- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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: RE: corporate tax cuts
Posted on 11/21/17 at 2:44 pm to RogerTheShrubber
Posted on 11/21/17 at 2:44 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
Yep, and look where we are with entitlements
OK then we should not give tax incentives. You do know that the biggest beneficiaries of entitlements in this country are.........wait for it..........corporations.....publicly traded corporations. Think insurance companies. Think hospitals via medicare and even medicaid transfers. Think agricultural subsidies.
Worried about some black woman in the projects taking advantage of SNAP or welfare? She's nothing compared to the "subsidies" we pay to agricultural concerns alone. Compared to them, the welfare queens in da hood are frickin' bargain
This post was edited on 11/21/17 at 2:45 pm
1
Posted on 11/21/17 at 2:44 pm to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
quote:
"no you can't do what's best for you here because it would hurt others"
That does not extend to forcing a corporation or an individual to spend their earnings in any matter that does not suit or benefit them.
I don't want government dictating to me.
Bet you loved the ACA mandate.
Posted on 11/21/17 at 2:45 pm to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
quote:
nd we have formed a GOVERNMENT which is strictly designed to make sure that they can sometimes tell people "no you can't do what's best for you here because it would hurt others"
No, we formed a government to protect us from outside threats. We fund this government via the private citizens earnings, and tax them, to give to the government to use that money the way we, the taxpayers, see fit. However, Government no longer works for the interest of the people, but for their own self interests. Which leads bureaucrats to say
quote:
"no you can't do what's best for you here because it would hurt others"
and justify more of our tax dollars to implement something to fix a problem that was created by government.
Posted on 11/21/17 at 2:45 pm to KiwiHead
quote:
Worried about some black woman in the projects taking advantage of SNAP or welfare? She's nothing compared to the "subsidies" we pay to agricultural concerns alone. Compared to them, the welfare queens in da hood are frickin' bargain
You incentivize that which you want more of, no?
Posted on 11/21/17 at 2:50 pm to BugAC
quote:
Is it possible, that a companies expenditures might influence it's operating costs?
Did you read this after typing it? You literally just said "is it possible, that buying a hamburger might influence how much money I spent today?" quote:
Why do you insist on maintaining stupid? Cut taxes and cut deductions.
Ok. Cut the tax rate and get rid of deduction and you have status quo. How does that help anything?
quote:
Except in every business model that has at least 1 employee. Do you think it's poor people that start businesses? Do you think businesses just start with x number of employees and never grow?
No. Company growth happens which necessitates an increase in employees. The growth happens first and employee growth trails. The rate a company grows has very little to do with its tax rate.
quote:
You have many problems, but your main problem here is you dont' understand economics, the free market, or business at all. You are under some delusion that every corporation is the size of Boeing or Wal-Mart.
LOL. That's where you are wrong. I am the owner of a quite successful LLC myself. I somehow survive due to hard/smart work and haven't let the heavy weight of massive taxes smush me yet.
Posted on 11/21/17 at 2:52 pm to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
Legislating behavior, morality, or business practice through thru the tax code is anathema to way a country should be governed. Get out of peoples life! As an owner of a small business that is brutalized by the tax code, esp the pass thru tax, I don't have to be told how to treat and retain quality employees. 
Posted on 11/21/17 at 2:52 pm to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
quote:
"no you can't do what's best for you here because it would hurt others
So, a corporation maximizing it's profits actually causes harm to whom exactly?
Posted on 11/21/17 at 2:53 pm to BlackHelicopterPilot
quote:
But, the winning company generally has the most employees.
Walmart has more than Sears.
Apple has more than Palm
But did Apple win because they increased their workforce or is it cause they did a better job with the workers they had which caused growth which then caused the increase in workforce. Tail doesn't wag the dog.
Posted on 11/21/17 at 2:55 pm to Haughton99
quote:
But did Apple win because they increased their workforce or is it cause they did a better job with the workers they had which caused growth which then caused the increase in workforce.
Apple won because they convinced fools to pay outrageous prices for their products. Apple has an enormous revenue stream with a relatively small market share.
Posted on 11/21/17 at 2:56 pm to Haughton99
quote:
But did Apple win because they increased their workforce
Of course not. But, when Apple was struggling (and, there certainly was a time) they were not profitable (as profitable?). The fact is that when corporations make profits, they do SOMETHING:
Invest in growth, pay out dividends, buy back stock, buy new equipment, whatever.
But, placing money in banks is the LEAST valuable thing they can do and even THAT is good for the economy.
Posted on 11/21/17 at 2:59 pm to BugAC
quote:
I'm curious as to Haughton's expert response to this.
I have a small business. I pay bonuses based on my year. The better my year the higher the bonuses.
If business is good, and I see there are opportunities then I hire more people. Some I hire are to grow a certain segment of my business, others I hire to add to my work force.
Often I get skilled employees who transfer from other companies because I offer them a better deal. This happens more often when business is good.
If someone comes after my people, I listen to what they have to say. If it's all about money I may not make it worth their while to stay. It depends, it's my call.
But to sit there and act if it's better for the government to take more of my money and not give me an opportunity to use it to grow the business, hire people, buy more trucks, hire more staff, and grow the business is someone who doesn't know how things really work.
They feel better if the government gets more money, hires more bureaucrats, greases the right palms, and flushes the money down a hole somewhere to please their friends.
Posted on 11/21/17 at 3:02 pm to Haughton99
quote:
But did Apple win because they increased their workforce or is it cause they did a better job with the workers they had which caused growth which then caused the increase in workforce. Tail doesn't wag the dog
They increased their workforce because they saw opportunities to make more profits. They didn't increase their workforce thinking they'd make less profits.
Posted on 11/21/17 at 3:03 pm to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
Are you the Greek Minister of Commerce?
What have companies said they would do with the tax savings? Is there some universal catalog of what companies would do? Some would reinvest, some would share profits, some would pay down debt, ALL OF WHICH WOULD BE GOOD FOR THE US ECONOMY!!!!!
That may not result in immediate wage increases, but it would result in more long-term stable employment and wage growth than NOT fixing the corporate tax system.
quote:
The reason for the question is simple. I , and most Americans, don't believe most of the tax saving would go towards what companies say it would.
What have companies said they would do with the tax savings? Is there some universal catalog of what companies would do? Some would reinvest, some would share profits, some would pay down debt, ALL OF WHICH WOULD BE GOOD FOR THE US ECONOMY!!!!!
That may not result in immediate wage increases, but it would result in more long-term stable employment and wage growth than NOT fixing the corporate tax system.
Posted on 11/21/17 at 3:08 pm to doubleb
quote:
You can't increase net profit for the year by lowering taxes.
You pay your taxes on the profits you make.
Net profit is probably the wrong term. EBITDA is more correct but not as commonly used.
EBITDA is $10 and you're taxed $3. You put $7 net profit in your pocket.
EBITDA is $10 and you're taxed $2. Net profit is $8.
quote:
The corporate tax reforms are to make US corporations competitive. In the worldwide economy they can't compete as well with companies that pay less taxes.
US Corporations are extremely competitive in the world and anyone who says otherwise are parroting what someone told them or are seriously misinformed.
quote:
lso higher taxes have pushed companies to leave the US to go elsewhere. Why would you want to taxes to push corporations to leave?
People confuse production leaving with actual companies leaving. How many of the top 100 companies in the world are headquartered in the US? I'm pretty sure we have an extremely larger percentage of them. Of the top 20 last year by revenue 10 are US based.
quote:
Let corporations keep more money. It's not the government's money. Corporations and businesses that keep more money can afford to grow their work force in order to expand their businesses. They can do that by hiring more people by training more workers or by increasing wages and wage packages.
I know this triggers your hard righters but the reason we still have so many of the biggest companies in the world is because of the infrastructure, workforce quality, and other factors paid for by their taxes.
quote:
Wages have been relatively flat. We haven't done anything but tax corporations to leave the country. Let's try relaxing taxes and let's see if wages increase faster than they did under Obama.
Not flat but not rising fast enough. This tax cut will do nothing to help that. The last major tax cut was in 2001 and notice what happened to wages after that.
This post was edited on 11/21/17 at 3:15 pm
Posted on 11/21/17 at 3:12 pm to Big12fan
quote:
Given that corporations are people, why not tax them as people are?
Ever heard of an S Corp? Some of y'all are clueless when it comes to retained earnings and taxation
Posted on 11/21/17 at 3:16 pm to Haughton99
quote:
EBITDA is $10 and you're taxed $3. You put $7 net profit in your pocket
EBITDA is 10 bucks, you pay 3 bucks in taxes and you don't put 7 bucks in your pocket.
Not if you buy another truck, outfit another service tech, hire another salesman with a company car, or pay your creditors.
That's what you're missing. Most business owners leave much if not most of their earnings in the business. They won't have to go borrow money to their bills or make that payroll, or hire that extra crew. They might be able to replace that broke down copier, truck or drilling machine.
It's way more complicated than that.
I like your graph, it demonstrates what happens when taxes are lowered, what happens after recessions, and how poorly we've been tracking during the Obama terms with high taxes, high mandated expenses, and numerous regulations.
Posted on 11/21/17 at 3:18 pm to Haughton99
quote:
Dividends and executive bonuses.
Which will both be taxed, likely at higher rates than proposed corporate rates.
Posted on 11/21/17 at 3:19 pm to OceanMan
quote:
Ever heard of an S Corp? Some of y'all are clueless when it comes to retained earnings and taxation
Retained earnings are always problematic for an S corp.
Posted on 11/21/17 at 3:29 pm to Jay Quest
quote:
Retained earnings are always problematic for an S corp.
That's kind of my point. They are paid out...and someone gets taxed
Posted on 11/21/17 at 3:32 pm to OceanMan
quote:
That's kind of my point. They are paid out...and someone gets taxed
Any income paid out to individuals is subjected to income tax but retained earnings is also subjected to a tax.
It's a consideration many don't consider before going the S corp route.
Page 5 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News