Posted on 09/03/2009 5:35:52 AM PDT by Sig Sauer P220
Well said.
I do believe that the elite ruling class truly believes that building products of any kind for sale is immoral.
They envision a world where everyone lives in a small space and quietly tends a garden, growing vegetables for their consumption, interspersed with reading intellectual tomes and participating in discussions about said tomes.
Peace, man.......
China is currently building a jet liner to be rolled out in 2014. They are using foreign suppliers for a majority of the airplane. Where China does have capabilities, such as building fuselage sections, wing sections, and empennage sections, McNerney wants to tap into.
As China progresses, they'll be building more of the airplane of course. However, that also means they'll be in a better position to buy more airplanes as well. In the long run, when it is done slowly with the considerations of labor taken into account, out sourcing to China will help Boeing. And Airbus as well. Its win-win for everyone.
So your guess is that Boeing is fleeing exceedingly high corporate tax rates. Are your guesses always so completely uninformed? Between 2005 and 2008 Boeing paid an average corporate tax rate of 3.2%. See: http://bwnt.businessweek.com/interactive_reports/corporate_taxes_2009/who_pays_the_least.asp. Not exactly a backbreaking tax burden, or one that would drive a company overseas. McNerney is making a grave mistake if he thinks China will be satisfied just being a subcontractor. Intel keeps its leading design in house - they would never outsource that, especially in China, who they know want to be a powerhouse in semiconductors.
So nice of you to cherry pick one item out of the list I posted. You are aware, aren't you, that corporations don't pay taxes. They collect taxes. So, even at 3.2% this is money that has to be added to the cost of doing business with companies, like Airbust, that are gubmint subsidized. Did you ever consider that? Or, is this sort of rude, antagonistic post how you get your jollies?
Did you ever consider the embedded taxes paid by Boeing that are incurred by the corporate taxes paid by their suppliers? Were Boeing's suppliers paying (collecting) 3.2% average corporate tax? What about the compliance costs of dealing with ridiculous gubmint regulations like Sarbanes-Oxley, not to mention tens of thousands of pages of IRS code with which they must comply? How many employees did Boeing have to hire just to comply with those regulations? What about excessive property taxes? What about tangible taxes paid on every piece of infrastructure used in the production of their product? What about the taxes on services that are essential to business like telephone taxes, taxes on energy, and the like? What about the workman's comp they pay for thousands of employees, all of which is MANDATED by gubmint? How about the compliance costs of OSHA regulations? What about their liability exposure and the costs associated with it, not only on their products, but the liability exposure they incur by allowing vendors, employees and visitors into their facilities daily?
Are your summations always so uninformed? What you know about running a business and the costs associated therein could fit on the point of a pin with plenty of room to spare. Thank you so much for opening your mouth and removing all doubt!
Certainly appears to be the case......
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.