Abrignac
2 years ago

$1.7 trillion in cuts means elimination of social security and the entire military.

HockeyDad wrote:



Well this intrigued me so I went surfing.

The 2021 “budget” was $7.1 Trillion. To be fair this budget includes COVID relief/stimulus money. I’ll see if I can find a more recent budget for comparison’s sake.

Of that:

$2.81 T (39.63 😵 for Social Security, Unemployment and Labor
$773.28 B (10.91 😵 for Military

Now to find revenue for 2021 to see how much was added to the debt for 2021.


HockeyDad
2 years ago

Well this intrigued me so I went surfing.

The 2021 “budget” was $7.1 Trillion. To be fair this budget includes COVID relief/stimulus money. I’ll see if I can find a more recent budget for comparison’s sake.

Of that:

$2.81 T (39.63 😵 for Social Security, Unemployment and Labor
$773.28 B (10.91 😵 for Military

Now to find revenue for 2021 to see how much was added to the debt for 2021.


Abrignac wrote:




You can’t use 2021 Great Reset spending numbers. They’re crazy.


$6.1T spend $4.4T revenue is 2023 FY

https://home.treasury.gov/news/press-releases/jy1829#:~:text=Outlays%20were%20%246.1%20trillion%20in,%24137%20billion%2C%20or%202.2%20percent .
RayR
2 years ago
HD, the regime is taking us down the tubes pretty fast. I wouldn't believe a thing Grandma Yellen says, she lies a lot. Things must be much worse than that press release.
Brewha
2 years ago

Jeez Scott give it a rest. I don’t know the magic percentage but it’s entirely possible to reduce government revenue by raising taxes. I think I read a government jobs report one time that stated around 85% or more jobs in the US are with small businesses. They are much more susceptible to increased taxes than large corporations and as such will be bankrupted by tax increases large enough to support the current level of government spending.

Large corporations are also sensitive to tax increases. But due to their size there are many offshore locations willing to host them at much more favorable tax rates. When the leave so does their taxes. Ever wonder why companies like Amazon pay a low taxes? Exxon-Mobil? Berkshire Hathaway? Because they have moved many of their corporate operations offshore. Seems there was an another government report that showed that even if the corporate tax was raised it would add very little to actual revenue relative to total intake.

Can you do better are will you just continue to troll with your raise corporate tax mantra?

Abrignac wrote:


You would ask anyone this clown show to “give it a rest”? You know better than that.

You believe that Amazon moved its corporate operations off shore - and there for pay little to no tax? You know that Amazon has a huge corporate operation in the 50 states, right?

Oh - and we should raise corporate taxes.
Brewha
2 years ago

People who identify as poor and victims should not have the internet.

HockeyDad wrote:


Trump says he is a victim - should we keep him off the internets?
Abrignac
2 years ago

You would ask anyone this clown show to “give it a rest”? You know better than that.

You believe that Amazon moved its corporate operations off shore - and there for pay little to no tax? You know that Amazon has a huge corporate operation in the 50 states, right?

Oh - and we should raise corporate taxes.

Brewha wrote:



Forgive my mistakes.

1) I should have used Apple as an example vs Amazon.
2) Should have said operations not corporate headquarters.

https://itep.org/fortune-500-companies-hold-a-record-26-trillion-offshore/#:~:text=Congressional%20hearings%20over%20the%20past%20few%20years%20have,lesser%20known%20companies%20such%20as%20Oracle%20and%20Symantec .

And yes I do certainly believe Amazon pays little to no taxes. In fact, its net tax burden for 2020 was 9.4%, which less than half of the statutory rate of 21%, on revenue of $24B.

https://itep.org/amazon-has-record-breaking-profits-in-2020-avoids-2-3-billion-in-federal-income-taxes/ 

But, isn’t its founder and CEO a Democrat supporter and mega donor? Don’t Democrats as a whole espouse higher taxes. I guess they do as long as they’re not the ones paying them.
RayR
2 years ago
The less Amazon pays in taxes, the more they have to donate to the DNC.

Democrats only encourage higher taxes for their non-supporters, so to facilitate support even from the unwilling they promote a complex tax code with deductions, incentives related to investment, research, and employee compensation. Then they'll threaten to raise taxes by taking take away those loopholes, those tax avoidance perks thus forcing their victims to seek relief by donating to their causes and their campaigns, all of which involve boosting their power and wealth.
Brewha
2 years ago

Forgive my mistakes.

1) I should have used Apple as an example vs Amazon.
2) Should have said operations not corporate headquarters.

https://itep.org/fortune-500-companies-hold-a-record-26-trillion-offshore/#:~:text=Congressional%20hearings%20over%20the%20past%20few%20years%20have,lesser%20known%20companies%20such%20as%20Oracle%20and%20Symantec .

And yes I do certainly believe Amazon pays little to no taxes. In fact, its net tax burden for 2020 was 9.4%, which less than half of the statutory rate of 21%, on revenue of $24B.

https://itep.org/amazon-has-record-breaking-profits-in-2020-avoids-2-3-billion-in-federal-income-taxes/ 

But, isn’t its founder and CEO a Democrat supporter and mega donor? Don’t Democrats as a whole espouse higher taxes. I guess they do as long as they’re not the ones paying them.

Abrignac wrote:



As a someone who votes Democrat, I’ll tell you the problem is too much of the tax burden is on the middle class. And that large corporation and the wealthy do not pay what they should as they have lobbyist and in general own officials that can see to their interest at the expense of the middle class.

And while I’m at it; I’ll tell you that the mega churches and their businesses should be taxed. This is because I’m no only a crazy liberal but and agnostic as well.
RayR
2 years ago

As a someone who votes Democrat, I’ll tell you the problem is too much of the tax burden is on the middle class. And that large corporation and the wealthy do not pay what they should as they have lobbyist and in general own officials that can see to their interest at the expense of the middle class.

And while I’m at it; I’ll tell you that the mega churches and their businesses should be taxed. This is because I’m no only a crazy liberal but and agnostic as well.

Brewha wrote:



Interesting 🤔 You sound just like one of those flighty TAX THE RICH commies like AOC and Bernie Sanders with their shoddy economics. Brew, why do you love the idea of taxing everybody you don't like until it hurts? Are you a sadist?



Abrignac
2 years ago

As a someone who votes Democrat, I’ll tell you the problem is too much of the tax burden is on the middle class. And that large corporation and the wealthy do not pay what they should as they have lobbyist and in general own officials that can see to their interest at the expense of the middle class.

And while I’m at it; I’ll tell you that the mega churches and their businesses should be taxed. This is because I’m no only a crazy liberal but and agnostic as well.

Brewha wrote:



Don’t disagree that the middle class shoulders a large overall percentage of the tax burden. But, the notion of ever collecting a statistical significant portion of taxes from the corporate sector has been, currently is and forever will be a pipe dream.

The corporate tax rate is 21% on net earnings. Yet, as evidenced by the second article I sent you large corporations will NEVER pay that rate and in most cases nowhere near that rate. Why? As sure as taxes or increased or some credit expires a new credit will take its place. Congress “fixes” loop holes only for 3 to take its place. Then Congress bickers over the new loop hole for x number of years. Then closes it. However that closing is usually offset by something new. Or savy accountants figure a way around it. Lather, rinse, repeat.

However, suppose Congress finally gets it right. A perfect and equitable tax code is by some miracle born. Now corporations have to pay their fair share. Well that’s going to play havoc on their share price. Investors are going to start looking for new stocks whose sale price was least affected. Do you think these formally greedy corporations are going to be satisfied and tow the new line? Doubtful. They will simply start raising prices to offset after tax earnings drops to push their share price as high as possible back the their prices before this new tax.

So now we’re right back where we started. The middle class shouldering too large a burden because they are paying a new tax. However, it’s not an income tax. It’s an inflation tax. So when it’s all said and done what was accomplished? Probably very little.

I forget what caused it but I remember when Biden was touting what has become known as Bideomics he promised lower taxes on people whose earnings were below a certain threshold. The reality is that program actually raised the costs born by the middle class.

The answer is to not keep increasing corporate taxes in an unending search of some holy grail solution that doesn’t exist. It would be far wiser to find a way to disincentivize retained corporate earnings. By doing so more dollars enter the economy and as a nation we benefit from the multiplier affect. It sounds like Reaganomics in a way but with some tweaks. It needs to ensure that money currently removed from the economy is brought in to the economy.
RayR
2 years ago
As long as you keep supporting progressive tax codes, the middle class will always be tax serfs complaining others are not being taxed enough.

"Progressive taxation of income and profits means that precisely those parts of the income which people would have saved and invested are taxed away." - Von Mises (Economic Policy)

"Nothing is more calculated to make a demagogue popular than a constantly reiterated demand for heavy taxes on the rich. Capital levies and high income taxes on the larger incomes are extraordinarily popular with the masses, who do not have to pay them." - Von Mises (Human Action)
Brewha
2 years ago

Don’t disagree that the middle class shoulders a large overall percentage of the tax burden. But, the notion of ever collecting a statistical significant portion of taxes from the corporate sector has been, currently is and forever will be a pipe dream.

The corporate tax rate is 21% on net earnings. Yet, as evidenced by the second article I sent you large corporations will NEVER pay that rate and in most cases nowhere near that rate. Why? As sure as taxes or increased or some credit expires a new credit will take its place. Congress “fixes” loop holes only for 3 to take its place. Then Congress bickers over the new loop hole for x number of years. Then closes it. However that closing is usually offset by something new. Or savy accountants figure a way around it. Lather, rinse, repeat.

However, suppose Congress finally gets it right. A perfect and equitable tax code is by some miracle born. Now corporations have to pay their fair share. Well that’s going to play havoc on their share price. Investors are going to start looking for new stocks whose sale price was least affected. Do you think these formally greedy corporations are going to be satisfied and tow the new line? Doubtful. They will simply start raising prices to offset after tax earnings drops to push their share price as high as possible back the their prices before this new tax.

So now we’re right back where we started. The middle class shouldering too large a burden because they are paying a new tax. However, it’s not an income tax. It’s an inflation tax. So when it’s all said and done what was accomplished? Probably very little.

I forget what caused it but I remember when Biden was touting what has become known as Bideomics he promised lower taxes on people whose earnings were below a certain threshold. The reality is that program actually raised the costs born by the middle class.

The answer is to not keep increasing corporate taxes in an unending search of some holy grail solution that doesn’t exist. It would be far wiser to find a way to disincentivize retained corporate earnings. By doing so more dollars enter the economy and as a nation we benefit from the multiplier affect. It sounds like Reaganomics in a way but with some tweaks. It needs to ensure that money currently removed from the economy is brought in to the economy.

Abrignac wrote:



First off I don't think the rich people would like that idea - then there is the matter of how to do it.

It does worry me that it sounds like your idea is base on the idea that companies will never "net net" pay their fair share - you're prolly right about that.

But when Cinnamon Hitler give them a huge tax break - and then we don't want to undo it - who to blame them?
Us I think.
ZRX1200
2 years ago
Keep your pitchfork sharp and your torches dry…..

*sigh*
RayR
2 years ago

Keep your pitchfork sharp and your torches dry…..

*sigh*

ZRX1200 wrote:



Brewha is most definitely a sadist. He can't deny it.
It's been a Jacobin lefty thing since the French Revolution to inflict as much pain as they can on people they don't like.

Users browsing this topic