The "People's Budget" from Progressive Caucus

#126
#126
BigPapaVol said:
Last question is one of the dumbest things I've ever read.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Of course. I felt rather embarassed having to write it. But, even you, in your area of interest, have proven to be a bit confused. The propaganda machine has done it's job well - and I was shocked to learn exactly how well.

The consumer does not absorb the tax burden. Taxes, put to use protecting incomes, jobs, etc, is therefore one of the most efficient ways of keeping the economy humming and keeping iniquity at a minimum.

This is obvious. This is elementary stuff. Yet the propaganda has American educated elites believing corporations should pay zero taxes because prices would suddenly fall (or go up). It's comic and tragic in the same breath.
 
Last edited:
#127
#127
utgibbs said:
Of course. I felt rather embarassed having to write it. But, even you, in your area of interest, have proven to be a bit confused. The propaganda machine has done it's job well - and I was shocked to learn exactly how well.

The consumer does not absorb the tax burden. Taxes, put to use protecting incomes, jobs, etc, is therefore one of the most efficient ways of keeping the economy humming and keeping iniquity at a minimum.

This is obvious. This is elementary stuff. Yet the propaganda has American educated elites believing corporations should pay zero taxes because prices would suddenly fall (or go up). It's comic and tragic in the same breath.
Click to expand...

Of course I confused you, as you have no idea what you're talking about. No amount of pretending you've proven something or settled a debate changes that you're just pissing in the wind. The last question I referenced was simply more evidence that you have no idea what might be going on around you.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#128
#128
VolDad said:
Where did I say "double your rents"? I said if taxes doubled for all rental property owners would you not raise your rent?
Click to expand...

utgibbs said:
Your OP completely contradicts this. You started by saying corporations do not pay taxes, they simply pass costs to the consumer. That implies the consumer pays for the tax burden. We have proven this absolutely false.

In today's market? - absolutely not. But I wear a lot of hats.
Click to expand...

It was a simple "Yes" or "No" question. I understand why you don't want to answer it.
 
#130
#130
BigPapaVol said:
Of course I confused you, as you have no idea what you're talking about. No amount of pretending you've proven something or settled a debate changes that you're just pissing in the wind. The last question I referenced was simply more evidence that you have no idea what might be going on around you.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

And we've all become accustomed to your James Stockdale impersonation of squawking, "Gridlock!" "You don't know what you are talking about...." "Who am I? Why am I here?" when you have been taken behind the woodshed.
 
#131
#131
utgibbs said:
And now you claim you don't understand Absolutely not?

And I understand perfectly why you don't. :hi:
Click to expand...

You used a disclaimer "in today’s market". You continue to play word games. (i.e. I would not double my rent, in today’s market - absolutely not).
 
#132
#132
utgibbs said:
And we've all become accustomed to your James Stockdale impersonation of squawking, "Gridlock!" "You don't know what you are talking about...." "Who am I? Why am I here?" when you have been taken behind the woodshed.
Click to expand...

Who is we?

When you're saying idiotic crap like a line item effectively doubling anything, the woodshed needs to be dropped on you.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#134
#134
VolDad said:
You used a disclaimer "in today’s market". You continue to play word games. (i.e. I would not double my rent, in today’s market - absolutely not).
Click to expand...

:lolabove:

"Absolutely not" is now a "word game." I suppose I should expect nothing less from the master quibbler.
 
#135
#135
I believe gibbs is saying that he is such a good business man that he would prefer losing money to raising prices. After all, he'll grab market share
 
#136
#136
you guys are high. we can raise taxes to any level and there will be no effect on the consumer. capital!
 
#137
#137
utgibbs said:
You're welcome. I've been running mine a little less time. And the gov't doesn't classify it as "dinky."

Taxes are part of the cost of doing business. They do not affect your profits and how you get them.

This is so academic.

If your taxes on profits doubled, could you raise your prices 2x?
Click to expand...

Of course not. But as has been stated ad nauseum they impact the amount of profit you are left with. Profit is needed (or as has been stated better, cash flow) to ride the ups and downs; attract capital and keep the business going. Taxes absolutely reduce the amount of profit you have left.

More importantly, if taxes were zero that reduction would be seen in prices - this is the entire point you've been arguing against. From this perspective, taxes are a pass through due their impact on prices.
 
#138
#138
Let's attack this from the other direction.

Gibbs, if your tax rate doubled do you believe your competitors would raise their prices? Would you? If not, how would you compensate for the reduction in after tax profits?

If you are fine with lower after tax profits, why not go ahead and lower your prices? Afterall, it will result in huge market share gains for you.
 
#139
#139
volinbham said:
Let's attack this from the other direction.

Gibbs, if your tax rate doubled do you believe your competitors would raise their prices? Would you? If not, how would you compensate for the reduction in after tax profits?

If you are fine with lower after tax profits, why not go ahead and lower your prices? Afterall, it will result in huge market share gains for you.
Click to expand...

he would just pay it out of profits. because every company and rich person has an unlimited amount of profits to tap into.
 
#140
#140
volinbham said:
Of course not. But as has been stated ad nauseum they impact the amount of profit you are left with. Profit is needed (or as has been stated better, cash flow) to ride the ups and downs; attract capital and keep the business going. Taxes absolutely reduce the amount of profit you have left.

More importantly, if taxes were zero that reduction would be seen in prices - this is the entire point you've been arguing against. From this perspective, taxes are a pass through due their impact on prices.
Click to expand...

volinbham, I've been saying that for a long time now. And it seems a not so very nuanced point y'all don't understand well.

It wasn't that corporate profitability was any better in the 1990s, it was that their taxes were so much lower.

Inflation was low in the 1990s, but this had everything to do with stagnant real wages and a loss of labor's bargaining power (with a dash of historically low oil prices). But those lower taxes DID NOT lower prices.

The argument was corporations simply pass their tax burden to the consumer. VolDad described this by saying, "Corporations don't pay taxes; they pass this on to the consumer." This absolutely does not happen.

Also, just so we are clear (because y'all have really shocked me on this one), profits are what you make after your operational costs. That is, it's the money you have after you pay for everything and everyone.
 
#141
#141
I have no clue if Gibbs is telling the truth about being a business man, but I had the unfortunate opportunity to watch one of my good friends go under because of the taxes he was having to pay. There are only two groups of people taxes are good for, the people who work for the government, and the poor, other than those two groups, taxes hinder a lot of growth for the average person. Just think what I could do with the $650 a month I pay in taxes. I could own my own home.
 
#142
#142
g8terh8ter_eric said:
I have no clue if Gibbs is telling the truth about being a business man, but I had the unfortunate opportunity to watch one of my good friends go under because of the taxes he was having to pay. There are only two groups of people taxes are good for, the people who work for the government, and the poor, other than those two groups, taxes hinder a lot of growth for the average person. Just think what I could do with the $650 a month I pay in taxes. I could own my own home.
Click to expand...

Remarkably, I've made the point that taxing corporations (non-people) at the proper rate would put more money in real people's pockets.

And then, when demonstrated beyond a shadow of a doubt, hey, the market determines prices not taxes, and taxes on corporations would be highly efficient, we still get an "argument" (sic) a few days later.
 
#143
#143
yet you've failed to explain how a market can dictate selling below cost if taxes go up. Guess I'll just keep waiting on that one
 
#144
#144
utgibbs said:
Remarkably, I've made the point that taxing corporations (non-people) at the proper rate would put more money in real people's pockets.

And then, when demonstrated beyond a shadow of a doubt, hey, the market determines prices not taxes, and taxes on corporations would be highly efficient, we still get an "argument" (sic) a few days later.
Click to expand...

Taxes are a cost of doing business, and they do effect prices. The tax is always passed down to the consumer, that's how business has been done for a long time now.
 
#145
#145
utgibbs said:
Remarkably, I've made the point that taxing corporations (non-people) at the proper rate would put more money in real people's pockets.

And then, when demonstrated beyond a shadow of a doubt, hey, the market determines prices not taxes, and taxes on corporations would be highly efficient, we still get an "argument" (sic) a few days later.
Click to expand...

the market determines prices, yet prices for market driven healthcare are inefficient?
 
#146
#146
g8terh8ter_eric said:
Taxes are a cost of doing business, and they do effect prices. The tax is always passed down to the consumer, that's how business has been done for a long time now.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if that's true 100% all of the time but you're right, a cost is a cost. (tax is just an example) If something negatively hits cash flow then I only see three options; you eat it, (if you've got nice margins that's on the table I guess), you cut elsewhere to compensate (downsize, cut salaries/benefits, etc) or pass the cost on to the consumer. What else is there?
 
#147
#147
utgibbs said:
volinbham, I've been saying that for a long time now. And it seems a not so very nuanced point y'all don't understand well.

It wasn't that corporate profitability was any better in the 1990s, it was that their taxes were so much lower.

Inflation was low in the 1990s, but this had everything to do with stagnant real wages and a loss of labor's bargaining power (with a dash of historically low oil prices). But those lower taxes DID NOT lower prices.

The argument was corporations simply pass their tax burden to the consumer. VolDad described this by saying, "Corporations don't pay taxes; they pass this on to the consumer." This absolutely does not happen.

Also, just so we are clear (because y'all have really shocked me on this one), profits are what you make after your operational costs. That is, it's the money you have after you pay for everything and everyone.
Click to expand...

Everyone here knows what profits are.


Let's take a hypothetical.

Revenues = 100
Operating costs = 90
Profit before taxes = 10
Tax rate 0%
Profit after taxes = 10

If taxes were 25% then profit falls to 7.50.

To earn the same after tax profit (10.00) under the 25% tax scheme revenues have to rise to 103.33.

Alternatively, if we started with a tax rate of 25% and resulting after tax profit of 7.50, the company could drop the price to 97.50 and make the same profit if taxes were zero.

Raise the tax rate and prices have to go up to maintain the same after tax profit; lower the tax rate and prices can go down while maintaining the same profit.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top