Just checked out the election results...

[muddstopper]

Quote:
It doesnt make one difference if its 1 or 1000, if they are illegal, they are not entitled to any public assitance. Do you think Mexico gives out free health care to illegal immigrants. Mexico will throw them in jail and deport them out of their country. If we stop all the freebies and handouts, most would go back home without waiting to get caught and deported. And that my friend would leave more funds available to treat the poor and elderly that are entitled to the benefits of being a American Citizen.

 

[deerman]

Greed to me would be from person....no don't take from me....that guy has more take his

Even though the guy with more works 70 hour a week, guy with less only works a 40 hour week.

Don't tax me ..tax the guy behind that tree.

 

[muddstopper]

Quote:

 

[nonseq]

Illegal immigration is a stalking horse.

 

[nonseq]

Quote:
Greedy and jaded. I really dont know how to respond to that. At least not in a manner that would be permitted on this forum.

Since when is 250k low for a profit on a small business. You think all small business clear a million bucks a year. To simplify this for you, you pay taxes on your profit, not on the revenue the business takes in. Do I need to also explain profit to you. Profit is what you make after all expenses/ cost of doing business, or as the liberals would like to call it, deductions, are substracted from your balance sheet.

As for the seperate books, yada, yada, yada, Stupid question and no answer deserved. Bottom line as a Chaper S corporation, My wife and I where still the listed owners of the company and all profits belonged to us and it is still our responsibility to pay the taxes owed. Now those taxes would have been paid thru the corporate account, but it still came out of our pockets.

Now your reference to cutting staff and the cost of insurance and makeing more money is rediculous to say the least. The goal is to grow a company in order to make more money. Not cut the staff so you cant do more work. And if you think that paultry 3% in extra taxes is going to pay the healthcare if the money is sent to the government to swindle and waste, you really need to rethink what you are proposeing. That 3% would be put to much better use in growing a business, hireing more workers and letting them get off of the welfare rolls. Let them become taxpayers, the government will still get their money, but it will be from the additional taxpayers added to the tax base, and not all from the few taxpayers that still have jobs.

Let me explain how a company not paying corporate taxes will not reslut in a lost of tax dollars to the feds. Lets just use $40k for a dollar wage. Now suppose I save $40g by not having to pay a coporate income tax. Wow, Now I am greedy, I just got to keep $40 g of my hard earned money. Now instead of sticking that money away in a jar in my back yard, I decide that if I hire another employee, I could increase production of my widgets and make more money. I take that $40g and hire another worker. This worker has been laid off for many months, was recieving food stamps, rent assitance, and medicare health benefits. Now he has a job, and isnt eligable for all the free handouts. Hes makeing $40g a year and can pay for his food electricty, rent and has health insurance thru a company health plan. Gosh, that alone has already saved the Federal Gov. a ton of money. I would guestimate at least $1200 a month or $14gs a year. This new worker, is also Paying income taxes on his newfound wealth, he had a little pocket money to spend on a new car, remodeling his house, ect, etc. He is in effect actually hireing or creating more jobs that can take even more poeple off of public assitance. Saving the gov even more. Reduceing the burden on medicare, paying into social security, driving this economy forward. Nah, it has to be better to let the federal government have the $40g and redistribute it as they see fit. We all know the government can be trusted to not waste our money on trips to India, playing golf, or a basketball court on the back lawn of the White House.

Unfortunately there is no empirical evidence to support this mythos. It's a Randian fallacy that the wealthy will act in a socially responsible manner or even with enlightened self-interest. They act with just plain old self-interest. Like the rest of us.

 

[Organics North]

Quote:
Unfortunately there is no empirical evidence to support this mythos. It's a Randian fallacy that the wealthy will act in a socially responsible manner or even with enlightened self-interest. They act with just plain old self-interest. Like the rest of us.

Agreed Nonseq,
I believe this is the model we have been using since Regan... I would say.... "Houston we have a problem here"

It is a failed approach, time to try something new...

ON

 

[muddstopper]

Unfortunately there is no empirical evidence to support this mythos. It's a Randian fallacy that the wealthy will act in a socially responsible manner or even with enlightened self-interest. They act with just plain old self-interest. Like the rest of us.

Let me point you to my earlier comments concerning the corporate taxes,

Now how do we get those business and the jobs they provide back onto US Soil. Its very simple, instead of taxing Corporation 35%, ( it will be 39.6% if the Bush tax cuts are allowed to expire). Do away with the tax altogether. Instead of driving companies and jobs overseas, this would encourage them to reinvest in America, in fact make it a law that instead of paying a coporate tax, every company should reinvest that amount of money they would have paid as a tax, back into their company inside the boundries of the United States.

Put another way, any business is going to look for the cheapest and most profitable place to invest their money. Right now that place happens to not be in the United States. Cheap wages is not the reason companies leave the US. Face the facts that the United States is currently the largest consumer nation, most of everything made has to be shipped to the US to be sold. Shipping cost big bucks. So much so that some companies are actually returning to the US to lower shipping cost. Shipping cost them more than the wages to produce their products. The major hurdel in getting other companies to come back to the US is the hostil business climate our government creates. Over taxation is one very serious problem. Over regulation is another. Wages are third at best. Any money saved on wages is simply lost having to ship the goods to where they are being sold. You want to create jobs in America, do what it takes to bring the business back home.​

 

[deerman]

Quote:
Greedy and jaded. I really dont know how to respond to that. At least not in a manner that would be permitted on this forum.

Since when is 250k low for a profit on a small business. You think all small business clear a million bucks a year. To simplify this for you, you pay taxes on your profit, not on the revenue the business takes in. Do I need to also explain profit to you. Profit is what you make after all expenses/ cost of doing business, or as the liberals would like to call it, deductions, are substracted from your balance sheet.

As for the seperate books, yada, yada, yada, Stupid question and no answer deserved. Bottom line as a Chaper S corporation, My wife and I where still the listed owners of the company and all profits belonged to us and it is still our responsibility to pay the taxes owed. Now those taxes would have been paid thru the corporate account, but it still came out of our pockets.

Now your reference to cutting staff and the cost of insurance and makeing more money is rediculous to say the least. The goal is to grow a company in order to make more money. Not cut the staff so you cant do more work. And if you think that paultry 3% in extra taxes is going to pay the healthcare if the money is sent to the government to swindle and waste, you really need to rethink what you are proposeing. That 3% would be put to much better use in growing a business, hireing more workers and letting them get off of the welfare rolls. Let them become taxpayers, the government will still get their money, but it will be from the additional taxpayers added to the tax base, and not all from the few taxpayers that still have jobs.

Let me explain how a company not paying corporate taxes will not reslut in a lost of tax dollars to the feds. Lets just use $40k for a dollar wage. Now suppose I save $40g by not having to pay a coporate income tax. Wow, Now I am greedy, I just got to keep $40 g of my hard earned money. Now instead of sticking that money away in a jar in my back yard, I decide that if I hire another employee, I could increase production of my widgets and make more money. I take that $40g and hire another worker. This worker has been laid off for many months, was recieving food stamps, rent assitance, and medicare health benefits. Now he has a job, and isnt eligable for all the free handouts. Hes makeing $40g a year and can pay for his food electricty, rent and has health insurance thru a company health plan. Gosh, that alone has already saved the Federal Gov. a ton of money. I would guestimate at least $1200 a month or $14gs a year. This new worker, is also Paying income taxes on his newfound wealth, he had a little pocket money to spend on a new car, remodeling his house, ect, etc. He is in effect actually hireing or creating more jobs that can take even more poeple off of public assitance. Saving the gov even more. Reduceing the burden on medicare, paying into social security, driving this economy forward. Nah, it has to be better to let the federal government have the $40g and redistribute it as they see fit. We all know the government can be trusted to not waste our money on trips to India, playing golf, or a basketball court on the back lawn of the White House.

Unfortunately there is no empirical evidence to support this mythos. It's a Randian fallacy that the wealthy will act in a socially responsible manner or even with enlightened self-interest. They act with just plain old self-interest. Like the rest of us.

Yes true , their self-interest is to make their company grow bigger ,which in turn means more employees to produce more goods. If you every see how they all want their company to grow ,grow ,and grow. Guess what the more profit they make ,more taxes they pay....WITHOUT INCREASE more tax on them.

 

[Q9]

I have WHAT in my yard? :

Q9 said:

Both Republicans and Democrats have been buying Keynes' bull for a LONG time now. That's why we're in this mess. As for your "neo-liberal" economics, you really need to study history better. We have been kneeling at the altar of Keynes' discredited theories since at least 1913 - when the Monster From Jekyll Island was born. Personally, I think that before ANYTHING else, that monster must be destroyed.

Be careful of telling other people to study history better. Do you know who was involved in the neo-liberal economics movement? Are you familiar with the team that "helped" the former Soviet states go through shock economics to "help" them make the change from communism to capitalism? Look at who the major players were. Look at the interlocking directorates that have dominated economic thought for the last 30 years.

Once upon a time I thought history was a known. Something that was laid out clearly because it was in the past. But it is not. History is written by the victors. It is played out to support whatever dominant ideology exists at the time, often with little regard for the actual facts. There is no side or group that is more or less adept at this. Nor are we necessarily better at it now than we were years ago.

Yes, the Fed was a bad idea. Even Wilson said so on his death bed, something to the effect that he knew he had ruined this country with that one decision and hoped a president who followed would be able to correct it. The only one who was really serious about dismantling it and had plans to do so was Kennedy.​

Keynes believed in capitalism to an extent, so it would make sense that Keynesian nations would aid Communist nations in what is definitely an improvement of economic policy. That doesn't change the fact that Keynes' philosophy has been followed by the US for ages. Look at what's happening right now! It REEKS of Keynesian economics. Ben Bernanke, Fed chairman, is a Keynesian. Greenspan, for all his libertarian talk, was a Keynesian. Fed policy has almost always been Keynesian. The Fed, by its very nature, is Keynesian. The Fed chairman ALWAYS goes with the flow, altering his policies to whoever is in power - it's always Keynesian, even Reagan. Congressman Paul's Audit the Fed bill was the first real attempt to do anything in years, and now is the first time that the Fed is being challenged since its creation. Now try telling me we haven't been following Keynes, if only by allowing the Fed to exist.​

 

[Q9]

Quote:
Unfortunately there is no empirical evidence to support this mythos. It's a Randian fallacy that the wealthy will act in a socially responsible manner or even with enlightened self-interest. They act with just plain old self-interest. Like the rest of us.

Agreed Nonseq,
I believe this is the model we have been using since Regan... I would say.... "Houston we have a problem here"

It is a failed approach, time to try something new...

ON

Great, what do YOU propose doing? I've got it! Let's run all businesses through GOVERNMENT! That's never been tried before, certainly not in places like Cuba and the USSR!

Failed approach my foot, we've been taxing the crap out of business for ages. THAT is a failed approach. Try lowering or even *gasp* ABOLISHING certain taxes. Let businesses grow and hire! When a business grows, it is INEVITABLE that it will hire. Only a moron would try to dramatically expand his business without hiring workers.