We're Doomed, He Hasn't a Clue
 

Extend payroll tax break extension and unemployment to produce jobs. Build roads and bridges (to nowhere) to employ out of work construction workers. In other words spend, spend spend! Not a peep about paying down the debt or even debt reduction. Simply tax more to maintain the out-of-control spending.

And tax those who can afford it. Make them pay their fair share. (already paying 80%):zz:

We've been doomed, and he NEVER had a clue. Congratulations, "Change" has arrived. Are the Obama zombies happy now?

Enjoy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghSJsEVf0pU

What continues to be alarming yet rarely ever spoken about is the fact senior citizens both present and in the future are among the largest owed creditors of the debt. $3.6 trillion, 100% owed, not a dime in cash, by a Treasury who had $60 billion on hand and had to kick and scream to get $1.2 trillion more, zero of which, was deposited in the SS fund. A fund that was fully paid for by recipients who paid in cash every pay period. Yet as soon as it was received in fact long before it was received it was spent with the promise of treasury credits. If they were a bank they'd be out of business and under indictment. Fixing social security should now be a priority above any program not funded by participents, including PBS, NPR, the national ad administration etc etc etc. Cuts are all in the details and there are thousands and thousands out there available to cut with little or no adverse effects to the general public.

It's a no brainer. We pay ourselves back the money owed us, reduce the debt by over $3 trillion and have a built in safety net so seniors will not have to worry anytime soon.

Meanwhile I can deal with the occasional pot hole.

It's amazing. It goes up on Red State, then comes out of your fingers. Just reflex arcs.

Here you go, Dell. Even conservative financial columnists say your view is "utterly perverse, utterly upside down".

"Always be impeccable with yourself...unless you suck."


( Just collecting like terms, that's all.)

Dell, aren't you the one who accused me of "freeloading" because I'm on Social Security?

Dylan for Prez :tro:

No you are entitled to your SS. I just said it's sad that you didn't plan/save for retirement and now depend on that check. You know, when you were crying 'poor'.

Not for anything Dell, but people can't even make ends meet now (and I'm talking about people with jobs). How the hell are they supposed to save/worry for the future?

Believe it or not, some people are not following the Dems budget plan of spending to prevent bankruptcy. :zz:

I'm not talking about ridiculous spending, I'm talking about the day to day cost of living. There are many people just struggling to survive now. How are they supposed to save for their retirements?

Dell is without Sympathy or Empathy for his fellow Americans although he will tell us otherwise despite the hundreds of posts that confirm the former.

...in your opinion.

Really J, what I'm saying has nothing to do with party lines. Cause honestly, the politicians don't give a s.hit about anything else except getting re-elected.
There are a lot of people hurting out there. We have discussed it before, the cost of living keeps going up and wages are not. The housing market continues to slip and you have to believe that there will eventually be a big credit card situation. For the most part, people with jobs can't be worried about raises, they are just happy to be employed. So honestly to Dell (or whoever else thinks they have the answer) how are people who are barely making ends meet now (if they are even doing that), supposed to save for their retirement?

Many can't right now and I realize that. There will be a even larger reliance on SS in the future and that's why I think before we send another check to the mideast or engage in some stupid program like paying for cars to be destroyed the SS fund should be at least partially funded with real assets rather than credits. In other words collected SS taxes should not be used for anything other than SS payments! It's one way we can control the wasteful spending, while reducing the debt, while insuring seniors now and in the future have access to their money that they've put in. It's one of those very rare win-win-win situations.

Yep, and the companies know it too. They are using it for leverage. Shut up, do your job or we'll get one of the 100's of others who would love to have your job.

And so are you clueless.

Got to admit you nailed this one.

But according to Joey thats ok becuase they are in business to make a profit and OWE Nothing to the country they operate in. They shouldn't be taxed , regulated and they should hire workers where they are the cheapest.

Who can have a problem with people getting THEIR money. If they put in $100k, they should get $100k. Not $150k. Their money, but no one else's.

And don't tax it. It was a tax to begin with.

Pay in ~45 years, get no gain at all? Can I get a little interest?

They ARE in business to make profit. That's indisputable. That's what separates them from nonprofit corporations.

Any taxes that are levied ARE paid by the consumers of the products and services of that company. It's pointless to keep raising taxes on corporations, ipso facto.

They CAN move and WILL move if they can profit by that, or undo a would-be loss.

Last, but not least - if you are successful in extracting sums of money from companies through taxes, fees, regulations and the like, and you also prevent them somehow from moving or passing the costs on to the consumers, they will go out of business. Unlike the government, they cannot operate at a loss.

I'm not saying I like it that way. I'm saying that's the way it really is, and it is pointless to talk about "the way it should be."

Right now you stand to not get back the principal, especially after taxes. This is why Social Security is a loser.

If you wanted interest, you'd invest that money yourself in something stable. Or loan it out for interest like a bank, with collateral having intrinsic value to protect your investment.

This is why Social Security should become a -gasp- "public option". You should be able to opt out. They won't let you since they need you to prop up the Ponzi Scheme. There are too many retirees and too few workers, there never was any trust fund, and they pay many people to administer it. And they tax your "benefit" - which is the payment you get, originally taken through taxes. It's taxed TWICE.

LOL... Isn't this wholeboard about "How it Should Be" ?

Yeah, OK I should have given a qualifier on my response. There are things we can change and then there are the economic equivalent of the laws of physics. I believe, and you may disagree, that the elements I listed in my last post belong to the latter category.

I'm all for better ideas that will actually work in bringing increased prosperity and freedom to as many citizens as possible. But they have to be sustainable. "Eating the rich" will not work. Eventually the rich stop producing and shelter their money, or they move.

That's not what the program is. Geeshus cripes, it's not a savings account. It's not a retirement account. It's not a ****ing tax.

It's an old-age pension, a safety net, that we the society gives our seniors, because we got tired of seeing them die of poverty in the streets.

And there is no major or immediate - or even intermediate - problem with Social Security meeting all it's obligations. This is all false alarm and nonsensical straw men.

Geehus - worry about something that matters, that is a real problem, like Medicaid or Medicare. Good lord.

So how's that been working out for us for the past 50 years, hum?

You have zero, absolutely zero, concrete grasp of how the economic corporate engine of this country is functioning now, and has been for the past 50 years, and what changes have wrought over that time, and how corps have benefited or not, and what has happened to our jobs. Zero.

Completely, 100% false.

I dare you to use google, and post a list here of the Top Twenty companies in the United States, and how much they paid in corporate taxes last year.

And "the rich stop producing, sheltering their money, and moved" has already happened. It's ALREADY HAPPENED.

Top 10 U.S. Companies (By Revenue) Fed Inc Tax as % of PreTax Earnings

WalMart 34%
Exxon 47%
Chevron 43%
GE 0%
Conoco 51%
AT&T 32%
Bank of America 0%
Ford 2%
Hewlett 20%
Berkshire 31%

You may want to rethink this drivel you post. Or at least get your oil changed.

Are you ever right?

I dare you to show some class and admit you have just been joking with us.

I double dare you.

Nope. You posted their rates. Post what they actually ended up paying

The point, as you will see, to Joey, is that fears about "taxing the rich" is laughable when corporations making billions pay virtually nothing at all. Or get refunds.

Fed Income TaxPaid 2010 -- 5 Largest U.S. Corporations

WalMart $7.1 Billion
Exxon $17.6 Billion
Chevron $8.1 Billion
GE $0
Conoco $13.0 Billion

That's paid. You want the others, look it up yourself, you lazy mutt. Read Forbes and don't worry -- looking at the website won't magically erase family money.

It's obvious you just post your **** to be funny. You're funny but, really, you are more pathetic than comical.

So, will you show some integrity and admit you had no clue that the three oil companies in the top ten paid a total of $38.7 Billion in Fed Income Tax with effective tax rates of 47%, 43% and 51% of pre-tax income?

Will you?

Can you?

No, it's easier for you to not educate yourself and just babble-rant against those big, nasty oil companies.

I dare you.

You're a complete moron.

As an aside, good luck with your pre-existing condition.

War'd she go????

I wonder why GE paid 0.0?:rolleyes:

This is about "taxing the rich", not an excuse for you to have a narcissistic, snarky, ad hominem hatred hissy fit against another poster you don't like while hiding behind a duplicate Dee Tee name.

But nice you've revealed yourself for exactly what you lack.

I think there should be a cut off poverty line. say 25k

Everything above 25k should be taxed at a flat rate of 15%, maybe 20%. Including business profits.

no deductions, no loopholes.

No tax deduction for Mortgage Interest will further Savage the housing market. I would allow writeoff of interest on up to 1 million of mortgage principal.

So let's talk about what the largest corporations in the US pay in income taxes. And let's not use just Forbes spin, let's use other financial sites (WSJ, Money), too. And the entire point of this is that "the rich" are hardly "overtaxed", especially if you are a multinational keeping your profits overseas until a tax holiday is declared. We need a major revision of the tax code. Too bad the Republicans (actually the Tea Party) just nixed a start to it.

Exxon Mobile
"Paulo", quoting Forbes, says Exxon paid $17.6 Billion in taxes in 2010.

That's pretty amazing, because they only made a profit of $19 billion in 2009, and they paid zero income tax in 2009 They actually received a $156 million rebate in 2009 from the IRS, according to its SEC filings.

WalMart
$7.1 Billion taxes paid in 2010

In 2009, $22.1 billion in profit. Their tax rate is 35%. But after deductions they paid just under 32.4%

Chevron
They did pay $8.1 Billion in US taxes in 2010
In 2009, $10 billion profits, $19 million refund from the IRS


GE
2010 tax rate: $0
2009 tax rate: $0
GE says it made no profits in the US. It booked its profits overseas as to not yet pay taxes on it. This left GE with a $1.1 billion benefit to its bottom line from taxes -- and an effective tax rate of negative 10.5%, a nice break from the 5.3% tax rate it recorded in 2008.

Over the past five years, GE made $26 billion in US profits, and received $4.1 billion refund from the IRS.

Bank of America
2009: $1.9 billion tax refund from the IRS, based upon $4.4 billion in profits, and in spite of receiving a Federal Reserve bailout of nearly $1 trillion.

Boeing
2009: received a $30 billion contract from the Pentagon to build 179 airborne tankers, received $124 million IRS refund.

Valero Energy
2009: $68 billion in US sales, $157 million tax refund check from IRS
2006-2009: received $134 million tax break from the oil and gas manufacturing tax deduction.

Goldman Sachs
2008: profit of 2.3 billion, bailout of $800 billion from Federal Reserve, only paid 1.1 percent of income in taxes

Citigroup
2009: $4 billion in profits, $2.5 trillion bailout from Federal Reserve, paid zero federal income taxes.

ConocoPhillips
2007 - 2009: $16 billion in profits, $451 million in tax breaks through the oil and gas manufacturing deduction.


Carnival Cruise Lines
2009: $11 billion in profits, but federal tax rate only 1.1 percent.