Woman calls out family at Walmart for using food stamps

O

ol skool

Active Member
BuzzD2Kill said:
There are a lot of reasons why the American doesnt make as much, its cheaper for an American to take out a loan from an American bank at 0% interest, build a facility over seas and ship the goods into the US avoiding corporate taxs. Thats the BS and the bottom line to bring bizz back to US. Its not profitable!
Click to expand...
"Thems the rules", eh... yeah... more BS
 
Last edited:
T

ThickStemz

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
Sounds like corporate tax evasion should be illegal
Click to expand...
That's not evasion. The scenario described here that your responding to is nonsense.

There would be taxes on the profits of the goods sold in the U.S.. The taxes that are avoided are the payroll taxes through using Chinese labor.

But they still pay taxes on their profits.

In fact, the US is one of the only, if not the only country that will charge its citizens and businesses tax on income/profits earned in other countries.

That's one of trumps big lines, if the business brings the money back its taxed. Trump proposes allowing a period of time where they can bring that money in tax free. They're not going to bring it in anyway. Might as well put the capital to work.
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
ThickStemz said:
That's not evasion. The scenario described here that your responding to is nonsense.

There would be taxes on the profits of the goods sold in the U.S.. The taxes that are avoided are the payroll taxes through using Chinese labor.

But they still pay taxes on their profits.

In fact, the US is one of the only, if not the only country that will charge its citizens and businesses tax on income/profits earned in other countries.

That's one of trumps big lines, if the business brings the money back its taxed. Trump proposes allowing a period of time where they can bring that money in tax free. They're not going to bring it in anyway. Might as well put the capital to work.
Click to expand...
I like the idea of criminalizing corporate inversions better
 
T

ThickStemz

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
I like the idea of criminalizing corporate inversions better
Click to expand...
Why? Just because it gives you the warm fuzzies for limiting how much money they can make?

What should the primary emphasis of tax laws be? In your own words, if you don't mind. No traps. I just want to try to understand where you're coming from.

You and I seem to have several common goals. But out methods are so different its hard for me understand your frame of reference for these things. To me, it seems you would rather just stick it to rich folks, for the sake of sticking it to rich folks.

I'm cool with enforcing equitable arabgements. Having opportunity for everyone and there is a lot that needs to be fixed.

But US corporations have billions or trillions of dollars in foreign markets that they do not bring back to the US market for only one reason. If they do 40%, 30% whatever it may be will be gone.

So that cash stays overseas instead of being put to work here. Its pragmatic to let them bring that money back, at 0% or very low, just for the good it can do here. Because there is 0% chance we are going to get to tax it at the full rate.
 
Padawanbater2

Padawanbater2

Well-Known Member
ThickStemz said:
Why? Just because it gives you the warm fuzzies for limiting how much money they can make?

What should the primary emphasis of tax laws be? In your own words, if you don't mind. No traps. I just want to try to understand where you're coming from.

You and I seem to have several common goals. But out methods are so different its hard for me understand your frame of reference for these things. To me, it seems you would rather just stick it to rich folks, for the sake of sticking it to rich folks.

I'm cool with enforcing equitable arabgements. Having opportunity for everyone and there is a lot that needs to be fixed.

But US corporations have billions or trillions of dollars in foreign markets that they do not bring back to the US market for only one reason. If they do 40%, 30% whatever it may be will be gone.

So that cash stays overseas instead of being put to work here. Its pragmatic to let them bring that money back, at 0% or very low, just for the good it can do here. Because there is 0% chance we are going to get to tax it at the full rate.
Click to expand...

The primary emphasis of tax laws should be on budgeting as efficiently as possible

"The world is a college of corporations inexorably determined by the immutable bylaws of business. The world is a business." -The Network

If we look at America like a business, we have a budget we have to balance just like every other business. And just like every other business we also have costs, things like maintenance, electricity, loan from the bank, etc. These things come with owning and operating a business. The money to fix the place, keep the lights on and pay back the loan has to come from somewhere and if it doesn't come from corporations, it has to come from individuals. The transfer of the tax burden from corporations onto individuals since the 1950s has shifted by more than 20%, meaning individuals are now picking up more than 20% of the slack corporations used to pay during the worst economic recession since the great depression.

That's unacceptable, and I don't buy into the idea that if we just lower the tax rate, they'll all come back and invest in America.

This isn't about punishing anybody. It's about people paying their fair share and the fact that you even consider negotiating lowering the rate to abdicate to their demands just to get them to bring their illegal tax evading profits back to America is evidence of that. "Please bring the money you were supposed to pay us at 35% back, if you do you don't have to pay us as much of it...", how is that fair? You and I can't get away with doing that, so why should a corporation?
 
T

ThickStemz

Well-Known Member
Padawanbater2 said:
The primary emphasis of tax laws should be on budgeting as efficiently as possible

"The world is a college of corporations inexorably determined by the immutable bylaws of business. The world is a business." -The Network

If we look at America like a business, we have a budget we have to balance just like every other business. And just like every other business we also have costs, things like maintenance, electricity, loan from the bank, etc. These things come with owning and operating a business. The money to fix the place, keep the lights on and pay back the loan has to come from somewhere and if it doesn't come from corporations, it has to come from individuals. The transfer of the tax burden from corporations onto individuals since the 1950s has shifted by more than 20%, meaning individuals are now picking up more than 20% of the slack corporations used to pay during the worst economic recession since the great depression.

That's unacceptable, and I don't buy into the idea that if we just lower the tax rate, they'll all come back and invest in America.

This isn't about punishing anybody. It's about people paying their fair share and the fact that you even consider negotiating lowering the rate to abdicate to their demands just to get them to bring their illegal tax evading profits back to America is evidence of that. "Please bring the money you were supposed to pay us at 35% back, if you do you don't have to pay us as much of it...", how is that fair? You and I can't get away with doing that, so why should a corporation?
Click to expand...
It's not a lower rate in general.

If the company makes a profit that year they would still be taxes just like normal on that profit at over 30%.

But the part they keep overseas now, that would be separate and independent. Maybe 10% on it. That's more than were going to get with out doing something.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
schuylaar said:
Yet my post garnered 4 'likes' in 5 minutes, and yours..?

I must be speaking truth in some way to your fodder.
Click to expand...
A thing inaccurate cannot become accurate simply by a consensus of ignorance. Your grasp on economics and morality remains flimsy regardless of how many people agree with you or not.

While I respect your right to continue to believe things which are inaccurate.
The problem becomes alive when you empower other people to ENACT YOUR BELIEFS on others without any consideration of the others wishes. It is the most nefarious form of oppression to run others lives for them and declare you are helping people. You disregard the means you use as if it doesn't exist. It does.


To speak the truth the means you use must be consistent with the end you seek.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
abandonconflict said:
She has demonstrated a far greater grasp of economics than any neckbearded, cheetoh-fingered, Ayn Rand fanboi lolbertarian you can quote. The fact is, privatization is the mother of poverty and government.

Seriously just do like the lady said and shut the fuck up.
Click to expand...

upload_2016-5-4_10-30-41.png
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
bluntmassa1 said:
Without hand outs the price of ground beef would be affordable.
Click to expand...
first of all, you can't afford ground beef? really?

second, the price of beef has more to do with droughts than food stamps.

bluntmassa1 said:
a fucking cop can't even afford to feed his family.
Click to expand...
the average cop salary is over $50,000.

you're a retarded person.

bluntmassa1 said:
you need to be enslaved to the bankers to own a home or decent car.
Click to expand...
if you can't afford to buy ground beef, you're pretty much gonna be a slave to everyone.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
The idea that taxes are theft could only be dreamed up by an oligarch;

Where the fuck else does money come from for infrastructure, defense and other government programs?

Don't want to pay taxes? Fine; don't drive, don't eat, don't get a home loan and don't ask for help when you get robbed or your house catches fire.
 
Fogdog

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
ThickStemz said:
I'm fortunate enough to have gotten to know both of my grandfather's very well. They lived to old age, they became fathers late in life, at least not early, so the generations were spread out.

The idea of rural poverty from back then is so different than today. They would be the first to tell you their families didn't have money to go buy things. But they had farm land. They were both the sons of share croppers.

They had food year round, and enough resources to barter for what they needed. Life wasnt easy. I wouldn't want to live that way being used to modern life. But their needs were met. One went to college and became a contractor, after ww2. The other became a plumber.

In the world of their youth those who were dirt poor were very self sufficient. There were hard years. What broke this was the dust bowl and we never went back to it.

In urban areas it was aweful. But out in the country the poor were better off.
Click to expand...
You are mistaken. If you think the rural poor's needs were met, you are minimizing what people need. Food was not plentiful. Diseases like rickets were not uncommon. Do you know what causes rickets? I bet you have to look it up you ignorant hillbilly.

Oh and sharecroppers were caught in a cycle of poverty that only broke during the massive government spend known as WWII. The GI bill was the leg up your grandfathers needed to finally get away from the farm. Tell me, did they ever talk about going back to sharecropping because it was so good? I think not.

I'm glad that the massive government's social assistance worked out for your grandfather. It being that you weren't born into a sharecropper's life, you benefited from it too. Its funny how people that benefit from this kind of help don't want others to get it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top