G
My problem with the Republican is they are far more interested in getting their ideas across. They want to cut spending by a substantial amount of money which may be very unpopular with the Democrats, but they are not going to compromise as far as the wealthy tax cut is concerned.
Will taxing industry reduce unemployment?
It's not taxing industry. It's getting rid of subsidies and loopholes, which are something that a real fiscal conservative would be opposed to - because in reality that's picking winners and losers. Subsidize one corporation but let the other out in the dust - leave them all to do what they need to do without government aid, and without getting gigantic tax receipts from Uncle Sam and not paying anything.
Psst...hey, guess what? We don't actually want the debt ceiling raised! At all!
Or at least, I don't.
Okay, then cut subsidies and loopholes.
Don't raise taxes.
I don't know why anyone would want to raise taxes especially considering we are hovering on a double dip recession. These FDR policies are going to keep us in a muck for a while.
Tax cuts pay for themselves
This is why you fail.
Reagan, tax cuts produced immediate tax revenue gains, so did the JFK and GWB Tax Cuts.
But, don't let that stop you, keep saying tax cuts take 25 years to pay for themselves!
Why would one want to raise taxes? Cause there's no such thing as a free lunch. Eventually we have to pay for what we're spending. Time to cowboy up and pay the tab.
Time to spend less.
Technically, depends on how they are done.
Don't forget this : http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/25/business/economy/25tax.html?_r=1
3.1 billion credit, but no actual taxes paid.
Here are some more: Ten giant U.S. companies avoiding income taxes: Sen. Bernie Sanders list - Lynn Sweet
Eliminating a tax subsidy isn't raising taxes. Think of it like this...
You have the Earned Income Tax Credit and the Child Tax Credit. In both cases, only those taxpayers who have dependent children who pay a certain percentage of their income to someone else to help provide care for that child (or children; i.e., "daycare") earn the credit. If you don't have qualified children, you can't claim the credit. Tax subsidies work almost the same way except they apply to business expenditures that under the tax code can be applied to your business' federal tax return, i.e., health care premiums paid by your employer. Such an expense is refunded under tax law, but it's not an increase in the marginal tax rate. It's just an expense that isn't counted as taxable income. Therefore, if the subsidy is eliminated, those formerly non-taxed earnings that would have otherwise been written off in a tax haven, i.e., insurance premiums paid, are instead counted as income where they've always been except now you can't claim the tax write-off.
Will it move said business into a higher tax bracket? Yes, because the business won't be able to claim the tax write-off any longer. Thus, their "real" earnings will have to be properly reported without the adjustment to gross income.
Have your taxes been raised? No, because the marginal tax rate you would have been paying had you not claimed the subsidy remains at the exact same level.
Is it a new tax? No.
Misinformed. Taxes actually went up during Reagan. He cut loopholes and the marginal rate; however, the net result was an increase in taxes that was also more equitable.
Call it what you want, but the end result is people/businesses will be paying more taxes. I can't afford to pay more taxes right now.
Who can except those who have continued to profit during this recession? This is why I've said time and again, tax those who can afford to pay alittle bit more - the wealthiest among us. I'm not saying increase their taxes to some absurd rate; a 2-5% marginal tax rate increase won't hurt the wealthy one bit. Nonetheless, in the case of eliminating tax subsidies for profitable business entities, i.e., big oil, if you're going to claim that ethanol companies have been profitable and, thus, no longer need a federal tax subsidy...
big oil companies should be held to the exact same standard because as we all know they've made huge profits for years and in some cases don't pay ANY federal income taxes whatsoever.
I've profited during this depression, even since Obama banned drilling. However, my profit is half what it was a few years ago. So now, you say that instead of paying 15% on 40 grand, I have to pay 17-20%?
Do the math, dude. You'll see that what you're suggesting will put many-a-small business owner below the poverty level.
Common sense really needs to take hold among the ranks of the Left, at some point.
It's not taxing industry. It's getting rid of subsidies and loopholes, which are something that a real fiscal conservative would be opposed to - because in reality that's picking winners and losers. Subsidize one corporation but let the other out in the dust - leave them all to do what they need to do without government aid, and without getting gigantic tax receipts from Uncle Sam and not paying anything.
Your business only makes 40k/year? Is that how much you take home and how much is left after operating cost? Then your business is not profitable.
Not profitable? How do you figger that? I made a 20% profit in 2010; that's above the national average. So, where are you coming from, exactly?
And, no, my business doesn't make 40 g's a year. Wait, let me rephrase that: my business didn't only make 40 g's a year...before the Libbos took over the government and ****ed everything up.
Tax cuts pay for themselves
Re-read what I asked. If you take all your profit as income, and your income is only 40k a year, which your statements lead me to believe, than your business is not profitable because you aren't including your income in the equation. If I misread your statements, then I'm wrong. Please clarify how much your business makes and how much you make.
This year, me and my company made 40 grand in profit, after deductions. And, you want me to pay more?
yeah! That's going to encourage small business growth.
BTW, what was your tax bill for 2010?
That's right cpwill. That's not the discussion. No one is attempting to raise rates. They are refusing to do exactly what you are FOR.
And many times. Someone posted all of it in this thread. Obama has publicly admitted.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?