrong. it has never been a liberal campaign initiative. ever.
SO when a Republican says that she wants my vote she is implying that a democrat doesn't want it? Or does this "implying" business only apply when you want to read something into a post which is not there? I think the latter.....
Posted on 1/17/14 at 5:40 am to ironsides
quote:
Then there are our over regulated industries that make it more attractive to hire outside America than inside.... So there's that too.
Over regulated? Which ones and which regulation? I will just about guarantee you that any regulation you can name is the result of years of abuse by the industry which knew it was doing something it ought not to have been doing or it is a regulation which is over seen by a regulatory body which is so woefully under-financed that the only way to ever get in its cross-hair is to do something so woefully destructive that it can't be ignored OR to do hundreds of incredibly stupid things every day of every week that eventually by sheer numbers of minor incidents alone the regulatory agency has to see what the frick is going on.
But lets talk about this seriously. What developed nation, which has any sort of regulation on business practices, is more attractive from a business perspective than the United States? I don't think you can seriously make this argument. It certainly isn't Europe or Japan. I would think you would have to look to developing nations to find a significantly more lax regulatory environment than the US...and you want to talk about risk, go ahead on and invest billions in China. That is a brilliant fricking move....of course life experience has taught that the US Taxpayers will foot the bill for the military to secure your investment so you can discount that risk to some degree.
Posted on 1/17/14 at 5:49 am to TrueTiger
quote:
This is huge because regulations function like taxes.
Yes...they both require that we play by the same rules. Some of us understand that these rules are necessary evils. Taxes and rules (which is all a regulation is. Regulation just sounds more "business like") require some people to do things they would otherwise not do IF they decide to participate.
Stops signs are a perfect example...you see people who refuse to comply with the spirit and the letter of the regulation everyday. These people feel that the onerous requirement forced upon them is simply to much to bare. Inevitably when they are taken to task for their refusal to do what is required of them they feel put upon....like they are being singled out. They know in their hearts that they would not do anything untoward at an interesection if there were no stop sign....and so the regulation shouldn't apply to them. Industry is comprised of people and some of those people no doubt dislike stop signs,,,,,
Posted on 1/17/14 at 5:53 am to germandawg
Stop signs don't increase costs on a business and prevent someone from starting a business.
Posted on 1/17/14 at 5:56 am to Antonio Moss
quote:
This is true only if you exclude government inefficiency and redistribution
SO who is this a net job killer? I know ya'll sincerely think it is, but all any of you ever do is say it is....you are like Leo Bloom....you keep saying it, you just don't say how.....
Posted on 1/17/14 at 5:59 am to Antonio Moss
quote:
Because expansion of business requires consistent liabilities. Right now, we have a very unstable future regarding federal liabilities (taxes, regs, ACA, etc.) - mostly the fault of incompetent government.
I agree 100% that uncertaintity is killing the economy right now...and it is due to politics, not necessarily government. But what is uncertaint about taxes? Is there any credible evidence that taxes are going to increase enough to significantly impact business? If so who is proposing such a tax increase? I know you going to claim Obamacare is just such a tax but the uncertaintity is steeped in the constant bickering over the bill, not the bill itself.
Posted on 1/17/14 at 6:01 am to Antonio Moss
quote:
It's just not understanding some basic economic principles.
You are right...I don't understand why taxation at current levels and even higher is a guaranteed job killer....and the reason I don't understand it is many, many, many trained economists claim that it is not...and all I have ever read or heard from the right is that it is and since it is there is no need for a reason. If you understand then explain...you will be the first person in the history of mankind to be able to do so....
Posted on 1/17/14 at 6:38 am to germandawg
Many trained economists also cited Krugman's work that suggests production will be concentrated in countries with high wages, but your iPhone is still made in china by slaves.
Higher taxes mean lower profits. All things being equal, you would shift your business to a lower tax area to maximize profits and please shareholders no? Why are you fighting math?
Higher taxes mean lower profits. All things being equal, you would shift your business to a lower tax area to maximize profits and please shareholders no? Why are you fighting math?
Posted on 1/17/14 at 6:42 am to stuntman
quote:
How can a state that's so deeply blue and has some of the highest tax rates in America blatantly admit that low/no taxes are beneficial to an economy?
Are they arguing its beneficial to the economy or beneficial to unemployment figures?
Which is a better economy - 6% unemployment with a median wage of $50,000 a year - or 0% unemployment with a median wage of $10,000 a year? The pro-big-business anti-union right to freeload crowd would certainly argue the latter.
This post was edited on 1/17/14 at 6:43 am
Posted on 1/17/14 at 9:13 am to germandawg
quote:
SO who is this a net job killer? I know ya'll sincerely think it is, but all any of you ever do is say it is....you are like Leo Bloom....you keep saying it, you just don't say how.....
My post was pretty clear. You are only looking at one aspect of the economy - currency - without accounting for production. Redistributed and inefficiently spent currency lacks production which hurts the economy. It's a basic macroeconomic principle which has the result of slow or non-existent growth (i.e. less jobs.)
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News