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.
You are correct. They way to raise revenue is to get more people working which means make the US more business friendly. Revenues under Bush were pouring in because people were working. That is the argument they should be having. I think corp taxes should be cut to zero for five years then ticked up say 2% a year after until some sort of balance is met. I doubt a flat tax will fly at this point. Too many uneducated on it. I'm really surprised a VAT tax isn't being pushed hard by the left but that would not punish the evil rich enough. All they're worried about now is kicking the ball past 2012.
What could be MORE business friendly than paying NO taxes? What could be MORE business friendly then making a $15 billion profit and being able to keep ALL OF IT? What could be MORE business friendly then having the freedom to go to foreign markets and make all the money you want and NOT pay a dime on your transactions? This is ALREADY HAPPENING.
GE did ALL of this LAST YEAR.
GE CUT its workforce by 5.5% during this SAME TIME.
This GARBAGE that jobs will magically be created by our wonderful companies if we just don't tax them is a MYTH.
GE took that $15 BILLION and did not create ONE job with it. You CAN NOT force companies to create jobs with their profits or magically hope that they will "do the right thing" and create jobs.
The top 1% already pays 30%-40% of all tax revenues and 50% pay nothing. It's already unfair for them.
If the government gets their money, they are responsible for how it is distributed. So if the rich are getting richer, maybe it's how the government is distributing the tax revenues.
Politicians are the last to blame themselves and the first to blame anyone handy. Just look at how Oblame-a handles the multitude of problems he's created. We need to tax Private JET OWNERS? WTF was the first thing that went through my head when he said that.
“I think it’s only fair to ask an oil company or a corporate jet owner that has done so well,” the president stated at one point, “to give up that tax break that no other business enjoys.” But the corporate jet tax break to which Obama was referring – called “accelerated depreciation,” and a popular Democratic foil of late – was reauthorized by his own stimulus package.
Just look at how Oblame-a handles the multitude of problems he's created.
From your link:
The incentive — known as accelerated depreciation — lets companies take a larger deduction in the early years of the life of an asset such as a plane. Companies will have to place orders by the end of 2009, and those planes will need to be delivered by the end of 2010 to take advantage of the tax benefit.
In short a temporary tax incentive which was never intended to be permanent.
Cause the math doesn't work out. While austerity measures make the impossible math situation worse, some things do need to be cut such as the TSA, Homeland Security, the completely illegitimate IMF and stop trying to be an empire. Empires go to Afghanistan to die and it looks like the United States may be another one sadly.
Gee, glad JFK didn't follow your advice when he lowered taxes and the economy and revenue went up.
We all know that the higher taxes are, the less productive the wealthy will be. We also know that cutting taxes increases revenue. So if we're serious about this debt problem why not cut spending AND taxes? If we cut taxes, more economic activity will take place meaning more taxable income.
Eliminate corporate taxes (corporate shareholders already pay personal income taxes, so why should they be double taxed, not to mention the fact that most corporate taxes are simply passed onto consumers.)
Eliminate capital gains taxes (why should people be punished for taking a risk?)
Eliminate payroll taxes
Eliminate all loopholes and deductions.
Institute a flat 15% income tax for all individuals.
Because (1) it decreases revenue when you cut taxes; and (2) the wealthy hoard their wealth, they rarely invest it.
Because (1) it decreases revenue when you cut taxes; and (2) the wealthy hoard their wealth, they rarely invest it.
What more obvious example do you want of this then the south.
The wealthy plantation owners didn't invest ANY of their profits back into the communities, they invested it in buying more slaves. Why do you think there were no public schools, no infastructure, no businesses, in the south before the Civil War. Look at the large plantation houses that are still standing, all generated by profits not investments.
After reconstruction and the north left, the plantation owners went right back to what they were doing. Look at all the pictures of poor white families from the turn of the century to the 1960s. They had no opportunities since the south never raised taxes to pay for any programs.
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.
The Republicans adopted the tax philosophy of JFK
