USA Federal deficit

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Do you really want to go down that road?

Not quite so simply, but yes, I do.

In addition - in my world - I would tax companies that outsource at a higher rate than those that use domestic labor.

I would definately require some sort of payroll tax on all non-domestic payroll and not allow these expenses to be deducted from corporate profits for tax purposes.

Then I'd just contract with a with a Consultant or sub-contractor in another country so it wouldn't be shown on my books as payroll. Pass all the taxes you want. Business' will always find a way around it.

Isn't that TAX EVASION? I wonder what Ken Lay would do. Think I'll make that my new sig line________

Why would that be illegal? I'm not responsible for payment of taxes for a Consultant or sub-contractors employees. I could tell you about a dozen legal ways to avoid taxes. If the govt. continues to raise taxes, they will be used. Why do you think business' are subcontracting to foreign companies right now? Keep raising taxes and more jobs will leave the US. Then people will end up on welfare and those who have jobs will be forced to support them.

I love how those with no experience running a business are the ones who think raising corporate taxes to support out of control govt. spending has no backlash.

You are correct. The right way to do it is to raise personal income tax on the wealthy, don't get involved in unnecessary wars on other continents, and don't spend more on defense than the next 8 nations combined.

Go to a poor Island country and set up a shell corporation as a charitable non-profit. Contribute money to it which become a tax write off. The shell corporation then purchases a new Mercedes and "lends" the vehicle to you.

Nice try Prof. but the more you try to unfairly raise taxes, the more easy ways there are to avoid them.

Would you support a change in the tax laws which reduced taxes in high cost of living areas? As an example $100,000 goes a lot further in rural Illinois than it does in Chicago. So shouldn't people in Chicago pay a lower tax rate based on their higher cost of living? Just curious if you support a truly progressive tax structure.

[kallend 2,151]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Do you really want to go down that road?

Not quite so simply, but yes, I do.

In addition - in my world - I would tax companies that outsource at a higher rate than those that use domestic labor.

I would definately require some sort of payroll tax on all non-domestic payroll and not allow these expenses to be deducted from corporate profits for tax purposes.

Then I'd just contract with a with a Consultant or sub-contractor in another country so it wouldn't be shown on my books as payroll. Pass all the taxes you want. Business' will always find a way around it.

Isn't that TAX EVASION? I wonder what Ken Lay would do. Think I'll make that my new sig line________

Why would that be illegal? I'm not responsible for payment of taxes for a Consultant or sub-contractors employees. I could tell you about a dozen legal ways to avoid taxes. If the govt. continues to raise taxes, they will be used. Why do you think business' are subcontracting to foreign companies right now? Keep raising taxes and more jobs will leave the US. Then people will end up on welfare and those who have jobs will be forced to support them.

I love how those with no experience running a business are the ones who think raising corporate taxes to support out of control govt. spending has no backlash.

You are correct. The right way to do it is to raise personal income tax on the wealthy, don't get involved in unnecessary wars on other continents, and don't spend more on defense than the next 8 nations combined.

Go to a poor Island country and set up a shell corporation as a charitable non-profit. Contribute money to it which become a tax write off. The shell corporation then purchases a new Mercedes and "lends" the vehicle to you.

Nice try Prof. but the more you try to unfairly raise taxes, the more easy ways there are to avoid them.

Would you support a change in the tax laws which reduced taxes in high cost of living areas? As an example $100,000 goes a lot further in rural Illinois than it does in Chicago. So shouldn't people in Chicago pay a lower tax rate based on their higher cost of living? Just curious if you support a truly progressive tax structure.

Oh, there are plenty of ways the very rich avoid paying taxes, which are "for the little people", under our current structure.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Do you really want to go down that road?

Not quite so simply, but yes, I do.

In addition - in my world - I would tax companies that outsource at a higher rate than those that use domestic labor.

I would definately require some sort of payroll tax on all non-domestic payroll and not allow these expenses to be deducted from corporate profits for tax purposes.

Then I'd just contract with a with a Consultant or sub-contractor in another country so it wouldn't be shown on my books as payroll. Pass all the taxes you want. Business' will always find a way around it.

Isn't that TAX EVASION? I wonder what Ken Lay would do. Think I'll make that my new sig line________

Why would that be illegal? I'm not responsible for payment of taxes for a Consultant or sub-contractors employees. I could tell you about a dozen legal ways to avoid taxes. If the govt. continues to raise taxes, they will be used. Why do you think business' are subcontracting to foreign companies right now? Keep raising taxes and more jobs will leave the US. Then people will end up on welfare and those who have jobs will be forced to support them.

I love how those with no experience running a business are the ones who think raising corporate taxes to support out of control govt. spending has no backlash.

You are correct. The right way to do it is to raise personal income tax on the wealthy, don't get involved in unnecessary wars on other continents, and don't spend more on defense than the next 8 nations combined.

Go to a poor Island country and set up a shell corporation as a charitable non-profit. Contribute money to it which become a tax write off. The shell corporation then purchases a new Mercedes and "lends" the vehicle to you.

Nice try Prof. but the more you try to unfairly raise taxes, the more easy ways there are to avoid them.

Would you support a change in the tax laws which reduced taxes in high cost of living areas? As an example $100,000 goes a lot further in rural Illinois than it does in Chicago. So shouldn't people in Chicago pay a lower tax rate based on their higher cost of living? Just curious if you support a truly progressive tax structure.

Oh, there are plenty of ways the very rich avoid paying taxes, which are "for the little people", under our current structure.

Yep, I agree. Toss out the entire tax structure, eliminate the IRS and institute a Flat Tax/National Sales Tax. It's the only way to make sure people pay their "Fair Share".

Interesting you avoided my question about restructuring tax rates for people living in areas with a higher cost of living. Surely you don't think it's fair that someone making $100,000 per year in Chicago should have to pay the same tax rate as someone living in say Rantoul, do you? How could that be fair?

[kallend 2,151]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Do you really want to go down that road?

Not quite so simply, but yes, I do.

In addition - in my world - I would tax companies that outsource at a higher rate than those that use domestic labor.

I would definately require some sort of payroll tax on all non-domestic payroll and not allow these expenses to be deducted from corporate profits for tax purposes.

Then I'd just contract with a with a Consultant or sub-contractor in another country so it wouldn't be shown on my books as payroll. Pass all the taxes you want. Business' will always find a way around it.

Isn't that TAX EVASION? I wonder what Ken Lay would do. Think I'll make that my new sig line________

Why would that be illegal? I'm not responsible for payment of taxes for a Consultant or sub-contractors employees. I could tell you about a dozen legal ways to avoid taxes. If the govt. continues to raise taxes, they will be used. Why do you think business' are subcontracting to foreign companies right now? Keep raising taxes and more jobs will leave the US. Then people will end up on welfare and those who have jobs will be forced to support them.

I love how those with no experience running a business are the ones who think raising corporate taxes to support out of control govt. spending has no backlash.

You are correct. The right way to do it is to raise personal income tax on the wealthy, don't get involved in unnecessary wars on other continents, and don't spend more on defense than the next 8 nations combined.

Go to a poor Island country and set up a shell corporation as a charitable non-profit. Contribute money to it which become a tax write off. The shell corporation then purchases a new Mercedes and "lends" the vehicle to you.

Nice try Prof. but the more you try to unfairly raise taxes, the more easy ways there are to avoid them.

Would you support a change in the tax laws which reduced taxes in high cost of living areas? As an example $100,000 goes a lot further in rural Illinois than it does in Chicago. So shouldn't people in Chicago pay a lower tax rate based on their higher cost of living? Just curious if you support a truly progressive tax structure.

Oh, there are plenty of ways the very rich avoid paying taxes, which are "for the little people", under our current structure.

Yep, I agree. Toss out the entire tax structure, eliminate the IRS and institute a Flat Tax/National Sales Tax. It's the only way to make sure people pay their "Fair Share".

Interesting you avoided my question about restructuring tax rates for people living in areas with a higher cost of living. Surely you don't think it's fair that someone making $100,000 per year in Chicago should have to pay the same tax rate as someone living in say Rantoul, do you? How could that be fair?

Define "fair" in this context.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Would you support a change in the tax laws which reduced taxes in high cost of living areas? As an example $100,000 goes a lot further in rural Illinois than it does in Chicago. So shouldn't people in Chicago pay a lower tax rate based on their higher cost of living? Just curious if you support a truly progressive tax structure.

Oh, there are plenty of ways the very rich avoid paying taxes, which are "for the little people", under our current structure.

[hairyjuan 0]

the 'federal debt', proves one thing totally and irrefutably- United States, INCORPORATED is bankrupt. google for h. j. r. 192 it will prove this statement. i'll get back to you later on the cites in the congressional record where our 'elected' corporate officers state this FACT. 'IT IS A GOVERNMENT OF CORPORATIONS, BY CORPORATIONS, FOR CORPORATIONS' benjamin harris 19th president

we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively


wishers never choose, choosers never wish

[Gravitymaster 0]

Great, I'm going to write off all my personal expenses too. Damned IRS has had me fooled all these years.

[kallend 2,151]

Quote

Quote

Would you support a change in the tax laws which reduced taxes in high cost of living areas? As an example $100,000 goes a lot further in rural Illinois than it does in Chicago. So shouldn't people in Chicago pay a lower tax rate based on their higher cost of living? Just curious if you support a truly progressive tax structure.

Oh, there are plenty of ways the very rich avoid paying taxes, which are "for the little people", under our current structure.

Yep, I agree. Toss out the entire tax structure, eliminate the IRS and institute a Flat Tax/National Sales Tax. It's the only way to make sure people pay their "Fair Share".

In this context fair is defined as eliminating all tax write offs, business expenses, charitable giving etc. This would be the only "fair" way for the govt. to make sure everyone paid the proper amount taxes. No more tax shelters for individuals or corporations.If you can afford a 100,000 automobile, you pay say, 17% or $17,000 in taxes. If you purchase a $20,000 auto, you only pay $3400.

Interesting you avoided my question about restructuring tax rates for people living in areas with a higher cost of living. Surely you don't think it's fair that someone making $100,000 per year in Chicago should have to pay the same tax rate as someone living in say Rantoul, do you? How could that be fair?

[EricTheRed 0]

Quote

Toss out the entire tax structure, eliminate the IRS and institute a Flat Tax/National Sales Tax. It's the only way to make sure people pay their "Fair Share".

If the same tax rate was applied to every item imported (either by individuals or corporations, including both raw and finished goods), I'd back it 100%.

Consumption should be taxed.

BTW: I would also define corporate takeovers/mergers as a sale and levy the going rate on the transaction value.

illegible usually

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

Our current revenues are higher than they've ever been.

Is there any indication what effect the added income on Oil and Gas had on these numbers? Do you know for a fact this increase can only be attributed to tax decreases?

[TheAnvil 0]

Added oil and gas income? Please explain.

I think the recovering economy had more to do with the increase in revenues, though I think the tax cuts themselves did contribute.

The fact remains that revenues after GWB's tax cut increased, so those screaming about the deficit being caused by tax cuts have no credibility whatsoever. Spending more than you have causes debt.

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[akarunway 1]

Quote

Added oil and gas income? Please explain.

I think the recovering economy had more to do with the increase in revenues, though I think the tax cuts themselves did contribute.

The fact remains that revenues after GWB's tax cut increased, so those screaming about the deficit being caused by tax cuts have no credibility whatsoever. Spending more than you have causes debt.

AGAIN. For the morons out therehttp://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec2006/cr021506.htm

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

Added oil and gas income? Please explain

Taxes on oil and gas are generally in % form. Hence the giant rises in oil and gas costs has translated in some giant increases in tax revenues.

[kallend 2,151]

Quote

Added oil and gas income? Please explain.

I think the recovering economy had more to do with the increase in revenues, though I think the tax cuts themselves did contribute.

The fact remains that revenues after GWB's tax cut increased, so those screaming about the deficit being caused by tax cuts have no credibility whatsoever. Spending more than you have causes debt.

Spending more than you have is a Republican trait. And there is NO evidence that tax cuts led to increased revenues - there are many other parameters involved. What we DO know is that we became the worlds biggest debtor nation under Republican leadership. Once upon a time (before Reagan) we were the world's biggest creditor.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[TheAnvil 0]

Revenues from excise taxes are up only about 4 Billion since '00. Revenue from corporate income taxes and custom duties are up, whereas revenues from individual income taxes have decreased slightly since '00.

Tax cuts fueled the economic recovery.

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[kallend 2,151]

Quote

Revenues from excise taxes are up only about 4 Billion since '00. Revenue from corporate income taxes and custom duties are up, whereas revenues from individual income taxes have decreased slightly since '00.

Tax cuts fueled the economic recovery.

Borrowing with no hope of paying back fueled the economic "recovery".

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[billvon 3,120]

>Tax cuts fueled the economic recovery.

If I took out ten mortgages on my house, I could probably clear a few million. Wouldn't make me a millionaire, although a fool might claim that. And although I could buy lots of flatscreen TV's and fancy sportscars, my financial situation, by any sane measure, would be dire indeed.

[TheAnvil 0]

I agree.

The current spending spree is completely unsustainable. I think all departments need to find ways to reduce spending - not cut spending ie increase it by less than planned, but actually REDUCE spending.

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[hairyjuan 0]

taxation is slavery, the debt proves that the united states,inc is Bankrupt. The Grace Commission, from ronnies era, "100% of every tax dollar is consumed by the federal debt". FRN's are borrowed into existence by the bankrupt government. your birth certificate is the collateral for the loan. From the original FEDERAL RESERVE ACT-every time a member bank asks for more FRN's a lien is placed on ALL of its demand deposits.

www.libertydollar.org

we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively


wishers never choose, choosers never wish

[kallend 2,151]

Quote

I agree.

The current spending spree is completely unsustainable. I think all departments need to find ways to reduce spending - not cut spending ie increase it by less than planned, but actually REDUCE spending.

Damn right.

Not spending $(hundreds of billions) on an elective war would be a good place to start. Next would be cutting defense spending in general so we only outspend, say, the next 3 nations combined instead of the next 8 nations combined.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[TheAnvil 0]

Defense spending, like any other departement, can definitely trim out quite a bit of fat and waste. However, 'tis the mandatory spending that is driving the deficit. Any cutting of waste will help, but if one is serious about reducing the deficit & debt, then one must address the mandatory spending problems we're facing.

Vinny the Anvil
Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL
JACKASS POWER!!!!!!

[akarunway 1]

Quote

taxation is slavery, the debt proves that the united states,inc is Bankrupt. The Grace Commission, from ronnies era, "100% of every tax dollar is consumed by the federal debt". FRN's are borrowed into existence by the bankrupt government. your birth certificate is the collateral for the loan. From the original FEDERAL RESERVE ACT-every time a member bank asks for more FRN's a lien is placed on ALL of its demand deposits.

www.libertydollar.org

The way the world is headed in general I think lead and brass and a boat are the best investments

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

I agree.

The current spending spree is completely unsustainable. I think all departments need to find ways to reduce spending - not cut spending ie increase it by less than planned, but actually REDUCE spending.

Damn right.

Not spending $(hundreds of billions) on an elective war would be a good place to start. Next would be cutting defense spending in general so we only outspend, say, the next 3 nations combined instead of the next 8 nations combined.

Oh, good... so we can get the REST of the troops on food stamps, and not just 1/3 of them?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[kallend 2,151]

Quote

Quote

Quote

I agree.

The current spending spree is completely unsustainable. I think all departments need to find ways to reduce spending - not cut spending ie increase it by less than planned, but actually REDUCE spending.

Damn right.

Not spending $(hundreds of billions) on an elective war would be a good place to start. Next would be cutting defense spending in general so we only outspend, say, the next 3 nations combined instead of the next 8 nations combined.

Oh, good... so we can get the REST of the troops on food stamps, and not just 1/3 of them?

Doesn't it occur to you that payments to the troops are NOT the reason we are spending more on defense than the next 8 nations combined?

What justification do you have for our defense spending being SO far out of line with that of the rest of the world? It's not like we can afford it, we are the worlds biggest debtor nation right now. Pre-Reagan we were the world's biggest creditor.

In addition to which, our fearless leaders are so inept that they have taken the world's finest military and put it in a no-win situation that will embarrass and haunt us for a generation, just like Vietnam did.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[mnealtx 0]

Quite the turnaround from '04, John, when you said the military didn't have enough money to buy armor... now it has too much money? Which one is it?

Having been there, I know damn well it's Joe Snuffy that's going to take the hardest hit from a reduction in defense spending... some perfumed prince general will decide his pet project is too important to be canned, regardless of flaws (Stryker, anyone?).

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706