Go Back   Stand Up! Fray > Standing room only > U.S. Politics > Economics

 
  

Economics Labor, economy, business -- anything about money / production / consumption goes here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-12-2012, 07:59 PM
Barb Barb is offline
I can comment on anything
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 605
Thanks: 1,101
Thanked 819 Times in 358 Posts
Nominated 47 Times in 20 Posts
Nominated TOTW/F/M Award(s): 9
Groans: 42
Groaned at 19 Times in 19 Posts
Barb has a reputation beyond repute
Barb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond repute
Default Big Companies Collecting State Taxes From Workers And Keeping The Money

Quote:
Across the United States more than 2,700 companies are collecting state income taxes from hundreds of thousands of workers - and are keeping the money with the states' approval, says an eye-opening report published on Thursday.

The report from Good Jobs First, a nonprofit taxpayer watchdog organization funded by Ford, Surdna and other major foundations, identifies 16 states that let companies divert some or all of the state income taxes deducted from workers' paychecks. None of the states requires notifying the workers, whose withholdings are treated as taxes they paid.
Now we all know about how states or cities will give all sorts of incentives to companies to locate or stay in a particular place, yet I had no idea or clear picture of what exactly this includes.

Quote:
AMC Entertainment announced a deal last year to move its corporate headquarters from Kansas City, Mo., to a nearby Kansas suburb. In return, Good Jobs First said, Kansas will let the multiplex chain keep $47 million of state income taxes withheld from its workers' paychecks, a drain on public finances that did not create any jobs, but does enrich the Wall Street firms that own AMC including arms of J. P. Morgan, Apollo Management, Bain Capital and the Carlyle Group.
So I wonder how much of this trickled on up into Mitt's pockets?

Quote:
Promising to retain jobs can be lucrative. General Electric invested $126 million updating part of its Ohio operations. In return, GE gets a tax credit equal to $115.3 million of its worker taxes, recovering 92 percent of its investment. A sweet deal for GE, but not its competitors.
700 million dollars a year in payroll tax being taken out of paychecks as bribes.

And people have the nerve to call a poor person on Food Stamps a welfare queen. I think GE and the rest of these companies who extort our hard earned payroll tax are the true welfare queens.
Reply With Quote
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Barb For This Useful Post:
CMAC (04-12-2012), FliesOnly (04-13-2012), heavyd (04-21-2012), jfstorm (04-16-2012), signcutter (04-16-2012), Texas (04-20-2012), Zumba (04-26-2012)
  #2  
Old 04-12-2012, 08:37 PM
Lance in Manassas Lance in Manassas is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 6,875
Thanks: 3,355
Thanked 3,284 Times in 1,928 Posts
Nominated 18 Times in 17 Posts
Nominated TOTW/F/M Award(s): 5
Groans: 0
Groaned at 107 Times in 100 Posts
Lance in Manassas has a reputation beyond reputeLance in Manassas has a reputation beyond reputeLance in Manassas has a reputation beyond repute
Lance in Manassas has a reputation beyond reputeLance in Manassas has a reputation beyond reputeLance in Manassas has a reputation beyond reputeLance in Manassas has a reputation beyond reputeLance in Manassas has a reputation beyond reputeLance in Manassas has a reputation beyond reputeLance in Manassas has a reputation beyond reputeLance in Manassas has a reputation beyond reputeLance in Manassas has a reputation beyond reputeLance in Manassas has a reputation beyond reputeLance in Manassas has a reputation beyond reputeLance in Manassas has a reputation beyond reputeLance in Manassas has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Hides the fact. If the money was going into the treasury and back out, people might notice.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Lance in Manassas For This Useful Post:
CMAC (04-12-2012)
  #3  
Old 04-12-2012, 09:40 PM
CMAC's Avatar
CMAC CMAC is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 3,385
Thanks: 2,723
Thanked 2,170 Times in 1,378 Posts
Nominated 16 Times in 11 Posts
Nominated TOTW/F/M Award(s): 9
Groans: 139
Groaned at 35 Times in 34 Posts
CMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond repute
CMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Barb View Post
Now we all know about how states or cities will give all sorts of incentives to companies to locate or stay in a particular place, yet I had no idea or clear picture of what exactly this includes.

So I wonder how much of this trickled on up into Mitt's pockets?

700 million dollars a year in payroll tax being taken out of paychecks as bribes.

And people have the nerve to call a poor person on Food Stamps a welfare queen. I think GE and the rest of these companies who extort our hard earned payroll tax are the true welfare queens.
Miwingman, here's your welfare queens right here. How about you cry a river for them? Since you're not naive, can't you see what they're doing?

Let's make em pay their own way, up from bootstraps and all that.
__________________
"We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard" -JFK
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to CMAC For This Useful Post:
heavyd (04-21-2012), jfstorm (04-16-2012)
  #4  
Old 04-13-2012, 09:16 AM
Miwingman Miwingman is offline
I can comment on anything
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 551
Thanks: 9
Thanked 117 Times in 95 Posts
Nominated 1 Time in 1 Post
TOTW/F/M Award(s): 0
Groans: 25
Groaned at 161 Times in 89 Posts
Miwingman is infamous around these partsMiwingman is infamous around these partsMiwingman is infamous around these partsMiwingman is infamous around these partsMiwingman is infamous around these partsMiwingman is infamous around these partsMiwingman is infamous around these partsMiwingman is infamous around these partsMiwingman is infamous around these partsMiwingman is infamous around these partsMiwingman is infamous around these partsMiwingman is infamous around these partsMiwingman is infamous around these partsMiwingman is infamous around these partsMiwingman is infamous around these partsMiwingman is infamous around these partsMiwingman is infamous around these partsMiwingman is infamous around these partsMiwingman is infamous around these partsMiwingman is infamous around these parts
Default

First of all I never used the term "welfare queens".

I do agree that these practices are unacceptable, but I don't know why you are blaming the corporations. You should be blaming the politicians who are making these practices possible.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Miwingman For This Useful Post:
JennyACJ (04-21-2012)
  #5  
Old 04-13-2012, 09:53 AM
Barb Barb is offline
I can comment on anything
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 605
Thanks: 1,101
Thanked 819 Times in 358 Posts
Nominated 47 Times in 20 Posts
Nominated TOTW/F/M Award(s): 9
Groans: 42
Groaned at 19 Times in 19 Posts
Barb has a reputation beyond repute
Barb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Miwingman View Post
First of all I never used the term "welfare queens".

I do agree that these practices are unacceptable, but I don't know why you are blaming the corporations. You should be blaming the politicians who are making these practices possible.
Well, yeah the corporations are utterly blameless here. Totally not part of the problem. LOL!!!!

It takes two to tango.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-13-2012, 01:50 PM
CMAC's Avatar
CMAC CMAC is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 3,385
Thanks: 2,723
Thanked 2,170 Times in 1,378 Posts
Nominated 16 Times in 11 Posts
Nominated TOTW/F/M Award(s): 9
Groans: 139
Groaned at 35 Times in 34 Posts
CMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond repute
CMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Miwingman View Post
First of all I never used the term "welfare queens".

I do agree that these practices are unacceptable, but I don't know why you are blaming the corporations. You should be blaming the politicians who are making these practices possible.
This could be a really interesting discussion here. This gets down to the two separate world views. We essentially are against the same things. People such as yourself see the pols as being the problem. People such as myself see the corps as the problem.

Normally a difference such as this would lead to conflict and disagreement on how to solve the problems. I think, if we (everyone) would put the country first we could actually solve the problem even if we disagree on the blame.
For example if we agree corporate welfare is wrong (a big if ), maybe we could agree cutting out corporate / government collusion could potentially solve the problem. We don't have to agree who is the lead in he collusion to solve it. This is just a tiny bit of one problem we might could get together on. To do so, however would require both sides to stop with the extreme rhetoric of "the _____is totally evil"
__________________
"We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard" -JFK
Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to CMAC For This Useful Post:
heavyd (04-21-2012), Ian in Ohio (04-13-2012), schremp (04-16-2012), Texas (04-20-2012)
  #7  
Old 04-13-2012, 02:08 PM
Indiana_April's Avatar
Indiana_April Indiana_April is offline
Queen of Recycling
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: SW Indiana
Posts: 10,826
Thanks: 18,603
Thanked 14,080 Times in 6,837 Posts
Nominated 175 Times in 98 Posts
Nominated TOTW/F/M Award(s): 24
Groans: 52
Groaned at 14 Times in 14 Posts
Indiana_April has a reputation beyond reputeIndiana_April has a reputation beyond reputeIndiana_April has a reputation beyond reputeIndiana_April has a reputation beyond reputeIndiana_April has a reputation beyond repute
Indiana_April has a reputation beyond reputeIndiana_April has a reputation beyond reputeIndiana_April has a reputation beyond reputeIndiana_April has a reputation beyond reputeIndiana_April has a reputation beyond reputeIndiana_April has a reputation beyond reputeIndiana_April has a reputation beyond reputeIndiana_April has a reputation beyond reputeIndiana_April has a reputation beyond reputeIndiana_April has a reputation beyond reputeIndiana_April has a reputation beyond reputeIndiana_April has a reputation beyond reputeIndiana_April has a reputation beyond reputeIndiana_April has a reputation beyond reputeIndiana_April has a reputation beyond reputeIndiana_April has a reputation beyond reputeIndiana_April has a reputation beyond reputeIndiana_April has a reputation beyond reputeIndiana_April has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via Yahoo to Indiana_April
Default

Damn it! And here is my company paying state taxes every month!

Small business gets screwed again!
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Indiana_April For This Useful Post:
Lance in Manassas (04-13-2012), vballcoachk (04-13-2012)
  #8  
Old 04-13-2012, 03:25 PM
Bigbenny's Avatar
Bigbenny Bigbenny is offline
I can comment on anything
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Altamonte Springs, FL
Posts: 876
Thanks: 1,033
Thanked 1,407 Times in 575 Posts
Nominated 19 Times in 13 Posts
Nominated TOTW/F/M Award(s): 7
Groans: 33
Groaned at 14 Times in 14 Posts
Bigbenny has a reputation beyond repute
Bigbenny has a reputation beyond reputeBigbenny has a reputation beyond reputeBigbenny has a reputation beyond reputeBigbenny has a reputation beyond reputeBigbenny has a reputation beyond reputeBigbenny has a reputation beyond reputeBigbenny has a reputation beyond reputeBigbenny has a reputation beyond reputeBigbenny has a reputation beyond reputeBigbenny has a reputation beyond reputeBigbenny has a reputation beyond reputeBigbenny has a reputation beyond reputeBigbenny has a reputation beyond reputeBigbenny has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CMAC View Post
This could be a really interesting discussion here. This gets down to the two separate world views. We essentially are against the same things. People such as yourself see the pols as being the problem. People such as myself see the corps as the problem.

Normally a difference such as this would lead to conflict and disagreement on how to solve the problems. I think, if we (everyone) would put the country first we could actually solve the problem even if we disagree on the blame.
For example if we agree corporate welfare is wrong (a big if ), maybe we could agree cutting out corporate / government collusion could potentially solve the problem. We don't have to agree who is the lead in he collusion to solve it. This is just a tiny bit of one problem we might could get together on. To do so, however would require both sides to stop with the extreme rhetoric of "the _____is totally evil"
using a horrible analogy governments don't make stupid rules, the corporate owners of government make stupid rules (guns don't kill people excuse). That seems like a conservative answer to me.
__________________
Benford's law of controversy - Passion is inversely proportional to the amount of real information available.

Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding it's way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge'- Isaac Asimov
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 04-13-2012, 08:46 PM
CMAC's Avatar
CMAC CMAC is offline
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Arkansas
Posts: 3,385
Thanks: 2,723
Thanked 2,170 Times in 1,378 Posts
Nominated 16 Times in 11 Posts
Nominated TOTW/F/M Award(s): 9
Groans: 139
Groaned at 35 Times in 34 Posts
CMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond repute
CMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond reputeCMAC has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bigbenny View Post
using a horrible analogy governments don't make stupid rules, the corporate owners of government make stupid rules (guns don't kill people excuse). That seems like a conservative answer to me.
?? Huh ?? If you're saying I made a horrible analogy, I'd have to disagree. Yes, I come from an other than conservative view, but I don't see government as some evil autonomous entity. I see government as representatives. We allow corporations to buy them off, so they represent the corporations. I think if Pols were more responsible to the actual citizens, they would try to curry favor with us.

I believe conservatives feel the opposite. They would be more likely to see government as evil autonomous entity. I guess corporations benefit because the pols are automatically going to do evil, and evil benefits corporations, maybe??

My post, however was trying to say, it shouldn't matter which view is correct, in some instances. If corporate money is related to bad government policies, and we correct that, it doesn't matter which entity is evil.
__________________
"We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard" -JFK
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to CMAC For This Useful Post:
heavyd (04-21-2012), Ian in Ohio (04-13-2012), Texas (04-20-2012)
  #10  
Old 04-13-2012, 09:06 PM
Ian in Ohio's Avatar
Ian in Ohio Ian in Ohio is offline
I can comment on anything
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Central Ohio
Posts: 836
Thanks: 616
Thanked 602 Times in 357 Posts
Nominated 5 Times in 5 Posts
Nominated TOTW/F/M Award(s): 1
Groans: 3
Groaned at 2 Times in 2 Posts
Ian in Ohio has a reputation beyond repute
Ian in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond repute
Default

It's funny that both sides use the same language about this too, but mean something different.

Getting special interests out of politics

For a Liberal means keeping corporations from making large donations.

For a Conservative means keeping unions (and others) from making large donations.

Neither side would be willing to do anything that would put a muzzle on their gift horse. I don't expect anything to happen to get special interests out of politics.

It is a sad fact that our political system can only be furthered through expensive ad campaigns, which mostly sell us lies.
__________________
--------------------------
Convictions are more dangerous foes of truth than lies. - Nietzsche
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Ian in Ohio For This Useful Post:
CMAC (04-13-2012), heavyd (04-21-2012), Texas (04-20-2012)
  #11  
Old 04-14-2012, 05:45 AM
Barb Barb is offline
I can comment on anything
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 605
Thanks: 1,101
Thanked 819 Times in 358 Posts
Nominated 47 Times in 20 Posts
Nominated TOTW/F/M Award(s): 9
Groans: 42
Groaned at 19 Times in 19 Posts
Barb has a reputation beyond repute
Barb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond repute
Default

See now I don't think we need to end all of the economic development tax breaks.

I think we need to see these deals done in the broad daylight. They should have strong claw-back provisions, and other safeguards.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Barb For This Useful Post:
heavyd (04-21-2012)
  #12  
Old 04-14-2012, 10:57 AM
Tritium's Avatar
Tritium Tritium is offline
Resistance is Futile.
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow.
Posts: 12,564
Thanks: 2,125
Thanked 8,740 Times in 4,849 Posts
Nominated 99 Times in 65 Posts
Nominated TOTW/F/M Award(s): 11
Groans: 31
Groaned at 181 Times in 155 Posts
Tritium has a reputation beyond reputeTritium has a reputation beyond reputeTritium has a reputation beyond reputeTritium has a reputation beyond reputeTritium has a reputation beyond reputeTritium has a reputation beyond reputeTritium has a reputation beyond reputeTritium has a reputation beyond reputeTritium has a reputation beyond repute
Tritium has a reputation beyond reputeTritium has a reputation beyond reputeTritium has a reputation beyond reputeTritium has a reputation beyond reputeTritium has a reputation beyond reputeTritium has a reputation beyond reputeTritium has a reputation beyond reputeTritium has a reputation beyond reputeTritium has a reputation beyond reputeTritium has a reputation beyond reputeTritium has a reputation beyond reputeTritium has a reputation beyond reputeTritium has a reputation beyond reputeTritium has a reputation beyond reputeTritium has a reputation beyond reputeTritium has a reputation beyond reputeTritium has a reputation beyond reputeTritium has a reputation beyond reputeTritium has a reputation beyond reputeTritium has a reputation beyond reputeTritium has a reputation beyond reputeTritium has a reputation beyond reputeTritium has a reputation beyond reputeTritium has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via MSN to Tritium
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Barb View Post
See now I don't think we need to end all of the economic development tax breaks.

I think we need to see these deals done in the broad daylight. They should have strong claw-back provisions, and other safeguards.
What we need is a State Constitutional Amendment in all the states, if they don't already have one. That all taxes must be equally applied across the board. No special treatment for corporations or persons. Everyone should pay their fair share.
__________________
I have an incoherent blog too! Go Here!

Government is instituted for the common good; for the protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness of the people; and not for profit, honor, or private interest of any one man, family, or class of men;
John Adams
Thoughts on Government, 1776
Fighting for peace is like screwing for virginity. ~ George Carlin
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Tritium For This Useful Post:
Texas (04-20-2012)
  #13  
Old 04-14-2012, 03:18 PM
Barb Barb is offline
I can comment on anything
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 605
Thanks: 1,101
Thanked 819 Times in 358 Posts
Nominated 47 Times in 20 Posts
Nominated TOTW/F/M Award(s): 9
Groans: 42
Groaned at 19 Times in 19 Posts
Barb has a reputation beyond repute
Barb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond reputeBarb has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tritium View Post
What we need is a State Constitutional Amendment in all the states, if they don't already have one. That all taxes must be equally applied across the board. No special treatment for corporations or persons. Everyone should pay their fair share.
I remember living in Hamtramck/ Detroit a while ago. I remember having a Farmer Jack there that constantly had rotten food on it's shelves, a horrible sour smell coming from it's milk coolers, meat that came in all sorts of shades of green and brown, and bread stacked on top of shelves with mouse shit.

To give a tax credit for a decent grocer to locate within 5 miles of my old home would have been a decent use of tax dollars in my opinion. It sucked driving to the suburbs to find a grocery store that didn't make you throw up.

Though giving companies the money that comes out of payroll checks for state or cit tax sure crosses the line for me.

And the couple of deals listed in the article seem to be pretty shitty deals if you ask me.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 04-14-2012, 07:37 PM
MrsPeabody MrsPeabody is offline
I hit 100 posts!
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 102
Thanks: 1
Thanked 34 Times in 24 Posts
Nominated 0 Times in 0 Posts
TOTW/F/M Award(s): 0
Groans: 0
Groaned at 22 Times in 17 Posts
MrsPeabody is infamous around these partsMrsPeabody is infamous around these partsMrsPeabody is infamous around these parts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ian in Ohio View Post
It's funny that both sides use the same language about this too, but mean something different.

Getting special interests out of politics

For a Liberal means keeping corporations from making large donations.

For a Conservative means keeping unions (and others) from making large donations.

Neither side would be willing to do anything that would put a muzzle on their gift horse. I don't expect anything to happen to get special interests out of politics.

It is a sad fact that our political system can only be furthered through expensive ad campaigns, which mostly sell us lies.
Thats not the conservative position at all.

Liberals focus on campaign finance reform and I have to give them credit that they include unions in the mix. Liberals think if they can just reduce the amount of money given to pols then the problems will be solved. They see the problem as the private sector asking/lobbying/buying favors and not the govt granting favors.

Conservatives (not republicans but conservatives) see the problem is the govt. Campaign finance is the symptom not the problem. If the govt cant grant favors in the first place then there is no problem. Take away the govts power to give subsidies, bailouts, special tax breaks, ear marks, etc., and there is no reason for corporations/unions to lobby the govt so heavily.

I dont understand the liberal approach. Govt has shown it can be bought and bribed. Thats what this thread is about - state govt giving corps a bribe through the state taxes. The fed govt does the same thing through the fed tax system. Politicians play the favors game now, and they write the rules, and liberals think if these same pols had just a little more power they would write rules to stop themselves from taking favors? What fantasy land is that from? An honest person doesnt need a rule to be honest. A dishonest person can write a million rules that look good but are ineffective.
Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to MrsPeabody For This Useful Post:
getatnard (04-16-2012), Philosopher Dan (04-14-2012), Texas (04-20-2012), vballcoachk (04-15-2012), Zumba (04-26-2012)
The Following User Says NO Thank You to MrsPeabody For This Un-useful Post:
CMAC (04-14-2012)
  #15  
Old 04-14-2012, 08:47 PM
Ian in Ohio's Avatar
Ian in Ohio Ian in Ohio is offline
I can comment on anything
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Central Ohio
Posts: 836
Thanks: 616
Thanked 602 Times in 357 Posts
Nominated 5 Times in 5 Posts
Nominated TOTW/F/M Award(s): 1
Groans: 3
Groaned at 2 Times in 2 Posts
Ian in Ohio has a reputation beyond repute
Ian in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond repute
Default

MRs.Peabody.

That is an interesting thought. Let me see if I understand.

If the politicians were more honest they wouldn't use their position of power to grant favors - and there are no other realistic ways to keep politicians from acting honestly.

Is that right?
__________________
--------------------------
Convictions are more dangerous foes of truth than lies. - Nietzsche
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 04-14-2012, 08:57 PM
Philosopher Dan's Avatar
Philosopher Dan Philosopher Dan is offline
Obscurer of clarity
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Charles County, MD
Posts: 1,285
Thanks: 1,084
Thanked 1,852 Times in 811 Posts
Nominated 48 Times in 28 Posts
Nominated TOTW/F/M Award(s): 8
Groans: 0
Groaned at 5 Times in 5 Posts
Philosopher Dan has a reputation beyond reputePhilosopher Dan has a reputation beyond repute
Philosopher Dan has a reputation beyond reputePhilosopher Dan has a reputation beyond reputePhilosopher Dan has a reputation beyond reputePhilosopher Dan has a reputation beyond reputePhilosopher Dan has a reputation beyond reputePhilosopher Dan has a reputation beyond reputePhilosopher Dan has a reputation beyond reputePhilosopher Dan has a reputation beyond reputePhilosopher Dan has a reputation beyond reputePhilosopher Dan has a reputation beyond reputePhilosopher Dan has a reputation beyond reputePhilosopher Dan has a reputation beyond reputePhilosopher Dan has a reputation beyond reputePhilosopher Dan has a reputation beyond reputePhilosopher Dan has a reputation beyond reputePhilosopher Dan has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrsPeabody View Post
Thats not the conservative position at all.

Liberals focus on campaign finance reform and I have to give them credit that they include unions in the mix. Liberals think if they can just reduce the amount of money given to pols then the problems will be solved. They see the problem as the private sector asking/lobbying/buying favors and not the govt granting favors.

Conservatives (not republicans but conservatives) see the problem is the govt. Campaign finance is the symptom not the problem. If the govt cant grant favors in the first place then there is no problem. Take away the govts power to give subsidies, bailouts, special tax breaks, ear marks, etc., and there is no reason for corporations/unions to lobby the govt so heavily.

I dont understand the liberal approach. Govt has shown it can be bought and bribed. Thats what this thread is about - state govt giving corps a bribe through the state taxes. The fed govt does the same thing through the fed tax system. Politicians play the favors game now, and they write the rules, and liberals think if these same pols had just a little more power they would write rules to stop themselves from taking favors? What fantasy land is that from? An honest person doesnt need a rule to be honest. A dishonest person can write a million rules that look good but are ineffective.
Okay - but if the politicians can't write rules, because they can't be trusted, then how will we get new rules that keep politicians from writing rules?

If we elect new people to write new rules, why would they not become corrupted? In particular, if we elect people who want to deregulate everything, why wouldn't they write rules which favor deregulation in such a way as to allow companies, without regulation, to acquire any favors they want? Wouldn't they be in the pocket of the people who funded their campaigns in just the same way?

If this might not be the case, I wonder if you have any historical examples whereby people who wanted less regulations got into power and put in place a system with less political corruption than had been the case before hand?

If there are not such examples, could you work out a more detailed argument whereby people who like less regulation would set up a system with less obvious corruption than is the case now?
__________________

Drive-by logic-chopper
Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Philosopher Dan For This Useful Post:
Barb (04-15-2012), heavyd (04-21-2012), Texas (04-20-2012), vballcoachk (04-15-2012)
  #17  
Old 04-14-2012, 08:59 PM
Ian in Ohio's Avatar
Ian in Ohio Ian in Ohio is offline
I can comment on anything
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Central Ohio
Posts: 836
Thanks: 616
Thanked 602 Times in 357 Posts
Nominated 5 Times in 5 Posts
Nominated TOTW/F/M Award(s): 1
Groans: 3
Groaned at 2 Times in 2 Posts
Ian in Ohio has a reputation beyond repute
Ian in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond reputeIan in Ohio has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ian in Ohio View Post
realistic ways to keep politicians from acting honestly.
That, of course, should have read, keep them acting honestly.
__________________
--------------------------
Convictions are more dangerous foes of truth than lies. - Nietzsche
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 04-15-2012, 08:55 PM
MrsPeabody MrsPeabody is offline
I hit 100 posts!
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 102
Thanks: 1
Thanked 34 Times in 24 Posts
Nominated 0 Times in 0 Posts
TOTW/F/M Award(s): 0
Groans: 0
Groaned at 22 Times in 17 Posts
MrsPeabody is infamous around these partsMrsPeabody is infamous around these partsMrsPeabody is infamous around these parts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Philosopher Dan View Post
Okay - but if the politicians can't write rules, because they can't be trusted, then how will we get new rules that keep politicians from writing rules?

If we elect new people to write new rules, why would they not become corrupted? In particular, if we elect people who want to deregulate everything, why wouldn't they write rules which favor deregulation in such a way as to allow companies, without regulation, to acquire any favors they want? Wouldn't they be in the pocket of the people who funded their campaigns in just the same way?

If this might not be the case, I wonder if you have any historical examples whereby people who wanted less regulations got into power and put in place a system with less political corruption than had been the case before hand?

If there are not such examples, could you work out a more detailed argument whereby people who like less regulation would set up a system with less obvious corruption than is the case now?


Don't write more rules to fix the problems that resulted from the old rules (which were written to fix problems resulting from even older rules).

Just take away the power of the feds.

If there is no federal dept of education, then nobody lobbies tthe federal govt over education issues.

If the tax law is a simple flat tax with
no exemptions or loopholes, then nobody lobbies Congress over the tax code because Congress cant do anything about it.

etc.

If the federal govt is strictly limited in what it can spend money on (national defense, maintain navigable waterways, etc) then they have less flexibility to deviate from their required task. A smaller govt is easier to track and monitor.


And now the liberals will scream that people will die in the streets (except for those that are thrown off the cliff) and there will be no education and we will all be reduced to cannibalism. BS. The states will do what they decide needs to be done. Show me evidence that the only people with a heart and mind are liberals in DC. Liberals follow Hobbes.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to MrsPeabody For This Useful Post:
JennyACJ (04-21-2012)
  #19  
Old 04-15-2012, 09:00 PM
MrsPeabody MrsPeabody is offline
I hit 100 posts!
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 102
Thanks: 1
Thanked 34 Times in 24 Posts
Nominated 0 Times in 0 Posts
TOTW/F/M Award(s): 0
Groans: 0
Groaned at 22 Times in 17 Posts
MrsPeabody is infamous around these partsMrsPeabody is infamous around these partsMrsPeabody is infamous around these parts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Philosopher Dan View Post
Okay - but if the politicians can't write rules, because they can't be trusted, then how will we get new rules that keep politicians from writing rules?

If we elect new people to write new rules, why would they not become corrupted? In particular, if we elect people who want to deregulate everything, why wouldn't they write rules which favor deregulation in such a way as to allow companies, without regulation, to acquire any favors they want? Wouldn't they be in the pocket of the people who funded their campaigns in just the same way?

If this might not be the case, I wonder if you have any historical examples whereby people who wanted less regulations got into power and put in place a system with less political corruption than had been the case before hand?

If there are not such examples, could you work out a more detailed argument whereby people who like less regulation would set up a system with less obvious corruption than is the case now?

I'm still waiting for the answer to my question.

Everyone sees that the pols are corrupt and have been for 100 years. Why do liberals have even the vaguest assurance that if the pols are given their 100th chance and given even more power that they will stop the corruption?

Its the same cycle for 100 years. The pols get caught with their hand in the cookie jar, people scream, the pols say they are sorry and will fix it so it never happens again, the pols pass something that mollifies the people, and its back to business as usual. Democrats are just as guilty as republicans.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 04-15-2012, 11:11 PM
Philosopher Dan's Avatar
Philosopher Dan Philosopher Dan is offline
Obscurer of clarity
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Charles County, MD
Posts: 1,285
Thanks: 1,084
Thanked 1,852 Times in 811 Posts
Nominated 48 Times in 28 Posts
Nominated TOTW/F/M Award(s): 8
Groans: 0
Groaned at 5 Times in 5 Posts
Philosopher Dan has a reputation beyond reputePhilosopher Dan has a reputation beyond repute
Philosopher Dan has a reputation beyond reputePhilosopher Dan has a reputation beyond reputePhilosopher Dan has a reputation beyond reputePhilosopher Dan has a reputation beyond reputePhilosopher Dan has a reputation beyond reputePhilosopher Dan has a reputation beyond reputePhilosopher Dan has a reputation beyond reputePhilosopher Dan has a reputation beyond reputePhilosopher Dan has a reputation beyond reputePhilosopher Dan has a reputation beyond reputePhilosopher Dan has a reputation beyond reputePhilosopher Dan has a reputation beyond reputePhilosopher Dan has a reputation beyond reputePhilosopher Dan has a reputation beyond reputePhilosopher Dan has a reputation beyond reputePhilosopher Dan has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrsPeabody View Post
Don't write more rules to fix the problems that resulted from the old rules (which were written to fix problems resulting from even older rules).

Just take away the power of the feds.

If there is no federal dept of education, then nobody lobbies tthe federal govt over education issues.

If the tax law is a simple flat tax with
no exemptions or loopholes, then nobody lobbies Congress over the tax code because Congress cant do anything about it.

etc.

If the federal govt is strictly limited in what it can spend money on (national defense, maintain navigable waterways, etc) then they have less flexibility to deviate from their required task. A smaller govt is easier to track and monitor.


And now the liberals will scream that people will die in the streets (except for those that are thrown off the cliff) and there will be no education and we will all be reduced to cannibalism. BS. The states will do what they decide needs to be done. Show me evidence that the only people with a heart and mind are liberals in DC. Liberals follow Hobbes.
Okay - but if state government is the problem, as this thread maintains, then how will giving more power to state governments be the answer?

And no one ever claimed that only liberal people in DC (whomever these people are) are the only ones who can do any thing of any kind. Some of us have maintained that without a coherent set of government rules, private enterprise will have no accountability. But to go from that to "only government can do it" is to commit a fallacy of straw man, and as the man says:



Also, Hobbes is typically considered to be a conservative political philosopher. Those people you paint with the broad brush of "liberals" (at some point, I wonder if you might not say a bit more about what you think a "liberal" is) typically believe in a host of rights. For Hobbes, citizens have no rights, but are under the thumb of the Sovereign.

The fact that some people we might identify, or who might self-identify as liberals, would like to have a progressive tax system in order to fund education does not mean said people do not care about rights. The right to an education happens to one which many such people care about, and so they want to guarantee that right via a method such as progressive taxation.

You may not like this, but that doesn't make it Hobbsian.

Now something like a flat tax might be viable. But if you cause a significant hamstringing of the government to collect revenue, then how will they enforce any laws or set any rules in the first place?

And if you want to say that, for some reason, people don't need laws to be honest (which again, no one ever said they did), that's fine. But it's not the honest people one has to worry about. If there aren't rules in place, or the ability to enforce rules, and one bad actor tries a one-off profit grab at the expense of the community, where will the recourse be?
__________________

Drive-by logic-chopper
Reply With Quote
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Philosopher Dan For This Useful Post:
Barb (04-16-2012), CMAC (04-16-2012), FliesOnly (04-16-2012), heavyd (04-21-2012), Ian in Ohio (04-15-2012), Lance in Manassas (04-16-2012), Texas (04-20-2012)
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Starbucks to Begin Collecting Donations to Stimulate U.S. Job Growth beetlebailey News and Current events 6 10-05-2011 09:07 PM
Energy Companies dishonor their workers xtreme Wyo coal miner E-Mails to Pete 13 04-08-2010 07:44 PM
Collecting rain is the hallmark of Islamo-fascists! Abe in NJ Hodge-podge topics 0 02-22-2010 06:10 PM



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.