Patriots Planet - New England Patriots Forums and Message Boards

Patriots Planet - New England Patriots Forums and Message Boards (http://www.patriotsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Politics and Religion Forum (http://www.patriotsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=14)
-   -   Why not Ron Paul? (http://www.patriotsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=60815)

Baron Samedi 06-15-2011 03:56 PM

I did not say "Relative to GDP"

I stated specifically "Corporate Tax Rates"

If you include state coporate taxes, we are #1 in the world.

Why did I not say "relative to GDP"?

Simple...GDP can be fixed. If we did not deficit spend 1.5 trillion last year, GDP would be 1.5 Trillion lower than it was.

Here's a question...whom do high corporate taxes hurt more? Small businesses, or big businesses?

High coporate taxes are a burden very large coporations can manage, but start ups and small businesses just go bankrupt under them.

That is why there are no jobs being created. No businesses are growing.

Steve-o 06-15-2011 03:56 PM

We also have one of the lowest rates of taxation of all developed nations:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...centage_of_GDP

Steve-o 06-15-2011 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baron Samedi (Post 1696488)
I did not say "Relative to GDP"

I stated specifically "Corporate Tax Rates"

If you include state coporate taxes, we are #1 in the world.

Why did I not say "relative to GDP"?

Simple...GDP can be fixed. If we did not deficit spend 1.5 trillion last year, GDP would be 1.5 Trillion lower than it was.

Here's a question...whom do high corporate taxes hurt more? Small businesses, or big businesses?

High coporate taxes are a burden very large coporations can manage, but start ups and small businesses just go bankrupt under them.

That is why there are no jobs being created. No businesses are growing.

We do not have high corporate taxes, as I have just proven.

Steve-o 06-15-2011 04:05 PM

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/03/bu...ates.html?_r=1

Quote:

The United States may soon wind up with a distinction that makes business leaders cringe — the highest corporate tax rate in the world.

Topping out at 35 percent, America’s official corporate income tax rate trails that of only Japan, at 39.5 percent, which has said it plans to lower its rate. It is nearly triple Ireland’s and 10 percentage points higher than in Denmark, Austria or China. To help companies here stay competitive, many executives say, Congress should lower it.

But by taking advantage of myriad breaks and loopholes that other countries generally do not offer, United States corporations pay only slightly more on average than their counterparts in other industrial countries. And some American corporations use aggressive strategies to pay less — often far less — than their competitors abroad and at home. A Government Accountability Office study released in 2008 found that 55 percent of United States companies paid no federal income taxes during at least one year in a seven-year period it studied.

The paradox of the United States tax code — high rates with a bounty of subsidies, shelters and special breaks — has made American multinationals “world leaders in tax avoidance,” according to Edward D. Kleinbard, a professor at the University of Southern California who was head of the Congressional joint committee on taxes. This has profound implications for businesses, the economy and the federal budget.
So, sure. By all means. Lower the corporate tax rates, if that is what it will take for you to ACTUALLY COLLECT TAXES FROM CORPORATIONS. :banghead:

johnlocke 06-15-2011 05:25 PM

Never mind.

Baron Samedi 06-15-2011 10:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve-o (Post 1696490)
We do not have high corporate taxes, as I have just proven.

Really?

http://www.taxfoundation.org/publica...how/22917.html

http://www.aei.org/outlook/101024

http://www.examiner.com/finance-exam...oving-overseas

http://alhambrainvestments.com/blog/...-country-oecd/

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner...onique-de-rugy

http://www.rikvin.com/blog/corporate...ome-tax-rates/

Measuring corporate taxes as a ratio of GDP is just economic legerdemain.

Let's say we want to lower the US's corporate tax to GDP next year.

All we have to do is spend another, say, 5 trillion dollars we don't have and "VOILA!!".....lower corporate tax to GDP.

OR...we could...say...NOT raise the debt ceiling this year, cut goverment spending to match revenue, and BOOM! An EXPLOSION in corporate tax to GDP.

All of which has nothing to do with corporations making the decision to expand in the US or elsewhere based on the tax rate.

Government loves to compare things to GDP...because then they can "improve" those numbers by spending more and more money.

That is sort of Keynesian 101. Measure everything as a ration to GDP, because you have unlimited printing money power, and you can spend like a drunken sailor to make everything look better on paper.

ASIDE FROM THAT>>

Corporations don't give a flying f**k what their tax to GDP ratio is.

They care what their US to foreign coporate tax ratio is.

Steve-o 06-15-2011 11:09 PM

No, they don't care what the **** their tax rates are, because they are not being forced to pay them, anyway.
Posted via Mobile Device

tehmackdaddy 06-16-2011 08:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve-o (Post 1696643)
No, they don't care what the **** their tax rates are, because they are not being forced to pay them, anyway.
Posted via Mobile Device

Sure they do, which is why those that can afford to shelter earnings in other countries that have lower rates. Of course, you didn't address the point Baron raised stating that small businesses don't enjoy this type of tax avoidance advantage.

Baron Samedi 06-16-2011 12:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tehmackdaddy (Post 1696712)
Sure they do, which is why those that can afford to shelter earnings in other countries that have lower rates. Of course, you didn't address the point Baron raised stating that small businesses don't enjoy this type of tax avoidance advantage.

Well, see...Steve-O is a classic socialist..

EVERY business in their mind is a mega-giant-conglomerate-too-big-to-fail-multi-billion-dollar-business.

That is why they support everything anti-business. The other 99% of businesses simply do not exist in their mind, and the effects of taxation and regulation on small business is never considered.

Baron Samedi 06-16-2011 01:13 PM

By the way, Bachman surged into second place in the primaries.

19% to Romney's 33%.

Cain is 3rd at 10%.

Steve-o 06-16-2011 01:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baron Samedi (Post 1696833)
By the way, Bachman surged into second place in the primaries.

19% to Romney's 33%.

Cain is 3rd at 10%.

Rasmussen. Again. ROFL

http://realclearpolitics.com/epolls/...tion-1452.html

Romney's numbers are only going up.

By the way, the previous Rasmussen poll had Romney at 17%, so even in your universe, he has nearly doubled his support this week.

Baron Samedi 06-16-2011 02:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve-o (Post 1696840)
Rasmussen. Again. ROFL

http://realclearpolitics.com/epolls/...tion-1452.html

Romney's numbers are only going up.

By the way, the previous Rasmussen poll had Romney at 17%, so even in your universe, he has nearly doubled his support this week.

That was because of Donal Trump in the race during the last poll.

Still..at this point in the race, polls don't mean squat. They are just points of interest.

EDIT: And the next wave of polling will tell more , incorporating the latest debate.

Baron Samedi 06-16-2011 02:26 PM

So, I was fully expecting to see something from Steve-O by Gallup.

When it didn;t come to pass I thought "Hmmm...must be something there he doesn't like."

Sure enough...

http://www.gallup.com/poll/148043/Ba...Intensity.aspx

Bascially the same numbers as Ras. ROFLROFL

Steve-o 06-16-2011 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baron Samedi (Post 1696855)
That was because of Donal Trump in the race during the last poll.

Still..at this point in the race, polls don't mean squat. They are just points of interest.

EDIT: And the next wave of polling will tell more , incorporating the latest debate.

And Romney got all the Trump people.

Dude, Romney has this thing wrapped up. Period.

Bachmann doesn't have a chance at the nomination, though it would be pretty awesome if she did.

The only thing that might be better would be if Rick Perry got it, because Obama would be running against Bush again, almost literally.

Baron Samedi 06-16-2011 03:09 PM

Not so sure about that.

Obama is basically Mega-Bush. All the things Bush did that people hate, Obama has continued or done even bigger...deficit spending, new people to bomb, Patriot Act, unemployment, you name it.
<iframe width="560" height="349" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/khXgPOLefGc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Obama is Mega-Bush.

The ONLY thing that makes Obama different is he wants to raise taxes instead of lower them.

Romney is living off of name recognition right now. Once people get to know other candidates, and Romney starts getting pressed on Romneycare, and being a waffler, he will take some massive cannonfire to his poll numbers.

If I had to lay money, which I wouldn't this early, but if I HAD to....my money would go on Bachman.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:07 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Patriots Planet is not affiliated with the NFL or with the New England Patriots. The views and opinions on this forum do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the owners and/or operators of this forum and website.