GatewayRedbirds.com

indyredbird wrote:

Popeye_Card wrote:

indyredbird wrote:I think corporate taxes are a bit high, 2nd highest in the world I believe.

Just thinking out loud here, but the US has the largest GDP in the world (for now) and the largest national debt in the world as well.

Is it that big of deal that we ask the rather profitable corporations to pay the second highest rate in the world to maybe keep that debt from increasing even more? I understand that there's a delicate balance that tips the scales towards stiffling new business.

The whole American economy is pretty eff'ed right now, and it's not just about the banks/mortgages/credit crisis. The fundamentals, as McCain likes to call them, are NOT strong, IMO. We've become a merchant economy that relies upon hypercapitalism. The manufacturing base is withering away. If you take a look at where global manufacturing has shifted to, you also see some of the strongest growing economies in the world. We need to fix the system to where we're the manufacturers again.

I think you just made the arguments that justify lowering the corporate rate. But if you want to reduce the debt, then lets do it. Both candidates want to increase spending, McCain seems less to me (again the lesser of two evils) Its true we have lost our manufacturing. People need to think of the big picture when buying that foreign car, all the cheap crapt form China. We have already lost the electronics and textile industry, and autos will be next. Yes the Japanese are assembling cars here, but the design, engineering are done in Japan mosty, and they set up Japanese suppliers in the US to buy parts from.

I think the fundamentals were realtively strong, the US workforce is extremely productive, the inflation rate was relatively low, interest rates low, the unemployment rate was pretty decent. The rising gas costs seemed to me to put the economy is a tail spin, which brought on the mortgage crisis.

Corporations aren't that concerned with the corp tax rates. They've managed to make do with tax rates as they are since 1950s. Corps are more interested in stock value increases (a thinking that has its own problems-because companies then tend to look short term) than corp income tax.

Corporate income tax accounts for one/third of what individual income tax produces in federal revenue. And guess what, corporate income tax is practically a voluntary tax as it is. At the end of the year, the corp decides what amount of taxable income to leave on the table, versus bonusing out or plunking into new expenditures.

I can't find a stat to back it up now, but I'm guessing corps pay more for health insurance than they do in corp tax. That is a bigger concern.

Point is - I was confused by McCain's foray into this concept during the debates. comparing US corp tax to Ireland tax rates. McCain's people had to know it is was bunk.

Thank you for your post expressing your views bw, that was excellent.

BW23 wrote:

Popeye_Card wrote:Lowering the rate (like lowering the individual tax rates) will do nothing but cut revenue the government is bringing in.

Good.

Naive.

We can't pay for Iraq. Irresponsible.

tax rates have been lowered for the last 8 years, primarily on the high end income and investments. Is it mere coincidence that we have greater deficits, larger gap between rich and poor? You would think with the lower tax rates in place for so long, we'd have a rip-roaring economy now - but we don't

Freed Roger wrote:

BW23 wrote:

Popeye_Card wrote:Lowering the rate (like lowering the individual tax rates) will do nothing but cut revenue the government is bringing in.

Good.

Naive.

We can't pay for Iraq. Irresponsible.

tax rates have been lowered for the last 8 years, primarily on the high end income and investments. Is it mere coincidence that we have greater deficits, larger gap between rich and poor? You would think with the lower tax rates in place for so long, we'd have a rip-roaring economy now - but we don't

I believe tax revenue actually went up, but spending skyrocketed (war, medicare and the bailouts etc.).

Tarver wrote:The McCain campaign should never have allowed this to slip out, as it looks terrible considering the current state of our economy and the image Palin is trying to project.

That said, Fulldeck's point stands. Do you not expect these people to look their best?

Personally I don't care what they look like as long as they are presentable. I just took assessment of what I'm wearing at work today - I'm embarrassed to admit most of it is a Target ensemble.

As you say, it just exposes their phony image, which most people assume its phony already. But not to the tune of $150M. And the family got in on the act too?

Again, looking at the McCain campaign, this wardrobe spending may be some of their better use of $ comparatively.

docellis wrote:
It seems like there have been posts that details lots of legislation that Obama has passed and posts the detail some pretty impressive accomplishments on all levels - but you keep saying he has done nothing but run for president.

I think I have seen where Obama has had 2 bills pass the senate. His first as primary sponsor was a Congo Relief Act

indyredbird wrote:

docellis wrote:
It seems like there have been posts that details lots of legislation that Obama has passed and posts the detail some pretty impressive accomplishments on all levels - but you keep saying he has done nothing but run for president.

I think I have seen where Obama has had 2 bills pass the senate. His first as primary sponsor was a Congo Relief Act

I'm totally against welfare for percussionists.

Leroy wrote:

indyredbird wrote:

docellis wrote:
It seems like there have been posts that details lots of legislation that Obama has passed and posts the detail some pretty impressive accomplishments on all levels - but you keep saying he has done nothing but run for president.

I think I have seen where Obama has had 2 bills pass the senate. His first as primary sponsor was a Congo Relief Act

I'm totally against welfare for percussionists.

To make it worse, a senator added pork relief for the woodwinds as well.

her outfits are about 4 times a plumbers salary.

in other news, has it been discussed that al-Qaeda apparently is backing mccain?