NO
But a wee bit of tolerance would help reduce your blood pressure considerably.
BTW where you at SPCA during the 1960's
L
But a wee bit of tolerance would help reduce your blood pressure considerably.
BTW where you at SPCA during the 1960's
L
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Show posts MenuQuote from: heganboy on August 10, 2011, 07:20:15 AM
lets do this point by point:
Point 1.
my opinion is that tax policy in the US is asinine, personal and corporate taxes both. In particular the taxes on the highest earners i.e. zero personal tax. How can you justify a hedge fund manager taking home $30M but paying zero tax on that income? How can you justify an american company bringing in $19 Billion dollars in profit yet paying no tax in the US (Exxon, in fact received a $150Million dollar tax rebate see rest of list below) . 57% of companies in the US have gone without paying tax for a year in the last 8 tax years. Tax on fuel further screws up the economy, and the corporation taxes here in the US are boosting foreign economies not the US domestic economy. As for standard and poors, I have read the report, and I have been reading reports from them every day for 10 years, I have kept some of their better ones, Lehman triple A ratings, AIG triple A ratings, US mortgage backed securities, CDOs. McGraw-Hill is a publishing company, some fiction, some non fiction.
Credit rating is based on the likelihood of a default on debt. The debt ceiling brinkmanship that played out over the last few weeks showed that there was a strong likelihood that American politicians of all backgrounds would allow the country to default on its loans.
Your opinion is the spending is the issue, no matter how clearly you state it, its still an opinion. You have however compared the US economy to a household in the past, so allow me to have a different opinion. Spending is certainly a problem, (how would stopping two wars/ military campaigns impact that spending), however it is over shadowed by the lack of taxation that are applied to certain sections of business and certain types of income. If it were as simple as you seem to see it- why doesn't everyone move to Delaware?
The public perception of this issue in the US is influenced by politicians, and that means soundbites and cherry picking of issues that they know will resonate. It doesn't suit a politician who wants to get elected to say "our tax code is a steaming pile of shite so we'll have to rewrite it" or "the spending commitments we have agreed to in order to get all these crappy bills passed that we scare mongered folks into supporting are complete bullshit and we basically bought votes in both houses by sticking this crap in there, but I got re-elected last time so who cares?" However look at the press and support you receive when you say "we're spending too much when I'm in power I'll spend less"
I am very happy to hear that you agree with cutting spending, but if you don't have a view on what taxation policy should be to pay for the spending that you do happen to agree with. Or maybe if you can cite one example of cutting government spending to stimulate an economy, or maybe cite a theory as to how this time its going to be different (remember no promising change..) then I'll be more than happy to hear your thoughts on the matter.
Point number 2.
Liberalism is not democratic US politics, nor is it GOP. I may be a liberal but I fail to see why gay marriage being legalized in New York has anything to do with tax policy. I would also argue strongly that on this issue that I'm not the one with his head buried in the sand (or over simplifying). Also raising taxes, as we have all seen over the last few weeks, has very little to do with the President, that would be a congressional issue, but as previously don't let the facts or logic get in the way of your point. or alternatively throw in yet another complete irrelevance into the discussion to "prove your point". For the record my line of work is at least 95% republican, and where I live although liberal in most senses of the word also votes consistently republican. And without trying to cast aspersions on your detective skills, and things being lost on you (the irony) who else from New York (or Chicago assuming you now allow that the President of the USA wasn't born in Kenya) is advocating tax increases, and who from outside of those areas (other than your good self) is advocating tax reductions?
Point 3.
you asked me to explain why it didn't make sense to me, but now apparently its about a sense of humor? And seeking truth in poetry? I do pay tax, I have a nice little accountant who works out exactly what I owe, and then I write 3 checks, one to NJ, one to NY and one to the IRS. All of them will send you back a check for the difference if you pay more than you owe just for future reference.
Now maybe you answer the questions
1. What do you think that tax levels should be in the US?
2. And what do you think people should pay taxes on?
3. What do you think corporations and businesses should pay taxes on?
While you're at it, can tell me what cause this is you're referring to and why I'm full of shite? ( because the dumb answer will get a reply asking you to write a check for less than you owe( assuming you actually pay tax)and then take your case to the supreme court- let me know how you get on with that...)
Or maybe you can come back with something other than a little sound bite without logic, reasoning or any basic economic common sense. Accuse me of being something or other, sympathizing with someone or other (and their ilk), disparaging remark about the president or another member of the democratic party who you seem to assume I have some allegiance to. Diversionary tactics wont be entertained either.
And food for thought, as you seem annoyed at being in the top 50% of tax payers and seem very pissed at having to subsidize that 50% that earn less than $47,000 per family per year. Spare a thought for the poor buggers that earn more than $380,00 per family per year who pay more tax than everyone who earns less than $160,000 combined even with this tax system. Its a cruel world after all...
List of non tax paying US companies:
1) Exxon Mobil made $19 billion in profits in 2009. Exxon not only paid no federal income taxes, it actually received a $156 million rebate from the IRS, according to its SEC filings.
2) Bank of America received a $1.9 billion tax refund from the IRS last year, although it made $4.4 billion in profits and received a bailout from the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department of nearly $1 trillion.
3) Over the past five years, while General Electric made $26 billion in profits in the United States, it received a $4.1 billion refund from the IRS.
4) Chevron received a $19 million refund from the IRS last year after it made $10 billion in profits in 2009.
5) Boeing, which received a $30 billion contract from the Pentagon to build 179 airborne tankers, got a $124 million refund from the IRS last year.
6) Valero Energy, the 25th largest company in America with $68 billion in sales last year received a $157 million tax refund check from the IRS and, over the past three years, it received a $134 million tax break from the oil and gas manufacturing tax deduction.
7) Goldman Sachs in 2008 only paid 1.1 percent of its income in taxes even though it earned a profit of $2.3 billion and received an almost $800 billion from the Federal Reserve and U.S. Treasury Department.
8 ) Citigroup last year made more than $4 billion in profits but paid no federal income taxes. It received a $2.5 trillion bailout from the Federal Reserve and U.S. Treasury.
9) ConocoPhillips, the fifth largest oil company in the United States, made $16 billion in profits from 2007 through 2009, but received $451 million in tax breaks through the oil and gas manufacturing deduction.
10) Over the past five years, Carnival Cruise Lines made more than $11 billion in profits, but its federal income tax rate during those years was just 1.1 percent.