GE make $5 billion in profits (in 2010, in the US alone) and pay no taxes

cnh

tonyb wrote: »

Yes, how about you stand or fall on your own ? Worked for thousands of years.

As an anthropologist, I can assure you that this is untrue. Before the rise of the State various social mechanisms existed that ensured that small groups of individuals could resolve their problems and survive through some modicum of cooperation and conflict resolution. Even the Theory of Evolution is not about the 'survival of the fittest' but the story of differential reproductive success where the group is still important.

Individual differences in 'ability' only become relevant with the rise of differentiation and a division of labor. But the evolutionary forces that molded the Human we see today centered on group 'survival' for 100s of thousands of years. The current situation that we see, i.e., the ideas of everyone for himself or herself are 'relatively' recent ideas specific to a particular historical trajectory associated with what many believe to be 'natural' but are very difficult to demonstrate as being rooted in biology or evolution unless you are a sociobiologist of a particular variety--not even all them agree? And that is a discipline which my discipline has pretty much 'torpedoed' as ideology masquerading as science.

One needs to examine numerous Historical/Cultural sequences before one can actually forward the claim that individual differences that fuel competition in more contemporary states are really normative of the human condition--society and social responsibility. To not engage in a comparative methodology is simply to take what you see in your own society or history and accept that as Universal before you've actually demonstrated it empirically?

cnh

inspiredsports

slk55amg wrote: »

if thou I have been warned about be political, here goes, anybody oppossed to " the greatest good for the greatest number"?

Yes, the famous liberal, Charles Darwin . . . and the famous conservative, me.

DarqueKnight

tonyb wrote: »

The way the system is set up, your right, everyone takes advantage of whatever loophole they can find,including myself.

The truth is, many people pay more taxes than they have to because they do not itemize or take advantage of loopholes available to them. Some people do this knowingly and willingly because it makes their head hurt to fill out the longer tax return form and attendant schedules. They balk at paying a professional tax preparer to do the forms for them, yet turn around and pay the IRS hundreds or thousands of dollars more than they need to.

tonyb wrote: »

So why not get rid of them ? Will I pay more ? Most likely, but at the same time, those who don't pay at all will have to.

I am not in favor of low income people being handed a hefty income tax bill. If rich people are lawfully avoiding paying income tax, kudos to them. A fair number of these rich people pay enormous amounts of sales taxes on their very expensive purchases and enormous amounts of property taxes on their very expensive mansions...not to mention the business taxes they pay.

Similar to the misconceptions and misinformation and misunderstanding about GE not paying any income taxes, I do not see where anyone in this country is getting totally off the hook from paying taxes.

tonyb wrote: »

I guess it comes down to is if your on the receiving end of tax loopholes, you obviously don't want to change that. If your not, you do.

There is not a single segment of our taxpaying population that does not have some tax loopholes offered to them.

I think the problem comes from people in one taxpayer segment wanting the advantages offered to another taxpayer segment decreased or taken away. The truth is, the higher you rise in any society, the more benefits and perks you get. Senior employees of a firm typically receive more pay, more vacation time, more substantial benefits packages than junior or new employees. Hewlett-Packard received a certain type of tax loopholes when they were a start up company operating out of a garage. They now receive a different set of tax loopholes as a multinational billion dollar corporation.

I just do not see any fairness in a "one size fits all" income tax system.

tonyb wrote: »

From the average joes perspective, more and more is being asked of them to so call "sacrifice" as they see a jobless recovery. Are you surprised at the anger?

Of course I an not surprised at the anger. I am also not surprised at the scapegoating that always comes about when hard times roll around.

tonyb wrote: »

Top it off with tarp, our money given as corporate welfare, with no strings attached, and then that money being used to create jobs not here,but overseas, people are going to get upset.

Similar to your misunderstanding about the IRS only "attacking" poor folk, I think you need to get a better understanding of the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP). The US government NEVER hands out money, especially BILLIONS of dollars, without strings attached.

According to you, the IRS only seizes property from poor folk and the US government handed out billions in TARP money with no strings attached. Where are you getting this nonsense?

tonyb wrote: »

If the economy was rolling along and jobs were available,banks lending again, all of this would be mute, but it's not right now.

Yeah, times are hard, but the fact is, no one owes anyone else a job. Rather than hustling for new economic or job opportunities, some people are content to sit and complain. Some people refuse to move to where jobs are. Some people refuse to retrain, even when job training is offered to them free. Some people refuse to take a job that is "beneath" them, even if that job is honorable work that would make ends meet until they can get back into a job they really like.

markmarc wrote: »

Much like any closet, the tax code needs to get cleaned out, paired down in order to foster new growth.

I definitely agree with this.

markmarc wrote: »

Personally, had their been a flat tax in place for 2010, I would have paid more.

Me too.

markmarc wrote: »

But I'm painfully willing to accept that if it leads to greater economic prosperity for all.

I am not in favor of paying one micro-millicent in taxes. What the government is getting now in tax revenue is fine. It is how they manage it that is the problem.

DarqueKnight

slk55amg wrote: »

I have an audio question, sorry to change the subject, How come when folks discuss AVR,s SONY ES is rarely mentioned? Before I purchased my Emotiva XPA5, my system ran off a Sony ES5300, never got hot,( warm yes but not hot) never went into protect mode, drove all 7 speakers with ease.................................

You are aware that you can start another thread in an appropriate section of the forum to ask this question...right?

Try the electronics section of the forum. Thanks.

inspiredsports

Catch the most current Stossel report quantifying how we have become a nation of people believing work to be unecessary and entitlements their birthright.

Beggars make hundreds or dollars per day TAX FREE, AND collect benefits while politicians call for even more programs and shelters.

inspiredsports

slk55amg wrote: »

I have an audio question, sorry to change the subject, How come when folks discuss AVR,s SONY ES is rarely mentioned? Before I purchased my Emotiva XPA5, my system ran off a Sony ES5300, never got hot,( warm yes but not hot) never went into protect mode, drove all 7 speakers with ease.................................

You need to connect that Emo to Bose speakers with Monster Cable to create the proper synergy (and what DK said).

slk55amg

DarqueKnight wrote: »

You are aware that you can start another thread in an appropriate section of the forum to ask this question...right?

Try the electronics section of the forum. Thanks.

Thanks so much

wayne3burk

if you compare our GDP with the rest of the worlds...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(nominal)

Then look at the list of most profitable US Corporations for 2010 by ranking on Forbes

Then if you look at the Median Household Income in the US....

National Median $44,389 50.00% 1.35 2.57

Median i.e., 50 % of american households below that line and 50% above that line ( i know, statistics 101 )....

but these are just statistics...

above all else no matter where you fall on the income scale in this country.... you're much better off than a very large proportion of the worlds population by virtue of where you were born.

When i hear people complain about how much they pay in taxes... i notice they don't complain about how little money they are actually bringing in a year.

Also keep in mind that the capital gains tax is around 15% while the tax on wages is between 28% and 33%.

My suggestion is to invest around $10 Million dollars in relatively safe investment portfolio that will draw around 5% annually, which will gross you about $500K. and because it's capital gains you will only have to pay around 15%, which will leave you still sitting on a cool $425K after taxes.

but remember... the bottom 1/2 of household incomes is less than 44K a year.

You'd think the redistribution people would do better in elections than they do.... with our abundant wealth you'd think we could model some sort of national health / dental plan along the lines of the swiss or the canadians that wouldnt leave 1/2 of the population under served and under insured.

it'd be downright christian (as opposed to capitalist)

thats my > $44,389 worth...

-- wayne --

tonyb

Dk.
Never said they only seize property from poor folks. If your not in favor of paying any taxes, how does the country run ? Though I do agree they have enough as it is and how they manage it is a whole nutha thread.
Poor people would not get handed a big tax bill, somewhat scapegoating yourself there. I also agree that noone owes anyone a job, and yes,some are lazy to not take a job beneath them, but why ? Because we pay them to stay home ? Cut off a good portion of unemployement benefits and you'll see those arses get off the couch pretty quick.

Your arguement is the age old one between the haves and the have nots, a valid one too with lots of merit. I for one support it to the extent that one should not be punished for their successes. That gets into the whole redistribution of wealth thing, Robin Hood, which I am against. Wealth no doubt brings priveledges, but should not be at the expense of the public trough. So whats fair to you in the way of taxation ? A percentage of income ? But with loopholes that the wealthy can only obtain ? Sure there are loopholes for every segment of income earners, even ones who barely have an income, but in your opinion, is it fair ? Just asking is all. Personally I can't see anything that isn't as fair as a flat tax based on income. The more you make the more you pay, whats wrong with that in theory ? I do understand your points. A billion dollar corp gives society other benefits aside from taxes so they should be allowed some leway. But where do you draw the line, if you should at all ?

Just saw a story about corporations posting record profits, One trillion dollars, yet no jobs. Now if they can afford to make those profits, which I am not against btw, then obviously they don't need corporate welfare from taxpayer monies. If your not going to hire or invest in America, then we've lost nothing by taking the welfare away.

Tarp thing, I may have been too ahead of myself by stateing no strings attached. Just that they lent out the coin,then changed policy midstream so many times,it's hard to keep track. Then made it hard for some to pay it back to get out from under it.

amulford

Stick it to big corporate and they will move or shut it down to minimal

No thet won't. They will continue do expand and produce. Why? Because they will MAKE A PROFIT. They will **** and they will moan, but they'll keep right on producing, because THEY ARE MAKING MONEY.

And no, I am not for STICKING IT to the big corporations. I work for a huge multi national oil company. I am glad when they have a good year, it's good for me. But if you listen to them, you'd think they are actually losing money. And that is TOTAL BS.

All I ask is that they pay their share as defined by law. No More, No Less. They earn the profits in this country, then pay the taxes owed. Period.

wayne3burk

1 2 3 4....

xj4094dg

tonyb wrote: »

Dk.

Just saw a story about corporations posting record profits, One trillion dollars, yet no jobs. Now if they can afford to make those profits, which I am not against btw, then obviously they don't need corporate welfare from taxpayer monies.

These record profits can be realized because of the tax-break spending they are afforded. Yes. That's right. These tax breaks are a form of government spending. I agree. We need to control spending. Both on the entitlements to big business and the evil poor.

tonyb

cnh wrote: »

As an anthropologist, I can assure you that this is untrue. Before the rise of the State various social mechanisms existed that ensured that small groups of individuals could resolve their problems and survive through some modicum of cooperation and conflict resolution. Even the Theory of Evolution is not about the 'survival of the fittest' but the story of differential reproductive success where the group is still important.

Individual differences in 'ability' only become relevant with the rise of differentiation and a division of labor. But the evolutionary forces that molded the Human we see today centered on group 'survival' for 100s of thousands of years. The current situation that we see, i.e., the ideas of everyone for himself or herself are 'relatively' recent ideas specific to a particular historical trajectory associated with what many believe to be 'natural' but are very difficult to demonstrate as being rooted in biology or evolution unless you are a sociobiologist of a particular variety--not even all them agree? And that is a discipline which my discipline has pretty much 'torpedoed' as ideology masquerading as science.

One needs to examine numerous Historical/Cultural sequences before one can actually forward the claim that individual differences that fuel competition in more contemporary states are really normative of the human condition--society and social responsibility. To not engage in a comparative methodology is simply to take what you see in your own society or history and accept that as Universal before you've actually demonstrated it empirically?

cnh

Historicaly speaking, your correct, you took that way too literaly. When you talk on a historical basis of thousands of years, then yes, the idea of every man for himself is recent. Humans were more tribe based and depended more so on the collective nature of the tribe to survive. Considering the population at that time, it worked for them. Even that collective survival has evolved over the years. Even early american settlers had a collective nature, but didn't work out too well for them. None the less, I stand corrected.

tonyb

I wouldn't call the poor "evil", those that want to keep them that way, yes. I believe we can foster a better way of bringing the poor out of poverty by education, and having job opportunities so that they can function as a contributor to society instead of a taker. Instead we foster this welfare state that does nothing but breed more welfare. We educate people on how to get on it,instead of off of it.

xj4094dg

tonyb wrote: »

I wouldn't call the poor "evil", those that want to keep them that way, yes. I believe we can foster a better way of bringing the poor out of poverty by education, and having job opportunities so that they can function as a contributor to society instead of a taker. Instead we foster this welfare state that does nothing but breed more welfare. We educate people on how to get on it,instead of off of it.

You're right. But first we have to eliminate all spending on public education and make sure all the people who can afford to go to private school get this very necessary education.

tonyb

Man, and we haven't tackled the spending side of this yet, lets rock !!

xj4094dg

tonyb wrote: »

Man, and we haven't tackled the spending side of this yet, lets rock !!

Wooooooooosssshhh!!!!!!!

tonyb

xj4094dg wrote: »

You're right. But first we have to eliminate all spending on public education and make sure all the people who can afford to go to private school get this very necessary education.

Did you take a class at that private school in sarcasm ??

Who wants to end public education ? The point is whats being taught in that public system. Of coarse,being in private school, you missed out on that wealth of knowledge.

madmax

xcapri79 wrote: »

What abundant wealth? We are over 14 trillion dollars in Federal debt! Redistribution of wealth is leading us into bankruptcy as a nation.

There is nothing Christian about stealling from the wealth of others. No it is downright socialist. Your income is your private property. It is theft to take it and redistribute it to others who did not earn it. That is what Karl Marx advocated and it is unacceptable by those who value their freedom and liberty.
Just because the government does it, doesn't always make it right, if it is not in keeping with the constitution. That is why it is important to elect people that follow the constitution and ensure that they do.

I have no problem with paying taxes to support the constitutionally legitimate functions of government.
But nowhere in the constitution does it specify that the government should take from one citizen and redistribute it to another. It is up to the citizen to decide what is charity and not for the government to decide for him.

A national healthcare system is just another scheme to redistribute wealth. It is not a function of government to provide healthcare to all of it's citizens. Additionally, Canadians do have national health care which is administered by each province and it is a mess. They do not have national dental care.

Wow! This is absolutely the first thing you have ever said that makes any sense at all, I agree 100%. I'm afraid now, very afraid... :eek:

treitz3

Hehe...

wayne3burk

we could all go to madrasas's ... or i mean catholic and lutheran schools

wayne3burk

shouldnt we get rid of the federal reserve too?

wayne3burk

and all regulations on business and commerce?

wayne3burk

i think we could disband the federal government... and become the american federation of states

xj4094dg

tonyb wrote: »

Did you take a class at that private school in sarcasm ??

Who wants to end public education ? The point is whats being taught in that public system. Of coarse,being in private school, you missed out on that wealth of knowledge.

I did have the great luxury of attending private schools. In fact, I have a PhD in sarcasm. Perhaps you would have understood my sarcastic point that you are calling for more effective education while cutting funding across the board for public education, IF you had gone to private school too.

How does cutting funding to the bone improve education? If quality education can be had for little or no money, why do the best schools cost so much? Why, if the elite schools are teaching nothing but liberal BS, are they filled with the children of the richest folks from both sides of the aisle?

Quality education ain't cheap, public or private.

cnh

Isn't Ron the guy who loves the GOLD standard? How much gold is there in the world? How much is the U.S. debt? What happens when the two meet each other? Pooooooffff.

cnh

xj4094dg

xcapri79 wrote: »

He said it.

<object style="height: 390px; width: 640px"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/vyT3SBiTbpc?version=3"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/vyT3SBiTbpc?version=3&quot; type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></object>

Didn't his campaign go down in flames? There isn't an elected politician in DC who wants to see their cash cow, the IRS, go away. Some might say that to try to get elected, but where would they get their pork from? Look how far it got this guy...

brettw22

xcapri79 wrote: »

There is nothing Christian about stealling from the wealth of others. No it is downright socialist.

So you're saying a Socialist could not be a Christian or is that your mouth getting in the way?

cnh

An interesting point B22. I think some of you may want to google the history of the SOCIAL GOSPEL Movement that led to the birth of such things as the YMCA and the Salvation Army among other notions of Christian Charity?

Does anyone know WHAT forces impinged upon Christians in the late 19th early 20th century? That caused them to think about 'poverty, crime, addiction, social justice, responsibility, etc.'?



cnh

markmarc

The funny thing about this discussion is that nobody here wants to admit to the basic fact of the Preamble to the Constitution that our gov't is based on, "We the people....". ALL of us in one form or another allowed our national debt to explode over the past 40 years. We can go back forth as to the semantics of taxation and revenue. Or, we can do the hard thing and put every part of the budget on the table and come up with solutions that will actually solve this mess without creating new messes. Too many of the far wing ideas of both the left and right will actually do more damage than good.

Here are some ideas:
1. We should all support the "Gang Of Six" senators (3 from each party) that are working outside of the instant news sound bites to come up with a plan solving the debt crisis to the floor of Congress. Everything is on the table, no sacred cows. http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/gang-of-6-senators-launch-public-campaign-to-support-deficit-reduction/2011/03/07/ABEtpzO_story.html

2. Every department in the Federal gov't should have a review of all laws and regulations that counteract other items, thus creating stumbling blocks and delays in job creation.

3. Removal of tax breaks that benefit outsourcing over keeping jobs in the USA.