And raising taxes is like using a Band-aid when a tourniquet is needed.

Clinton
1994 1,461,753
1995 1,515,742
1996 1,560,484
1997 1,601,116

1998 1,652,458
1999 1,701,842
2000 1,788,950
2001 1,862,846

Bush
2002 2,010,894
2003 2,159,899
2004 2,292,841
2005 2,471,957

2006 2,655,050
2007 2,728,686
2008 2,982,544
2009 3,517,677

Obama
2010 3,456,213
2011 3,603,061
2012 estimate 3,795,547
2013 estimate 3,803,364

As can be seen, spending went up by 0.61 trillion during first 4 fiscal years (fy 2005 – fy 2001) and 1.05 trillion during the second 4 fiscal years (fy 2009 – fy 2005) of the Bush administration. In contrast, it is estimated that spending will increase under the Obama administration first 4 fiscal years (fy 2013 estimated – fy 2009) by 0.28 trillion dollars. I’ll leave it to the reader to decide under which administration federal government spending exploded.

With this understanding, every person employed by a corporation is earning taxable income. A new tax code could possibly eliminate “redundant” corporate taxes, close ALL loopholes and establish a new, more equitable set of tables. Defining “equitable” to everyone’s satisfaction will likely continue to be a challenge.

Apple and all the rest knew what the laws were before they started bankrolling millions and billions in overseas profits, and should pay taxes if they want to use the money here in the USA.

Likewise.. they wouldn’t have all that profit, save for underpaid foreign workers putting all those parts together.

Assuming Apple does pay, it would interesting to see what the difference would be to have paid US workers a fair wage to do the same job. They could still keep the COST of iDevices close to the same, but the profit margin on each would be less…. OFFSET, of course, by having to pay a lot less in taxes on overseas profits.

If corporations want to be persons in the legal sense we should shackle their azz just like any citizen. We are subject to double taxation when we work as expatriates- why should they be any different?

Corporations should be stripped of legal personhood and put under restricted time charters like they were originally. They had to prove their worth to be rechartered and could not exist beyond the lifetime of a human.

Throught the Euro Union corporations are in the process of moving their HQ,s to Switzerland for two reasons: To be near their customers HQ,s and to be able to pay less corporation tax. So the Swiss will collect the lions share of multi -national corporation tax generated in the EEC even though Switzerland is not a member state of the EEC. Meanwhile sales taxes are likely to rise as a result. In the UK Value Added Tax was originally 8% it went to 15% then 17.5% and now it’s 20%. Tax relief of your home loan was abolished some time back. Pension pots were raided too because politicians and the ruling elites won’t get a grip on direct taxation and the numerous loopholes that exist.

It’s an old Democrat trick, and Republicans allow it.

Because that’s how votes are bought. More benefits for less work.

Also, if a VAT is implemented, it will be in ADDITION to a high income tax rate.

What are you smoking….?

At some point, prices will rise or some aspect of service will be cut.

If you raise taxes on the people and reduce taxes on corporations, then EVERYONE pays for the reduced prices on goods.

VAT is based on the principle of making people who consume more, pay more. It’s a more “FAIR” tax than increased taxation on income. The US would be wise to adopt a national sales tax and a corresponding reduction in income tax.

You want MORE, you pay MORE.

Why does everything we do benefit the consumers and not the fiscally responsible?

http://ingrimayne.com/econ/elasticity/RevEtDemand.html

And that most businesses are already charging whatever the traffic will bear. They can’t pass along increased taxes (costs) without reducing demand, and therefor, profits.

I can see the headlines
“New tax Keeps ‘The Little Guy’ From Enjoying Coffee While Listening To iPod”
Pull quote “Only the 1%ers can buy those now!’ (never mind the reality….)

The BEST idea to generate revenue is for the economy to be booming.
The BEST way for the economy to succeed is to remove as much uncertainty as possible.
The BEST way to do that is be realistic about what we as a nation can afford and what we want to pay in taxes.

Too much social engineering has removed certainty in the markets as well as the desire to pay more in taxes, because most of us know it will end up being wasted NO MATTER HOW HIGH THEY RAISE THE RATE!!!!!

What is your point?

As far as leaders of corporations not being held responsible, only in America, for now.

A tax is a tax is a tax, directly or indirectly.
If they can afford it, fine.
VAT anyone? That is where this is heading.

Which begs the question, why not just raise the income tax level, since it is the same people who will pay it?

It’s all a game, where one side gets to say ‘yeah, we really stood up for the little guy by sticking it to those faceless corporations!’
(never mind that, when it is all said and done, the faceless corps STILL don’t actually pay the tax, the ‘little guy’ does)

As for people paying taxes… didn’t they already try to raise taxes on the wealthy? Didn’t work too well.

But then again, you know this, and understand the ramifications to the consumer, worker, and investor.

You can only vote out the politicians, not the bureaucrats.

Dramatic? You must lead a very boring life if THIS is dramatic!

And BTW, it is the FannieMae, FreddieMac debacle and ObamaCare that are(will be) eating our taxes up, not the war.

Anyhow, this thread wasn’t about politics, you just brought that up.

It’s not even whether corporations should pay or not, just the fact that in the end, it WILL affect consumers, directly or indirectly.

And the fact that you refuse to read anything that doesn’t go in line with your belief of what reality is explains why you have no grasp of it…..

The reason is was just added to the budget was for the sake of
The Democrats. It was always known the war would eventually end and the amount not spent in later years. Now that it has been added to the budget, they will ALWAYS spend that much, even when the war is over.

This why Conservatives are so against raising taxes. Not that we don’t want the debt paid, but because it ALWAYS adds new debt.

The reality is we faought a war for over a decade that we just recently started including in our budgets and we have to pay for it somehow. If that causes corporate profits to go down or I have to make my laptop last an extra year… So be it.

The fact is investors look at profits as a reason to invest. Less profit could result in less investment, and the chain reaction starts.

Just because a reality is simplistic doesn’t make it ‘simple’. Added cost hit the consumers in one way or the other.

Of course, the government could always take that tax revenue and subsidize the related cost to avoid any chance of “too big to fail”…..

Bullshit. They make this profit from selling in the UK. I hate it when someone thinks readers are complete fools.

If you follow it through, we end up with a small cartel of multinationals pretty much dominating every industry sector. Is that really what we want?

We shall see how it plays out.