Quote:
Originally Posted by oscottscotto
I fully agree with this. Still do not want to see a second "stimulus" package pushed though, especially when the first one has barely been used yet. That just makes no sense. Health Care is the last big spending I want to see for a while. On corporations, I wouldn't be opposed to eliminating tax loopholes but lowering tax rates.
|
Now just so you don't misinterperet my message, I wasn't saying that the government should stop spending. I was saying that the government should stop borrowing. I think that the government needs to increase spending/investments in many things: infrastucture, light rail and other public transportation, renewable energy, preventing forclosures, food stamps, welfare, health care reform, education. However, the govenment should find a way to pay for it all through tax increases, cutting unecessary spending, government-run enterprises or a combination of all 3.
Loopholes are a good place to start. Obama is already eliminating offshore tax safe havens, which I completely support, but there are many other loopholes that need to go as well. Here is a good story that I read a while back about coporations not paying taxes.
Many Firms Didn't Pay Taxes - washingtonpost.com
If you check this story out, or if you already have, you will see that about two thirds of all corporations in the US didn't pay any taxes, 28% of large corporations didn't pay any taxes and 68% of foreign corporations didn't pay any taxes. Me being the type that likes to stand up for the little guy, I can understand, and support, some tax breaks for small businesses. But they still should be contributing something. There is no reason at all that large corporations shouldn't be paying their fair share, especially foreign corporations. If someone from another country wants to come to the states to make money, they need to give back to the community that is enabling them to make money.
I don't see anything wrong with the 35% corporate tax rate. I am aware that it is higher than alot of other countries. I'm also aware that many people think that if you close the loopholes and don't reduce the corporate tax rate, it will kill jobs; these same people say that if you lower the taxes, corporations will have more money and the wealth will trickle down. I have a problem with this because evidence has shown that the wealth is trickling UP, not DOWN.
CEO pay: Redefining sky-high - Aug. 30, 2005
The CEO/worker pay ratio used to be around 40/1 when Reaganomics took off. For almost 30 years we have hung on to this trickle down theory and now have a CEO/worker pay ratio of over 400/1. To derive from my main point for a second, I think there should be a maximum wage for exectutives; no more than 50 times the pay of your average non-managment employee, no more than 100 times the pay of your lowest paid employee. I think this will help the poor and the middle class get some more cash in their pocket, which they will spend, helping to stimulate the economy. I also think that workers will be more productive because they know that if the company is doing well, they'll get a pay raise; therefore their interests are the same as the company's interests.
One poster made a good point that corporations don't add more jobs because they have more money; they add more jobs because they can sell more products. Therefore, I think the goverment shoud spend money, help the have-nots and the middle class (which are sadly becoming have-nots as well) get a little cash in their pockets, they'll go out and spend it, and companies will then add jobs due to greater demand for their products.
As you can see, I'm definetly not a fiscal conservative. I do, however, believe in fiscal responsiblity; the government should find a way to pay for what it's spending.
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.
