France wants to slap the rich with 75% super tax

My point is that corporations don't have to move. The can have operations here in the US and keep profits overseas.

Of course, big business is seeking the lowest tax burden...who isn't? When you pay your taxes, do you file without any credits or deductions? If not, you're just not smart. Everyone always seeks the best deal.

But when businesses are forced to lay people off because of the tax burden, then they will be called evil for that. It's a no-win situation. Obama needs to remember that 25% of something is better than 35% of nothing.

 

The fact is the tax burden on U.S. corporations is the lowest it's ever been in half a century.

Lower than it was under Reagan. Lower than it was under Clinton and Dubya.
But suddenly Obama is cutting their nuts off??
No, there's something else going on IMO.

 

How is this not a problem for you? Would you allow any other anything to take something from you, to the tune of billions of dollars, and then NOT INVEST that same money into the whole structure that allows them to make that much money?

No ONE in america is asking them to GIVE FREE MONEY AWAY.
What america IS asking for is, as the country that gave you YOUR START and made you so wealthy, can you please reciprocate in an EQUAL manner?

It's not like if they have to pay higher tax rates or taxes to begin with that that wouldn't benefit them.
If they would pay their share and STOP making the middle class and poor shoulder the burden...GUESS who would have even MORE money to buy MORE of their crappy ass products and services?
The same middle class and poor who are struggling under an unfair tax burden.

That's like the biggest DUH ever.

 

Careful you're making too much sense. I honestly don't get this struggling corporation image they keep laying out. Aren't their businesses based on consumership? Who consumes more than we do? Isn't it good business for them to pay more taxes so that we can give that money plus more right back to them?

 

What do you think of my previous post before the one you just responded too? Still avoiding huh? From a market perspective there is no more favorable place than America, so how does your more favorable place concept apply?? Economic concepts are only relevant when you apply them to a circumstance. The theory of a more favorable place assumes that there is one, but in this circumstance there is not. You can't move to a more favorable market, so the more favorable place argument does not make sense. America can block any company from her marketplace if the company in question refuses to pay a higher tax. Regardless of the rate of taxes the cost of labor in other countries is still going to be lower, is it not?? Taxes and Labor are two different cost drivers. Still dodging my question?? Do you not believe that this country can actually cut ties with any company that it pleases too. Next question= Have you not heard of import quotas?? Why would you major in economics if cost savings was your only goal?? Anybody with common sense knows that someone else would rather pay less for the same thing, why spend 50,000-150,000 for someone to tell you that?? Has it not crossed your mind that I am not making a one dimensional point??

 

And Beasty as Keeper of the Treasury

 

lol

 

What I'm saying is that companies locate in markets that give them tax breaks. For instance, Austin Texas offered Apple a $7.4 million tax break to build a new facility in their county and offer jobs "economically disadvantaged" people. By Apple locating an office there 3600 jobs are expected to be filled over the next 10 years at an average salary of $54,000-$73,000. That is a huge deal for that area. So city and state governments have been smart enough to see the benefit, but Obama instead wants to offer no breaks to corporations. They're not evil...they create jobs!

http://www.statesman.com/news/business/travis-county-considers-terms-for-apple-to-receive/nRmhx/

To answer your other question, companies can locate wherever they choose. Even if its located here, they can still keep a percentage of their profits overseas if they are a multi-national corporation.

 

Businesses must run a business. So every business owner must seek the best tax rate possible. I ran a small business with 12 employees. Once you pay state taxes, federal corporate tax, payroll taxes, salaries, bills...you have next to nothing at the end. Instead of giving companies a break so they can hire more people, they tax them to the point where they're forced to layoff employees or close down. Some state and local governments have been great about offering tax breaks to entice businesses to hire people in their area. Thank God for them because we're certainly not going to get that from the government. If Microsoft or WalMart have 100,000 employees and make products we use everyday, I would say they're doing their "fair share".

 

Yeah, yeah.
You know what?
Your employees are getting taxed as well. At heavy rates. And that means that sometimes they have to choose between putting food on the table or paying rent. Both of those are absolute necessities.

And ftr, when MOST people talk about business, they are talking about CORPORATIONS. You know, the huge companies that only choose shitty wages and other countries so they make MORE money? And they aren't hiring. So what now?

There is NO WAY in hell that exxon mobile is having to make a decision between keeping employees or going out of business. They are only trying to get yet MORE tax breaks from the government so that they can pay their CEOs million dollar bonuses plus some.

 

So let me get this straight, companies didn't exist during the 20th century when the tax rate was well above what it is now? Because the we're taxed too much to survive theory holds no water my friend.

 

Guess I did have it all figured out in 7th grade. I knew it was this simple, teachers were just trying to make things complicated by teaching useless concepts like algebra, shame on them. Lets just lower the tax rate everytime the economy slows down, fortunatley for us, there are numbers smaller than zero.

 

My point is that we have 23 million people unemployed and the corporations can't provide those jobs because of the tax rates. If Obama lowered personal income taxes, people could afford to go out and start spending. And if he lowered corporate taxes, it would give them more flexibility to hire more people. But instead he treats them like they're the "big bad wolf".

 

What the hell are you talking about?
How are they able sustain record profits year after year if people aren't spending.
You'd have a point if we didn't see people camping out to get Iphones or GM reporting the best fiscal year in decades.
So corporations can provide jobs if they wanted but instead they act in their own interest which I wouldn't say is a bad thing. Its really on Americans to stop buying their foreign made shit and show how we feel with dollars not words.

 

I know you're being sarcastic, but it really is that simple. In a down economy, the only thing you can do is lower rates. The Federal Reserve has done all it can do to help. They lowered interest rates to near zero and will continue to hold them there until 2015. They are also buying $40 billion worth of mortgage backed securities each month. But as you can see it is not making an impact on the economy. The President needs to lower rates on income taxes and corporate taxes to turn the economy around. But he is unwilling to do that because that would cut into his spending money. Every American has lost their spending money, but Barack wants to keep his!!

 

They are able to sustain record profits because of the points I mentioned. I'll use Apple as the example since it's the one you used. They produce almost everything in China which gives them lower wages. They also setup facilities with city governments who will give them tax breaks since the federal government won't do it. Most recently, Austin offered them an $8 million tax break to locate there. But guess what? That will bring 3600 jobs averaging $53,000-$74,000 annually to the area. Imagine what they could if the government treated them like a friend instead of an enemy.

http://www.statesman.com/news/news/local/austin-council-oks-86m-in-incentives-for-new-apple/nRmQJ/

Right now Apple has about $64 billion cash on hand that is sitting overseas, largely from its overseas sales of iPhones and iPads.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...-the-tax-code/2012/03/19/gIQAEMkDNS_blog.html

PLEASE VIEW THESE LINKS

 

JAMES WILSON, What I am hearing from you is that if companies have engineers in China working for 5 dollars an hour, once we give those companies a tax break, they will begin hiring engineers in America for 40 dollars an hour, instead of hiring more engineers in China for 5 dollars an hour. rayer:

 

lol

 

Haha...

Good one beasty. But isn't that they what do already? You know greedy mofo isnt going to give up 35 dollars in profit if they can keep it instead.

They already get tax breaks.

And now we are back on the job creators bullshit.

 

This. This is the crippling flaw of trickle down economics. Why people still believe in that nonsense despite the fact that it is never going to work to anyone's advantage is beyond me. Companies don't exist to create jobs, companies exist to create money. If they can only one of the two, they will choose money every single time.