0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: cfbandyman on July 19, 2017, 09:59:38 PMQuote from: sonofdaxjones on July 19, 2017, 09:56:04 PMQuote from: cfbandyman on July 19, 2017, 09:51:18 PMQuote from: sonofdaxjones on July 19, 2017, 09:08:00 PMQuote from: cfbandyman on July 19, 2017, 05:10:14 PMQuote from: sonofdaxjones on July 19, 2017, 04:01:32 PMCandyman. Come on man.The primary point is, the left wants to tax tax tax.Yet left preferred corporate heroes park a crap ton of cash offshore. Then when there's talk of trying to bring that back on shore. People like ednwhackadoo start talking about corporate welfare and neoconservative economics (whatever the eff that means). Meanwhile and apparently, people like ednwhackadoo has no problem with these companies parking trillions offshore, then to double down on the stupid ednwhackadoo tries to apply a "neoconservative" economy policy to what was apparently . . . nothing.I will not just come on, it was needless bullshit to stir the pot and you goddamn well know it and I called you out for it. I refuse to play your stupid games with the tax crap. If the game is rigged a certain way, corporations will play their games regardless of the politics, hell even within the article you posted great neocon and known trump lover Apple CEO Tim Cook was asking for lower corporate tax. Those lefty coprorations, what will they oppose what you want next.As for wanting where I, the flaming liberal you just hate where I'd want taxes to go up, you're in luck, cause I'll tell you where they should. I for one and totally fine will tax on a lot of brackets (not insane like the 50s-60s with like 24-33 of them, let's keep it around 9-15) that goes up to around 50-60% once you get to the 400k and 500k level, increase the standard deduction to help the middle class, keep that tax rate fairly low with a smaller slide for capital gains (really, not unchanged from what we have now). Really, the goal should be is to push away from CEOs and other high earning individuals from being paid essentially eff you money, and push their money earnings more into investments and compensation based on their ability to make their keeping corporations, and thus more people, successful. There is a big reason why there has been a divergence in who has wealth (cough cough Reagan) since the 80's. Corporate rates pegged somewhere near the average of the world (25ish%). That being said, it'd be effective enough to close some loopholes to keep the money from flooding out in the first place, as it would be hard to compete against the caymen island's (and others) low low rate of 0%. Tax havens abroad are hard to fight when you can shift things around globally like that. Overall, for a massive boogeyman you make the left to be, clearly history on corporate tax rates proves different as per the chart, no one has done dick about it.Your principle of wanting to lower the rate and actually get some income is not unfounded or wrong in this instance, you just put your typical hyperpartisan dax bullshit into it. You prove once again you don't get it and thus just gurgle out nonsense that everyone knows already. Corps that Libs admire choose to offshore trillions of dollars to avoid US taxation. One would think like Libs would be outraged over this. But, as long as these corps lean left, in some cases openly criticizing Drumpf. Libs don't care. In a related note trying to bring that money home and/or keep money that would be offshored in the future is certainly a worthy thing to look at. But as we've seen here Libs immediately think corporate welfare. So using that logic we have to believe the same Libs prefer these corps avoid paying US taxes on billions straight out. Which is weird.This just proves you literally did not read anything I wrote, never stop daxI did, look you're journey through individual tax rates, CEO's et al was fascinating. But not relevant. Also, I wasn't assailing the corporations themselves so why you even went down that path is weird in every way. That's just two things right there. you said the primary point of the left is tax tax tax, implying that to me, as you often do, I set you straight, and it is absolutely relevant to this discussion when I said Tim Cook wanted corporate taxes down. Don't duck out of thisWhere did I even imply that corporations wouldn't want and didn't want lower taxes. I am talking rank and file Libs who shriek at that thought of "Corporate Welfare".
Quote from: sonofdaxjones on July 19, 2017, 09:56:04 PMQuote from: cfbandyman on July 19, 2017, 09:51:18 PMQuote from: sonofdaxjones on July 19, 2017, 09:08:00 PMQuote from: cfbandyman on July 19, 2017, 05:10:14 PMQuote from: sonofdaxjones on July 19, 2017, 04:01:32 PMCandyman. Come on man.The primary point is, the left wants to tax tax tax.Yet left preferred corporate heroes park a crap ton of cash offshore. Then when there's talk of trying to bring that back on shore. People like ednwhackadoo start talking about corporate welfare and neoconservative economics (whatever the eff that means). Meanwhile and apparently, people like ednwhackadoo has no problem with these companies parking trillions offshore, then to double down on the stupid ednwhackadoo tries to apply a "neoconservative" economy policy to what was apparently . . . nothing.I will not just come on, it was needless bullshit to stir the pot and you goddamn well know it and I called you out for it. I refuse to play your stupid games with the tax crap. If the game is rigged a certain way, corporations will play their games regardless of the politics, hell even within the article you posted great neocon and known trump lover Apple CEO Tim Cook was asking for lower corporate tax. Those lefty coprorations, what will they oppose what you want next.As for wanting where I, the flaming liberal you just hate where I'd want taxes to go up, you're in luck, cause I'll tell you where they should. I for one and totally fine will tax on a lot of brackets (not insane like the 50s-60s with like 24-33 of them, let's keep it around 9-15) that goes up to around 50-60% once you get to the 400k and 500k level, increase the standard deduction to help the middle class, keep that tax rate fairly low with a smaller slide for capital gains (really, not unchanged from what we have now). Really, the goal should be is to push away from CEOs and other high earning individuals from being paid essentially eff you money, and push their money earnings more into investments and compensation based on their ability to make their keeping corporations, and thus more people, successful. There is a big reason why there has been a divergence in who has wealth (cough cough Reagan) since the 80's. Corporate rates pegged somewhere near the average of the world (25ish%). That being said, it'd be effective enough to close some loopholes to keep the money from flooding out in the first place, as it would be hard to compete against the caymen island's (and others) low low rate of 0%. Tax havens abroad are hard to fight when you can shift things around globally like that. Overall, for a massive boogeyman you make the left to be, clearly history on corporate tax rates proves different as per the chart, no one has done dick about it.Your principle of wanting to lower the rate and actually get some income is not unfounded or wrong in this instance, you just put your typical hyperpartisan dax bullshit into it. You prove once again you don't get it and thus just gurgle out nonsense that everyone knows already. Corps that Libs admire choose to offshore trillions of dollars to avoid US taxation. One would think like Libs would be outraged over this. But, as long as these corps lean left, in some cases openly criticizing Drumpf. Libs don't care. In a related note trying to bring that money home and/or keep money that would be offshored in the future is certainly a worthy thing to look at. But as we've seen here Libs immediately think corporate welfare. So using that logic we have to believe the same Libs prefer these corps avoid paying US taxes on billions straight out. Which is weird.This just proves you literally did not read anything I wrote, never stop daxI did, look you're journey through individual tax rates, CEO's et al was fascinating. But not relevant. Also, I wasn't assailing the corporations themselves so why you even went down that path is weird in every way. That's just two things right there. you said the primary point of the left is tax tax tax, implying that to me, as you often do, I set you straight, and it is absolutely relevant to this discussion when I said Tim Cook wanted corporate taxes down. Don't duck out of this
Quote from: cfbandyman on July 19, 2017, 09:51:18 PMQuote from: sonofdaxjones on July 19, 2017, 09:08:00 PMQuote from: cfbandyman on July 19, 2017, 05:10:14 PMQuote from: sonofdaxjones on July 19, 2017, 04:01:32 PMCandyman. Come on man.The primary point is, the left wants to tax tax tax.Yet left preferred corporate heroes park a crap ton of cash offshore. Then when there's talk of trying to bring that back on shore. People like ednwhackadoo start talking about corporate welfare and neoconservative economics (whatever the eff that means). Meanwhile and apparently, people like ednwhackadoo has no problem with these companies parking trillions offshore, then to double down on the stupid ednwhackadoo tries to apply a "neoconservative" economy policy to what was apparently . . . nothing.I will not just come on, it was needless bullshit to stir the pot and you goddamn well know it and I called you out for it. I refuse to play your stupid games with the tax crap. If the game is rigged a certain way, corporations will play their games regardless of the politics, hell even within the article you posted great neocon and known trump lover Apple CEO Tim Cook was asking for lower corporate tax. Those lefty coprorations, what will they oppose what you want next.As for wanting where I, the flaming liberal you just hate where I'd want taxes to go up, you're in luck, cause I'll tell you where they should. I for one and totally fine will tax on a lot of brackets (not insane like the 50s-60s with like 24-33 of them, let's keep it around 9-15) that goes up to around 50-60% once you get to the 400k and 500k level, increase the standard deduction to help the middle class, keep that tax rate fairly low with a smaller slide for capital gains (really, not unchanged from what we have now). Really, the goal should be is to push away from CEOs and other high earning individuals from being paid essentially eff you money, and push their money earnings more into investments and compensation based on their ability to make their keeping corporations, and thus more people, successful. There is a big reason why there has been a divergence in who has wealth (cough cough Reagan) since the 80's. Corporate rates pegged somewhere near the average of the world (25ish%). That being said, it'd be effective enough to close some loopholes to keep the money from flooding out in the first place, as it would be hard to compete against the caymen island's (and others) low low rate of 0%. Tax havens abroad are hard to fight when you can shift things around globally like that. Overall, for a massive boogeyman you make the left to be, clearly history on corporate tax rates proves different as per the chart, no one has done dick about it.Your principle of wanting to lower the rate and actually get some income is not unfounded or wrong in this instance, you just put your typical hyperpartisan dax bullshit into it. You prove once again you don't get it and thus just gurgle out nonsense that everyone knows already. Corps that Libs admire choose to offshore trillions of dollars to avoid US taxation. One would think like Libs would be outraged over this. But, as long as these corps lean left, in some cases openly criticizing Drumpf. Libs don't care. In a related note trying to bring that money home and/or keep money that would be offshored in the future is certainly a worthy thing to look at. But as we've seen here Libs immediately think corporate welfare. So using that logic we have to believe the same Libs prefer these corps avoid paying US taxes on billions straight out. Which is weird.This just proves you literally did not read anything I wrote, never stop daxI did, look you're journey through individual tax rates, CEO's et al was fascinating. But not relevant. Also, I wasn't assailing the corporations themselves so why you even went down that path is weird in every way. That's just two things right there.
Quote from: sonofdaxjones on July 19, 2017, 09:08:00 PMQuote from: cfbandyman on July 19, 2017, 05:10:14 PMQuote from: sonofdaxjones on July 19, 2017, 04:01:32 PMCandyman. Come on man.The primary point is, the left wants to tax tax tax.Yet left preferred corporate heroes park a crap ton of cash offshore. Then when there's talk of trying to bring that back on shore. People like ednwhackadoo start talking about corporate welfare and neoconservative economics (whatever the eff that means). Meanwhile and apparently, people like ednwhackadoo has no problem with these companies parking trillions offshore, then to double down on the stupid ednwhackadoo tries to apply a "neoconservative" economy policy to what was apparently . . . nothing.I will not just come on, it was needless bullshit to stir the pot and you goddamn well know it and I called you out for it. I refuse to play your stupid games with the tax crap. If the game is rigged a certain way, corporations will play their games regardless of the politics, hell even within the article you posted great neocon and known trump lover Apple CEO Tim Cook was asking for lower corporate tax. Those lefty coprorations, what will they oppose what you want next.As for wanting where I, the flaming liberal you just hate where I'd want taxes to go up, you're in luck, cause I'll tell you where they should. I for one and totally fine will tax on a lot of brackets (not insane like the 50s-60s with like 24-33 of them, let's keep it around 9-15) that goes up to around 50-60% once you get to the 400k and 500k level, increase the standard deduction to help the middle class, keep that tax rate fairly low with a smaller slide for capital gains (really, not unchanged from what we have now). Really, the goal should be is to push away from CEOs and other high earning individuals from being paid essentially eff you money, and push their money earnings more into investments and compensation based on their ability to make their keeping corporations, and thus more people, successful. There is a big reason why there has been a divergence in who has wealth (cough cough Reagan) since the 80's. Corporate rates pegged somewhere near the average of the world (25ish%). That being said, it'd be effective enough to close some loopholes to keep the money from flooding out in the first place, as it would be hard to compete against the caymen island's (and others) low low rate of 0%. Tax havens abroad are hard to fight when you can shift things around globally like that. Overall, for a massive boogeyman you make the left to be, clearly history on corporate tax rates proves different as per the chart, no one has done dick about it.Your principle of wanting to lower the rate and actually get some income is not unfounded or wrong in this instance, you just put your typical hyperpartisan dax bullshit into it. You prove once again you don't get it and thus just gurgle out nonsense that everyone knows already. Corps that Libs admire choose to offshore trillions of dollars to avoid US taxation. One would think like Libs would be outraged over this. But, as long as these corps lean left, in some cases openly criticizing Drumpf. Libs don't care. In a related note trying to bring that money home and/or keep money that would be offshored in the future is certainly a worthy thing to look at. But as we've seen here Libs immediately think corporate welfare. So using that logic we have to believe the same Libs prefer these corps avoid paying US taxes on billions straight out. Which is weird.This just proves you literally did not read anything I wrote, never stop dax
Quote from: cfbandyman on July 19, 2017, 05:10:14 PMQuote from: sonofdaxjones on July 19, 2017, 04:01:32 PMCandyman. Come on man.The primary point is, the left wants to tax tax tax.Yet left preferred corporate heroes park a crap ton of cash offshore. Then when there's talk of trying to bring that back on shore. People like ednwhackadoo start talking about corporate welfare and neoconservative economics (whatever the eff that means). Meanwhile and apparently, people like ednwhackadoo has no problem with these companies parking trillions offshore, then to double down on the stupid ednwhackadoo tries to apply a "neoconservative" economy policy to what was apparently . . . nothing.I will not just come on, it was needless bullshit to stir the pot and you goddamn well know it and I called you out for it. I refuse to play your stupid games with the tax crap. If the game is rigged a certain way, corporations will play their games regardless of the politics, hell even within the article you posted great neocon and known trump lover Apple CEO Tim Cook was asking for lower corporate tax. Those lefty coprorations, what will they oppose what you want next.As for wanting where I, the flaming liberal you just hate where I'd want taxes to go up, you're in luck, cause I'll tell you where they should. I for one and totally fine will tax on a lot of brackets (not insane like the 50s-60s with like 24-33 of them, let's keep it around 9-15) that goes up to around 50-60% once you get to the 400k and 500k level, increase the standard deduction to help the middle class, keep that tax rate fairly low with a smaller slide for capital gains (really, not unchanged from what we have now). Really, the goal should be is to push away from CEOs and other high earning individuals from being paid essentially eff you money, and push their money earnings more into investments and compensation based on their ability to make their keeping corporations, and thus more people, successful. There is a big reason why there has been a divergence in who has wealth (cough cough Reagan) since the 80's. Corporate rates pegged somewhere near the average of the world (25ish%). That being said, it'd be effective enough to close some loopholes to keep the money from flooding out in the first place, as it would be hard to compete against the caymen island's (and others) low low rate of 0%. Tax havens abroad are hard to fight when you can shift things around globally like that. Overall, for a massive boogeyman you make the left to be, clearly history on corporate tax rates proves different as per the chart, no one has done dick about it.Your principle of wanting to lower the rate and actually get some income is not unfounded or wrong in this instance, you just put your typical hyperpartisan dax bullshit into it. You prove once again you don't get it and thus just gurgle out nonsense that everyone knows already. Corps that Libs admire choose to offshore trillions of dollars to avoid US taxation. One would think like Libs would be outraged over this. But, as long as these corps lean left, in some cases openly criticizing Drumpf. Libs don't care. In a related note trying to bring that money home and/or keep money that would be offshored in the future is certainly a worthy thing to look at. But as we've seen here Libs immediately think corporate welfare. So using that logic we have to believe the same Libs prefer these corps avoid paying US taxes on billions straight out. Which is weird.
Quote from: sonofdaxjones on July 19, 2017, 04:01:32 PMCandyman. Come on man.The primary point is, the left wants to tax tax tax.Yet left preferred corporate heroes park a crap ton of cash offshore. Then when there's talk of trying to bring that back on shore. People like ednwhackadoo start talking about corporate welfare and neoconservative economics (whatever the eff that means). Meanwhile and apparently, people like ednwhackadoo has no problem with these companies parking trillions offshore, then to double down on the stupid ednwhackadoo tries to apply a "neoconservative" economy policy to what was apparently . . . nothing.I will not just come on, it was needless bullshit to stir the pot and you goddamn well know it and I called you out for it. I refuse to play your stupid games with the tax crap. If the game is rigged a certain way, corporations will play their games regardless of the politics, hell even within the article you posted great neocon and known trump lover Apple CEO Tim Cook was asking for lower corporate tax. Those lefty coprorations, what will they oppose what you want next.As for wanting where I, the flaming liberal you just hate where I'd want taxes to go up, you're in luck, cause I'll tell you where they should. I for one and totally fine will tax on a lot of brackets (not insane like the 50s-60s with like 24-33 of them, let's keep it around 9-15) that goes up to around 50-60% once you get to the 400k and 500k level, increase the standard deduction to help the middle class, keep that tax rate fairly low with a smaller slide for capital gains (really, not unchanged from what we have now). Really, the goal should be is to push away from CEOs and other high earning individuals from being paid essentially eff you money, and push their money earnings more into investments and compensation based on their ability to make their keeping corporations, and thus more people, successful. There is a big reason why there has been a divergence in who has wealth (cough cough Reagan) since the 80's. Corporate rates pegged somewhere near the average of the world (25ish%). That being said, it'd be effective enough to close some loopholes to keep the money from flooding out in the first place, as it would be hard to compete against the caymen island's (and others) low low rate of 0%. Tax havens abroad are hard to fight when you can shift things around globally like that. Overall, for a massive boogeyman you make the left to be, clearly history on corporate tax rates proves different as per the chart, no one has done dick about it.Your principle of wanting to lower the rate and actually get some income is not unfounded or wrong in this instance, you just put your typical hyperpartisan dax bullshit into it.
Candyman. Come on man.The primary point is, the left wants to tax tax tax.Yet left preferred corporate heroes park a crap ton of cash offshore. Then when there's talk of trying to bring that back on shore. People like ednwhackadoo start talking about corporate welfare and neoconservative economics (whatever the eff that means). Meanwhile and apparently, people like ednwhackadoo has no problem with these companies parking trillions offshore, then to double down on the stupid ednwhackadoo tries to apply a "neoconservative" economy policy to what was apparently . . . nothing.
Quote from: sonofdaxjones on July 19, 2017, 10:01:52 PMQuote from: cfbandyman on July 19, 2017, 09:59:38 PMQuote from: sonofdaxjones on July 19, 2017, 09:56:04 PMQuote from: cfbandyman on July 19, 2017, 09:51:18 PMQuote from: sonofdaxjones on July 19, 2017, 09:08:00 PMQuote from: cfbandyman on July 19, 2017, 05:10:14 PMQuote from: sonofdaxjones on July 19, 2017, 04:01:32 PMCandyman. Come on man.The primary point is, the left wants to tax tax tax.Yet left preferred corporate heroes park a crap ton of cash offshore. Then when there's talk of trying to bring that back on shore. People like ednwhackadoo start talking about corporate welfare and neoconservative economics (whatever the eff that means). Meanwhile and apparently, people like ednwhackadoo has no problem with these companies parking trillions offshore, then to double down on the stupid ednwhackadoo tries to apply a "neoconservative" economy policy to what was apparently . . . nothing.I will not just come on, it was needless bullshit to stir the pot and you goddamn well know it and I called you out for it. I refuse to play your stupid games with the tax crap. If the game is rigged a certain way, corporations will play their games regardless of the politics, hell even within the article you posted great neocon and known trump lover Apple CEO Tim Cook was asking for lower corporate tax. Those lefty coprorations, what will they oppose what you want next.As for wanting where I, the flaming liberal you just hate where I'd want taxes to go up, you're in luck, cause I'll tell you where they should. I for one and totally fine will tax on a lot of brackets (not insane like the 50s-60s with like 24-33 of them, let's keep it around 9-15) that goes up to around 50-60% once you get to the 400k and 500k level, increase the standard deduction to help the middle class, keep that tax rate fairly low with a smaller slide for capital gains (really, not unchanged from what we have now). Really, the goal should be is to push away from CEOs and other high earning individuals from being paid essentially eff you money, and push their money earnings more into investments and compensation based on their ability to make their keeping corporations, and thus more people, successful. There is a big reason why there has been a divergence in who has wealth (cough cough Reagan) since the 80's. Corporate rates pegged somewhere near the average of the world (25ish%). That being said, it'd be effective enough to close some loopholes to keep the money from flooding out in the first place, as it would be hard to compete against the caymen island's (and others) low low rate of 0%. Tax havens abroad are hard to fight when you can shift things around globally like that. Overall, for a massive boogeyman you make the left to be, clearly history on corporate tax rates proves different as per the chart, no one has done dick about it.Your principle of wanting to lower the rate and actually get some income is not unfounded or wrong in this instance, you just put your typical hyperpartisan dax bullshit into it. You prove once again you don't get it and thus just gurgle out nonsense that everyone knows already. Corps that Libs admire choose to offshore trillions of dollars to avoid US taxation. One would think like Libs would be outraged over this. But, as long as these corps lean left, in some cases openly criticizing Drumpf. Libs don't care. In a related note trying to bring that money home and/or keep money that would be offshored in the future is certainly a worthy thing to look at. But as we've seen here Libs immediately think corporate welfare. So using that logic we have to believe the same Libs prefer these corps avoid paying US taxes on billions straight out. Which is weird.This just proves you literally did not read anything I wrote, never stop daxI did, look you're journey through individual tax rates, CEO's et al was fascinating. But not relevant. Also, I wasn't assailing the corporations themselves so why you even went down that path is weird in every way. That's just two things right there. you said the primary point of the left is tax tax tax, implying that to me, as you often do, I set you straight, and it is absolutely relevant to this discussion when I said Tim Cook wanted corporate taxes down. Don't duck out of thisWhere did I even imply that corporations wouldn't want and didn't want lower taxes. I am talking rank and file Libs who shriek at that thought of "Corporate Welfare".You're right, corporate welfare doesnt come from this tax rate, it comes from subisides for oil, agriculture, pharmaceuticals, tax exemptions from cities et al
Quote from: cfbandyman on July 19, 2017, 10:05:17 PMQuote from: sonofdaxjones on July 19, 2017, 10:01:52 PMQuote from: cfbandyman on July 19, 2017, 09:59:38 PMQuote from: sonofdaxjones on July 19, 2017, 09:56:04 PMQuote from: cfbandyman on July 19, 2017, 09:51:18 PMQuote from: sonofdaxjones on July 19, 2017, 09:08:00 PMQuote from: cfbandyman on July 19, 2017, 05:10:14 PMQuote from: sonofdaxjones on July 19, 2017, 04:01:32 PMCandyman. Come on man.The primary point is, the left wants to tax tax tax.Yet left preferred corporate heroes park a crap ton of cash offshore. Then when there's talk of trying to bring that back on shore. People like ednwhackadoo start talking about corporate welfare and neoconservative economics (whatever the eff that means). Meanwhile and apparently, people like ednwhackadoo has no problem with these companies parking trillions offshore, then to double down on the stupid ednwhackadoo tries to apply a "neoconservative" economy policy to what was apparently . . . nothing.I will not just come on, it was needless bullshit to stir the pot and you goddamn well know it and I called you out for it. I refuse to play your stupid games with the tax crap. If the game is rigged a certain way, corporations will play their games regardless of the politics, hell even within the article you posted great neocon and known trump lover Apple CEO Tim Cook was asking for lower corporate tax. Those lefty coprorations, what will they oppose what you want next.As for wanting where I, the flaming liberal you just hate where I'd want taxes to go up, you're in luck, cause I'll tell you where they should. I for one and totally fine will tax on a lot of brackets (not insane like the 50s-60s with like 24-33 of them, let's keep it around 9-15) that goes up to around 50-60% once you get to the 400k and 500k level, increase the standard deduction to help the middle class, keep that tax rate fairly low with a smaller slide for capital gains (really, not unchanged from what we have now). Really, the goal should be is to push away from CEOs and other high earning individuals from being paid essentially eff you money, and push their money earnings more into investments and compensation based on their ability to make their keeping corporations, and thus more people, successful. There is a big reason why there has been a divergence in who has wealth (cough cough Reagan) since the 80's. Corporate rates pegged somewhere near the average of the world (25ish%). That being said, it'd be effective enough to close some loopholes to keep the money from flooding out in the first place, as it would be hard to compete against the caymen island's (and others) low low rate of 0%. Tax havens abroad are hard to fight when you can shift things around globally like that. Overall, for a massive boogeyman you make the left to be, clearly history on corporate tax rates proves different as per the chart, no one has done dick about it.Your principle of wanting to lower the rate and actually get some income is not unfounded or wrong in this instance, you just put your typical hyperpartisan dax bullshit into it. You prove once again you don't get it and thus just gurgle out nonsense that everyone knows already. Corps that Libs admire choose to offshore trillions of dollars to avoid US taxation. One would think like Libs would be outraged over this. But, as long as these corps lean left, in some cases openly criticizing Drumpf. Libs don't care. In a related note trying to bring that money home and/or keep money that would be offshored in the future is certainly a worthy thing to look at. But as we've seen here Libs immediately think corporate welfare. So using that logic we have to believe the same Libs prefer these corps avoid paying US taxes on billions straight out. Which is weird.This just proves you literally did not read anything I wrote, never stop daxI did, look you're journey through individual tax rates, CEO's et al was fascinating. But not relevant. Also, I wasn't assailing the corporations themselves so why you even went down that path is weird in every way. That's just two things right there. you said the primary point of the left is tax tax tax, implying that to me, as you often do, I set you straight, and it is absolutely relevant to this discussion when I said Tim Cook wanted corporate taxes down. Don't duck out of thisWhere did I even imply that corporations wouldn't want and didn't want lower taxes. I am talking rank and file Libs who shriek at that thought of "Corporate Welfare".You're right, corporate welfare doesnt come from this tax rate, it comes from subisides for oil, agriculture, pharmaceuticals, tax exemptions from cities et alSigh, thanks again Captain Obvious. Then, like Russians, why do Libs see "corporate welfare" under every rock? Why would their be any opposition to reducing the highest corporate tax rate (or close) in the G20?
Quote from: sonofdaxjones on July 19, 2017, 10:10:39 PMQuote from: cfbandyman on July 19, 2017, 10:05:17 PMQuote from: sonofdaxjones on July 19, 2017, 10:01:52 PMQuote from: cfbandyman on July 19, 2017, 09:59:38 PMQuote from: sonofdaxjones on July 19, 2017, 09:56:04 PMQuote from: cfbandyman on July 19, 2017, 09:51:18 PMQuote from: sonofdaxjones on July 19, 2017, 09:08:00 PMQuote from: cfbandyman on July 19, 2017, 05:10:14 PMQuote from: sonofdaxjones on July 19, 2017, 04:01:32 PMCandyman. Come on man.The primary point is, the left wants to tax tax tax.Yet left preferred corporate heroes park a crap ton of cash offshore. Then when there's talk of trying to bring that back on shore. People like ednwhackadoo start talking about corporate welfare and neoconservative economics (whatever the eff that means). Meanwhile and apparently, people like ednwhackadoo has no problem with these companies parking trillions offshore, then to double down on the stupid ednwhackadoo tries to apply a "neoconservative" economy policy to what was apparently . . . nothing.I will not just come on, it was needless bullshit to stir the pot and you goddamn well know it and I called you out for it. I refuse to play your stupid games with the tax crap. If the game is rigged a certain way, corporations will play their games regardless of the politics, hell even within the article you posted great neocon and known trump lover Apple CEO Tim Cook was asking for lower corporate tax. Those lefty coprorations, what will they oppose what you want next.As for wanting where I, the flaming liberal you just hate where I'd want taxes to go up, you're in luck, cause I'll tell you where they should. I for one and totally fine will tax on a lot of brackets (not insane like the 50s-60s with like 24-33 of them, let's keep it around 9-15) that goes up to around 50-60% once you get to the 400k and 500k level, increase the standard deduction to help the middle class, keep that tax rate fairly low with a smaller slide for capital gains (really, not unchanged from what we have now). Really, the goal should be is to push away from CEOs and other high earning individuals from being paid essentially eff you money, and push their money earnings more into investments and compensation based on their ability to make their keeping corporations, and thus more people, successful. There is a big reason why there has been a divergence in who has wealth (cough cough Reagan) since the 80's. Corporate rates pegged somewhere near the average of the world (25ish%). That being said, it'd be effective enough to close some loopholes to keep the money from flooding out in the first place, as it would be hard to compete against the caymen island's (and others) low low rate of 0%. Tax havens abroad are hard to fight when you can shift things around globally like that. Overall, for a massive boogeyman you make the left to be, clearly history on corporate tax rates proves different as per the chart, no one has done dick about it.Your principle of wanting to lower the rate and actually get some income is not unfounded or wrong in this instance, you just put your typical hyperpartisan dax bullshit into it. You prove once again you don't get it and thus just gurgle out nonsense that everyone knows already. Corps that Libs admire choose to offshore trillions of dollars to avoid US taxation. One would think like Libs would be outraged over this. But, as long as these corps lean left, in some cases openly criticizing Drumpf. Libs don't care. In a related note trying to bring that money home and/or keep money that would be offshored in the future is certainly a worthy thing to look at. But as we've seen here Libs immediately think corporate welfare. So using that logic we have to believe the same Libs prefer these corps avoid paying US taxes on billions straight out. Which is weird.This just proves you literally did not read anything I wrote, never stop daxI did, look you're journey through individual tax rates, CEO's et al was fascinating. But not relevant. Also, I wasn't assailing the corporations themselves so why you even went down that path is weird in every way. That's just two things right there. you said the primary point of the left is tax tax tax, implying that to me, as you often do, I set you straight, and it is absolutely relevant to this discussion when I said Tim Cook wanted corporate taxes down. Don't duck out of thisWhere did I even imply that corporations wouldn't want and didn't want lower taxes. I am talking rank and file Libs who shriek at that thought of "Corporate Welfare".You're right, corporate welfare doesnt come from this tax rate, it comes from subisides for oil, agriculture, pharmaceuticals, tax exemptions from cities et alSigh, thanks again Captain Obvious. Then, like Russians, why do Libs see "corporate welfare" under every rock? Why would their be any opposition to reducing the highest corporate tax rate (or close) in the G20? I don't know dax, ask them, I really dont understand you sometimes, maybe you should stop baiting people with dumbassery like you always do, you ask a stupid question, you get a stupid answer
Candy man. Are we still friends?
or better yet stop tolling, or I'll keep making things difficult for you about things you think you're sooooo smart about, geez and to think people revere you
Quote from: cfbandyman on July 19, 2017, 10:20:45 PMor better yet stop tolling, or I'll keep making things difficult for you about things you think you're sooooo smart about, geez and to think people revere youStop being a moron and accept your beatdown. dax making you look like Hillary after Dondon grabbed her by the pussy and threw her into the Potomac.
Quote from: Republicat on July 19, 2017, 10:26:22 AMQuote from: Republicat on July 19, 2017, 10:25:07 AMQuote from: libliblibliblibliblib on July 19, 2017, 10:16:54 AMWhy would I call a burning man a racist? What a strange takebecause you call everyone a racist.No I call you a racist because you are a racist. TBT is right racistcat just wants validation.Hahahaha
Quote from: Republicat on July 19, 2017, 10:25:07 AMQuote from: libliblibliblibliblib on July 19, 2017, 10:16:54 AMWhy would I call a burning man a racist? What a strange takebecause you call everyone a racist.No I call you a racist because you are a racist. TBT is right racistcat just wants validation.
Quote from: libliblibliblibliblib on July 19, 2017, 10:16:54 AMWhy would I call a burning man a racist? What a strange takebecause you call everyone a racist.
Why would I call a burning man a racist? What a strange take
If you actually believe I'm racistcat, then I don't know where to begin with my disappointment in you
crap!
Hey cfbandyman, you are a disappointment