U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 10-17-2017, 11:00 AM
 
Location: Paranoid State
13,047 posts, read 10,437,354 times
Reputation: 15683

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by loves2read View Post
The money coming back to the companies as tax relief can be used in any manner the company so desires
Which is as it should be, of course. Only the company management knows its own economic situation and how to allocate capital. The alternative is a Kafkaesque nightmare of governments attempting to dictate resource allocation. Government employees are notoriously bad at understanding what makes for a good private sector investment. Just google Solyndra or Fiskar Automotive.

Quote:
Originally Posted by loves2read View Post
There is NOTHING guaranteed about raising wages or even contributing more to lower cost of benefits like health care costs to workers or additional pension contributions
There is so much wrong with that statement I'm not even sure where to begin.

The primary purpose of corporate tax relief is to spur growth, not to increase wages, pay for more health care, or to fund pensions. The entire premise is wrong.

Increases in the price of health care and concomitant increases in the price of health care insurance have soaked up much of the increases in total employee compensation over the past 20 years. Employees who don't see their wages increase as much as they want frequently misunderstand the portion of their increased total compensation that goes to pay for employer-sponsored health care insurance premiums.

Compensation goes up because of competition for employees (which demands it) coupled with increases in productivity (which enables it). We are in a productivity slump - employee productivity just isn't increasing the way we've been used to, which explains why compensation has not increased as much as desired.

But at the end of the day, all it takes is for a few companies to increase compensation, and for employees to vote with their feet. For example, in Silicon Valley and in San Francisco, it is hand-to-hand combat to hire skilled employees. Anyone can just drive into the wrong parking lot, go into the building and get hired.

Quote:
Originally Posted by loves2read View Post
If someone gets a tax refund of $X there is nothing to say the recipient HAS to do something constructive with that refund--like pay down credit card bills or invest in a child's college fund or invest it for retirement---
There is nothing to keep that recipient from buying lottery tickets, new clothes (which go toward consumer spending), or sock it way under the mattress...
Which is as it should be, of course.

Quote:
Originally Posted by loves2read View Post
THERE ARE NO CONSTRAINTS ON HOW THOSE TAX SAVINGS WILL BE USED--
Which is as it should be, of course.

Quote:
Originally Posted by loves2read View Post
There is nothing to say companies MUST BRING MONEY BACK FROM OFFSHORE even if there is a lower rate
Which is as it should be. of course. Governments can provide incentives and throw up disincentives, but it is up to a business to have its own business plan and execute it. Currently, our country provides countless disincentives to expansion in the USA, including a punitive tax structure. The correct objective is to reduce those disincentives. We can't predict the exact behaviour of any specific business any more than we can predict the exact economic behaviour of any specific person. We can, to a certain extent, predict the aggregate behaviour of both.

 
Old 10-17-2017, 11:04 AM
 
Location: Paranoid State
13,047 posts, read 10,437,354 times
Reputation: 15683
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy View Post
When a business pays less tax they can do what they want with the savings and history has shown that they rarely reinvest it in the business or increase employee pay.
LOL! That's a good "alternative fact." ROFLMAO!
 
Old 10-17-2017, 11:08 AM
 
Location: Paranoid State
13,047 posts, read 10,437,354 times
Reputation: 15683
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ariadne22 View Post
Guess this is what they mean by "broadening the base" - sock it to the low income?
Since nearly half pay have not federal income tax burden, yet, broadening the base means including some of them so they pay their fair share.
 
Old 10-17-2017, 11:12 AM
 
29,779 posts, read 34,863,854 times
Reputation: 11705
Elections have consequences. The eight years of wanting to use tax policy reform to redistribute wealth is over and supporters of candidates past and present embracing that either lost or are not represented in sufficient numbers at the national level.

We need to realize that any tax reform done in 2017/18 will reflect goals more consistent with corporate tax relief and relief for the wealthy of previous redistribution efforts. Depending on how you define the middle class you will see some relief there. Remember Gary Cohn talked about a family of four making 100K a year. Not middle class to some but certainly to others. In another thread I posted HUD data of the states where low income was defined as 68k a year for a family of four. That would make 100K about right in some areas within those states.

Elections have consequences and if people don't vote or candidates don't campaign hard enough is it the fault of the victors that they won?

Do I agree with everything I might post? No! But I realize it is the current mindset by those in power.
 
Old 10-17-2017, 12:30 PM
 
29,779 posts, read 34,863,854 times
Reputation: 11705
White House fears Senate will sink tax cuts - POLITICO

Quote:
Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) is so skeptical that the Senate can enact the GOP's tax framework that he’s begun pitching his own tax plans to colleagues. It would shift the burden of corporate taxes onto shareholders and allow individuals to opt out of the existing tax code and into a system without the confusing array of tax preferences and deductions that people can now choose.
It’s radically different from what congressional leaders and the president proposed. But Johnson said in an interview that leadership’s plan “is going to be very difficult to pass. We’ve already seen with the outline now, with the principles given, that’s going to be a challenge.”
 
Old 10-17-2017, 02:02 PM
 
Location: Manhattan
21,478 posts, read 28,357,225 times
Reputation: 9755
Quote:
Originally Posted by SportyandMisty View Post
Lower income people don't pay any federal income tax in the first place. How do you give even more relief to someone who is not contributing in the first place?

Easy, you give them a refundable tax credit.
 
Old 10-17-2017, 04:02 PM
 
30,087 posts, read 47,327,614 times
Reputation: 16027
Quote:
Originally Posted by SportyandMisty View Post
LOL! That's a good "alternative fact." ROFLMAO!
If you are claiming that is a lie--then provide the proof from an UNBIASED, reputable source that businesses do use the money that would have been spent on taxes after tax relief on items building new plants or staffing new offices, putting money into research and hiring people to do that research, like increasing workers' benefits and salaries to attract a better workforce (because a happy workforce won't be siphoned off to competitors), enlarging their business model vs buying a competitor to gain market share (which usually results in reducing work force, closing/consolidating outlets, and grabbing someone's already existing customers vs creating NEW ones)...putting money into physical items that are bought (hopefully) from American companies vs buying back shares and increasing dividends which helps stock owners--not employees...

Trump and his minions are touting this tax bill as the answer to lower wages--not just some relief to workers on THEIR taxes--but a means to gin up the economy...
Surely all those billions stashed overseas that are being offered a lower rate for repatriation are supposed to be used to "grow" businesses and the country--not just pay off Wall Street investors with a plumped up "engineered" ROI...and increased share price...
 
Old 10-17-2017, 04:10 PM
 
30,087 posts, read 47,327,614 times
Reputation: 16027
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kefir King View Post
Easy, you give them a refundable tax credit.
And that is the problem the GOP has--

Some GOP members of Congress have a real problem with that and using the fact that people were filing false returns to get tax credits they were not entitled to--imagine that--tax fraud...like it never happened with millionaires or even members of Congress...
They see this as a government handout (welfare) and imagine that the only people taking advantage of it are inner city minorities---whereas there are people all over the country in every race/ethnic group who took advantage of it...since it was based on income levels. If there were larger percentages of minorities, that is due to the fact that there are more minorities in lower income groups vs in higher income levels which didn't qualify for the EITC...

It is about the math--not the race--

And there was always an uptick in consumer spending when that money gets into people's hands...
Of course a certain percentage of those returns were confiscated for things like child support payments that were in arrears, or past income tax penalties, or other traceable garnishments on that person's earnings...
 
Old 10-17-2017, 04:22 PM
 
Location: Wisconsin
21,538 posts, read 44,002,416 times
Reputation: 15140
The EITC was not opposed by the GOP because it replaces a higher wage and benefits - thus SOCIALIZING corporate costs. The GOP is ALL ABOUT using OTHER PEOPLE'S MONEY (read "middle-class taxpayer") - at EVERY opportunity. That's why "deficits" and "blowing up the debt" don't matter to many of them (think Dick Cheney). Similarly, many corporations provide no or inadequate benefits, relying on the taxpayer to fund Medicaid. There is a reason record numbers are on Medicaid and SNAP - and it is not the fault of the recipient. Corporations - with their off-shoring and low wages and minimal benefits - have abdicated their responsibilities to their communities and this country.

So-called "fair share tax" for the poor espoused by S&M is pure crap. There is no fair share of taxes for the artificially lower wage far too many are paid these days.

Granted, people should use their talents and intelligence to improve their lot in life. Back in the '70's, when I was young and working, I always knew we wouldn't get ahead on a wage - since neither husband or I were highly-paid professionals - so, at that time, we began investing in real estate. Early days of marriage, lived in a two-family, rent from which paid the mortgage. We saved and bought a number of rental properties, values were skyrocketing, so we refinanced and bought more. That foundation has provided for my life going forward. In those years, my wage was in the $15k range, hubby's close to $40k - NOT MUCH DIFFERENT THAN TODAY for many families.

So, how, exactly, with 70's wages but today's costs are people to do what we did?

And, then, not everyone is like us. Either lacking the smarts or the energy.

There are too many variables to say the poor should "pay their fair share." To me, that is ridiculous on its face.

Last edited by Ariadne22; 10-17-2017 at 05:00 PM..
 
Old 10-18-2017, 09:22 AM
 
Location: Paranoid State
13,047 posts, read 10,437,354 times
Reputation: 15683
As this thread is about the effect of legislation that does not exist on retirees, perhaps the better place for anti-Republican rants is in the POC forum.

Look, we get it -- several of you really, really hate Republicans, and essentially every post exudes your hatred. If Republicans came out with a plan to save lost puppies, you'd rant that they are anti-cat. Several of you undoubtedly stand with CBS Vice-President Hayley Geftman-Gold when she made her infamous comments “not even sympathetic” to victims of the Las Vegas massacre because “country music fans often are gun-toting Republicans," referring to Republicans as "Repugs."
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.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top