dads706

Dow passed 24,000

Recommended Posts

You are correct, Bitty. Corporations don’t pay taxes. The checks they write to the government are added into their Cost of Goods Sold, this added to the price of their widgets, thus paid by their customers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, ihrondiesel said:

You are correct, Bitty. Corporations don’t pay taxes. The checks they write to the government are added into their Cost of Goods Sold, this added to the price of their widgets, thus paid by their customers. 

This is the biggest problem with how the average person is taught in school what's what. 

 

It's a planned thing that the class warfare is drummed up constantly. It's perpetuated mainly because most in control of the media and politicians want more money to spend ( despite running up severe deficits) 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am just stunned at the lack of comprehension of both tax policy and this new legislation.  I could post factual contradictions all day and I dont think it would do any good but Ill try one last time.  I thought farmers (thats what you are right?) were better businessmen than this...

http://www.businessinsider.com/gop-tax-reform-bill-means-for-housing-mortgage-interest-deduction-2017-12

  • Housing-industry trade organizations immediately condemned House Republicans' tax bill when it passed in mid-November.
  • Senate Republicans' version passed over the weekend. Unlike the House's bill, it doesn't halve the mortgage interest deduction, but it could still remove tax benefits for homeowners.
  • The Senate's bill raises the standard deduction, meaning households would be less likely to exceed that threshold and choose to itemize their mortgage interest.
  • Both versions could end up weakening home prices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My 2 cents, not adjusted for inflation...

So a tax cut for a business is “bad business for the consumer “? But bailouts for these same companies are good? IE- the gm bailouts?

IF these companies are always propped up irregardless of the business decisions that are made, doesn’t that mean that these companies can lose money that is actually their customers money( government bailout- aka American consumer)?

If a company is rewarded for good business decisions, and tax sheltering IS a business decision, than perhaps these companies will reinvest in America and not move the corporate offices off shore to protect themselves from higher corporate taxes. Hence, giving these companies a tax break might( wishful thinking?) bring these companies back to America?

I think that the media is yelling the sky is falling with these tax plans, without thinking what might be following these tax cuts. I don’t know, just thinking outside the box here...

As far as investing in this market, yes I know, what goes up will come down, but is there opportunity here to make some money? I would expect so. If someone invested 10k into the market right now, and pull the earnings out up until your 10k is recovered, leaving additional earnings in the market, than aren’t you investing in just realized gains?

Im not financially savvy, but IF you can realize gains of 20%+, you recover your initial investment a lot quicker than making long term investment in real estate where you STILL pay taxes on that investment in terms of property taxes.

IDK, just seems like it’s an easier way to make a living IF you figure out a way to protect your investments?

Sorry for rambling...

Sid

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Ihfan4life said:

My 2 cents, not adjusted for inflation...

So a tax cut for a business is “bad business for the consumer “? But bailouts for these same companies are good? IE- the gm bailouts?

IF these companies are always propped up irregardless of the business decisions that are made, doesn’t that mean that these companies can lose money that is actually their customers money( government bailout- aka American consumer)?

If a company is rewarded for good business decisions, and tax sheltering IS a business decision, than perhaps these companies will reinvest in America and not move the corporate offices off shore to protect themselves from higher corporate taxes. Hence, giving these companies a tax break might( wishful thinking?) bring these companies back to America?

I think that the media is yelling the sky is falling with these tax plans, without thinking what might be following these tax cuts. I don’t know, just thinking outside the box here...

As far as investing in this market, yes I know, what goes up will come down, but is there opportunity here to make some money? I would expect so. If someone invested 10k into the market right now, and pull the earnings out up until your 10k is recovered, leaving additional earnings in the market, than aren’t you investing in just realized gains?

Im not financially savvy, but IF you can realize gains of 20%+, you recover your initial investment a lot quicker than making long term investment in real estate where you STILL pay taxes on that investment in terms of property taxes.

IDK, just seems like it’s an easier way to make a living IF you figure out a way to protect your investments?

Sorry for rambling...

Sid

 

Here's the basic problem Sid,

The CBO estimate is that its going to blow a 1.5 trillion dollar hole in the deficit.  This is AFTER economic growth from the cuts is factored in...  So, there is no coming back from that loss.

Already, they have back doors cut into this thing like having all the wage earner tax cuts (such that they are) --- sunset in a few years.  But NOT the corporate or high income cuts.  Nice huh?

And guys like Rubio are talking about cutting social security and Medicare.  Here's the problem with that....  These are not expenses.  They are debts the government owes you and me because Reagan changed the book keeping on them to include FICA taxes as income not borrowing which it really is.  Why?  Because it makes the deficit look smaller even though it isnt.

So, what they are really doing is using all this as an excuse to welch on a big part of the Federal debt because voters are dumb enough to thing that screwing all those old people is a pretty good idea.

Its times like this that I think I might have to rethink my opposition to a balanced budget amendment.  It would make this bill instantly illegal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Couple of observations -

a) "Trickle Down" is a great selling point to the general public in support of it during initiatives to pass, but in the last several iterations hasn't panned out to be true.

B) Many of the proposed middle class "tax breaks" are planned to expire before the end of the 10-year projection.  Tax cuts to corporations do not.

c) Tax reductions by corporations will either be -

     1) Turned into management bonus', passed down to shareholders as profit; and/or

     2) Spent on automation further reducing the need for American workers

c) Independent assessments show these bills will not be revenue neutral and in fact increase the Natty debt by $1,000,000,000,000 at the end of 10-years.  [pass given - deficit spending only matters when Democrats approve)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The next step, according to Ryan, is cutting spending. And while Congress hasn't gotten that far yet, the agenda is clear. If a version of the tax plan passes, the next major item of business in Congress will likely include major cuts to Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security.

http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/42811-tax-plans-pave-way-for-massive-cuts-to-medicare-medicaid-social-security

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Atilathehun99 said:

 

c) Independent assessments show these bills will not be revenue neutral and in fact increase the Natty debt by $1,000,000,000,000 at the end of 10-years.  [pass given - deficit spending only matters when Democrats approve)

 

Democrats dont do it at a time when the economy is doing fine and when they do it, its to put people back on their feet not hand out trillions to the already rich.

Everything else you wrote is right on tho!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, oldtech said:

Democrats dont do it at a time when the economy is doing fine and when they do it, its to put people back on their feet not hand out trillions to the already rich.

Everything else you wrote is right on tho!

Quinnipiac poll shows only 29% of Americans approve Repub's tax plans. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Atilathehun99 said:

Quinnipiac poll shows only 29% of Americans approve Repub's tax plans. 

And what does that poll show about Americans approval of Congress?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Ihfan4life said:

And what does that poll show about Americans approval of Congress?

Worse I expect.  It would seem with good reason too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fellas,

     If you are in business as a  Farmer or run a small business.

        Consider becoming a Chapter "S" corporation .

     With a good accountant & attorney  it will help set you up to run your life and business like a Corp. and for the most part you can enjoy all the " advantages "of being a Corp.

       Its available to the normal everyday business person.

       I incorporated in early 70's as a" C " later when my direction changed I converted to a "S" corp.  I cannot begin to tell you the times it has helped me in the nearly 50 years of farming & life.

        As Old Tech says mostly taxes are set to help big & small business's . Most are run as Corp's of one sort or another.  We do not have to stand at the fence looking in. Its opened to the individual doing small business.

        Tony

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If, as Atila stated is a possibility, corporate tax savings are passed on to stockholders as increased dividends, would you still have a problem with the corporate tax cuts, oldtech?  You already told us you have money in the stock market so it should benefit you as an investor. It could also benefit you as a consumer via lower prices. I’m not naive enough to think that all tax savings would be passed to the investor or consumer, this was more of an ideal world hypothetical question. But remember, corporations don’t pay taxes, they pass them on, so applying the same reasoning to tax savings at least makes sense in theory. 

As for cutting spending, I agree wholeheartedly that things like Social Security and the other items you mentioned should not be touched. These are not expenses, they are debts. To cut them would be like me telling my banker that I’m only paying what I feel I can afford because I’m trying to cut my expenses. There are a lot of common sense ways they could cut government spending. One thing that really ticks me off is when politicians talk about “paying for tax cuts” as though the thought of any government entity getting by on less just isn’t feasible. They like to think all money is theirs and they have to discuss how much they should let us have. I think the easiest way to downsize government would be to eliminate all payroll deductions and make everyone write a check to pay taxes. Too many people only care about take-home pay instead of what they actually earn. Anyone who is self-employed knows what they write that check to the IRS for. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, ihrondiesel said:

If, as Atila stated is a possibility, corporate tax savings are passed on to stockholders as increased dividends, would you still have a problem with the corporate tax cuts, oldtech?  You already told us you have money in the stock market so it should benefit you as an investor. It could also benefit you as a consumer via lower prices. I’m not naive enough to think that all tax savings would be passed to the investor or consumer, this was more of an ideal world hypothetical question. But remember, corporations don’t pay taxes, they pass them on, so applying the same reasoning to tax savings at least makes sense in theory. 

As for cutting spending, I agree wholeheartedly that things like Social Security and the other items you mentioned should not be touched. These are not expenses, they are debts. To cut them would be like me telling my banker that I’m only paying what I feel I can afford because I’m trying to cut my expenses. There are a lot of common sense ways they could cut government spending. One thing that really ticks me off is when politicians talk about “paying for tax cuts” as though the thought of any government entity getting by on less just isn’t feasible. They like to think all money is theirs and they have to discuss how much they should let us have. I think the easiest way to downsize government would be to eliminate all payroll deductions and make everyone write a check to pay taxes. Too many people only care about take-home pay instead of what they actually earn. Anyone who is self-employed knows what they write that check to the IRS for. 

I have said for years that they only way that they should be allowed to make us pay taxes is that everyone's employer should have to put this money for your taxes in another account for you. Then you should have to be required to go to the bank the bank would have to withdrawal the money ,stack it on a pile in front of you in $20 bills and you should have to stand there and look at it for 30 minutes before you hand it back to the bank teller for them to wire it to the IRS for your taxes so everybody actually sees the money that is taken out of their paycheck. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, bitty said:

I have said for years that they only way that they should be allowed to make us pay taxes is that everyone's employer should have to put this money for your taxes in another account for you. Then you should have to be required to go to the bank the bank would have to withdrawal the money ,stack it on a pile in front of you in $20 bills and you should have to stand there and look at it for 30 minutes before you hand it back to the bank teller for them to wire it to the IRS for your taxes so everybody actually sees the money that is taken out of their paycheck. 

I look at that $500 that goes to them every week out of my paycheck and wonder, where’s my entitlement?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It will be there when you retire or become disabled or you kids are left fatherless.  But only if the Republicans keep their bloody hands off it and stop running up the debt which is what they are doing now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, ihrondiesel said:

If, as Atila stated is a possibility, corporate tax savings are passed on to stockholders as increased dividends, would you still have a problem with the corporate tax cuts, oldtech?  You already told us you have money in the stock market so it should benefit you as an investor. It could also benefit you as a consumer via lower prices. I’m not naive enough to think that all tax savings would be passed to the investor or consumer, this was more of an ideal world hypothetical question. But remember, corporations don’t pay taxes, they pass them on, so applying the same reasoning to tax savings at least makes sense in theory. 

As for cutting spending, I agree wholeheartedly that things like Social Security and the other items you mentioned should not be touched. These are not expenses, they are debts. To cut them would be like me telling my banker that I’m only paying what I feel I can afford because I’m trying to cut my expenses. There are a lot of common sense ways they could cut government spending. One thing that really ticks me off is when politicians talk about “paying for tax cuts” as though the thought of any government entity getting by on less just isn’t feasible. They like to think all money is theirs and they have to discuss how much they should let us have. I think the easiest way to downsize government would be to eliminate all payroll deductions and make everyone write a check to pay taxes. Too many people only care about take-home pay instead of what they actually earn. Anyone who is self-employed knows what they write that check to the IRS for. 

Its hard to argue with that but consider this...

Who ultimately pays those payroll deductions?  You?  Or your employer?  Isnt it true that your check (both take home and tax deductions) all come from the same place?  Does the business then not add that to the cost of their products?

So, in the end... what difference does it make?  

Here's a suggestion for you.  Why tax labor at all?  Why not just tax business profits and let them deduct labor costs?  Think of all the money it would save in processing hundreds of millions of tax returns?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, oldtech said:

It will be there when you retire or become disabled or you kids are left fatherless.  But only if the Republicans keep their bloody hands off it and stop running up the debt which is what they are doing now.

So the 9 trillion that Obumbler ran up in his 8 years in office don’t count as being a bad thing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a bad thing.  But consider who caused it.  

But he could have cut it way back by raising the taxes on the rich or at least repealing the Bush tax cuts.  It is in fact how Clinton produced his surplus.

He was no FDR, thats for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, ihrondiesel said:

If, as Atila stated is a possibility, corporate tax savings are passed on to stockholders as increased dividends, would you still have a problem with the corporate tax cuts, oldtech?  You already told us you have money in the stock market so it should benefit you as an investor. It could also benefit you as a consumer via lower prices. I’m not naive enough to think that all tax savings would be passed to the investor or consumer, this was more of an ideal world hypothetical question. But remember, corporations don’t pay taxes, they pass them on, so applying the same reasoning to tax savings at least makes sense in theory. 

As for cutting spending, I agree wholeheartedly that things like Social Security and the other items you mentioned should not be touched. These are not expenses, they are debts. To cut them would be like me telling my banker that I’m only paying what I feel I can afford because I’m trying to cut my expenses. There are a lot of common sense ways they could cut government spending. One thing that really ticks me off is when politicians talk about “paying for tax cuts” as though the thought of any government entity getting by on less just isn’t feasible. They like to think all money is theirs and they have to discuss how much they should let us have. I think the easiest way to downsize government would be to eliminate all payroll deductions and make everyone write a check to pay taxes. Too many people only care about take-home pay instead of what they actually earn. Anyone who is self-employed knows what they write that check to the IRS for. 

       I believe that is when Government got out of control !  WHEN THEY STARTED DEDUCTING TAXES FROM INCOME CHECK.  People just look at their take home and pay no mind to what uncle removes.

      If populace had to write a check on April 15th ,The howls would be loud !  Peoples mentality now has become ," Oh, tax day, I get a refund check" !  Really Sad !

       I have two relatives who are bankers and in conversation they did not know how much income tax they paid.  (It was in a situation where they needed to state, not that they where trying to keep private)

    Now ,they want us to E-file so, even more removed from reality.

              Tony

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, oldtech said:

Its hard to argue with that but consider this...

Who ultimately pays those payroll deductions?  You?  Or your employer?  Isnt it true that your check (both take home and tax deductions) all come from the same place?  Does the business then not add that to the cost of their products?

So, in the end... what difference does it make?  

Here's a suggestion for you.  Why tax labor at all?  Why not just tax business profits and let them deduct labor costs?  Think of all the money it would save in processing hundreds of millions of tax returns?

Yes and no. Those taxes withheld from paychecks do come from the same place, but you make it sound like my employer has all the expense so he adds it to the price of what he sells. I see it the other way. It is all my expense, because my pay could be higher if payroll deductions weren’t taken out. Even the employers half of FICA really comes out of my paycheck. An employer doesn’t have to add it to the price of his products if he can tell his employees “You are worth $30/hr to me in labor. Your benefit package costs me $10/hr and payroll taxes are a couple bucks an hour so I’ll pay you $17.50 an hour. That’s pretty good because the company down the street only pays $16.25 and their benefits aren’t as good.”  The conversation may not go exactly like that but you get the point. 

Why tax labor at all?  Easy. Uncle Sam isn’t dumb. If he can skim a little off everyone, he has a lot more ‘walkin’ around money’. That was my point earlier which Bitty reiterated about eliminating payroll deductions. Most people look at take-home pay and don’t know what they actually pay in taxes. Uncle Sam has a great gig going with that one.  Uncle Sam needs to stop being everyone’s Sugar Daddy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Corporate taxes get passed on to consumer and then consumer says, costs too much. So corporation finds a place overseas to produce the product at lower costs.  Now consumer buys product. That is why people say lower the corp taxes to  get them to stay here and some more to come back here.  Plain and simple.  Will it work, don't know. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, oldtech said:

It will be there when you retire or become disabled or you kids are left fatherless.  But only if the Republicans keep their bloody hands off it and stop running up the debt which is what they are doing now.

do you think the current administration has sent the loan ap to china yet?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not if you mean, is he going to repay it with the China money.

A good part of the national debt is held by China including private sector commercial debt.  Its whoever wants to buy the bonds...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, pete23 said:

Corporate taxes get passed on to consumer and then consumer says, costs too much. So corporation finds a place overseas to produce the product at lower costs.  Now consumer buys product. That is why people say lower the corp taxes to  get them to stay here and some more to come back here.  Plain and simple.  Will it work, don't know. 

You didnt answer or perhaps didnt understand my question.

ALL tax money comes from employers, doesnt it?  Including the income tax withholding on your check and the FICA taxes and all of it.  Dont you think that that money is "added" to the cost of things?  If so, why not?

Doesnt taxing labor make it more expensive to hire people here?  Stop and think about this for a bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now