Really

Kalamazoo, MI

#257 Feb 25, 2013
pipedream wrote:
What is the Michigan New Jobs Training Program?
Designed as an economic development tool, the Michigan New Jobs Training Program allows community colleges to provide free training for employers that are creating new jobs and/or expanding operations in Michigan. The training for the newly hired workers is paid by capturing the state income tax associated with the new employees' wages.
Explain your comment Really in light of the above definition of NJTP.
The taxes are paid by the corporation to the community colleges. Again, another tax. But, since you and SIB think you are the only smart ones on these boards, you won't believe me. I personally don't care what you believe or don't believe. I see the payments each and every month.
Really

Kalamazoo, MI

#258 Feb 25, 2013
SeenItBefore wrote:
<quoted text>
Why should anyone give you any useful information just so you can check with your political cyber-shill handlers trying to find a way to argue it with their talking point rhetoric.
My, my, my, SIB...afraid that your arguments don't hold water??? Cyber shill handlers? LOL The only talking points that are ever seen are the ones you and your fellow democrat hacks use.
Really

Kalamazoo, MI

#259 Feb 25, 2013
FLBeaver wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually I advocate reducing the taxes on both business and individuals by paying only for those things that work and are necessary, not just wanted. I also advocate for personal responsibility. Why should I pay health care costs for someone who smokes for 50 years and gets cancer and racks up millions in Health Care costs? Or someone who weighs 400 pounds and smokes? No one minds paying for the baby that get a disease through no fault of it's own, but raising personal taxes to pay for the guy who does 12oz Bud curls and can't even get up to change the channel? Spending per student is way up versus 1970 but the students are dumber. We pay about $325,000 per year to run 1 4th grade classroom. The teacher gets about $50K of that. The rest is wasted. SS was designed so that only 1 in 4 actually collected it. Go back to FDR's original formula and teach people how to invest. If you put $160 away each month, by the time you were 65 you would have a million dollars. Will SS give you a check for a million when you turn 65?
Essentially I believe that every program should have to prove itself or be eliminated, that individuals have the primary responsibility to take care of themselves and their family members, that taxes should be used for things that benefit every person, not just the wealthy, unions, companies, the poor, the lazy or the stupid. Other than a few people, everyone from Bill Gates to someone in prison is there because of the choices they made and it is not government's responsibility to make up for people's poor choices or try to manipulate and ignore human behavior.
As far as business taxes, you aren't even close. Michigan ranks 49th (as of 2012) in Corporate taxes. FL is 12th. CA is 48th and that is a God-awful place to run a business. Being worse than CA is really bad.
http://taxfoundation.org/article/2012-state-b...
The only place where MI beats FL is on sales tax.
Careful there FL, you just threw something new at SIB. She can't handle that. By the way? I totally agree with what you just said.
Batch 37 Pain Is Good

Mount Morris, MI

#260 Feb 25, 2013
pipedream wrote:
I have plenty of skin in the game punk.
1040 EZ filings don't really count.
Bob

Big Rapids, MI

#261 Feb 25, 2013
Batch 37 Pain Is Good wrote:
<quoted text>1040 EZ filings don't really count.
That's what Mitt said........

Look how well that worked out for him!
Batch 37 Pain Is Good

Mount Morris, MI

#262 Feb 25, 2013
Bob wrote:
<quoted text>
That's what Mitt said.......Look how well that worked out for him!
Obama says you can keep your insurance and costs will go down....... How is that working for you?

Since: Feb 10

Grand Rapids, MI

#263 Feb 25, 2013
SeenItBefore wrote:
Understand I am still saying screw the tax foundation.
According to money-zine; as of the 2012 data among the most overall tax friendly states Florida ranks 22 with Michigan 14.
For business; Florida ranks better than Michigan at 12 to 5. Again though the (corporate) tax rates are only 0.5% apart.
http://www.money-zine.com/Financial-Planning/...
Far different from your citing the tax foundation at Michigan 49th.
Which according to the 2013 ranking by the tax foundation Florida is ranked 5 with a score of 6.88 while Michigan is ranked 12 with a score of 5.86 in business tax.
http://taxfoundation.org/article/2013-state-b...
So where you are coming up with Michigan at 49th is bizarre.
Yet MN is ranked 45 and we don't see businesses running away from there.
Here is another site showing FL 2 and MI 45 and MN 36th.

http://chiefexecutive.net/best-worst-states-f...

When I looked I found several examples of business leaving MN, whether it was State Farm moving their regional offices out or when Delta and Northwest merged, shutting down the MN facilities for the GA ones. For any business, leaving is tough because they have so much already invested. My question was actually about starting a business instead of one of those top 5 states, or of convincing a company to relocate or expand to MI instead of one of those other states. Perry went to CA to talk to business about moving to TX. Would you be able to go to CA or NY and credibly convince business to move to MI?
Bob

Big Rapids, MI

#264 Feb 25, 2013
Batch 37 Pain Is Good wrote:
<quoted text>Obama says you can keep your insurance and costs will go down....... How is that working for you?
Perhaps you should be asking the millions of unemployed in Boston who lost their jobs, their insurance, and had costs skyrocket when Mittens put the same exact program into motion in that state.

Since: Feb 10

Grand Rapids, MI

#265 Feb 25, 2013
SeenItBefore wrote:
<quoted text>
Screw the tax foundation. I got it directly off the Florida government site.[You] get a hold of them and tell em their wrong.
And hell no. You have NEVER advocated nor shown ANY sign of advocating lowering taxes for both business and individuals. Even though I have given you several opportunities to pick up on it.
I have always advocated lower taxes for both individuals and business, long before I came to this board. I can't help it if your comprehension is low, that's part of being a liberal.

It could be that while I advocate lower government spending and thus lower taxes for everyone, you simply want to lower taxes on people but increase both business taxes and government spending. The problem is that as I have said many times before, businesses don't pay taxes. Whatever they owe in taxes is passed on to their customers or taken from their workers. Just like a business doesn't pay wages, the money for those wages, or any other expense comes from the revenue they generate from selling their goods/services. All business expenses, be it taxes, capital, wages, or paper comes from revenue generated from the customers. If taxes, wages, or the cost of goods goes up, so do the prices.
SeenItBefore

Jenison, MI

#266 Feb 25, 2013
Really wrote:
<quoted text>Have you? As for the "boogy-man", if you haven't seen the payments that have been made, I suggest you put a sock in it. I see them each and every month...."new jobs tax" is just that....a tax paid to the local community colleges for "job training". Whatever, SIB. You refuse, for whatever reason, to admit that the taxes on business are the highest in the world. THAT has been referenced many, many times. Since you refuse to believe what you read, I suggest you leave it alone.
Yes I have and I know what it actually is.
SeenItBefore

Jenison, MI

#267 Feb 25, 2013
Really wrote:
<quoted text>The taxes are paid by the corporation to the community colleges. Again, another tax. But, since you and SIB think you are the only smart ones on these boards, you won't believe me. I personally don't care what you believe or don't believe. I see the payments each and every month.
The training for the newly hired workers is paid by capturing the state income tax associated with the new employees' wages.

The crux of it is that once again the tax payers foot the bill. Its' that much less revenue for the state that would have been realized from [employee(s)] income taxes The only cost(s) to the companies could be considered their bean counting of what it costs them for their book keepers to file the forms.

The only snag in has been the authors of the legislation meant it to be $50million per year while the Michigan Dept. of Treasury has interpreted it to be a one time cap of $50million in contracts.
SeenItBefore

Jenison, MI

#268 Feb 25, 2013
FLBeaver wrote:
<quoted text>
I have always advocated lower taxes for both individuals and business, long before I came to this board. I can't help it if your comprehension is low, that's part of being a liberal.
It could be that while I advocate lower government spending and thus lower taxes for everyone, you simply want to lower taxes on people but increase both business taxes and government spending. The problem is that as I have said many times before, businesses don't pay taxes. Whatever they owe in taxes is passed on to their customers or taken from their workers. Just like a business doesn't pay wages, the money for those wages, or any other expense comes from the revenue they generate from selling their goods/services. All business expenses, be it taxes, capital, wages, or paper comes from revenue generated from the customers. If taxes, wages, or the cost of goods goes up, so do the prices.
My comprehension level is low because you have always advocated lower taxes for everyone long before you came to this board? And what, you expect me to be some kind of a mind reader?

Well then I must have missed the many times before you have said businesses don't pay taxes. Well DUH. I KNOW I have written that down so many times before on here. But then I'm just a liberal. Better to waste a bunch of time and create unnecessary frustration and dis-inform all those who may not know avoiding getting to the solution by a bunch of double speak just to make liberals the bad guys that don't know anything.

So business doesn't pay any taxes, they pass them onto the employees and/or passed onto their customers. Big surprise. So then in the final analysis it's all a ruse making it seem like business is going to be attracted or rebuffed by state tax rates. Like arguing black isn't a color, it's actually a combination of all the colors.

So it's actually business that are the takers. Just like with the MI NJTP, externalizing their expenses while internalizing their profits. All the while crying like babies that they should even have to put into their business to make their profits.

Since: Feb 10

Grand Rapids, MI

#269 Feb 25, 2013
SeenItBefore wrote:
<quoted text>
My comprehension level is low because you have always advocated lower taxes for everyone long before you came to this board? And what, you expect me to be some kind of a mind reader?
Well then I must have missed the many times before you have said businesses don't pay taxes. Well DUH. I KNOW I have written that down so many times before on here. But then I'm just a liberal. Better to waste a bunch of time and create unnecessary frustration and dis-inform all those who may not know avoiding getting to the solution by a bunch of double speak just to make liberals the bad guys that don't know anything.
So business doesn't pay any taxes, they pass them onto the employees and/or passed onto their customers. Big surprise. So then in the final analysis it's all a ruse making it seem like business is going to be attracted or rebuffed by state tax rates. Like arguing black isn't a color, it's actually a combination of all the colors.
So it's actually business that are the takers. Just like with the MI NJTP, externalizing their expenses while internalizing their profits. All the while crying like babies that they should even have to put into their business to make their profits.
1) With all these points going over your head, you must be extremely bald. I have always advocated lower taxes for both individuals and businesses. I did so before I came here and continued that same position here. My position hasn't changed and it has been posted numerous times.
2) If you agree that business doesn't really pay taxes than why do you keep advocating that taxes be raised on them? If you get this then you also understand that by lowering taxes that lowers prices and raises wages. Or is this based on your Marxist (note, I didn't say communist) world view that all business people are evil and are just out to screw the downtrodden proletariat?
3) If business people are just takers, than go back to my questions you haven't answered. What incentive does a business have to start in MI? What incentive does a business have to relocate here? And if business folks are just takers, why should any large business, like Ford, Kellogg's or Whirlpool stay here? If businesses just "took" wouldn't it have made more sense to leave MI a long time ago, especially for say the auto industry? Seems like the big 3 could have moved to NV, saved a bundle in taxes, been closer to their largest market (CA), and left the union behind. So explain how staying in MI enabled the Big 3 to "take" more by staying.
SeenItBefore

Jenison, MI

#270 Feb 25, 2013
FLBeaver wrote:
<quoted text>
1) With all these points going over your head, you must be extremely bald. I have always advocated lower taxes for both individuals and businesses. I did so before I came here and continued that same position here. My position hasn't changed and it has been posted numerous times.
2) If you agree that business doesn't really pay taxes than why do you keep advocating that taxes be raised on them? If you get this then you also understand that by lowering taxes that lowers prices and raises wages. Or is this based on your Marxist (note, I didn't say communist) world view that all business people are evil and are just out to screw the downtrodden proletariat?
3) If business people are just takers, than go back to my questions you haven't answered. What incentive does a business have to start in MI? What incentive does a business have to relocate here? And if business folks are just takers, why should any large business, like Ford, Kellogg's or Whirlpool stay here? If businesses just "took" wouldn't it have made more sense to leave MI a long time ago, especially for say the auto industry? Seems like the big 3 could have moved to NV, saved a bundle in taxes, been closer to their largest market (CA), and left the union behind. So explain how staying in MI enabled the Big 3 to "take" more by staying.
Ya know, screw this. You want to keep calling me a Marxist you aren't really looking for answers. Just something else to agitate over.

I've got the answers to your "questions" but then you aren't really interested in em and you wouldn't see the points anyway.

I'm no longer interested in your little pin-pricking "debate" just to cause discontent.

Taxes have been lowered and lowered and lowered on business, they have been given deductions no individual person is allowed, while the deductions the people have been allowed are being taken away, for the sole purpose of business not having to contribute to the communities they operate to increase profits and you can't comprehend the obvious result.
Really

Kalamazoo, MI

#271 Feb 25, 2013
SeenItBefore wrote:
<quoted text>
The training for the newly hired workers is paid by capturing the state income tax associated with the new employees' wages.
The crux of it is that once again the tax payers foot the bill. Its' that much less revenue for the state that would have been realized from [employee(s)] income taxes The only cost(s) to the companies could be considered their bean counting of what it costs them for their book keepers to file the forms.
The only snag in has been the authors of the legislation meant it to be $50million per year while the Michigan Dept. of Treasury has interpreted it to be a one time cap of $50million in contracts.
"Bean counting for their bookkeepers to file the forms". Again, you are revealing that you have never owned a business and other than book knowledge, you have no knowledge of how business, both large and small, actually work. Try this on for size...due to the complexity of the tax codes, no business with a brain does their own forms anymore. They have accountants to do them for them because of the risk of losing their business for missing something. Again, you support government being large, the IRS is the biggest bully on the block and the costs associated with avoiding them are passed onto the consumer. Your proclivity to blame businesses (both small and large) exclusively is foolish to say the least.

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#272 Feb 25, 2013
...Scare....Scare....Scare.... Scare....Scare....Scare....Sca re....Scare....Scare.........

Since: Feb 10

Grand Rapids, MI

#275 Feb 25, 2013
SeenItBefore wrote:
<quoted text>
Ya know, screw this. You want to keep calling me a Marxist you aren't really looking for answers. Just something else to agitate over.
I've got the answers to your "questions" but then you aren't really interested in em and you wouldn't see the points anyway.
I'm no longer interested in your little pin-pricking "debate" just to cause discontent.
Taxes have been lowered and lowered and lowered on business, they have been given deductions no individual person is allowed, while the deductions the people have been allowed are being taken away, for the sole purpose of business not having to contribute to the communities they operate to increase profits and you can't comprehend the obvious result.
You say “screw this” and then say I’m the one agitating on this. I have repeatedly asked you simple questions yet you either refuse or are unable to answer them. Even other folks have called you out because you can’t put together a coherent argument and simply go on about how we are too stupid to understand and that we “wouldn’t see the points anyway.”

I agree that taxes have been lowered on business. But according to the IRS they have also been lowered on individuals since the 90% range of the 1950’s to where they are now, which was established in 1993. Since then the tax code has been played with but essentially it hasn’t moved much. When one thing goes down another goes up and so the actual percentage has been fairly constant.

But whether that tax rate is 14% or 40%, the issue isn’t the tax rate, it is the spending. The IRS didn’t even exist until 1953 and now it is one of the largest agencies in the government. If the only government spending was for military, would anyone be having this argument over tax rates? What if the government spent ½ of what it currently spends, would that impact the tax discussion.

Look, I’ll make this easy for you. Right now we have the 3rd highest corporate tax rate in the world according to multiple sources, including the CBO. We are at 39.3% compared to Japan at #1 with 40.4%. So I agree to move corporate taxes to 42%(making it the highest in the word) and make individual taxes at 0%. Now, you come up with exactly what you would spend that revenue on without borrowing one penny or using money from SS, Medicare or any other pre-designated funds.

The dumbest way to do any budget is to start with “here’s what I want” and then borrow money to pay for what one wants and not just what one needs. But that’s where a big part of this argument comes from. Politicians have way overspent and now are trying to find new funds (taxes) to pay for stupid stuff. According to the IRS, in 2010 Total Revenue (excl. SS, Med, etc.) was just over one trillion dollars.$900 Billion came from individual taxes and $200 billion came from corporate taxes. So now you have $200 Billion to pay for all government services. The military budget alone is $600B. So, what services are you cutting or how much revenue are you going to get from individual taxes?
Batch 37 Pain Is Good

Macomb, MI

#276 Feb 25, 2013
Bob wrote:
<quoted text>
Perhaps you should be asking the millions of unemployed in Boston who lost their jobs, their insurance, and had costs skyrocket when Mittens put the same exact program into motion in that state.
Yeah, the Dems wanted that program bad and Mitt was COMPROMISING in a Dem State..... You should live there sometime.... People there are just like you......
SeenItBefore

Jenison, MI

#277 Feb 25, 2013
Really wrote:
<quoted text>"Bean counting for their bookkeepers to file the forms". Again, you are revealing that you have never owned a business and other than book knowledge, you have no knowledge of how business, both large and small, actually work. Try this on for size...due to the complexity of the tax codes, no business with a brain does their own forms anymore. They have accountants to do them for them because of the risk of losing their business for missing something. Again, you support government being large, the IRS is the biggest bully on the block and the costs associated with avoiding them are passed onto the consumer. Your proclivity to blame businesses (both small and large) exclusively is foolish to say the least.
So what you're saying is out of every business out there large and small none have their won accounting department(s). Is that what you are saying?
Really

Kalamazoo, MI

#278 Feb 25, 2013
SeenItBefore wrote:
<quoted text>
So what you're saying is out of every business out there large and small none have their won accounting department(s). Is that what you are saying?
No, quit be obtuse. You know what I was saying, but just to clarify it for you....you were demeaning the accounting departments of the businesses, big and small, by calling their accounting departments "bookkeepers" and you knew you were doing it. Just one more show of your disdain for the businesses in this country.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Grand Rapids Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News College football roundup: Ohio State starts the... (Sep '13) 4 hr stewart scott 1,942
News Shop owner will deny - openly gay' customers 6 hr Batch 37 Pain Is ... 81
Old things and places we remember from the Gran... (Feb '09) 8 hr Freddie 1,002
News State holds unclaimed property - and it can be ... 14 hr TheMissingMoneyLady 1
bruce jenner!? who cares! Tue ricardo gran polla 6
News Victim in ponzi scheme comes forward (May '09) Tue Batch 37 Pain Is ... 40
are you texas enough? Tue Batch 37 Pain Is ... 2
More from around the web

Grand Rapids People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]