Stunned

[lawgator1]

I am going to say this twice. The problem in this economy is not that companies do not have enough money to hire.

People talk about the corporate tax rate in this country. Twenty-five of the most profitable companies in the U.S.last year paid their CEOs -- just their CEOS -- more than they paid in taxes. CEO Pay Exceeds Company Tax Bill at Major Corporations | Truthout


Here's a chart on hiring versus corporate profits.





The problem in this economy is not that companies do not have enough money to hire.



I am NOT accusing big business of being greedy. That's their function. What I AM saying is let's stop the charade that big business is hurting and that if we just cut their rates all will be right with the world.

 

[VOLatile]

Yeah. I'm sure you're really stunned. Just like how stunned I was when I saw the story last night. Really stunned me.

/s

Had a nice chat with a local business owner and the police chief last night at dinner about how corporations get massive tax breaks, yet small businesses get hardly anything.

 

[BigPapaVol]

Who is arguing to cut their rates? In fact, mist are arguing to kill the loopholes, fix the number and keep it transparent.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[golfballs]

we should nationalize those companies and force them to hire

 

[VOLatile]

we should nationalize those companies and force them to hire

Or just cut incentives until they stop squating.

 

[lawgator1]

Who is arguing to cut their rates? In fact, mist are arguing to kill the loopholes, fix the number and keep it transparent.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

You really believe the GOP favors taking actioin, the ultimate effect of which is to increase the taxes paid by these companies? Please, its a giant shell game. When the GOP says they want to close loopholes but lower rates, the plan they are presenting in detail ultimately reduces the tax bill on these companies.

we should nationalize those companies and force them to hire

No, don't force anyone to hire, that's silly.

Do, however, call them out on the fabrication that they are barely able to keep their heads above water.

 

[BigPapaVol]

LG, canning the loopholes will not lower the bill. Let's get out of the tax credit business and make the tax bill predictable for everyone.

I don't give a crap what a fundraising politician wants. I'm talking about what responsible Americans want. We'll have a much easier time balancing corporate vs personal income taxes if we can reasonably predict what everyone pays.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[HSVol]

Corporations are hoarding cash to hedge against another downturn. Sounds like sound business to me. They've learned the lessons from 2008. Plus, when businesses have found ways to increase profits through cutting costs and increasing efficiencies, why would they sacrifice those profits? They have an obligation to their shareholders to maximize profits.

It's the new normal for a reason. Doesn't make it good for everyone else, but there's an economic axiom that states that what is good for the individual isn't necessarily good for the group. That applies in this case.

It's not an evil corporate conspiracy. It's business.

 

[lawgator1]

Corporations are hoarding cash to hedge against another downturn. Sounds like sound business to me. They've learned the lessons from 2008. Plus, when businesses have found ways to increase profits through cutting costs and increasing efficiencies, why would they sacrifice those profits? They have an obligation to their shareholders to maximize profits.

It's the new normal for a reason. Doesn't make it good for everyone else, but there's an economic axiom that states that what is good for the individual isn't necessarily good for the group. That applies in this case.

It's not an evil corporate conspiracy. It's business.

I don't disagree with you.

But would you also agree with me that they don't need a tax break?

 

[sjt18]

I am going to say this twice. The problem in this economy is not that companies do not have enough money to hire.

People talk about the corporate tax rate in this country. Twenty-five of the most profitable companies in the U.S.last year paid their CEOs -- just their CEOS -- more than they paid in taxes. CEO Pay Exceeds Company Tax Bill at Major Corporations | Truthout


Here's a chart on hiring versus corporate profits.





The problem in this economy is not that companies do not have enough money to hire.



I am NOT accusing big business of being greedy. That's their function. What I AM saying is let's stop the charade that big business is hurting and that if we just cut their rates all will be right with the world.

The problem right now IS Barack Obama. He is single-handedly keeping jitters in the market. Regardless of what he "says"... his regulatory storm troopers are out there playing a very expensive game of "gotcha". Obamacare still looms out there as an expense that companies cannot afford. If they are to survive its implementation... they'll need cash. Obama has tried every angle there is to raise taxes on businesses. The pro-union stuff he's doing is absolutely anti-business and will result in more good jobs moving out of the country if it isn't stopped.

Companies will spend money when they see favorable probability for a return. Not before. Unfortunately, that probably requires Obama to be defeated. They don't trust him BECAUSE he's given them ample reason not to.

 

[sjt18]

I don't disagree with you.

But would you also agree with me that they don't need a tax break?

No. Not really. That changes the economic equation. It makes it more likely that companies can make a profit even with the other uncertainty spawned by Obama. If he weren't de-stabilizing the economy in so many other ways then you might have a point.

 

[BigPapaVol]

I don't disagree with you.

But would you also agree with me that they don't need a tax break?

Nobody is debating a tax break. The argument is about a de facto tax hike, which, in this economy with this loony administration, is senseless.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[sjt18]

You really believe the GOP favors taking actioin, the ultimate effect of which is to increase the taxes paid by these companies? Please, its a giant shell game. When the GOP says they want to close loopholes but lower rates, the plan they are presenting in detail ultimately reduces the tax bill on these companies.




.

Actually I think MOST Republicans are on record favoring a reduction of rates couple with the elimination of deductions, credits, and loopholes. The net effect would still be more revenue because it would create a more favorable business environment and lower the cost of tax code compliance.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

Corporations aren't going broke. The government is.

Most people on top of all this realize the difference.

 

[n_huffhines]

Had a nice chat with a local business owner and the police chief last night at dinner about how corporations get massive tax breaks, yet small businesses get hardly anything.

Just saw Amazon is moving (leaving CA, I think) to Texas who promised them major breaks on state taxes in order for them move there. State governments are willing to do this because they want the jobs, but this gives an unfair advantage to big employers over small business.

Laissez faire, mofos. Figure it out.

 

[volinbham]

I don't think anyone was saying companies couldn't afford to hire - most of the headlines are about all the cash they have sitting on the sidelines.

What has been said repeatedly is that businesses are afraid to hire because they can't plan for the future costs of 1) their employees, 2) regulatory-based changes.

BPV is right and if you look at Ryan's plan it does include removal of loopholes in favor of a stable tax rate that applies equally across businesses and industries.

 

[volinbham]

Actually I think MOST Republicans are on record favoring a reduction of rates couple with the elimination of deductions, credits, and loopholes. The net effect would still be more revenue because it would create a more favorable business environment and lower the cost of tax code compliance.

It is a core component of the Ryan plan that passed the House so yes they favor this.

 

[HSVol]

I can understand both sides of the argument. However, I'm not convinced corporate tax breaks would equal new jobs. We need an increase in consumer demand before there's a need to hire new workers, or else there's no need to ramp up production. If there's no increase in quantity demanded, there's no need to increase the supply.

My question is would a tax break equal more jobs? Why would a company hire new workers to produce goods and services for which there is no demand? It seems to me, and this is only my opinion, that a tax break would equal more cash hoarded. Actually a good thing for corporate survivability in a downturn, but I'm not sure it would benefit the jobless.

 

[volinbham]

I can understand both sides of the argument. However, I'm not convinced corporate tax breaks would equal new jobs. We need an increase in consumer demand before there's a need to hire new workers, or else there's no need to ramp up production. If there's no increase in quantity demanded, there's no need to increase the supply.

My question is would a tax break equal more jobs? Why would a company hire new workers to produce goods and services for which there is no demand? It seems to me, and this is only my opinion, that a tax break would equal more cash hoarded. Actually a good thing for corporate survivability in a downturn, but I'm not sure it would benefit the jobless.

You can take this analogy to a larger degree - why would any government stimulus = more demand?

From all I've seen, the biggest thing that would drive more hiring is predictability of future costs.

The logic of stimulus and hiring is the same - more $ in the hands of people = more demand; more demand = more need for jobs. If this logic holds, extending UE payments in effect substitutes for job growth.

IMHO if the govt would not keep extending UE while at the same time showing some signs of a more predictable regulatory environment then the "stimulus" would come from the private sector. Forget the tax incentives and short-term credits. Simplify the tax code and stabilize it. That will do more than a temporary change in rates.

 

[IBlvNTmWrk]

I'll bet that $500 million that Obama gave out to his buddies at Solyndra could have been used to create a lot of jobs... oh wait, that's why he gave it to them in the first place.

 

[BigPapaVol]

Muons who believes the regulatory environment for lenders isn't a huge liquidity problem in the greater economy just doesn't know anything about it.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[volinbham]

From the Kauffmann Foundation - ways to jump start new companies and the economy.

Let's import a lot more skilled workers, beginning with those who want to come here and found companies.

Let's change our tax code to facilitate the financing of small business, with a permanent capital gains exemption on investments in startups held for at least five years and a significant cut in corporate tax rates for new companies in the first three years they have taxable income.

To make it easier for growing private companies to go public, let's give their shareholders (who can best judge the benefits and costs of financial auditing mandates) and those of other public companies with a market cap of $1 billion or less the choice whether to comply with the onerous requirements of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.

To get more new ideas into the marketplace faster, let's give the Patent and Trademark Office the tools it needs -- primarily differential fees for faster service, but with special breaks for small business and individual inventors -- to cut down the enormous and growing backlog of patent applications.

Furthermore, let's create a competitive market in technology licensing by enabling faculty inventors more freedom to license their federally funded innovations, without having to be hostage to their own universities' licensing offices.

And let's finally truly reform federal regulation by sun-setting all major rules after 10 years, requiring all new major rules to pass a benefit-cost test, and by collecting sufficient data on regulation at the state and local level to permit private sector organizations to rate these jurisdictions on their business-friendly climates.

The last one would help across large and small businesses.

 

[lawgator1]

Nobody is debating a tax break. The argument is about a de facto tax hike, which, in this economy with this loony administration, is senseless.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

No, you are wrong. The GOP has been proposing "tax reform" and a reduced rate on corporations while closing some loopholes, but as I say the proposals are shell games and replace obsolete tax breaks with new and improved versions, which will lower the actual gross taxes paid even more.

 

[volinbham]

No, you are wrong. The GOP has been proposing "tax reform" and a reduced rate on corporations while closing some loopholes, but as I say the proposals are shell games and replace obsolete tax breaks with new and improved versions, which will lower the actual gross taxes paid even more.

what are the "new and improved" ones?

how have you determined actual gross taxes will be reduced?

 

[BigPapaVol]

No, you are wrong. The GOP has been proposing "tax reform" and a reduced rate on corporations while closing some loopholes, but as I say the proposals are shell games and replace obsolete tax breaks with new and improved versions, which will lower the actual gross taxes paid even more.

No, you are wrong. The net effect is greater and more predictable tax streams from corporations.
Posted via VolNation Mobile