Just don't call it raising taxes.

Discussion in 'Politics' started by carpro, Jul 11, 2011.

  1. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,911
    Likes Received:
    295
    http://www.boston.com/news/nation/w...7/11/obama_dems_skirt_the_issue_on_tax_hikes/

    SPIN METER: Obama, Dems skirt issue on tax hikes

    By Erica Werner
    Associated Press / July 11, 2011

    WASHINGTON—Call it eliminating an unfair break, or removing an unjust loophole, or even "taking a balanced approach." Just don't call it raising taxes.

    As they work toward a must-do deal with Republicans on paring trillions from the deficit in order to raise the nation's debt limit, President Barack Obama and Democrats are saying almost anything to avoid the politically toxic pronouncement that they want to increase taxes.
     
  2. HankD

    HankD
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    15,147
    Likes Received:
    322
    Just print more money to pay the debt and call it "increasing the money supply".

    HankD
     
  3. freeatlast

    freeatlast
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2004
    Messages:
    10,295
    Likes Received:
    0
    First off they are not paring trillions from the deficit or even trying to. The only thing proposed by the Republican's is to slow the growth of the debt, not stop deficit growth.
    The Dems are ding the same thing just from another approach. Both parties know that the condition we are in is un-fixable and we will default at some point down the road in the near future, but they are trying to push it back.
    As to doing away with the tax breaks that is a good idea, but the irresponsible republicans just can't see it. On the other hand the irresponsible democrats cannot see the need to cut spending. Both parties are irresponsible and corrupt with the only desire to cover their back side for their irresponsible and corrupt actions that brought us to this point.
     
  4. just-want-peace

    just-want-peace
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2002
    Messages:
    5,505
    Likes Received:
    40
    It's a moot point, IMHO, simply because the Rs, I'm afraid, will simply have a redeaux of '94 - IE come out blazing, but jump for cover as soon as a Dem yells "BANG" in a authoritative voice, thereby ending the "squabble"!:tear:

    This is one of those times I would love to be proven wrong!:BangHead:
     
  5. Robert Snow

    Robert Snow
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2009
    Messages:
    4,466
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is one of the few times I hope you are correct.
     
  6. Crabtownboy

    Crabtownboy
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    16,632
    Likes Received:
    158
    When you cut benefits to Social Security and Medicare you are, in essence, raising taxes on the elderly as well as raising their cost of living. They will be paying the same for less services with the same amount of money and at the same time have to pay more for medical services.
     
  7. Baptist in Richmond

    Baptist in Richmond
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2003
    Messages:
    5,075
    Likes Received:
    4
    IMO that is the most interesting aspect of this whole issue: the GOP is overtly brazen in their calls to cut these programs, yet are adamant that there should be no increases in taxes on corporations and the wealthy. As a matter of fact, Ohio Governor John Kasich was on Hannity last night [7/12/2011] and says we should actually LOWER corporate income taxes.

    If the Democrats were smart (and they aren't), they would take this point and run with it. They should repeatedly hit the GOP with this fact, and repeat it at every opportunity. They would have a real shot at re-taking the House with that message. Guess I missed my calling as a strategist.

    I guess only the poor, the elderly and the middle class should bear the burden of this mess.....

    Regards, hope all is well,
    BiR
     
  8. freeatlast

    freeatlast
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2004
    Messages:
    10,295
    Likes Received:
    0
    [SIZE=+0][SIZE=+0]The problem is that neither party needs control as they are both so irresponsible and corrupt that their opposing mind sets is the only thing that is keeping us from total destruction at this very moment. Both parties have had control at some point in the past few years and neither has done a thing to fix our debt. In fact when that happens the debt escalates. At least with no one sided control we will get a few more months or possibly years before we as a nation do self destruct.
    If the people could only understand the dire straight we are in because of these self centered politicians then perhaps they would boot these two parties out of office and replace them with people who have some integrity. However even with that it is still too late to fix what is going to come on us.
    There is but one possible hope and even that would still bring consequences as we are a broken nation and only when the church becomes a broken people can we expect rescue from ourselves.
    "if My people who are called by My name will humble themselves, and pray and seek My face, and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin and heal their land.
    [/SIZE]

    [/SIZE]

     
  9. targus

    targus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    U.S. corporate taxes are the highest in the industrialized world.

    Businesses go where the costs are lowest.

    If you want more money to pay for social issues then lower the corporate tax rates in order to be cost competative with the rest of the world.

    Business will report more income in the U.S. instead of off shore and tax revenue will increase.

    Why do liberals and democrats always want to kill the golden goose?
     
  10. Baptist in Richmond

    Baptist in Richmond
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2003
    Messages:
    5,075
    Likes Received:
    4
    Um..........actually that's not true. That would be Japan.
    George Allen even tried to say that the US was the second highest, which was deemed to be "mostly true."

    http://www.politifact.com/virginia/...-allen-says-us-corporate-tax-rate-second-hig/

    Besides, do you really think that corporations are paying a true effective rate - that they aren't taking deductions, credits, etc? Do you really think they aren't claiming deductions for state and local taxes from their federal income taxes?

    As I am sure you are aware, General Electric didn't pay taxes at all.
    http://money.cnn.com/2010/04/16/news/companies/ge_7000_tax_returns/

    Do you really think they are alone?

    Regards,
    BiR
     
  11. targus

    targus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    It looks like liberals and democrats want to take the "tax the rich" mantra to a whole new level.

    Suddenly deducting expenses against revenues and loss carryforwards are now "loopholes". :laugh:
     
  12. Baptist in Richmond

    Baptist in Richmond
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2003
    Messages:
    5,075
    Likes Received:
    4
    You didn't answer any of my questions, did you?
     
  13. targus

    targus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    Your own link contradicts your assertion and supports my original statement.

    "The national rate of 35 percent is actually the highest among democratic industrial nations."

    Yes, many corporations pay the top rate even after deductions (expenses) and tax credits. As a CPA I see it all the time.

    Right, because they had prior year losses in U.S. operations to carryforward against current U.S net income.

    And I am sure that there are many other corporations that also suffered prior losses that offset current taxable income.

    What's your point?

    That companies should not be able to carry losses forward against current income?

    How would that be fair or just?
     
  14. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,911
    Likes Received:
    295
    He doesn't have one. His questions, as usual, belabor the obvious and are the point.

    And he will chase you from one thread to another for answers to useless questions that are important to him, and him alone.:rolleyes:
     
  15. Baptist in Richmond

    Baptist in Richmond
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2003
    Messages:
    5,075
    Likes Received:
    4
    Japan has the highest.

    And as a CPA, you are aware that there are ways to disguise income, offset income, or add expenses to reduce income, right? Remember how Enron found interesting ways to do that?

    Enough, in fact, to offset most of their income, right? So, by doing so, they didn't pay income taxes. The tax rate really is irrelevant when there is enough to offset.

    I am not saying that they shouldn't, simply noting that in some cases, the rate is irrelevant when there are enough offsets to cover the income. What does lowering a tax rate do in terms of increasing tax receipts? The precedent for moving funds offshore has already been established. Unless you are suggesting that we lower the rate to the lowest in the industrialized world, anything less will simply lower revenue.

    Don't get me wrong: I know you're a CPA - just wanted a more in-depth discussion.

    Regards,
    BiR
     
    #15 Baptist in Richmond, Jul 14, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 14, 2011
  16. Baptist in Richmond

    Baptist in Richmond
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2003
    Messages:
    5,075
    Likes Received:
    4
    A point worth noting is that I never directed anything at you, never responded to you, yet you felt compelled to discuss me anyway.

    I have been gone for a while, yet I see some things don't change: still really not adding much to the discussion (other than your predictably uninteresting attacks), are you?

    Regards anyway,
    BiR
     
  17. Bro. Curtis

    Bro. Curtis
    Expand Collapse
    <img src =/curtis.gif>

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Messages:
    20,253
    Likes Received:
    4
    Actually, it's carpro's thread.
     
    #17 Bro. Curtis, Jul 15, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 15, 2011
  18. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,911
    Likes Received:
    295
    And you're still chasing people for answers to stupid questions.

    You can be gone a little longer if you wish. You rarely add anything to the discussion, other than your oh so importantant (to you) "questions".
     
  19. InTheLight

    InTheLight
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    16,227
    Likes Received:
    615
  20. InTheLight

    InTheLight
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    16,227
    Likes Received:
    615

Share This Page

Loading...