Three biggest lies why corporation taxes should be lowered

That was informative. i was on lower or simplify the code train. The first point i think is a reason to simplify the code because you can use the current model to say anything.

 

Glynch -- Although I respect both of you, BobMarley and you use the same strategy -- post an article and then leave without any real commentary of your own.

Robert Reich is a very liberal but very dynamic thinker. I have actually met him. He's ... uh, diminutive ... but with a quiet, commanding presence. For once, you have chosen someone whose credentials and rationale have earned respect.

Now, Otis thorpe got his big hands on my first thoughts with the basketball skills of his namesake moniker.

The net result of our current tax code may be the same, but the costs of accountants, tax attorneys, etc., can be staggering. Smaller businesses cannot afford these "luxuries" and thereby are less competitive. G.E. paid no taxes on their billions in profits while smaller companies doing business in America paid the freight.

If you go to a graduated flat tax, everybody, individuals and corporations alike, get to play by the same rules. The added bonus to simplification is that we gut the IRS because the majority of this out of control department would be unnecessary.

Regarding his second point, corporations are sitting on those trillions because of the uncertainty precipitated by the Obama administration, particularly on the Obamacare issue.

I agree with Reich on the third point. If we want to reinvigorate the economy, we must have fair but punitive taxation for sending jobs out of the country. We would have to watch the incentives lest we slowly return to our "exceptions and subsidies for all" tax codes.

 

Sometimes an article does the commenting for me.

 

noted job and wealth creator Robert Reich

 

But if you have nothing to add, why bring it to the D&D?

 

Like say, Karl Rove, Reich is not a "job and wealth creator," he is a thinker. I often don't agree with him, but you must respect his analyses.

 

presided as Secretary of Labor on one of the greatest periods of job and wealth creation in American history (93-97).

Scoreboard.

 

How many people did he hire?

 

Because often the article adds to the discussion what often is lacking here in the D&D, logic and insight.

 

probably more, as Secretary of Labor, then all of us combined, unless one of you guys runs the Googleplex or something.

so I'm thinking his voice has some merit even in internet forum gaga land.

("that model with pointy knees, she ain't ever gonna be beautiful")

 

Despite my respect for Reich, he was not as much of an influence in your statistics as a number of other Democrats and Republicans. You are correct that he was in the right place at the right time and his writings were influential, but he was not the political architect of those economic policies.

 

Stop evading the question. How many people did he hire during his tenure as Labor Secretary?

 

If you want to have an idea, look it up yourself. The Labor Department after all, is a large and complex federal cabinet-level department.

http://www.dol.gov/oasam/doljobs/apply/apply-overview.htm#1

...

this is getting so tangential though, it's verging on the ridiculous. I think I've underscored my point that by score-boarding based on "job and wealth creation", you get some people really holding onto the margins, rather than addressing the points.



you guys who are focusing on credentials are all at level orange, and look to stay there. (try to frame yourselves so you go up many more steps).

 

Hey, glynch. You're shirking your thread. Your thoughts, insights and rebuttals are needed.

 

The disturbing thing about corporate taxes in this country isn't the rate, it is the number of corporations that actually pay no taxes under the system. GE, IIRC, paid no income taxes last year and Facebook got a $400 million refund.

I would be for a lower corporate tax rate if we can shore up the accounting rules and loopholes to ensure that companies are actually paying. I would rather have 20% of something as opposed to 35% of nothing.

 

The problem is... the very same corporations (and others) will still work around the lowered tax rate.

Its like a conversation I had with my mother in-law. She was arguing that there were too many taxes and regulations and thus corporations were moving overseas. When I asked her for ideas on how to solve this, she suggested lower taxes for companies that hire people and increased regulations placing hire taxes or penalties on companies moving overseas.

 

This is a symptom of a basic problem with our tax code, both corporate and personal. It is so complex with so many deductions and loopholes that it can be easily exploited. In that regard I support lowering the marginal tax rate in exchange for simplifying the tax code and closing loopholes to keep the effective tax rate up.

 

No doubt lowering rates and simplifying the code won't put accountants and lawyers out of business and corporations will seek to maximize every advantage they get. That said a simpler code will reduce the likelihood of such excesses as we've seen with GE and Apple where even with massive profits they get tax credits instead of paying taxes. Also while some corporations might still try to game the system a lot of corporations, especially smaller and medium sized ones, might see more value regarding time to pay more in taxes rather than spending that money on accountants if filing is much simpler.