I love big business

[canedriver]

A lot has been discussed on this board and many other boards regarding the taxation of people and business. I have argued that our taxes are in fact lower then they should be with regards to businesses and higher income tax brackets.

Lower taxes increases jobs

Lower taxes would spur the economy

Both arguments I have heard for lower taxes.

Think again.

Last night the federal excise tax expired on domestic airline tickets and airlines are raising the prices of tickets offsetting any tax saving.

http://www.starnewsonline.com/articl...0685?p=1&tc=pg

Let the flame wars begin

[Loafer]

Business as usual....

[AlabamaNomadRider]

There is always something. It's just like the people on Medicare get a raise but the amount they have to pay goes up to off set the raise. You might as well not get a raise.

[ringadingh]

Typical corporate greed.

[Dave]

Originally Posted by Ringadingh

Typical corporate greed.

I'll never understand why people think this way. Personally I want corporations to make money. When was the last time a company that was in the red hired people?

And what about personal greed? Is that bad? We see it all the time even here on this board. How many time have you seen people post about where they bought something and save money? They could have bought it for more at their local store but did not. Is that not the same? Is that not "greed" when one is saving money. I don't see the difference.

Like Gordon Gekko says, "Greed is good."

[usranger74]

With a few exceptions, business do not pay taxes. They simply pass on to the consumer the taxes placed on them.

[Bull Durham]

If lower taxes increased jobs, then that means in the last ten years with lower taxes, the unemployement rate should be zero. But it's not, so that kind of blows that theory out of the water.

I think instead of the big deal going on with raising taxes, simply eliminate ALL tax loop holes. That would take care of the deficit.

[canedriver]

I agree that greed is good to a certain extent. Having said that though a lot of these big airlines receive subsidies, benefits and tax exempt benefits from the government.

My point of the original post is that if you give the company tax breaks they do not in fact create jobs or spur the economy. They simply line their own pockets in the form of pay increases, bonuses, or dividends.

I am called a socialist by a few people on the board, but your looking at an industry that is subsidized by the government and has been for years.

I like the tax loophole idea. That brings to mind a question. How many people own or have owned a house declared the interest deduction on that home; have whined or complained about people living off government welfare?

Don't worry I have done it to. There is a spot in my society for you comrade

[petenomad]

Originally Posted by canedriver

That brings to mind a question. How many people own or have owned a house declared the interest deduction on that home; have whined or complained about people living off government welfare?

That is not a loophole - that is a deduction that is available to everyone who owns a home because it has been determined that society benefits when people own their homes. In the current debate, the president has chosen to villify certain corporations who are enjoying high profits at present. However, most of these "loopholes" or "subsidies" are actually just the same depreciation rules that all corporations use when purchasing new equipment. There are subsidies for oil exploration, but I'm not really sure there is any point in giving these subsidies when no new drilling permits are forthcoming. But while we are at it, lets end subsidies for Ethanol and tobacco.

Virgin and Spirit airlines are not collecting the FAA tax at present, but most are. I think they are probably expecting the tax to be reinstated; possibly retro-actively. If they continue to collect and pocket for another week, then I think there will be reprecussions.

Companies are sitting on cash and not hiring because they don't know what new regulations or taxes are coming or who will be the next target of the current administration - Steve Wynn vocalized this just this last week. Lower taxes would help companies move off this position, but the looming taxes and regulations related to the healthcare law are not helping either. I don't think it is quite so simple that lower taxes = more hiring. However, I know that higher taxes will not encoruage hiring.

[ringadingh]

If the airline didn't gouge people, perhaps more would use it and they could increase there revenues that way. The raising prices would be ok if there was mandatory cost of living adjustments given out the the regular working class.

[glwilson]

Originally Posted by Bull Durham

I think instead of the big deal going on with raising taxes, simply eliminate ALL tax loop holes. That would take care of the deficit.

No offense... but you cannot even pay the U.S. government's annual spending; let alone the federal deficit; even if ALL income produced by every person and corporation was given to the government. The math is fairly simple to that point.

In doing so, you would end-up a several months short of paying for all that the politicians are spending in a fiscal-year.

Clearly a cut in spending is in order... whether anyone likes it or not.

Think Greece... think downgrade on our debt (and currency as if it isn't already discounted enough already)... think what the repercussions will be when that happens.

This is a far more serious issue than many are suggesting it to be. ;)

[BudMan]

Well said Glenn

[canedriver]

This is where both parties are idiots. The republican plan of only cutting spending isn't enough.

How many people are willing to do without lets say Military, social security, medicare, medicaid, education, veterans benefits, etc etc etc the list goes on. 1 in 6 is on some form of welfare or public assistance. EVERY SINGLE ONE OF YOU has someone in your immediate or extended family receiving benefits in the form of subsidized housing for low income or elderly, welfare, wic, medicare, medicaid or some other form of public assistance.

Who does without, because someone is going to be cut out of the loop.

The democratic plan isn't enough either as spending does indeed have to be reined in and raising taxes with minimal cuts isn't going to cut it.

The balance is a sacrifice on everyone's part.

People want the benefits but don't want taxes yet almost HALF of the households in America pay zero taxes due to tax credits and loopholes. This means the federal government takes in less money but the states need federal money to run because among other things property taxes and other revenues are down.

Taxes need to be raised. Even the bipartisan committees agree to this, yet every election you see politicians leading the polls with the no new taxes slogan.

What gets me is people concentrating so much on the tax issue when almost half of the households pay zero taxes. They say nothing or there is a minimal outcry about raising fees to access parks, drivers licenses, business licenses, tolls, red light cameras, speeding cameras etc etc etc the list goes on.

You have a choice. Continue to pay less and less taxes in exchange for higher and higher everyday fees associated with the cost of living or shut down every single perk the government subsidizes.

[Bull Durham]

Petenomad,

That simply is not true about no new drilling permits being issued by Obama. And in fact, only one well has been drilled in the last 12 years by ANY company, in Alaska, whether it has been Bush in office with both houses of Congress, or Obama.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/....ai sed-stop-si/


Canedriver,

I agree in part with what you say, I think spending should go down and taxes go up. But to me, Social Security is not a government handout, I've paid into it my whole life, like everyone else, and if the rest of the government would keep their grubby hands out of the Social Security cookie jar, there would be no money shortage with it.

How anyone can say keeping corporate taxes low are going to increase jobs, is funny. I believe corporate tax is the lowest since 1956, so where are the jobs?

Corporations are paying low tax, yet still shipping jobs overseas. If all the jobs are being shipped overseas, means no jobs. No jobs means no taxes being paid. No wonder half the country isn't paying taxes. Companies trying to maximize their profits is fine and what they should be doing, but at the expense of not paying taxes is crazy.

I believe if a company wants to mover overseas, fine, that's their right. But if they want to sell their product back in the US, they need to pay an equal amount of Import tax to even out if they had stayed.

I've watched companies start the trend 30 years ago of letting go a full time employee, then hiring two employees to fill that slot as "part time" status, so they don't have to pay any type of benefits.

You will always have a certain amount of people that will always be looking for a way out of working, for a handout from the governement, their family, etc. But I think most people would rather have some type of job, just for self pride.

I was RIF'd at the beginning of this recession, and took a suck a$$ job at almost half my salary at a horrible place of employment. I could of sat back and collected unemployment for two years, but chose to work the sucky job instead, just for my own piece of mind.

[canedriver]

Bull,

I agree with the social security issue you bring up because you (and millions of others) have paid into it for years, and the talking heads did in fact raid the coffers to pay for other projects, programs etc.

The problem is they raided the coffers to pay for projects they passed and didn't fund in the form of new or increased taxes. An example was the prescription drug benefit that republicans passed to solidify senior votes in 2004.. It was unfunded but they run on no new taxes platforms. I personally laugh at democrats who bitch about this program because it is a program they would typically want.

The problem is Washington for years has played a shell game funding programs on both sides of the aisle and those debts are now due.

It's why i said it's going to take sacrifices on everyone's part. There simply isn't an easy or cheap fix to the problem that everyone contributed to.

Have no fear they will pass a debt solution to raise the debt ceiling BUT its going to be a very basic down payment. The numbers running around are 2-3 trillion when in fact 20 trillion is whats needed. The average american will breathe a sigh of relief that "disaster was diverted" and the talking heads will run on platforms in the next election of look what we did we solved the debt problem. The sad problem is that voters will believe it.