Thoughts on Today's Political Landscape

[smc]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

No, Tracy will say "I didn't realize the GOP were saying that. You're right. That is wrong for the rich not to pay one red cent in taxes."

Let's take a stab at the civil discussion we've been talking about elsewhere.

What do you think is a reasonable breakdown of tax rates based on income levels? For instance, should we go back to the rates that existed during the Clinton Administration, or keep them as is with the so-called "Bush tax cuts" that Obama agreed to extend? If you are for a flat tax, I urge you not to re-open that discussion, but simply refer us to earlier postings.

Also, what about corporate tax rates? Should all corporations pay taxes? Should loopholes that create the known situation in which many of the largest corporations in the United States pay no income tax be shut?

Most important, please motivate your answer. What is the reasoning behind the answers you give.

[TracyCoxx]

Originally Posted by smc

What do you think is a reasonable breakdown of tax rates based on income levels? For instance, should we go back to the rates that existed during the Clinton Administration, or keep them as is with the so-called "Bush tax cuts" that Obama agreed to extend? If you are for a flat tax, I urge you not to re-open that discussion, but simply refer us to earlier postings.

It was discussed here.

Originally Posted by smc

Also, what about corporate tax rates? Should all corporations pay taxes? Should loopholes that create the known situation in which many of the largest corporations in the United States pay no income tax be shut?

I haven't thought a lot about corporate tax rates, so my opinion probably isn't worth much and I'm sure plenty of holes can be shot through it because it's a huge issue and like I've said I haven't thought a lot about it. Tax on corporations include income tax, employment taxes and excise taxes correct?

All these taxes are passed on to and actually paid by customers, employees, suppliers, and shareholders. Many of these people are already paying income tax or sales tax so it seems that in taxing a corporation, the government is really potentially taxing customers, employees, suppliers, and shareholders twice, which I don't think is right. Excise taxes is a very thorny issue. Some of it is probably warranted, other parts of it, I don't think so.

One opinion I am sure of is that corporations shouldn't be taxed to the point where they are not competitive against foreign businesses. Otherwise the corporations will relocate some or all of their work to other countries and drive their economy instead of ours.

[smc]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

... I haven't thought a lot about corporate tax rates, so my opinion probably isn't worth much and I'm sure plenty of holes can be shot through it because it's a huge issue and like I've said I haven't thought a lot about it. Tax on corporations include income tax, employment taxes and excise taxes correct?

All these taxes are passed on to and actually paid by customers, employees, suppliers, and shareholders. Many of these people are already paying income tax or sales tax so it seems that in taxing a corporation, the government is really potentially taxing customers, employees, suppliers, and shareholders twice, which I don't think is right. Excise taxes is a very thorny issue. Some of it is probably warranted, other parts of it, I don't think so.

One opinion I am sure of is that corporations shouldn't be taxed to the point where they are not competitive against foreign businesses. Otherwise the corporations will relocate some or all of their work to other countries and drive their economy instead of ours.

This sounds like an argument either for no taxes (or very little) on corporations, or for price controls. I am sure it's not the latter. Please elaborate on this question: is it reasonable in theory to tax profits? If so, what might be done to prevent the burden of such a tax from being passed onto to consumers? Do you believe, as Ron Paul might state, that the "market" can be counted on to solve all things?

[randolph]

Originally Posted by TracyCoxx

It was discussed here.

I haven't thought a lot about corporate tax rates, so my opinion probably isn't worth much and I'm sure plenty of holes can be shot through it because it's a huge issue and like I've said I haven't thought a lot about it. Tax on corporations include income tax, employment taxes and excise taxes correct?

All these taxes are passed on to and actually paid by customers, employees, suppliers, and shareholders. Many of these people are already paying income tax or sales tax so it seems that in taxing a corporation, the government is really potentially taxing customers, employees, suppliers, and shareholders twice, which I don't think is right. Excise taxes is a very thorny issue. Some of it is probably warranted, other parts of it, I don't
think so.

One opinion I am sure of is that corporations shouldn't be taxed to the point where they are not competitive against foreign businesses. Otherwise the corporations will relocate some or all of their work to other countries and drive their economy instead of ours.

There is some logic in just taxing just individuals. Of course corporations and individuals would have to be closely monitored to prevent cheating. Also the capital gains tax would also have to be progressive instead of a mere 15%.

[GRH]

If corporations are "persons" as the Supreme Court has recently decided, than by God, they can pay their share of taxes like all the other REAL people I know.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by GRH

If corporations are "persons" as the Supreme Court has recently decided, than by God, they can pay their share of taxes like all the other REAL people I know.

I find the whole corporate personhood thing to be a real brain teaser. It is so self evidently absurd it's a wonder it's gained any traction at all.

[randolph]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

I find the whole corporate personhood thing to be a real brain teaser. It is so self evidently absurd it's a wonder it's gained any traction at all.

Defining a corporation as a person was done back in the 1880s. the purpose was to protect the owners of the corporation from liability suits relating to the corporations activities. Since the corporation is a "person". Liability stays with the corporation and the owners are protected from lawsuits.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by randolph

Defining a corporation as a person was done back in the 1880s. the purpose was to protect the owners of the corporation from liability suits relating to the corporations activities. Since the corporation is a "person". Liability stays with the corporation and the owners are protected from lawsuits.

Right yea because that funny building that scratches the sky--made of glass and steel, lots and lots of glass eyes--is a thinking thing. Sure. How brilliant then--I mean, how curious it protects the corporation's owners from the repercussions they should have coming to them were they to do something bad. How very very odd.