America doesn't feel much like the champion of the world these days. Everywhere we look, we see other countries outdoing us — in economic growth, educational performance and men's soccer. But this year, we are expected to gain an impressive distinction: the highest corporate tax rate in the developed world.
...
The left of his party may demand to know if Obama wants to accommodate big business or stand up for the interests of workers. But who says we can't do both?
Interesting commentary that I agree with. Point/Counterpoint?
Being wrong about a topic is called post partisanism - kalm
MAQA - putting the Q into qrazy qanon qult qonspiracy theories since 2015.
It will probably be difficult for MAQA yahoos to overcome the Qult programming but they should give being rational & reasonable a try.
Thank you for your attention to this matter - UNI88
we should have made a deal with the corporations...
modify their tax rates so that they'd pay about what they are paying now, but incorporate a big portion in to a national health system - enabling them to save a fortune on employee health care costs... win/win.
/flamebait
North Dakota State University Bison 2011 and 2012 National Champions
TwinTownBisonFan wrote:we should have made a deal with the corporations...
modify their tax rates so that they'd pay about what they are paying now, but incorporate a big portion in to a national health system - enabling them to save a fortune on employee health care costs... win/win.
/flamebait
This. Also, with loop holes that corporations lobbied for, the rate at which our corporations pay isn't anywhere near the top. Use the tax system to incentivize domestic production and jobs.
TwinTownBisonFan wrote:we should have made a deal with the corporations...
modify their tax rates so that they'd pay about what they are paying now, but incorporate a big portion in to a national health system - enabling them to save a fortune on employee health care costs... win/win.
/flamebait
This. Also, with loop holes that corporations lobbied for, the rate at which our corporations pay isn't anywhere near the top. Use the tax system to incentivize domestic production and jobs.
And how does one use the tax system to incentivize domestic production and jobs? Tariffs? Ignoring the reality that much of the world operates now in a relatively free trade sphere (obviously not a perfect one but a free trade one nonetheless) isn't going to help us. I'm not sure if there's ever an example where protectionism ever really worked and I don't see how it works now. You brought up the German example before - but the secret to the German example and their ability to remain an exporter is that they make things that people want and need and they focus on those and best at what they make. Not because the government tells them so or because they pushed to make certain things by machinations of the tax code. Businesses pick what they can do and compete in and they go and do it. We get into trouble when we try to dictate an outcome by playing with tax codes - you could argue that our problems with energy right now is because we have so convoluted the energy market with tax cuts, subsidies, beauracracy, and import duties that we can't possibly see the real cost of various forms of energy. Generally speaking, we should use the tax code to simply raise the revenue we need to run the country. Playing games with it to craft desired outcomes beyond that leads us down paths we often can't find our way out of. Corporatocracy, something you've denounced, more easily exists when corporations can leverage their advantages and help lobby government to craft tax policy to favor them. I'd never advocate a flat tax, but the one aspect of that system that could be used in a different system is the fact that it's not tampered with to play favorites.
kalm wrote:
This. Also, with loop holes that corporations lobbied for, the rate at which our corporations pay isn't anywhere near the top. Use the tax system to incentivize domestic production and jobs.
And how does one use the tax system to incentivize domestic production and jobs? Tariffs? Ignoring the reality that much of the world operates now in a relatively free trade sphere (obviously not a perfect one but a free trade one nonetheless) isn't going to help us. I'm not sure if there's ever an example where protectionism ever really worked and I don't see how it works now. You brought up the German example before - but the secret to the German example and their ability to remain an exporter is that they make things that people want and need and they focus on those and best at what they make. Not because the government tells them so or because they pushed to make certain things by machinations of the tax code. Businesses pick what they can do and compete in and they go and do it. We get into trouble when we try to dictate an outcome by playing with tax codes - you could argue that our problems with energy right now is because we have so convoluted the energy market with tax cuts, subsidies, beauracracy, and import duties that we can't possibly see the real cost of various forms of energy. Generally speaking, we should use the tax code to simply raise the revenue we need to run the country. Playing games with it to craft desired outcomes beyond that leads us down paths we often can't find our way out of. Corporatocracy, something you've denounced, more easily exists when corporations can leverage their advantages and help lobby government to craft tax policy to favor them. I'd never advocate a flat tax, but the one aspect of that system that could be used in a different system is the fact that it's not tampered with to play favorites.
I agree with pretty much everything you say here Gannon except the bolded part. At the expense of the American worker and to the benefit of American based multinational companies, what we have right now is not even close to free trade.
TwinTownBisonFan wrote:we should have made a deal with the corporations...
modify their tax rates so that they'd pay about what they are paying now, but incorporate a big portion in to a national health system - enabling them to save a fortune on employee health care costs... win/win.
/flamebait
This. Also, with loop holes that corporations lobbied for, the rate at which our corporations pay isn't anywhere near the top. Use the tax system to incentivize domestic production and jobs.
Partially correct, some corps pay nothing, some pay the full load. so yes it is time to cut the loopholes and lower they rate so that the corporiations are all paying the same percentage.
GannonFan wrote:
And how does one use the tax system to incentivize domestic production and jobs? Tariffs? Ignoring the reality that much of the world operates now in a relatively free trade sphere (obviously not a perfect one but a free trade one nonetheless) isn't going to help us. I'm not sure if there's ever an example where protectionism ever really worked and I don't see how it works now. You brought up the German example before - but the secret to the German example and their ability to remain an exporter is that they make things that people want and need and they focus on those and best at what they make. Not because the government tells them so or because they pushed to make certain things by machinations of the tax code. Businesses pick what they can do and compete in and they go and do it. We get into trouble when we try to dictate an outcome by playing with tax codes - you could argue that our problems with energy right now is because we have so convoluted the energy market with tax cuts, subsidies, beauracracy, and import duties that we can't possibly see the real cost of various forms of energy. Generally speaking, we should use the tax code to simply raise the revenue we need to run the country. Playing games with it to craft desired outcomes beyond that leads us down paths we often can't find our way out of. Corporatocracy, something you've denounced, more easily exists when corporations can leverage their advantages and help lobby government to craft tax policy to favor them. I'd never advocate a flat tax, but the one aspect of that system that could be used in a different system is the fact that it's not tampered with to play favorites.
I agree with pretty much everything you say here Gannon except the bolded part. At the expense of the American worker and to the benefit of American based multinational companies, what we have right now is not even close to free trade.
Kalm, not trying to be difficult but I don't understand what you don't agree with? Are you saying that the world is not operating in a free trade sphere and the American worker has been hurt as a result or that you are not in favor of free trade to this extent because of its impact on the American worker?
I would argue that as we moved into a global economy with free trade the average wage of the American manufacturing worker was found to be artificially high and that work migrated to lower cost areas. The answer isn't to try and use artificial government methods to hold onto those jobs but to retrain those workers for other fields. We could also focus some R&D on technology that increases productivity in a way that makes the lower cost of overseas labor less relevant than shipping costs. Theoretically, the more robots we use in manufacturing the less impact the cost of labor has on where the manufacturing is located. Of course, robots don't translate into line jobs but they will require a much smaller number of mechanics to keep them running.
Being wrong about a topic is called post partisanism - kalm
MAQA - putting the Q into qrazy qanon qult qonspiracy theories since 2015.
It will probably be difficult for MAQA yahoos to overcome the Qult programming but they should give being rational & reasonable a try.
Thank you for your attention to this matter - UNI88
kalm wrote:
I agree with pretty much everything you say here Gannon except the bolded part. At the expense of the American worker and to the benefit of American based multinational companies, what we have right now is not even close to free trade.
Kalm, not trying to be difficult but I don't understand what you don't agree with? Are you saying that the world is not operating in a free trade sphere and the American worker has been hurt as a result or that you are not in favor of free trade to this extent because of its impact on the American worker?
I would argue that as we moved into a global economy with free trade the average wage of the American manufacturing worker was found to be artificially high and that work migrated to lower cost areas. The answer isn't to try and use artificial government methods to hold onto those jobs but to retrain those workers for other fields. We could also focus some R&D on technology that increases productivity in a way that makes the lower cost of overseas labor less relevant than shipping costs. Theoretically, the more robots we use in manufacturing the less impact the cost of labor has on where the manufacturing is located. Of course, robots don't translate into line jobs but they will require a much smaller number of mechanics to keep them running.
I would argue that you are mistaken about the existence of "free trade", the marketplace is overflowing with guvmint tariffs and subsidies all around the world.
If you have spent any time in manufacturing you already know that Americans are the worlds most productive workers.
You matter. Unless you multiply yourself by c squared. Then you energy.
"I really love America. I just don't know how to get there anymore."John Prine
GannonFan wrote:
And how does one use the tax system to incentivize domestic production and jobs? Tariffs? Ignoring the reality that much of the world operates now in a relatively free trade sphere (obviously not a perfect one but a free trade one nonetheless) isn't going to help us. I'm not sure if there's ever an example where protectionism ever really worked and I don't see how it works now. You brought up the German example before - but the secret to the German example and their ability to remain an exporter is that they make things that people want and need and they focus on those and best at what they make. Not because the government tells them so or because they pushed to make certain things by machinations of the tax code. Businesses pick what they can do and compete in and they go and do it. We get into trouble when we try to dictate an outcome by playing with tax codes - you could argue that our problems with energy right now is because we have so convoluted the energy market with tax cuts, subsidies, beauracracy, and import duties that we can't possibly see the real cost of various forms of energy. Generally speaking, we should use the tax code to simply raise the revenue we need to run the country. Playing games with it to craft desired outcomes beyond that leads us down paths we often can't find our way out of. Corporatocracy, something you've denounced, more easily exists when corporations can leverage their advantages and help lobby government to craft tax policy to favor them. I'd never advocate a flat tax, but the one aspect of that system that could be used in a different system is the fact that it's not tampered with to play favorites.
I agree with pretty much everything you say here Gannon except the bolded part. At the expense of the American worker and to the benefit of American based multinational companies, what we have right now is not even close to free trade.
I never meant to imply that it is truly free trade and certainly tried to temper my wording to reflect that it isn't. But I'd argue that it's closer to free trade than it is to the protectionism and mercantilism that existed even 50 years ago, and the trend is to continue moving towards freer and freer trade. I don't think we'll ever get there, and as HD correctly points out, there are subsidies and tarriffs all around the world. But the winners in today's economy aren't those that are trying to backpedal towards more subsidies and more tarriffs and such, the real winners are the ones who focus on making things or services that people want and then excel at doing just that, especially compared to anyone that can do the same (and preferably you're doing something that very few can duplicate). Hiding behind a wall of government protection and being coddled with subsidies and machinations of the tax code are no substitute for being good at what you do and in the long term will see you fall so far behind that you won't catch up. It's not a perfect free trade world, but the winners are the ones who recognize that we are slowly marching in that direction.
I would love for the tax code to be simplified, close all of the loopholes, and as Gannon put it, simply pay for the government we have. I would love for rational self interest to create a fair and free market and trade environment between nations. But we ain't there yet.
Other than cheaper stuff to be purchased, which the average American is finding more and more difficult to afford, there is ultimately no advantage to us as a nation and specifically the middle class in offshoring manufacturing and natural resources. Those two items are a competitive advantage and are what create wealth. We've basically traded wealth creating manufacturing jobs that drive consumer spending and demand for exchanging services and retail jobs. We've traded an economy dominated by manufacturing for one dominated by financial services for the chosen few. That's how the stock market continues to go up while employment remains stagnant. It's a massive re-distribution of wealth.
The same manufacturing and high wages that created income inequality between American workers and others also created a standard of living inequality which we've all benefited from. There's a saying that America didn't really end slavery, it just offshored it to SE Asia. Hyperbole for sure, but you get the point.
It's not an all or nothing thing and I'm not saying we should become completely or even heavily isolationist. But we should use everything at our disposal, just like many other countries do, to take advantage of our strengths. Of course this might upset multinational corporations who tend to have a hell of a lot more say in these things than we do. So I'm not gonna lose much sleep over it.
