Reply With Quote
Which large corporation paid the full corporate income tax, WC?
Then the first order is to fix the political system and tax code not to unfairly favor those that have the most. Good luck with that.
Which large corporation paid the full corporate income tax, WC?
It should be neutral. Problem is, taxing is one of congress' largest control over the people. they will not give it up easily by creating a neutral system.
I'll bet its so few that I'm not going to bother looking.
Do you know?
I think corporate tax rates are too high, but I am in favor of eliminating all tax credits.
What do you mean neutral? And how do you reconcile that with the realities of lobbying, secret campaign finance, etc?
Like I said, it will be hard to get congress to let go of that power. We need to start by voting out politicians who abuse that power.
"by voting out politicians"
won't make any difference. All politicians will suck off anything for quid-pro-quo donations. DC is completely corrupt, tea baggers included.
Voting is a charade, US democacy a sham.
Human-Americans are completely disenfranchised by corporate and capitalist money.
Only because so many people like you have given up. But it's really not that. Most people don't realize what they are doing. Politicians are buying your vote. They tell you they will take something away (tax dollars) and give to you. You vote for these people. Am I right or wrong?
So your proposal is utopian... should've started there...
Yep.
It's impossible to talk the wolves out of not voting to have the sheep for dinner.
(bailed)
Last edited by Winehole23; 06-08-2011 at 03:43 AM.
I thought you were against tax cuts?
Do away with social security taxes for 2 years. That way people decide how
To spend stimulus.
Why not? I'm not doctrinaire.
Bypassing the financial intermediaries would probably be a good idea next time around. Better to hit people directly in their pocketbooks.
It all comes from the same place. The question
Is do you want government to determine
Where to spend or people?
In recession I prefer people, in periods of growth
I prefer government.
The thread is led "U.S. funding for future promises lags by trillions". Getting rid of SS taxes for 2 years would only make it worse.
This has already been tried multiple times going all the way back to the $600 checks Bush sent out four years ago. It's failed miserably each time. The "give them money and cross your fingers" approach to economic stimulus simply does not work.That way people decide how
To spend stimulus.
999
shrub's $600 checks was $180B
Barry's stimulus was was few $100B
Krugman, Reich, etc said the size of the way-too-small stimulus should have been $2T+ to match better the size of he Banksters' Great Depression.
Rolling ALL taxes back to 1975 would fix the deficit quick. Higher taxes stimulate investment (rather than profit taking).
Then stop both wars and cut $500B/year off the MIC and State Department Imperial spending, garrisoning of the planet which runs about $1.3T/year.
We have an aggregate demand problem that's
Killing tax revenue. Cutting social security taxes
Is a lot more than $600. On average it amounts to
An extra 300 bucks per month.
Now that will stimulate this economy and generate more tax
Revenue.
Cutting SS insurance completely on wage earners would only give the top wage earners $373.80 a month more. Us little people would get to keep $35 more monthly for every $10k we earn annual.
The 2011 SS insurance cut I say was a mistake. However, the highest wage earners only get a $178 per month break.
SS insurance for 2011 went down to 4.2% from 6.2% (-2%). The cap is at $102,000. 0.2 x $102,000 = $2,136 annual, or $178 a month.
This is a savings of $200 for every $10k annually, up to the limit. $50 monthly for every $30k annual.
Last edited by Wild Cobra; 06-08-2011 at 07:00 PM.
Spending absolutely generates revenue in the form of taxes which is why stimulus never burdens with the entirety of its cost. This country drastically needs infrastructure improvements yet where is the political will to spend the money to fix our country which would in turn do worlds of wonder for the economy. Instead we tell people to go out and buy a PS3 when instead we could make a worthwhile investment in ourselves.
If the past stimulus packages were all geared to infrastructure that actually created jobs, instead of bailing out the rich, I wouldn't be so against it. However, we are financially is such a deep hole, I don't see more spending practical.
I say it will now be a long slow path to a recovery that will never happen if we don't bring manufacturing jobs back home. To do this, we must do what ever we can to encourage business to start manufacturing here again, and have a reasonable trade balance.
Look what we have lost over the years.
Timber industry... mostly outsourced.
Steel industry... mostly outsourced.
Cars industy... highly outsourced.
Consumer electronics... almost completely outsourced.
etc.
etc.
etc.
We're just not compe ive... you could go full protectionist, but that's really not a solution, but a bandaid. Either way you'll see a fairly heavy decrease in the standard of living.
Your math is off. Median Income is $51,000 @ 6.2% per year that's $263.5 per month. An extra $263.5 per month for the average household would go a long way!
That, in my opinion, would stimulate aggregate demand (sales).
Short-term fix, but is what I would prefer the stimulus to look like.
No, your math is off. The current SS rate is 4.2%.
---ooops---
Part of mine is off. I calculated part of the SS at $102k cap rather than $106.8k cap.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
