Getting ready to enroll in Medicare? AARP’s Medicare Made Easy has the resources you need to help you make the right choices.

Reply
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
404
Views

Re: Profitable US Companies - No Taxes Paid?

404 Views
Message 21 of 110

@sp362 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@sp362 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@sp362 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@sp362 wrote:

rk9152 wrote"And this is the last time I am going to explain that the issue is not what motivates the consumer to buy. It is not a matter whether or not consumers have a choice. It is much simpler than that - taxes paid are a cost of doing business and are reflected in the price - hence, the consumer pays the taxes (albeit indirectly)."

 

You are forcing consumers to support companies even if they are not buying their products.  It is a matter of choice, whether you want to ackowledge or not.


Let's try to boil this down it the basics. I believe that any taxes a company pays comes from it's cash inflow. The cash inflow comes from the customers. Ergo, it really is the customers money that is paying the taxes.

 

Can we agree on that?


So why do you expect me to support a company whos products I choose not to buy.  The end customer should be paying the full cost of the product and not expecting it to be subsidized in the free market.


Can we simply deal with the basic question of where the money comes from to pay corporate taxes. It is my belief that it comes from the consumer. Can we agree on that? If so, we can then more on to other issues.


All costs for a good or service will be beared by the end user.  If corporations are allowed to pay a lower tax rate, this means that all consumers are forced to subsidize a corporation to artificially deflate their price points, with the cost being passed on to all.  If you really believe in a free market, than you should also believe in the power of the consumer to pick and choose what and how much they consume.


Again - I'll be glad to get into all that with you. But can we resolve the question of who actually pays corporate taxes?


I've already answered (multiple times) who pays and who should.  If you choose to read something into my answer that is or is not there, that is up to you.


I have several times asked if we are in agreement. A simple "yes" or "no" would allow us to move on to the other aspects you are interested in. Quite frankly, I have read your responses and have never seen that answer. Instead I saw comments sorta nibbling around the edges but not getting to the issue itself.

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
404
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
403
Views

Re: Profitable US Companies - No Taxes Paid?

403 Views
Message 22 of 110

@sp362 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@ChasKy53 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@ChasKy53 wrote:

@KidBoy2 wrote:


When we had a business people would ask about our profit. I would say its not profit it making a living .. hope to make what a worker in the mill makes, hope to make what a school teacher makes..etc....people could understand that.

So paying board members $$Millions$$ and CEOs multiple $$Millions$$ and 400 times more that a worker makes is just "making a living" ??????  Uh ............. the correct answer is NO !


How is that class warfare jazz connected to the fact that the consumers actually pay corporate taxes?

 

Uh.......the correct answer is it isn't.


It's pointing out that the CEOs and board members are paid such ridiculously large amounts that those salaries and bonuses coul absorb much of the cost of taxes going up intead of piling it all on the consumer.

 


@sp362 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@ChasKy53 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@ChasKy53 wrote:

@KidBoy2 wrote:


When we had a business people would ask about our profit. I would say its not profit it making a living .. hope to make what a worker in the mill makes, hope to make what a school teacher makes..etc....people could understand that.

So paying board members $$Millions$$ and CEOs multiple $$Millions$$ and 400 times more that a worker makes is just "making a living" ??????  Uh ............. the correct answer is NO !


How is that class warfare jazz connected to the fact that the consumers actually pay corporate taxes?

 

Uh.......the correct answer is it isn't.


It's pointing out that the CEOs and board members are paid such ridiculously large amounts that those salaries and bonuses coul absorb much of the cost of taxes going up intead of piling it all on the consumer.

 

Why didn't you call it "class warfare" when Reagan cut taxes on the wealthiest which has cause the greatest income and wealth disparity since the 1700s ?


Ah, you've jumped on the "Regan Taxscam" bandwagon. Do you really believe that execs are paid more by their companies because their personal income tax rate was lowered. That is illogical. 

 

According to Paul Krugman (the economist of the extreme left) the wealth disparity you refer to started in the '70s. Now, do you suppose that some cosmic force predicted the Reagan Presidency and started acting on what was going to happen before it happened? Again - illogical.


Wealth disparity reached its peak in 1929.  Wealth started to equalize in the 1930s and especially in the 1940s.  In the 1950s and 1960s, wealth distribution remained fairly stable.  In the 1970s wages stagnated and wealth disparity started to increase.  Reagans policies helped increase the rate of this disparity.





Ah, you've jumped on the "Regan Taxscam" bandwagon. Do you really believe that execs are paid more by their companies because their personal income tax rate was lowered. That is illogical. 

 

According to Paul Krugman (the economist of the extreme left) the wealth disparity you refer to started in the '70s. Now, do you suppose that some cosmic force predicted the Reagan Presidency and started acting on what was going to happen before it happened? Again - illogical.


Wealth disparity reached its peak in 1929.  Wealth started to equalize in the 1930s and especially in the 1940s.  In the 1950s and 1960s, wealth distribution remained fairly stable.  In the 1970s wages stagnated and wealth disparity started to increase.  Reagans policies helped increase the rate of this disparity.


I was challenging - "Why didn't you call it "class warfare" when Reagan cut taxes on the wealthiest which has cause the greatest income and wealth disparity since the 1700s ?" - the contribution and degree of effect of the tax cuts can be discussed. But I still cannot see how a person getting a tax cut leads to the same person getting a raise, which seems to be the belief of some.

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
403
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
409
Views

Re: Profitable US Companies - No Taxes Paid?

409 Views
Message 23 of 110

@pc6063 wrote:

Sales tax is paid by customers and is just turned over to the state.  It has nothing to do with company profits.  Income taxes and property taxes are paid by almost everyone-(I realize some states handle things differenctly)--but those taxes are used by states to pay for a multitude of projects and needs.  Stupid to think coorporations, large or small businesses shouldn't pay their fair share.  This shifts burden to individuals.  The communities suffer as monies are no longer there to pay for needed projects, schools etc. 

Lack of restrictions lead to fraud, inferior product quality, pollution--can't think of ANYTHING more irresponsible--EXCEPT MAYBE THE FOOL ON THE HILL, who by the way, subscribes to the inane idea that restrictions are bad.


Doesn;t matter what it's called or what the Company does with the money after it collects it from the Consumer - it's still included in the Price the Consumer pays................................

 

NH has - No Sales Tax or No State Personal Income Tax - but we still have Roads & Bridges - Public Transportation - Several Airports - One Even Has a Runway Long Enough to Land The Space Shuttle - We have Lowes & Home Depot - Every Kind of Automobile Dealer Imaginable - BJ's & Sams - Best Buy - Etc Etc - all with either lower or competitive prices to all the neighboring states that have both a Income Tax and a Sales Tax

 

Oh and we finally did Expand Medicaid

 

In my NH town the Real Estate Tax Rate is $14.79 - a average home costs $350,000

 

In Neighboring Newburyport Ma the Real Estate Tax Rate is $14.16 - a average home costs $350,000

 

As I mentioned I comparison shop every major purchase and sometimes I buy in NH and sometimes in Mass but I do all my routine everyday purchases in NH because Food Gas Clothing is always cheaper

 

In addition NH has no Major Industry outside of Tourism, Guns & Ammo

 


My point - someone is zooming someone in both the different Statehouses and the Corporate Boardrooms and especially the Federal Government - there are no strict formulas like cost of doing business to consumer pricing or state taxing 

 

It might as well all be done with a Dartboard.....................................................

 

 

 

( " China if You're Listening - Get Trumps Tax Returns " )

" )
" - Anonymous

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
409
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
416
Views

Re: Profitable US Companies - No Taxes Paid?

416 Views
Message 24 of 110

Sales tax is paid by customers and is just turned over to the state.  It has nothing to do with company profits.  Income taxes and property taxes are paid by almost everyone-(I realize some states handle things differenctly)--but those taxes are used by states to pay for a multitude of projects and needs.  Stupid to think coorporations, large or small businesses shouldn't pay their fair share.  This shifts burden to individuals.  The communities suffer as monies are no longer there to pay for needed projects, schools etc. 

Lack of restrictions lead to fraud, inferior product quality, pollution--can't think of ANYTHING more irresponsible--EXCEPT MAYBE THE FOOL ON THE HILL, who by the way, subscribes to the inane idea that restrictions are bad.

Gee, I miss having a real President!!
Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
416
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
421
Views

Re: Profitable US Companies - No Taxes Paid?

421 Views
Message 25 of 110

@rk9152 wrote:

@sp362 wrote:

rk9152 wrote"And this is the last time I am going to explain that the issue is not what motivates the consumer to buy. It is not a matter whether or not consumers have a choice. It is much simpler than that - taxes paid are a cost of doing business and are reflected in the price - hence, the consumer pays the taxes (albeit indirectly)."

 

You are forcing consumers to support companies even if they are not buying their products.  It is a matter of choice, whether you want to ackowledge or not.


Let's try to boil this down it the basics. I believe that any taxes a company pays comes from it's cash inflow. The cash inflow comes from the customers. Ergo, it really is the customers money that is paying the taxes.

 

Can we agree on that?


I'm confused?????

 

New Hampshire has No Sales Tax - neighboring Massachusetts has a 6.25% Sales Tax but I frequently find that I can make even major brand name purchases like Vehicles, Furniture & Appliances from a Massachusetts vendor cheaper than in New Hampshire and I live in a Border Town where the NH Prices are always the lowest in the State in order to attract Massachusetts Customers

 

A even bigger source of confusion is GE is headquartered in Boston Ma and they manufacture most of their Medical Imaging Equipment in Wisconsin........................

 

But if you look at the Cost Charged to Patients across the USA for a MRI it ranges from $500 - $15,000 for the same test using the same machine according to one Study

 

Source - http://time.com/money/2995166/why-does-mri-cost-so-much/

 

GE also sells the same Imaging Equipment used in the USA to other Countries around the World

 

Here is a breakdown of the costs for a Cat Scan of a Live Adult Human Head

 

USA - $2000

 

France $212

 

Germany $319

 

Netherlands - $258

 

Spain - $161

MRI Costs.png

 

 

So - I'm having a real hard time with the argument about how the start-up costs to Shareholders and Taxes paid by Companies and the daily price to Consumers have anything at all do with the Prices a Company Charges?

 

Source - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/d-brad-wright/the-price-of-diagnostic-i_b_361934.html

 

 

( " China if You're Listening - Get Trumps Tax Returns " )

" )
" - Anonymous

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
421
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
421
Views

Re: Profitable US Companies - No Taxes Paid?

421 Views
Message 26 of 110

@rk9152 wrote:

@sp362 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@sp362 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@sp362 wrote:

rk9152 wrote"And this is the last time I am going to explain that the issue is not what motivates the consumer to buy. It is not a matter whether or not consumers have a choice. It is much simpler than that - taxes paid are a cost of doing business and are reflected in the price - hence, the consumer pays the taxes (albeit indirectly)."

 

You are forcing consumers to support companies even if they are not buying their products.  It is a matter of choice, whether you want to ackowledge or not.


Let's try to boil this down it the basics. I believe that any taxes a company pays comes from it's cash inflow. The cash inflow comes from the customers. Ergo, it really is the customers money that is paying the taxes.

 

Can we agree on that?


So why do you expect me to support a company whos products I choose not to buy.  The end customer should be paying the full cost of the product and not expecting it to be subsidized in the free market.


Can we simply deal with the basic question of where the money comes from to pay corporate taxes. It is my belief that it comes from the consumer. Can we agree on that? If so, we can then more on to other issues.


All costs for a good or service will be beared by the end user.  If corporations are allowed to pay a lower tax rate, this means that all consumers are forced to subsidize a corporation to artificially deflate their price points, with the cost being passed on to all.  If you really believe in a free market, than you should also believe in the power of the consumer to pick and choose what and how much they consume.


Again - I'll be glad to get into all that with you. But can we resolve the question of who actually pays corporate taxes?


I've already answered (multiple times) who pays and who should.  If you choose to read something into my answer that is or is not there, that is up to you.

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
421
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
414
Views

Re: Profitable US Companies - No Taxes Paid?

414 Views
Message 27 of 110

@rk9152 wrote:

@ChasKy53 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@ChasKy53 wrote:

@KidBoy2 wrote:


When we had a business people would ask about our profit. I would say its not profit it making a living .. hope to make what a worker in the mill makes, hope to make what a school teacher makes..etc....people could understand that.

So paying board members $$Millions$$ and CEOs multiple $$Millions$$ and 400 times more that a worker makes is just "making a living" ??????  Uh ............. the correct answer is NO !


How is that class warfare jazz connected to the fact that the consumers actually pay corporate taxes?

 

Uh.......the correct answer is it isn't.


It's pointing out that the CEOs and board members are paid such ridiculously large amounts that those salaries and bonuses coul absorb much of the cost of taxes going up intead of piling it all on the consumer.

 

Why didn't you call it "class warfare" when Reagan cut taxes on the wealthiest which has cause the greatest income and wealth disparity since the 1700s ?


Ah, you've jumped on the "Regan Taxscam" bandwagon. Do you really believe that execs are paid more by their companies because their personal income tax rate was lowered. That is illogical. 

 

According to Paul Krugman (the economist of the extreme left) the wealth disparity you refer to started in the '70s. Now, do you suppose that some cosmic force predicted the Reagan Presidency and started acting on what was going to happen before it happened? Again - illogical.


Wealth disparity reached its peak in 1929.  Wealth started to equalize in the 1930s and especially in the 1940s.  In the 1950s and 1960s, wealth distribution remained fairly stable.  In the 1970s wages stagnated and wealth disparity started to increase.  Reagans policies helped increase the rate of this disparity.

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
414
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
413
Views

Re: Profitable US Companies - No Taxes Paid?

413 Views
Message 28 of 110

@sp362 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@sp362 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@sp362 wrote:

rk9152 wrote"And this is the last time I am going to explain that the issue is not what motivates the consumer to buy. It is not a matter whether or not consumers have a choice. It is much simpler than that - taxes paid are a cost of doing business and are reflected in the price - hence, the consumer pays the taxes (albeit indirectly)."

 

You are forcing consumers to support companies even if they are not buying their products.  It is a matter of choice, whether you want to ackowledge or not.


Let's try to boil this down it the basics. I believe that any taxes a company pays comes from it's cash inflow. The cash inflow comes from the customers. Ergo, it really is the customers money that is paying the taxes.

 

Can we agree on that?


So why do you expect me to support a company whos products I choose not to buy.  The end customer should be paying the full cost of the product and not expecting it to be subsidized in the free market.


Can we simply deal with the basic question of where the money comes from to pay corporate taxes. It is my belief that it comes from the consumer. Can we agree on that? If so, we can then more on to other issues.


All costs for a good or service will be beared by the end user.  If corporations are allowed to pay a lower tax rate, this means that all consumers are forced to subsidize a corporation to artificially deflate their price points, with the cost being passed on to all.  If you really believe in a free market, than you should also believe in the power of the consumer to pick and choose what and how much they consume.


Again - I'll be glad to get into all that with you. But can we resolve the question of who actually pays corporate taxes?

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
413
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
414
Views

Re: Profitable US Companies - No Taxes Paid?

414 Views
Message 29 of 110

@ChasKy53 wrote:

@rk9152 wrote:

@ChasKy53 wrote:

@KidBoy2 wrote:


When we had a business people would ask about our profit. I would say its not profit it making a living .. hope to make what a worker in the mill makes, hope to make what a school teacher makes..etc....people could understand that.

So paying board members $$Millions$$ and CEOs multiple $$Millions$$ and 400 times more that a worker makes is just "making a living" ??????  Uh ............. the correct answer is NO !


How is that class warfare jazz connected to the fact that the consumers actually pay corporate taxes?

 

Uh.......the correct answer is it isn't.


It's pointing out that the CEOs and board members are paid such ridiculously large amounts that those salaries and bonuses coul absorb much of the cost of taxes going up intead of piling it all on the consumer.

 

Why didn't you call it "class warfare" when Reagan cut taxes on the wealthiest which has cause the greatest income and wealth disparity since the 1700s ?


Ah, you've jumped on the "Regan Taxscam" bandwagon. Do you really believe that execs are paid more by their companies because their personal income tax rate was lowered. That is illogical. 

 

According to Paul Krugman (the economist of the extreme left) the wealth disparity you refer to started in the '70s. Now, do you suppose that some cosmic force predicted the Reagan Presidency and started acting on what was going to happen before it happened? Again - illogical.

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
414
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
416
Views

Re: Profitable US Companies - No Taxes Paid?

416 Views
Message 30 of 110

scout - If there was an ounce of truth in that canard, then the companies that pay NO tax would have a huge price advantage over the ones that get stuck paying 20 or 25%

 

I have seen nothing in what you call the "Republican mantra" that suggests such a thing. Perhaps you could define that a bit better.

 

In the 1960's HALF of Federal Income Tax revenue came from Corporations.

 

Nope. It was collected by the corporations from the consumers.

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
416
Views