Corporations want tax cuts on Offshore profits - Really?
Posted in the Opelousas Forum
#1 Jun 20, 2011
As you will see, when W. gave it to them in 2005, they gave most of the money to their shareholders rather than create jobs/invest in America.
Should we trust them up front to do the right thing?
Or, should they create the jobs and then get a tax credit?
#2 Jun 23, 2011
well well taxman we agree on something if they really want jobs get rid of omba care and people will start hireing people dont know what going to happen and cant plan ahead
#3 Jun 25, 2011
Read and comment on your thoughts!
To me, it looks like they are screwing with the American taxpayers. GREED!
What is your tax rate?
#4 Jun 30, 2011
cajunfreak, do not try to argue with a liberal about obama, they will simply say how this is all still W's fault. See, they have not one thing that they can say has worked. They point to obamacare, when they dare talk about it, but they never address the fact that obamacare CUT 500 billion from medicare...yes that is a B for billion. but then they come out with these little commercials saying that paul ryan is destroying medicare...laughable, I know, but it's true.
They have to talk about the previous administration because they can't talk about their own achievments because there are none. which is why you will see obama go down as a one term president. They are in full on panic mode. It is quite funny. Even the one thing they do tout...obamacare....is falling further into dislike by the american people with every TRUE scientific poll taken.
#5 Jun 30, 2011
there was all this talk about newt gingrich's staff leaving. Do you realize that all of obamas advisors are gone? not one that orchestrated this debacle of bailouts is still there save for bernanke. Oh how the castle walls are crumbling. Guess we finally see that the great wizard is really a man behind the curtain. Even Carville is saying they are in BIG trouble.
#6 Jun 30, 2011
You seem not to have a problem with the Very Rich NOT paying their fair share. Why?
People have left in every administration. They use their clout in private jobs - making more money or advance their careers. New Blood/ideas isn't necessarily a bad thing. People leave jobs all the time.
Obama may not have cleaned up W.'s mess yet, but he has not given up. Didn't vote for him, but I admire his achievements thus far.
#7 Jul 2, 2011
i know but its fun
#8 Jul 3, 2011
You two must be the ONLY TWO who don't think the mess we found ourselves in in 2007/2008 wasn't W.'s. Wasn't he President at that time???????
#9 Jul 3, 2011
Hasn't anyone thought about: If Obamacare is voted out, companies will stop offering health insurance coverage through the work place; too expensive.
Some large and small companies have started hiring the entry to middle class employees through third party services; getting around having to pay for benefits.
Ever thought this may happen to you? You know with all the buying and selling of small service companies.
#10 Jul 3, 2011
the rich not paying their fair share? Obviously you haven't read any other post that I make.
You do some research and we'll talk. Let me start you off with the first and most obvious. Who are you to decide what is fair? You didn't earn the damn money that I make, what entitles you to decide what is fair? Want to talk fair? Fair would be that we all pay the same percentage. Even God himself asks everyone to pay only 10 %. That 10% if for EVERYONE.
SEcondly, if you look at the IRS website, you will see that the bottom 47% of wage earners get more back from the government than they pay in, so in other words THEY DON'T PAY TAXES OR CONTRIBUTE TO THE KITTY. The top 53% pay ALL THE TAXES. And don't even try to go with "they have all the wealth", we arent' talking about wealth, we're talking about yearly income, and it is the "rich" that pay all the taxes. And if you want to talk about taxcuts for the rich, it's kind of hard to give a tax cut to people WHO PAY NO TAXES. Besides that, everyone got the same percentage in the cuts, the people who earned more, got more back because they PAID more.
#11 Jul 3, 2011
Curious, you are plain wrong about obamacare. More businesses will QUIT offering insurance BECAUSE of obamacare. The reason is because the penalty for not offering health insurance is far lower than the cost rise from the minimum mandates in obamacare. But you knew that right? It was designed that way, because their goal was not to create an alternative plan, and let you keep your current insurance, it was to create a single payer system, a fact that you liberals are all celebrating now. Make the penalty lower than the cost rise due to the mandates and they don't have to compete against insurance companies, the employers will drop their insurance because the penalty is cheaper. So basically obama lied about the plan.
This is exactly what the heritage foundation and everyone against the plan said was going to happen. What you liberals don't comprehend is that while this is happening, the cost of the plan is going up because with companies dumping their insurance in favor of the penalties they are adding to the number of people that obamacare must cover, which will make the cost of obamacare a lot more than what was projected (hello higher taxes, or more debt borrowing). Obama/pelosi/reed have managed to make insurance more expensive, while at the same time making their own plan cost more. Aside from all this, what you really don't understand is that with more people eventually being thrown onto obamacare, and fewer doctors/hospitals accepting this medicare, helthcare is going to be rationed by default. Which means that quality of care is going to drop. This too was predicted by heritage and those in opposition to obamacare, but y'all knew better. Socialized medicine never has worked, and never will. Socialized ANYTHING never has worked and never will. It has failed EVERYWHERE it has been tried, yet you liberals insisted on trying it here.
Companies NOW are already dropping employer sponsored insurance for spouses, and it's estimated that 30% will drop ESI alltogether.
#12 Jul 6, 2011
How have they managed to make it more expensive?
Based on your postings, it sounds like you are at least 55 years of age, correct?
I guess it is all relative, those of us who will be affected the most will be considered Librals.
Congress stopped too short in 2009, they should have expanded Medicare (with adjustments)and individuals would be responsible for their own insurance. Single payer, no credits to employers. First step in correcting the Tax Code.
2008/2009 people from California were interviewed about healthcare premiums: one lady with two teenage sons has just received a premium increase, new premium almost $1300/month (not a premium plan) and in the case of another family, the insurance company would not insure one family member because of her disability no matter if the premium would be higher.
While the CEO of Blue Shield testified before Congress, when requesting a premium increase, told them that the reason she was requesting the increase was not that they had not made a profit in the previous years and has plenty in reserves to pay claims, but that they wanted their larger piece of the pie (as the pharmaceutical companies). The members of Congress could not believe she had said that so they asked her how much compensation she had received in the previous year: around $5 million - wages, commissions, bonuses and stock options. This is what happens when For Profit takes over. Just like the oil companies, their loyalty is to the stockholders and filling their deep pockets. I think they now have to request/receive approval to raise premiums higher than 10% per year.
An employee of the insurance industry testified that she would regularly deny necessary test/treatment to save on paying claims. She was praised and rewarded with bonuses. Then one day it hit home - one of the patients she denied test for died of the illness that her doctor suspected she had. She quit her job. She did not want to put Money ahead of Human Life!
#13 Jul 6, 2011
Just heard on the news that CEO's got an average of 23% pay increase last year.
How about you?
The employees in the report got an average of .5%.
Another report about a month ago stated that in the last 3 decades top management pay has gone from about 40 times to over 300 times the average employee's pay. Why? What are they doing to deserve this rate of pay (in the millions)?
#14 Jul 6, 2011
Curious, you do have the right to choose NOT to buy a corporations product if you disagree with their pay scale. I'm not rich, but I am comfortable, and I am not envious of corporation ceo's. I'm not envious of anyone's pay. I am quite sure that the shareholders WHO INVESTED in the companies are quite happy to have some dividend returned to them, unlike obama who gutted shares from shareholders to give part ownership of GM to the union. If you'd like to have the pay of the CEO's, why aren't you running a corporation? I've chosen to invest in those companies, so I'm quite happy when their stock rises. also, weren't the employees paid for a job? they could go somewhere else to work if they disagree with the wage they were paid. Heck, they could start their own business if they wanted to and compete against other businesses then THEY could be the ones collecting the big bucks. It generally is a free country, no one is stopping them or you for that matter of starting your own corporation and having a pay scale that you are happy with. See, that is the difference in our train of thought. You would rather have socialism where the government says you will make this much, and you will contribute this much. it's worked out great everywhere else it's been tried right? Hardy har har.
#15 Jul 6, 2011
You blame those evil rich corporations for so much. Do you realize how much corporation pay in taxes? Your medicare and social security is funded 50% by you, and 50% by YOUR employer. They do that for ALL their employees. When you see an arbitrary amount like $500 deducted from your paycheck for FICA, YOUR EMPLOYER also pays an additional $500 on your behalf for social security and medicare. They do that for all their employees.
Yet you want them to pay more. do you liberals even listen to yourselves? If someone was paying half of something FOR MY BENEFIT, I damn sure wouldn't be asking for more.
#16 Jul 6, 2011
Top management takes home in the millions, so that would make their raises in the millions.
Average worker received about $200 (based on wages around $39,990).
What is management doing to get that much of a difference in raise? Oh yeah, having the workers do more for about the same amount of money - no new jobs. Or sending jobs overseas. Or bringing in illegals.
Corporate America (due to profits) has a responsibility to the country: infrastructure, education and healthcare (Commerce/employees). So you are saying, the working class should pay for these things too!
Their main arguement is that the US employees are not as educated/smart as overseas. True? Healthcare costs are out of control. True?
Too many regulations. True?
I am not against profits or reasonable higher wages for Management, if they are successful in their jobs.
I am for everyone paying their fair share, that includes Corporations, before $ goes to stockholders. Get rid of the loopholes. Write your Congresspeople!
#17 Apr 25, 2012
Drilling into Big Oil's big job claims
In this article, Big Oil says they produce one in ten new jobs and they could produce 1M new jobs in the next seven years. This is why they should keep their subsidies and tax breaks, even with record profits.
The problem with their math is, most of the new jobs are not directly associated with Big Oil Cos. and therefore, do not have good pay, benefits and retirement. Without these, Medicare and SS will continue to suffer/decline and more and more people will go without healthcare coverage (more and more small businesses are NOT offering health insurance).
We need the subsidies to encourage green jobs. We need to make a "competitive" environment. We need more jobs that provide a good pay w/benefits. You would think they would be in favor of this; being "free enterprise and all".
Time to take the training wheels off and see them go it alone.
#18 Mar 19, 2013
Business Roundtable CEOs Push To Limit Taxes On Record-Breaking Offshore Profits
Looks like these greedy CEOs are willing to pay a huge chunk of change NOT to pay taxes.
Is it because paying off politicians now will give them more money in he long run (you know, change the law in their favor once again; like equity firms claiming their earned income as investment "unearned income" and not paying payroll taxes and paying a lower income tax rate)?
Why not do as POTUS says. Create good jobs w/beneifts and get a credit on their tax bill.
I don't know too many people who pay for something ahead of time. W. made a deal back in 2005 with the corporate world and they did not keep up their end of the deal. They are still laughing at W.
Keep in mind, the US needs this tax money for the infrastructure, education and healthcare! If the money doesn't come from them it will come from the working poor and middle class once again!!!
Add your comments below
|Women of Cameron||7 min||wondering||7|
|kim dugas||1 hr||dontfoverky||2|
|Debate: Gay Marriage - Ville Platte, LA (Aug '10)||6 hr||what a joke||70|
|courtableaus bar||Fri||skanky place||7|
|stepson is wrecking my marriage||Fri||been there||8|
Find what you want!
Search Opelousas Forum Now
Copyright © 2015 Topix LLC