Message boards :
Politics :
Political Thread [19] - CLOSED
Message board moderation
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 . . . 39 · Next
Author | Message |
---|---|
Misfit Send message Joined: 21 Jun 01 Posts: 21804 Credit: 2,815,091 RAC: 0 |
They did NOTHING as usual! But they did get PAID for it! No work on fixing [snip] They had an outfit in your size? me@rescam.org |
Rush Send message Joined: 3 Apr 99 Posts: 3131 Credit: 302,569 RAC: 0 |
A US Company would be one that is registered in the US. No not JUST registered to do Business, but one that is Registered and Licensed and founded here. Stockholders are an unimportant entity in this discussion. The companies that see value in moving overseas, i.e. the ones that have done/do it, don't care where they are registered, licensed, and founded. If they want to leave, they do, they have, and they will. The more expensive you make it here, the faster they will leave. Once they do, U.S. tax law is of no interest to them. They don't care what you think about it. Changing registration and licensing is easy. Why, for example, do you think that ships are generally registered outside of the U.S.? Because they aren't subject to punitive U.S. regulation and tax law. All the tax laws in the world don't mean anything to them, they don't care. Actually this is sorta true, Exxon/Mobil did not "open" a new company overseas, they are still Exxon/Mobil. They just do not bring any profits back to the US because of the current tax rules. This would stop under my idea. I'll bet Exxon owns hundreds, if not a few thousand, subsidiaries worldwide. While you say it would stop, Exxon would just leave, and cease paying what you think they should pay. Keeping in mind, of course, that every single cent of tax is passed directly on to the consumer. They would not be able to say these monies were earned overseas and are therefore not taxable. Yes, they could. For obvious reasons, U.S. tax law is not sovereign worldwide and Exxon could simply refuse to pay it. Just as they do now. They don't bring the money here because they lose 35% off the top. That's idiotic. The tax rate, under my idea, would be less than the 35%, it would be the same as if the money were earned in the US. The Company is based and Headquartered in the US, it pays money on its assets in the US, ALL of its assets! Heh. You tell 'em. And the U.S. corporate tax rate is 35%, up to 39% in some cases. That is true, but the U.S.G. awards hundreds of millions, billions even, of dollars of contracts each year. If your Company wants no part of that fine, but the US worker will then take over and make the money and it will help to keep the economy going. Not line the pockets of some overseas Company. Heh. Ever consider how many "foreign parts" go into a quintessentially American product like an F-16? Avionics, machined parts, sub-assemblies, et cetera. Guess what? The money lines the pockets of any number of overseas companies... Why? Because it's not possible to build such things anymore with 100% American parts. Not by a long shot. Actually I did not send any money overseas when I bought my computer, I build my own and buy the parts from the local mom and pop store. When I do have one built, it is also by them. Where they buy their parts is part of the overall problem, but not part of the issue we are discussing. They are not part of the Companies that have taken their monies overseas. And those Companies that do go overseas will have to reweigh those decisions, especially if they can no longer supply the U.S.G. with materials. Currently they can do both, leave and still get the U.S.G.'s money! Actually, it is exactly the issue we are discussing. Your mom and pop store is just a middle man, sending your money directly overseas for nearly every single part you bought from them. If you can understand why they do it (to buy parts at a reasonable price) you can understand why it is done on a significantly larger scale: to avoid costs. Taxes are just costs, just like raw materials and labor. You seem to think people/corporations are in this for you, or your idea of fairness, or some other silly horse hockey. They aren't. The higher you drive their costs up, the faster they will leave. No one makes TVs in the U.S. anymore, because it wasn't worth the effort--they left. Why? They do not have to pay punitive U.S. tax and regulatory costs that way. And that makes simple economic sense. GM makes cars all around the world--they don't need a building in Detroit to do that. Cordially, Rush elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com Remove the obvious... |
Darth Dogbytes™ Send message Joined: 30 Jul 03 Posts: 7512 Credit: 2,021,148 RAC: 0 |
They did NOTHING as usual! But they did get PAID for it! No work on fixing [snip] I have no idea...perhaps they should check your closet when they get to Diego. Account frozen... |
Misfit Send message Joined: 21 Jun 01 Posts: 21804 Credit: 2,815,091 RAC: 0 |
They did NOTHING as usual! But they did get PAID for it! No work on fixing [snip] I wouldn't dream of disturbing your hiding place. me@rescam.org |
Saenger Send message Joined: 3 Apr 99 Posts: 2452 Credit: 33,281 RAC: 0 |
From an article in the NYT With One Word, Children’s Book Sets Off Uproar Is this real possible in the "land of the free"? A childrens book can be banned from libraries by some prude extremists because of an innocent word for a perfectly normal body part? The uproar in the readers opinions section is quite unison, but that's probably only those who read the NYT, wich is afaik considered a bit to the left for american standards. Gruesse vom Saenger For questions about Boinc look in the BOINC-Wiki |
Darth Dogbytes™ Send message Joined: 30 Jul 03 Posts: 7512 Credit: 2,021,148 RAC: 0 |
From an article in the NYT We are the land of the free...you're free here to be a complete idiot...just ask any voter. However, if the author had used the British word "bollocks" the average American wouldn't have understood it, and there wouldn't have been this uproar from the Puritan Squad. BTW...I already read that article. Account frozen... |
Darth Dogbytes™ Send message Joined: 30 Jul 03 Posts: 7512 Credit: 2,021,148 RAC: 0 |
They did NOTHING as usual! But they did get PAID for it! No work on fixing [snip] Sorry, I don't use a closet, I use a wardrode...yours will have to suffice, I'm sure you will have something that will fit after the Navy Ball. Account frozen... |
mikey Send message Joined: 17 Dec 99 Posts: 4215 Credit: 3,474,603 RAC: 0 |
Why? They do not have to pay punitive U.S. tax and regulatory costs that way. And that makes simple economic sense. GM makes cars all around the world--they don't need a building in Detroit to do that. Since you haven't actually read a single word I wrote I will make it simpler...any Company that stays in the US will have exclusive access to all U.S.G. contracts. Also any Company that stays, or comes, will pay a lower corporate tax rate than they currently pay. NO MORE 36% tax rate, or 39% rate either!!!! ALL monies earned by a Company will be subject to taxes, even monies earned out of the Country. BUT as stated earlier, AT A LOWER THAN 35% RATE! |
Saenger Send message Joined: 3 Apr 99 Posts: 2452 Credit: 33,281 RAC: 0 |
Why? They do not have to pay punitive U.S. tax and regulatory costs that way. And that makes simple economic sense. GM makes cars all around the world--they don't need a building in Detroit to do that. So they will be taxed twice if they do business with other countires. Once in the US, and of course in the other countries for their subsideries there, because they have to pay the taxes were they are earned, for example in the EU. I don't like tax shelters as well, be 'em Channel Islands, Zwitzerland, Caymans, Delaware, Luxemburg or whereever. The only good they do is shelter as much money as possible from being used by the society for good things. And they only serve those who have ridicoulously much money, not the average guy/gal. The average guy/gal has no chance to get it's money off-shore (and avoid the necessary payments for the infrastructure, justice system, police, government... you name it). So the unavoidable stuff in the budged will be paied for not by those who could easily do so, without much notice, but mostly by those for whome 1 grand is a lot of money. |
Rush Send message Joined: 3 Apr 99 Posts: 3131 Credit: 302,569 RAC: 0 |
Since you haven't actually read a single word I wrote I will make it simpler... Odd then, that I replied in-line... Maybe coherent would be better than simpler... any Company that stays in the US will have exclusive access to all U.S.G. contracts. Big deal, they leave now, in lieu of them. U.S.G contracts are not the be-all, end-all of business. Also any Company that stays, or comes, will pay a lower corporate tax rate than they currently pay. NO MORE 36% tax rate, or 39% rate either!!!! ALL monies earned by a Company will be subject to taxes, even monies earned out of the Country. BUT as stated earlier, AT A LOWER THAN 35% RATE! I have no problem with that, but you ain't running the gov't. And even if you were, you likely couldn't get a massive corporate tax rate cut past Congress. Cordially, Rush elrushbo2@theobviousgmail.com Remove the obvious... |
Misfit Send message Joined: 21 Jun 01 Posts: 21804 Credit: 2,815,091 RAC: 0 |
They did NOTHING as usual! But they did get PAID for it! No work on fixing [snip] Do not deny your water closet. me@rescam.org |
Darth Dogbytes™ Send message Joined: 30 Jul 03 Posts: 7512 Credit: 2,021,148 RAC: 0 |
They did NOTHING as usual! But they did get PAID for it! No work on fixing [snip] I left that one in England...I didn't know you were into water sports...must be a Naval thing......sooo Calfornia. Account frozen... |
Misfit Send message Joined: 21 Jun 01 Posts: 21804 Credit: 2,815,091 RAC: 0 |
They did NOTHING as usual! But they did get PAID for it! No work on fixing [snip] That's not my naval you're staring at. me@rescam.org |
Darth Dogbytes™ Send message Joined: 30 Jul 03 Posts: 7512 Credit: 2,021,148 RAC: 0 |
They did NOTHING as usual! But they did get PAID for it! No work on fixing [snip] Can't...there's a big fold of fat in the way. Account frozen... |
Misfit Send message Joined: 21 Jun 01 Posts: 21804 Credit: 2,815,091 RAC: 0 |
They did NOTHING as usual! But they did get PAID for it! No work on fixing [snip] That provides greatly needed shade. And I need a lot of shade. me@rescam.org |
Darth Dogbytes™ Send message Joined: 30 Jul 03 Posts: 7512 Credit: 2,021,148 RAC: 0 |
They did NOTHING as usual! But they did get PAID for it! No work on fixing [snip] Yup...keeps your knees from getting sunburnt and your shoes wet in the rain. Account frozen... |
Misfit Send message Joined: 21 Jun 01 Posts: 21804 Credit: 2,815,091 RAC: 0 |
They did NOTHING as usual! But they did get PAID for it! No work on fixing [snip] And we wouldn't want our steel-toes to rust. me@rescam.org |
Darth Dogbytes™ Send message Joined: 30 Jul 03 Posts: 7512 Credit: 2,021,148 RAC: 0 |
They did NOTHING as usual! But they did get PAID for it! No work on fixing [snip] ...the family heirlooms from her military service days? Account frozen... |
thorin belvrog Send message Joined: 29 Sep 06 Posts: 6418 Credit: 8,893 RAC: 0 |
Since you haven't actually read a single word I wrote I will make it simpler... Oh my - not this darned subject again... Okay: A simple example from East Germany, a couple of years ago: A world-wide well-known car producing company stated that they wanted to build a facility in East Germany, offering - let's say: 1000 jobs. And they spread out that they were looking for a well-prepared and good-to-reach place to build on. Three towns prepared new grounds as industrial places (paid by the tax-payers) and offered aid-money to them for each employed former jobless person (up to the same costs the company would have paid per employee). So the only cost this company would have been the material for building the facility. But: There was a Czech town heard that also. They also prepared a place paid by tax-payers, and offered them a similar amount of aid-money as these German towns - and they got it, because the wages are cheaper there. So all in all, this rich company gets paid by this Czech town to employ their people! And where do they pay their taxes? As I read last year, this well-known, famous "German" company had been able to manipulate the countable income down to just 10 millions - means 3 millions on taxes for Germany: less than they had to pay for their new facility in this Czech town - and even less than the difference between the costs for this factory over there in the Czech Republic and East Germany. I think, an US company should produce only in the US, a German company only in Germany, a Japanese company only in Japan etc, and they should not be able to simply buy other companies of other countries. I have nothing against producing by product licences, or by kind of franchise, but then the producers remain quite independent. Between 1990 and the fusion with Chrysler, Daimler-Benz for example haven't paid any taxes to Germany. They always managed to let it look like having no taxable income. But they couldn't managed to be not involved in the Party Donation scandal in the late 90's. Account frozen... |
mikey Send message Joined: 17 Dec 99 Posts: 4215 Credit: 3,474,603 RAC: 0 |
And even if you were, you likely couldn't get a massive corporate tax rate cut past Congress. That about sums up the content and substance of your discussion doesn't it? |
©2024 University of California
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.