Stop quoting that quack, he is just wrong!<quoted text> Maybe you should have watched the whole thing! The point is that there is not enough money in the US to pay for a 3.7 TRILLION dollar budget as Nero proposed.
domestic financial assets totaled $131 trillion
"During FY 2010, the federal government collected approximately $2.16 trillion in tax revenue. Primary receipt categories included individual income taxes (42%), Social Security/Social Insurance taxes (40%), and corporate taxes (9%). Other types included excise, estate and gift taxes."
More than 60% of the 3.4 trillion budget already collected with low tax rates. Just raise the taxes.(I'm for cutting subsidies, fraud, tax evasion and waste to offset the difference)
Uh, ok, so let's take out sub-s 'pass-through' companies and say that half of taxable income is paid by 'individuals', so 1/2 of 9% is 4.5% should be in the corporate column, or 13.5%. That still is a small slice of the pie.<quoted text>
As for corporate profits, your reference ( http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/Tax-VOX/201... )
states "But these breaks are only one reason why the statutory rate tells less than the whole corporate tax story. It turns out that more than half of taxable business income in the U.S. is earned by pass-through companies such as partnerships and S corporations. Their owners pay individual taxes on this income, but owe no corporate tax at all.
Just raise the capital gain rate back to historic levels and restore the higher top tax bracket.
Why is it so difficult? You just stated it was half.<quoted text>
Because this happens far less frequently elsewhere, it is very difficult to compare U.S. business taxes (either rates or payments) with those in other countries. Peter Merrill, a principal at the accounting firm of PriceWaterhouseCoopers, argues that the shift to pass-through companies may be the single most important reason why U.S. corporate tax revenues are so low."
That would account for 4.5% of the pie, added to 9% is still much lower than other industrialized countries.
Why do you conservatives continually bring up that disingenuous argument? We are talking about paying for medicare, medicaid, social security and cutbacks or elimination of social services programs which help the poor. They aren't big consumers so incremental rise in prices won't hurt them as much as loss of these lifelines.<quoted text>
WHY do you liberals think that taxing corporations is without consequence? A tax on corporations is most likely to affect those less able to pay the tax, i.e. the poor. Do you really think corporations will not raise prices to cover the additional taxes imposed? The smartest thing we as a nation could do is ELIMINATE corporate taxes.