Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Obviously it would never happen although I certainly wouldn't mind privatizing the whole thing.

Because then we could pay taxes and insurance premiums.

  • Replies 82
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted (edited)

Yes nearly all public services are bloated. 10% is not a small increment and corporate taxes don't need to be raised at all. You have never made any argument why corporate taxes need to be raised other than "look at this infographic" and "it will save $1B". No one will take you seriously if those are the best arguments you can come up with.

I've stated it's a nice bonus to help ease the austerity measures and that there are no severe economic impacts with an increase of that percentage.

The onus of proof is on you to show all services are bloated or that the tax increase will be harmful to the economy.

Edited by mentalfloss
Posted (edited)

I've stated it's a nice bonus to help ease the austerity measures and that there are no severe economic impacts with an increase of that percentage.

The onus of proof is on you to show all services are bloated or that the tax increase will be harmful to the economy.

Nope the onus of proof is on you to show why we should "raise corporate taxes by 5%."

So for your only argument is "take a look at this infographic", and "because it's a nice bonus to ease austerity" (3% of the deficit is not a bonus, it is an afterthought. No one would care if our deficit was 450M, or 900M for a 10% hike). Try harder.

Edited by CPCFTW
Posted

I already pay insurance premiums and taxes. The idea is to pay less taxes and get better service. ;)

People have a lot of ideas. They aren't always right.

Posted (edited)

Nope the onus of proof is on you to show why we should "raise corporate taxes by 5%."

So for your only argument is "take a look at this infographic", and "because it's a nice bonus to ease austerity" (3% of the deficit is not a bonus, it is an afterthought. No one would care if our deficit was 450M, or 900M for a 10% hike). Try harder.

No, I said that it would create a nice billion dollar bonus - in addition to cuts - that would cost no economic penalty.

And considering you've continued to fail to prove that a 10% increase would have anything but a negligible effect on the economy, it looks like I was completely justified.

B)

Edited by mentalfloss
Posted

No, I said that it would create a nice billion dollar bonus - in addition to cuts - that would cost no economic penalty.

And considering you've continued to fail to prove that a 10% increase would have anything but a negligible effect on the economy, it looks like I was completely justified.

B)

I don't have to prove economics to you. Pick up a textbook. B)

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,919
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Milla
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • LinkSoul60 earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • LinkSoul60 earned a badge
      Collaborator
    • LinkSoul60 went up a rank
      Rookie
    • Milla earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Michael R D James went up a rank
      Rookie
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...