Posted on 07/03/2011 10:49:24 AM PDT by Snickering Hound
You’re right. Second generation assimilation and the desire to live here with opportunity has always been the key to our nation using immigration to our benefit and strength but not in such huge numbers.
We’ve had too much non-beneficial immigration since the 1965 “screw our heritage immigration bill” was passed at the behest of NE elites. Little of our immigration is determined based upon what the immigrants can offer the USA, as are the parameters in every other nation. We need educated and technically qualified immigrants that can become an asset to the nation, not the uneducated base labor and gang bangers and gangstas that are often overrepresented.
You are buying into the commie rat trap by using that term. I agree that we should not be subsidizing corporations, but legitimate business expenses should ALWAYS be deductible in arriving at taxable income - IF you must tax income and IF you must tax corporations.
The current situation is that you cannot pin the rat politicians down using vague terms like "corporate welfare". The problem is, rat supporters' expenses are always "legitimate", but not those on the other side of the political fence. For the well-being of citizens AND business, not to mention to take corruption out of government to the extent possible, tax law should be as static and unchanged as possible. Taxpayers ALWAYS get screwed with tax law is changed - ALWAYS. And oh don't the Democrats truly love to monkey with the tax code. Armed robbery of a convenience store is a more honorable way to steal than the way our government does it. At least you get to look the lousy thief in the eye and tell him what you think, maybe even try to stop him.
The other point is that corporations don't really pay taxes - their customers pay the tax. Corporate taxes are just a way for our theiving politicians to obfuscate the FACT that citizens are paying far higher tax rates than they know. These taxes are just buried up in the price of goods and services they consume. When you understand that, you understand that our government has become fundamentally deceitful and insidious. So by using the term "corporate welfare", you are aiding Democrat argument on the issue by acknowledging that their premise is fact - it most certainly is NOT!!
Another example was the Nissan plant debacle in North Mississippi... where we will collect no taxes for 30 years... eminent domain seized private property and gave it to Nissan for their plant... but the jobs they brought in are a net loss... because we are collecting no State taxes from Nissan and will not for decades... and people had their lives ripped apart for this corporate welfare.
Then there was the Regina Vacuum Company that had a 15 year tax free deal from the State and Long Beach, Mississippi... 15 years later they closed and moved to Tennessee, where they worked out another tax free deal... and then they will move again when that bill comes due. No, I understand completely. Lower corporate tax rates in America... remove the needless red tape and regulations... but stop corporate welfare from corporatists like barbour.
LLS
HA took the words right out of my mouth....er keyboard ;)
here here
I go along with a speshul tax increase that results in true millionaires like Buffet, Gates, Obama, Biden (and any of their individual donors like Michael Moore and Babs Streisand) simply paying the top “Bush” 35% federal income tax rate
and published tax returns to prove it
Lead on, Barry Moochelle Joe and “DOCTOR” Jill
In reading the entire article, eliminating ethanol subsidies was mentioned which most, if not all of us, would support. Same for the other “green energy” subsidies such as for solar and wind. But if he is talking about eliminating things like depreciation deductions for corporate aircraft and depletion allowances for oil companies, he is confirming that he is a genuine RINO.
Getting rid of so-called “corporate welfare” is fine if you mean actual subsidies.
As for corporate taxes, the main problem is double taxation of corporate dividends. This could be handled by allowing corporations a deduction for dividends paid or eliminating all taxation of dividends (one or the other, not both).
The biggest danger right now is that Republicans are going to get played again. Republicans will agree to some tax increases (maybe calling them something else) in exchange for “promises” by Democrats to cut spending in the future; and, of course, the spending cuts will never materialize. Furthermore, even the promised cuts will just be reductions in the rate of projected spending growth, not real cuts in spending.
So, real taxes will be raised now, and a promise of spending cuts will be made now. However, the promised spending cuts will actually be only a promised cut in the projected rate of spending growth (no real cuts), and even the cut in spending growth will never actually occur.
As usual, taxpayers are screwed, while America’s governing class (Democrats and Republicans) and its enabling moochers make out like bandits.
Show the American people that you have some backbone and they will support you. Else get out of the way or be run over by the Tea Party conservative movement that has Congress in its crosshairs in 2012.
Moral of the story: Don’t get rid of my tax breaks; just get rid of his tax breaks.
None of your description fits John Cornyn.
So I CAN understand, what do you do for a living, as in your source of income?
“Should we redo the tax code - Yes; anything more than 100 pages is too long.”
Everyone here is talking about band-aids. We need to abolish the tax code and start all over with the Fair Tax.
Asbestos suit now in place. Flame on.
Eliminate the taxes on corporate profits (net) and charge a small percentage on GROSS earnings. Wipes out all the outfits like expensive restaurants, spas, and other business who can only exist due to corporate expense accounts. The corporations can still patronize these place, just not on the taxpayers’ dime.
I don’t take issue with you on any of those cases. I am more with you than you realize. But what the Democrats are doing are targeting legitimate business expenses that they currently get deductions for, calling them “corporate welfare”, and trying to eliminate the deductions for them. They are trying to paint the image in the minds of voters that the cases you cited are no different than real, legitimate business deductions that you deduct. Hence, they are confusing the voters by using the vague term “corporate welfare; they are lumping the two in the same category. But that is comparing apples to oranges to give them an opening to get at legitimate business expenses. When they eliminate or reduce such deductions, they have raised taxes on businesses.
The real problem is that the politicians are giving handouts to big business because they fund their re-elections, and these handouts and favors put small businesses like yourself at a further competitive disadvantge. But rest assured, the “corporate welfare” tag, in the Democrat mind, is not really aimed at big business, it is aimed at people like YOU. They will find another way to pad the pockets of their big business benefactors. But we need to get the government out of the business of picking favorites and off the backs of small business people like you.
LLS
(I know a couple of you are different, but) For the most part, you are all reacting like an emotional mob to the spin by the Houston Chronicle. You’re not doing your homework as you should as FReepers. In what universe do you live if you believe that a left-leaning rag is the least bit reliable???
If you want to know the truth - to see what Cornyn actually said about loopholes and subsidies that don’t make any sense like the ethanol subsidy and he talks about lowering the overall tax rates - and how the Chronicle falsely spun it - Fox has the video up http://video.foxnews.com/#/v/1036571582001/sen-cornyn-on-debt-talks/?playlist_id=87485
“You’re not doing your homework as you should as FReepers.”
That may well be the case for me...I definitely didn’t dig into this. But we are so WORN OUT by Republicans caving to Obama (especially during the lame duck session), that it doesn’t even seem worth our time to give any Republican leader the benefit of the doubt anymore.
I recalling posting that a truly revenue neutral simplification of the Code would be a good thing.
Thanks for the heads up but I don’t understand what part of what I’ve said that you disagree with...but I accept your right to disagree.
Ever since the neocons came to fruition, I became aware that I was not a cookie cutter conservative except for fiscally. I told my guy not to cut taxes until they cut expenses in 2001. We all evaluate our beliefs on merits and experiences.
If I was king for a day I’d treat all income as ordinary income and equally taxable and lower the rates for all individuals and corporations who made 90% of their income in the USA. There would be no special deals for investors, financiers or average workers. An E5 serving in the military would not pay a higher rate that a billionaire hedge fund guy. That currently happens. The E5 should not pay more taxes than corporation such as GE that claims to be profitable top shareholders.
No farm or corporation or business could receive special subsidies - period. This would be especially true for those with an international bent who ship their business and jobs to China. If they want USA military protection then they need to be a citizen of the USA and support the USA. If they want to be a citizen of Commie China or any other country then go for it, but they get nothing from USA taxpayers or military. It would be their decision.
As far as Sen Cornyn I really don’t care what he says. As a life long Numbers USA supporter any politician that kowtows to illegals and amnesty I will trash at every opportunity. They are anti-USA.
http://www.numbersusa.com/content/my/congress/1081/reportcard/CONGRESS/
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.