+- MacResource (https://forums.macresource.com)
+-- Forum: My Category (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: 'Friendly' Political Ranting (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Thread: Meaningful steps (/showthread.php?tid=121582)
Meaningful steps - swampy - 08-08-2011
Here are some ways Congress can immediately fix some of our economic problems (as soon as they return from their high priced vacations)
• Open a short window to allow corporations to bring home, tax free, the $2T they currently hold off shore allowing them to recapitalize, expand and create jobs. These jobs will bring "new" tax payers back into the government revenue stream.
• Terminate the pension and health care benefits for all lawmakers and roll all these monies into the Social Security Trust Fund. They need to participate in the same programs they legislate and make them enroll in their new health care plan they have exempted themselves from.
• Term limits.
Re: Meaningful steps - cbelt3 - 08-08-2011
Well, let's see:
#1- US corporations with non US subsidiaries typically involve growth in local non US markets, not 'exporting jobs'. So while it sounds good to a politician, a business person would say "Huh ?".
You might as well say "Detroit needs jobs. We're going to move all the fishing industry from Louisiana up there so they can have jobs."
#2- THAT argument is SO 2008. Congress has the same health benefits as all other Federal workers. Well, except for access to the Congressional clinic, for which they pay extra.
#2b- Social Security IS NOT A TRUST FUND. Sheesh. It's an 'entitlement program'. There is no firewall. There is no piggy bank.
#3- I don't have the chapter and verse at hand, but term limits have not worked too well in those states where they have been enacted. At you'd do in a term limited Congress is push the graft and corroption early, so they get theirs before the timer runs out.
But hey.. keep thinking. I'm impressed that this wasn't a cut and paste from somewhere else. Good !
Re: Meaningful steps - Pam - 08-08-2011
Anyone who entered federal service after 1984 is under FERS, which is social security. Only the old timers would be under CSRS.
Re: Meaningful steps - BCam - 08-08-2011
Al Gore's "lockbox" doesn't seem like so much of a punchline these days, does it?
Re: Meaningful steps - Dennis S - 08-08-2011
"Open a short window to allow corporations to bring home, tax free, the $2T they currently hold off shore allowing them to recapitalize, expand and create jobs. These jobs will bring 'new' tax payers back into the government revenue stream." - swampy
They already have the money to create jobs. This will just let them pay less taxes than ever.
Re: Meaningful steps - Filliam H. Muffman - 08-08-2011
swampy wrote:
• Open a short window to allow corporations to bring home, tax free, the $2T they currently hold off shore allowing them to recapitalize, expand and create jobs. These jobs will bring "new" tax payers back into the government revenue stream.
The last time this was done, it resulted in a huge windfall mostly only for corporate officers and actually seemed to result in a drop in US employment. Fail.
Re: Meaningful steps - Mac1337 - 08-08-2011
Are they paying taxes on them NOW?
Re: Meaningful steps - cbelt3 - 08-08-2011
Ugh... still with the same misconception. US corporations bought businesses in other countries and paid taxes there. Much the same way that foreign corporations bought US businesses and pay taxes here.
Making that proposed change to the US tax law will result in:
1- Global corporations moving their HQ's someplace more internationally tax-friendly. Immediate loss of US jobs.
2- US corporations selling off their non-US assets, resulting in immediate loss of US jobs that were keeping an eye on those non-US companies.
3- A net loss in taxes for the US, and a net loss in jobs for the US.
Yeah. Go right ahead and activate that poorly thought out piece of political propaganda trash. I double dog dare ya.
Re: Meaningful steps - john dough - 08-08-2011
I honestly think that the posters throw out the far right
I would imagine that most/all of those things, if passed, will make you look back in retrospect as "wow, that really f:censor:ked not only this country, my state and my community, but me as well."
Giving massive breaks to companies has NEVER resulted in job growth or better conditions for the workers there. These companies use folksy terms like "repatriate" and "bring home", but the reality is that they made huge profits by evading paying income taxes, yet got the benefits of residing in the US and all the good it has to offer here.
They should pay double taxes, as a penalty, if they want that money to be brought "home". The same folks that talk of how bad a job that the White House is doing are the quickest to defend practices that export their jobs and keep money from this country when it is so desperately needed.
Re: Meaningful steps - cbelt3 - 08-08-2011
john, I tend to use personal notes, so let me 'splain.
The company I work for started three partnerships in China. They've expanded, we bought them out, and we now control a pretty good chunk of our particular market (around 15-20% worldwide, which makes us the largest in the world).
NONE of those products come back to the US. We've expanded our US facilities, and recently hired 300 people. Yep. In Ohio. We've invested over $100M in our facilities in NE Ohio, and acquired six, count 'em six businesses in the US. And grown them as well. Our US business grew from around $600M to $1.5 B in the last 10 years. Our international business grew to about $1B.
The corporate tax rate we pay in the US is similar to the tax rates we pay everywhere else. A bit more here and there, a bit less hither and yon. It averages out, let's say to 35%.
Let's say we make $100M profit overseas, and pay $35M in taxes to foreign governments. That leaves the corporation $65M profit to share with the employees and shareholders, put back in the business, acquire other companies, yadda yadda.
IF you tax that overseas profit TWICE, we will have less... you'll tax the $65M, now cutting our corporate earnings by $22.7 M, and making our effective tax rate for overseas operations higher than our US operations.
Forcing us to raise our prices internationally, which will DRIVE US OUT OF THE FOREIGN MARKET.
Oh, by the way, we've also received the US Dept of Commerce "E" Award for excellence in exports many times. Why ? Because the products we make and sell in China, for example, mean significant exports from good 'old Cleveland of products made here that go together with the stuff we make there.
So we'd lose those sales too. And they are HUGE.
So what you're saying is you want to drive this US corporation from a $2.6 B a year company back to a $600M a year company.
And I'll come knocking on your door looking for a job. OK ?