Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is exactly the results the "tax cutters" want. I hope every Trumpie is subscribing to the WaPo (Amazon owned) and buying some stuff at Amazon today......After all, Bezos may hit 60 or 70X what their King is worth as opposed to only 50+ X.
so what you are saying is you don't know the difference between a person earning money (which should absolutely be taxed) and a company that makes money?
you are clearly conflating the two. what causes you to be incapable of the distinction?
Sure. Let's pretend NY politicians don't care one whit about Amazon or any business for that matter. And let's pretend the rich aren't fleeing NY in droves. And lets pretend 25000 jobs is no loss for 25000 New York job seekers. A rounding error my arse.
You leave out the fact that MOST OF THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE THERE were part of the effort for NO.
It's sorta the opposite of what you are making it out to be. Of course Big Pols want it.....they look at it as a feather in their cap. But do you think the people who have lived there for generations want it?
Answer: NO.
NYC is at full employment (3.3% or thereabouts) - and a LOT of the eventual Amazon workers would be people who moved to the NYC for that reason.
There are already 5,000 Amazon employees - and probably a lot more when their whole system is figured in - in NYC.
You also fail to note that the 25K figure is in 15 years...maybe! So let's exaggerate....and say 2,000 jobs a year.
NOT EVEN a rounding error.
You sound like the kind of person who approves of 3 billion dollar stadium projects that the taxpayers underwrite. That's not my style. If a company wants to come and play by the rules as everyone else, so be it.
Boston, as you may know, said NO to the Olympics. Why? Because they are not Rio or Sochi. They don't want it or need it.
How about Amazon? Would Boston want it? "With tech talent at a premium, tech executives and hiring managers in Boston are heaving a sigh of relief that Amazon has chosen cities other than Boston to house its second (and third) headquarters sites."
I can only assume you don't understand success. Success is being able to write your own ticket. If NYC wanted them, that's great. If they don't, that's great too.
Not hard unless one thinks corporations are entitled people.
so what you are saying is you don't know the difference between a person earning money (which should absolutely be taxed) and a company that makes money?
you are clearly conflating the two. what causes you to be incapable of the distinction?
Well, being as I have run C and S corps since 1977 I think I know the difference. My C corp (which Amazon is) paid tax at least 90% of the years I ran it. That's in addition to the sales tax I collected (quite often 15K+ a month) and all the various taxes due to employees, etc.
Surely you understand Corporate Tax? Isn't that the one Trump lowered from 35 to 20 or so?
Are you intentionally acting as if you don't know what Corporate tax is? Let me help you with that.
Apple pays about 12 BILLION in taxes per year - corporately.
They are the largest taxpayer in the world.
Amazon paid ZERO in US Corporate Taxes. In fact, they got back money they didn't pay in (a credit).
If that were true we would be facing deflation since we just had a large decrease in corp taxes. Profits go to shareholders both directly (dividends) and indirectly (Stock buybacks). This is exactly where most of the tax decrease went.
Corporations want to get the most money they can for a product in face of whatever competition they face and the ability of their customers to pay said price.
There are long windy articles online more technical debunking that lie far far better than I can.
once again you think you are smarter than someone who has actually done the work just because you read some article about what goes into pricing by some nameless guy on the internet.
if i price a cooler motor at say $55.00, and taxes drop say 20%, that does not mean i am going to lower the price of that cooler motor accordingly. same as with if the wholesale price that the products drops 20%. the consumer is used to paying $55.00 for that motor, so if the price or taxes drop, that means i dont have to raise the price as much when it comes time to change prices on that motor. the next time around i may up the price by say $2.50 instead of the $3.50 i was planning on.
You know a republican has been drinking the fox Kool aid when they are in favor of higher taxes for working poor and think corporations should pay none.
A tax bill for business is an expense no different than the light bill, like the light bill it gets passed onto the consumer. I'm not in favor of these special deals, I'm for eliminating tax on business across the board.
Status:
"Moldy Tater Gangrene, even before Moscow Marge."
(set 2 days ago)
Location: Dallas, TX
5,790 posts, read 3,600,682 times
Reputation: 5697
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackknationalist
THIS is precisely why I am in favor of a 10% flat tax across the board for everyone...no exemptions, no loopholes. The govt. must manage within this 10%. 10% of say 20 Trillion dollar economy would still be at minimum $1 trillion in taxes, plenty of money to run the government.
A poor person losing 10% of their income is a huge hit. Even a lower middle class person losing 10% of their income is going to feel it hard, especially if they have debts that simply can't be avoided to begin with. Even a middle-middle class person would notice a 10% drop in their income. The billionaires, or even $10-100 millionaires? They wouldn't even notice if their accountant didn't tell them about it.
That said, if we're to have a flat tax, make sure the first $32,500 or so for a single person with no dependents is tax free. Up that by about 80% for a two-parent household with two kids.
Amazon essentially uses the tax code to pay for re-expansion by shifting money that would be paid to the government and use it to build out distribution centers and logistics overseas.
It's not that simple, a new $50 million warehouse is NOT an expense that can be deducted because it goes on the balance sheet as a $50M capital asset, it's a complete wash and has no tax advantage. The main sources of write offs are due to accrual gymnastics which eventually do have to get taxed. Amazon paid something like 12% federal tax average in the 4 years before this one. They are just kicking the tax bill from last year down the road
Think about that when you are paying your taxes this year.
Of course Jeff Bezos NEEDS a tax break, how could he possibly get by on the hundreds of BILLIONS he already has?!?!?! God forbid he might offer affordable healthcare to his workers... better to just let us (taxpayers) pay for them.
Trump and the Republicans are just out to lunch when it comes to the American worker.
I've yet to see an actual "fact" that shows Amazon pays no taxes. Something heard on HuffPo perhaps?
Amazon's actual tax returns are not available to the public. However, their financials show an expense of $1.19 Billion for income tax for last year.
Inconvenient facts?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
