On Fri, 02 May 2008 15:08:37 -0400, CB wrote:
>
> "The Trucker" <mikcob@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:pan.2008.05.02.15.51.45.206127@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> On Fri, 02 May 2008 01:45:03 -0400, CB wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> <retrogrouch@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>>> news:hllj14ds09fn445745vf2nvo30rkfeoial@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>> On Thu, 1 May 2008 03:42:22 -0700 (PDT), "zzbunker@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"
>>>> <zzbunker@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> While American Lib/Coms cheer their comrads on in China, they curse
>>>>>> America
>>>>>> to Energy Constriction- Hide quoted text -
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Let's see the GOP pushes trade with China, borrows 3 trillion
dollars
>>>> from them and puts our fate in their hands, while the left wants
>>>> trade restrictions, an end to Chinese Wallmart goods and job
>>>> protections and protests Tibet, and you march out BS like this?
>>>>
>>>> What an incredible lame ass you are.
>>>
>>> The American entrepreneur does business in China because Liberal
policies
>>> in
>>> America have become hostile to doing bidniz in America.
>>
>> I see no problem with this. Never have. So long as there are
>> repatriation taxes. Now if the entrepreneur wants to actually move his
>> family and his business to India and do his thing as an Indian (or
China
>> or whatever) then there need be no repatriation taxes. Repatriation
taxes
>> prevent the financial sector's destruction of other cultures and the
>> widening of the wealth gap here and in developing nations. If the
>> "profits" from a business enterprise remain withing the same tax
>> jurisdiction as the costs then all is well. Highly progressive income
>> taxes are workable, but a blunt instrument.
>
> That kind of greedy thinking 'is' why so many business owners are moving
out
> of the country.
Their moving out of the country is NOT a loss, moron.
>>
>>> Unions demand more
>>> pay than their members are skilled.
>>
>> I am not a big fan of unions, but they are not problematic due to their
>> insistence on a fair share of productivity gains. They are problematic
>> due to their failure to be more inclusive and organized one union with
the
>> other.
>
> Unions drive up retail costs so that profit margins may be met
So long as the proper share of productivity gains are returned in wages
the increase in price does not adversely effect the producer segment of
the economy. Piss on your profit margins. In most cases those
"margins" are economic rents in the guise of "accounting" profits. (Yet
another misuse of economic terms to hide the rip offs by the privileged).
>>
>>> License requirements make it impossible
>>> to comply so industry naturally move where its welcome, offshore.
>>
>> Here again, I see no real problem with this that cannot be addressed
with
>> a "repatriation tax". The "owners" of the business should not be
>> encouraged to become rich from manufacturing in a foreign nation. This
>> results in destruction of culture and undue hard****p for the common
>> people of the developing nations and a widening of the wealth gap all
>> over the world.
>
> Where you see destruction of foreign lands I see op****tunities for
poorer
> nations to benefit from a new tenant willing to share in the wealth.
Of course you do.
> Create a business friendly atmosphere here (end cor****ate taxes on
inanimate
> objects) and industry will come home.
No thanks. I am not in search of "business". I am in search of
prosperity.
>>
>>> Hillary threatens the fuel industry with windfall taxes. What's to
>>> prevent
>>> them mean oil companies to say "the Hell with that" and move to Dubi,
>>> where
>>> business is welcome?
>>
>> BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!! Can I go to the docks and throw
>> flowers as these rip off artists move their offices to Dubai? Are they
>> going to take the oil with them?
>>
>>> Libs always eat the goose that lays the golden egg
>>
>> The only "golden egg" is the oil itself.
>
> No, just another 100,000 jobs, investments and future plant assets which
> could have benefited Americans.
How so?
Wait.... Let me get some popcorn and my seat belt.
>
>>
>> The tax system is the key to all the problems. Income tax is not the
best
>> way to tax though it has many advantages when properly implemented.
>> Repatriation taxes and resource rents are much more appropriate in a
>> global economy. But most people (and especially conservatives and
>> Republicans) are so brainwashed by the current income tax system that
they
>> can conceive of no other world. Hell, they can't even understand the
>> actual rationale behind progressive income taxation.
>
> You're correct. Where you want TAKE money away from people in
progressive
> taxes, those who are taxed the most just charge more at the pump or in
duh
> stoe (trickle-down economics) keeping their profit margins as they were
> before. The unintended consequences of progressive taxes (along with
unions
> and over regulation) on the wealthy has driven them offshore to
countries
> who welcome them with little to no taxes or regulation. So when you say
> "Repatriation taxes", what you really mean is "your not welcome
here...but
> we'll let you stay if you gib me money".
All spoken like a mantra. No real thought. No real understanding of
economics. Just an example of what I have said: No understanding of how
progressive taxation can work rather well across the board. It is a blunt
instrument. But when used by competent government it can be quite
effective. The underlying benefit is that it taxes primarily economic
rents as opposed to production. The result is more and better
productivity.
> Before you say it, American entrepreneurs have always been the best
stewards
> of 'industrial' mother Earth. American technology has reduced carbon
> emissions 75% from 50 years ago and leads the world in conservation.
>
> Freedom comes from limiting govenment, not from feeding it other peoples
> money.
A tax on economic rent is a recovery of money that is unearned and
simply appropriated from the society in the first place. It is the
recovery of stolen goods :)
--
"I know no safe depository of the ultimate powers
of society but the people themselves; and
if we think them not enlightened enough to
exercise their control with a wholesome
discretion, the remedy is not to take it from
them, but to inform their discretion by
education." - Thomas Jefferson
http://GreaterVoice.org/extend
|
