Trump Signs Deal to keep Carrier in the US

Argus · December 2, 2016

1 hour ago, DogOnPorch said:

You see, this illustrates the problem for me: you're right because you say you're right. Myself, I don't believe YOU, either.

Corporate welfare does not go with fiscal conservatism. One of the reasons our productivity has sucked for so long is the habit of government to pay money to support inefficient industries and companies and to attract others. If the only reason you can turn a profit is because the government subsidizes you then in most respects you should not be in business.

cannuck · December 2, 2016

25 minutes ago, Argus said:

Corporate welfare does not go with fiscal conservatism. One of the reasons our productivity has sucked for so long is the habit of government to pay money to support inefficient industries and companies and to attract others. If the only reason you can turn a profit is because the government subsidizes you then in most respects you should not be in business.

While I can agree 100% with this, reality is EVERY "economic development" officer at the federal, state/provincial or municipal level thinks jobs are "created" by luring big business into their back yard, and the principal tool they have to do so is $$$$ in tax breaks or outright gifts. Established business (Carrier as a good example) will simply put production wherever the best handout or tax regime might be. So will any other large company with the sales volume and resources to do so.

Reality is: new growth and wealth being created comes from small business that grows and competes - but are in no condition financially to make big demands and move assets all over the globe. Essentially, what the hand-out morons do is bring a company in (or keep one) by making their neighbours and competitors subsidize them to do so. They are too lazy and too stupid to do their job in the best interests of the taxpayers who fund them.

Now, Trumpet dropping the corporate tax rate is a pretty decent deal - because it SHOULD meet what I consider the ultimate measure of good legislation and policy: EVERY business will be on the same footing and enjoy the same advantage. I think the handouts to Carrier were really about a gesture in the VP elect's back yard to show some kind of meeting of election promise(s).

sharkman · December 2, 2016

You don't get it Argus. The the US the corporate tax rate is way too high. Then they have to pay for Obama's ridiculous healthcare system. Then they have all of the new enviro regs to abide by. All of this makes them want to leave the US so they can make some money. But Trump is going to fix all that, just be patient and know that it's not corporate welfare, but corporate fleecing that's going on right now.

bush_cheney2004 · December 2, 2016

There's no such thing as a tax cut...it's not the government's money. Corporations will still pay taxes, as will the employees (pay roll taxes). Employees will spend their wages and pay even more taxes.

Argus · December 2, 2016

1 hour ago, sharkman said:

You don't get it Argus. The the US the corporate tax rate is way too high. Then they have to pay for Obama's ridiculous healthcare system. Then they have all of the new enviro regs to abide by. All of this makes them want to leave the US so they can make some money. But Trump is going to fix all that, just be patient and know that it's not corporate welfare, but corporate fleecing that's going on right now.

The US corporate tax rate is probably about the same as ours once you add in the wide range of loopholes and tax refunds companies have. That's how hugely profitable companies avoid paying taxes for years. As for having to pay for Obamacare - did you just put that into a thread comparing tax rates in Canada and the US? Do you not think Canadian companies also contribute to our health care system?

BubberMiley · December 2, 2016

1 hour ago, sharkman said:

But Trump is going to fix all that, just be patient and know that it's not corporate welfare, but corporate fleecing that's going on right now.

You still have the wide-eyed optimism that Trump will fix everything after it has been revealed that the Carrier jobs that were "saved" were engineering and head-office jobs that were never at risk? Psychoanalytically speaking, you sound like a con artist's dream.

bush_cheney2004 · December 2, 2016

23 minutes ago, Argus said:

The US corporate tax rate is probably about the same as ours once you add in the wide range of loopholes and tax refunds companies have.

I hope that Trump can get U.S. rates down low enough to bring all automotive manufacturing back to right-to-work states from Ontario, where other costs make it the most expensive place in the world to build cars/trucks. No reason to build American makes in Canada any more. Just shut it all down.

?Impact · December 2, 2016

2 hours ago, cannuck said:

Reality is: new growth and wealth being created comes from small business that grows and competes - but are in no condition financially to make big demands and move assets all over the globe.

More and more small businesses are focused on bringing in product from around the world, or outsourcing their manufacturing overseas. Yes, there are some sectors that are local, but in the goods producing sectors it is getting to be very few like food where time is a critical factor.

Here is a successful small Canadian business, they designed and made an excellent product line (I have 3 of their models) but the reality is made in China.

Edited December 2, 2016 by ?Impact

sharkman · December 3, 2016

23 hours ago, Argus said:

The US corporate tax rate is probably about the same as ours once you add in the wide range of loopholes and tax refunds companies have. That's how hugely profitable companies avoid paying taxes for years. As for having to pay for Obamacare - did you just put that into a thread comparing tax rates in Canada and the US? Do you not think Canadian companies also contribute to our health care system?

1) The US corporate tax rate is not the same.

2) The US is not the same as Canada, apples to oranges.

3) 8 years of Obama's debt spending has put the US on the edge of an interest rate cliff.

Topaz · December 4, 2016

The biggest enemy to workers around the world are ROBOTS and u may see more governments come on the side of workers because IF robot take over the work force, where will governments get their tax dollars....the rich and corporation, will be the only ones making good money, I wonder if Corps. thought of that?

Argus · December 4, 2016

18 hours ago, sharkman said:

1) The US corporate tax rate is not the same.

2) The US is not the same as Canada, apples to oranges.

3) 8 years of Obama's debt spending has put the US on the edge of an interest rate cliff.

Many US corporations pay little or no tax. This is known. And spending in the United States is controlled by Congress, not the president. I'm surprised you don't know this.

Corporations are paying a smaller share of federal tax revenue than they did in the 1950s, dropping from one-third then to only one-tenth of the total today. Yet, an army of lobbyists is pushing hard to convince Congress to cut the corporate income tax rate by nearly one-third — from the current 35% to 25%. This issue is at the epicenter of the coming battle over tax reform.

Conservatives have defined the debate in a highly misleading manner. They focus on the top statutory rate — the rate specified by law — instead of the effective tax rate — what is actually paid.

http://americansfortaxfairness.org/tax-fairness-briefing-booklet/fact-sheet-corporate-tax-rates/

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/markets/2016/03/07/27-giant-profitable-companies-paid-no-taxes/81399094/

sharkman · December 4, 2016

You are obviously playing dumb because it's Obama who has refused to fashion a business friendly economy that will generate tax revenue instead of having to borrow trillions. The 1950's US population was around HALF of what it is now. And as for "defining the debate in a misleading manner", how is it that the US employment rate is above 100%, when millions have never been hired back after 2009? This assumes you understand basic unemployment rate fundamentals.

Look, it's obvious all you want to do is play games. Have fun.

?Impact · December 4, 2016

Discretionary spending 2015: $1.16 trillion

Tax breaks 2015: $1.24 trillion

Argus · December 4, 2016

2 hours ago, sharkman said:

You are obviously playing dumb because it's Obama who has refused to fashion a business friendly economy that will generate tax revenue instead of having to borrow trillions. The 1950's US population was around HALF of what it is now. And as for "defining the debate in a misleading manner", how is it that the US employment rate is above 100%, when millions have never been hired back after 2009? This assumes you understand basic unemployment rate fundamentals.

Look, it's obvious all you want to do is play games. Have fun.

I'm sorry if facts disturb you. What the Us population was in 1950s is completely irrelevant to the point under discussion. There were also far and away less business back then too. Business paid 32% and now it's 10%. As for your 'business friendly economy' that usually seems to involve more tax breaks for business, and fewer regulation. Sometimes fewer regulation can be good. But it was lack of regulation and irresponsible oversight of what there was which caused the financial crisis in the first place. Also, the point you refuse to address was about the corporate tax rate in the cite:

The top statutory tax rate of 35% in the U.S. is somewhat higher than that of 30 other OECD countries, but the average effective tax rate — the actual rate paid after deductions and credits — is slightly lower than our competitors, according to the Congressional Research Service (CRS).

Several studies have found that U.S. corporations pay a similar or a lower effective tax rate — the rate actually paid — than corporations in other countries. For example:

Our average effective tax rate is 27.1% compared with 27.7% for the other 30 OECD countries, according to CRS.

cybercoma · December 5, 2016

0.6 points less is not much. That seems to indicate the effective rate is pretty similar to other OECD nations, not much lower as the arguments thus far have implied, and certainly not much higher either.

bush_cheney2004 · December 6, 2016

In an interesting bit of Trump election timing, Mexico has now overtaken Canada for the #2 exporting nation to the U.S. as reported by Bloomberg. Canada has been losing total export value mostly due to energy exports and the price of oil (my guess).

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-12-06/mexico-overtakes-canada-as-no-2-u-s-exporter-ahead-of-trump