Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Monday, Nov. 26, 2012 | 2:02 a.m.
Another view?
View more of the Las Vegas Sun's opinion section:
• Editorials - the Sun's viewpoint.
• Columnists - local and syndicated writers.
• Letters to the editor - readers' views.
Have your own opinion? Write a letter to the editor.
There recently was a meeting in Washington, D.C., that included a coalition of business leaders who talked to politicians about their list of 200 concerns.
This coalition, the Council on Competitiveness, wants lower tax rates, streamlined regulations, a more highly trained workforce, a permanent tax credit for research and development, and improved infrastructure. Well, who would not want all those things?
Let me give you a definition of competitiveness: “It is an ability to compete while supporting high living standards for average Americans.” I’ll bet that coalition declined to mention that definition as one of its goals.
The coalition complains about a 35 percent tax rate, which in reality no one pays. The average U.S. corporate tax rate for 2011 was 12.9 percent. Many corporations, including General Electric, paid no income tax.
Many corporations pay their CEOs more than they pay in taxes. The corporation’s workers pay a higher tax rate than the corporation while the CEO’s pay is 325 times the workers’ rate of pay. Many corporations spend more on marketing than research and development.
The coalition is against those annoying regulations that attempt to keep the corporations from committing fraud on their customers. Corporations want an improved infrastructure but do not want to contribute to the cost of infrastructure through fair taxes. This does nothing for the working class.
Some of the attendees were the same corporations that are hoarding $3 trillion in cash in the U.S. and another $2 trillion in offshore tax-dodging accounts.
Dave,
The goal should be to grow our economy first in order to get Americans working again. Raising tax rates now will not grow our economy, it will not create jobs and it will not sufficiently close the gap between tax and spend.
The Simpson-Bowles plan, Obama's own debt commission, recommends lowering the tax rates. The republican tax plan recommends lowering the tax rates. The Simpson-Bowles plan replaces the current six-bracket individual tax rate schedule with a three-bracket schedule with the lower rates of 9%, 15%, and 24%. The republican tax reforms the individual income tax code eliminating loopholes and reducing taxes into two simple brackets: 10% and 25%. Simpson-Bowles recommends lowering the corporate tax rate to 26% while the republican plan lowers it to 25%. Both plans recommend to remove corporate tax loopholes.
Business investing and expansion requires a stable government tax & spend policy in order to expand our economy and create jobs. We need more from our government to create the environment conducive for business expansion which leads to job creation. Dave is correct that many businesses have gone through the deleveraging cycle reducing the percentage of debt in its balance sheet resulting in available funds normally used for business expansion after economic contraction. Businesses are now waiting for more fiscal certainty from government before investing in expensive business expansion plans.
Re Freeman repeatedly, ad nauseum states:
"Businesses are now waiting for more fiscal certainty from government before investing in expensive business expansion plans."
I Say:
They are more secure keeping the money in their pockets because they don't, as a result of the past 30 odd years of Reaganomics and its "Government IS The Problem" coupled with an effective union busting push have a customer base to sell to.
These business owners and CEO's know their markets. They ain't going to market with wallets that are locked shut.
Two possible solutions here, re-open the middle class doors, or have hyperinflation make those trillions disappear.
Either way, the 1% needs to make the next move. The 99% just had a referendum. Their choice was apparent.
"There you go again." Bashing business. Where did you guys work and who did you work for? Non-profits? The Government? Or, more likely, were you one of the parasites who got "free stuff" from Uncle Nanny? 100s of millions of hard-working folks work for "businesses" that treat them fairly and provide them with the financial means to pay their bills and, perhaps, sock aside a little money as well and all guys like Starr & Jeff can do is denigrate them. Without businesses and entrepeneurs, where would those guys and their fellow travelers be? They'd be growing their own food, sewing their own clothing, building their own homes, walking instead of driving, reading by candlelight or, perhaps, they would now be dead - killed by some disease that wasn't conquered because no one put up the money for the research necessary to defeat it. I guess by now you get the picture. These ingrates have no idea of what it took and of what it takes to provide them with all of the necessities & luxuries they take for granted. Someone invested the money, time and effort to "build" those business that have made their lives easier and all they can do is carp. I guess it's true that "No good deed goes unpunished" when one deals with the economically functionally illiterate.
Remember letter writer the first meeting President Obama held at the White House after his reelection was with the labor leaders and union representatives who bankrolled and supported his campaign. If you're looking for symbolism and meaning in which comes first with this President and Administration, labor or business, the answer is very simple.
CarmineD
JeffFromVegas wrote "These business owners and CEO's know their markets. They ain't going to market with wallets that are locked shut".
GDP = private consumption + gross investment + government spending + (exports imports). The current government tax & spend policies have failed to create an environment conducive for business expansion(investing), entrepreneurship and an environment for those with means to buy which is essential to lifting our economy from stall speed.
I would suggest you read more about business and how the economy works. The below article might enlighten you on a few points regarding business investment. The article states "The slowdown in capital spending contrasts with a rebound in U.S. consumer spending and confidence, which has returned to a five-year high. Meanwhile, the latest survey by the Business Roundtable, which tracks expectations for sales and investment among its big-company CEOs, found the worst sentiment about the economic outlook in three years. Businesses appear more worried about the future, as profit growth and the global economy slow and the outlook for U.S. government policies remains murky."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424...
The funny thing is that the author is another person who expects us to govern based on what may well be an outlier in the flow of tax revenue. The percentage was close to 30% in 2007. Over 30% in 2008 and then fell sharply. This according to a graph from the Congressional Budget Office. The average from 1987-2008 was 25.6% and the CBO expects the average to return to that level over the next few years. So, should we focus on the low point in a graph as the single point 'trend'?
The number mentioned is based on total taxes divided by total profits. This makes the number skewed based on the results of the largest companies. The ten largest companies paid around 9%. Lots of smaller companies actually pay close to the actual statutory rate and that is the real problem. Like with personal taxes, the problem should be looking at why some companies pay so little and perhaps correcting that while lowering rates a bit. Just like taking a few people who make a lot of money and pay a low rate and painting that as the norm rather than looking at what the aggregate is.
The tax system, both for corporations and individuals, is in need of a serious overhaul. Most people would be willing to give up some deductions if they knew that everyone else was giving up similarly, but almost nobody seems to believe that would happen. So, we lumber on with a badly deformed tax system and people throwing around even worse statistics.
ReFreeman wrote,
"The Simpson-Bowles plan replaces the current six-bracket individual tax rate schedule with a three-bracket schedule with the lower rates of 9%, 15%, and 24%." (Reasonable. What's the holdup? LTV)
"The republican tax reforms the individual income tax code eliminating loopholes and reducing taxes into two simple brackets: 10% and 25%." (Reasonable. What loopholes to eliminate? LTV)
"Simpson-Bowles recommends lowering the corporate tax rate to 26% while the republican plan lowers it to 25%. Both plans recommend to remove corporate tax loopholes." (Again, reasonable, but what loopholes to eliminate? LTV)
"Businesses are now waiting for more fiscal certainty from government before investing in expensive business expansion plans." (Agree. LTV)
ReFreeman, this is one of your best response, if not the best. Good information. Balanced, factual and educational. A healthy discussion should follow, a response from other commentators is recommended.
Freeman:
I refuse to use anything owned by Rupert Murdoch to infiltrate my life. The Wall Street Journal used to be a highlight of my day. Very much looked forward to.
Now it is owned by a foreigner who tries to dictate the direction of America via Fox News.
You should look elsewhere for your news, not push that trash on fellow Americans.
longtimevegan:
Here is a thorough refutation of the "catfood commisions findings: http://neweconomicperspectives.org/2012/...
Highlights:
"Second, what does it mean to reduce the deficit "in a balanced way"? We know what it means. It means that any "grand bargain" should be "fair" in that it takes something out of everyone's hide. "Shared sacrifice," you know.
So, what's that about? Maybe a few points increase in marginal tax rates for the rich, the impact of which they will be able to substantially get around with tax loopholes and deductions anyway. Some reductions in spending on defense including cuts for defense contractors. And for the middle class and the poor the expiration of the payroll tax cuts, perhaps cuts for the long-term unemployed, certainly cuts for discretionary spending programs that benefit working and middle class people, and probably cuts in Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security entitlements, since the President has so kindly put these on the table again and again over the past years.
But that doesn't begin to be fair. The 1% have fully recovered from the crash of 2008, largely because of the policies of the Obama Administration and the Federal Reserve in saving the big banks, and the system that allows them to make profits in the derivatives casino, which in turn have also helped the stock exchanges to erase the losses caused by the crash. In addition, the big banks have never been brought to account for their execrable and astonishingly numerous and blatant mortgage frauds that have made a hash of property rights for the middle class in the United States.
However, working people haven't shared in that recovery, as employment, housing, and inequality statistics amply indicate. The rich are getting richer, while everyone else is getting poorer, because of an economy and an associated financial system that has been politically rigged to benefit them and grievously harm everyone else."
http://www.foxbusiness.com/personal-fina...
Read the above Fox News post. A classic!!!These firms employ vast numbers of Americans. Pay them nothing, but top management....millions and millions and millions. A CEO needs to make $15 million a year to sell hamburgers and fries.
Only in America!!!!In other parts of the world execs make a fraction of what they make here and the difference in $$$$ goes to the worker.
Over the past thirty years, I have observed the corporate sector get pretty much every policy it has asked for and watched as the working class quality of life has consistently deteriorated.
The corporate sector wants policies that make things easier for them and removes any uncertainty. It doesn't view the working class worthy of ANYTHING that improves the working class quality of life, or removes uncertainty for it. It uses the working class to socialize losses by increasing the working classes' financial support of corporate initiatives and mistakes while, of course, privatizing profits.
The actual results of the corporate policies are now evident. They got their way. The results were not what they claimed they would be. Some might even say, "Not even close."
Corporations should spend as much time working as they spend trying to get out of it.
If the corporate sector really wants certainty, here's some: Corporations are going to be paying more taxes. Finally.
http://www.forbes.com/pictures/efkk45iem...
Forbes gave BMW the title of most reputable company in the world.
BMW ties exec compensation to blue collar compensation. In Germany a BMW worker makes $70 an hour including perks. Read the below article.
http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/co...
A completely different mind set. Here the entire working class will soon be on welfare.
Jeff,
Much of our current crisis is manufactured by Republicans in Washington. Uncertainty is the key goal. Much of the uncertainty started in 2009 with the negative campaign waged by House and Senate Republicans telling America Business in so many words, don't invest in America because we are shutting down the US Government for the next 4 years.
Night after night throughout the media the message was sent to scare off investments and lending. Enough to drive away any business person that was thinking of expanding or investing in America. The message sent by Republicans was launched out to the media outlet on day one of President Obama taking office. The negative numbers we are seeing are from the efforts by Republican to scare off any type of recovery from the worst recession since the great depression. A constant drum beat of negative press, primarily coming from the stage of Foxnews. As parade after parade of Republicans marched through the set of Foxnews to bashed the President and tell Americans (America Business') that America is in decline and run for the hills (the Hills, meaning--China).
So, it is very easy to show negative numbers from the past 3 1/2 years. So when you see commentators showing comparisons from past years to years with similar situations, this is false and misleading. The cause of the negative numbers are not being discussed or acknowledged.
For one, the eight years of the Bush presidency is a cause for the negative numbers. Secondly, the Republicans campaigned against doing business in America, is other cause for the negative numbers. Now, many on both sides argue numbers that are false...self made. Instead of investors jumping off buildings like in 1929, investors and business's moved production and investments out of the USA. Why? In part because the Republican campaign of uncertainty for American business's.
Uncertainty was the goal of Senate and House Republicans. This was an extreme measure. They achieved the goal to the detriment of the Republican Party, as evident on November 6, 2012.
Longtimevegan,
Yes, foxnews and 6 million employer firms are colluding together to lower GDP and increase unemployment. California's small business failure rate was 69% higher than the national average, the worst of all the states.Nevada is next, with a rate 65% higher than the national average, followed by New Hampshire with 38%, Tennessee with 36% and Colorado with 33%. All of these states, blue and red states, colluded to make the economy tank even at the risk of a business failing. LOL
Repeat after me.
"Tax cuts do not create jobs."
"Consumer spending creates jobs."
If the corporation want a tax cut, then the need to hire more workers, invest more in American or pay better wages to their workers.
Until then "No Deal".
This country needs sacrifice by all its citizens.
This means CEO pay needs to be capped at $1,000,000 per year.
Corporations need to pony up more tax money or spend the money to improve our economy.
The working class shouldn't be the only ones contributing to the success of this country.
Freeman,
I thought you were a paid operative for sure. I am not sure if you are still on someone's payroll.
Maybe you are idealistic-as hard as that may be for us to believe.
There has been a 30 year attempt by ideologues to crush dem ideals. Sometimes coordinated, sometimes seeded.
They depend upon the potentially good intentions of people who are like yourself?
Hopefully you'll have a great increase in your vision soon. It could be a good fit, a guy or gal like you playing for the good guys.
ReFreeman,
You can pretend to be naive, but I think you are smart and not consumed the numbers you read daily.
The Republicans had many goals during the last 3 1/2 years. Uncertainty being among the top. The main goal was to remove President Obama from office by elected Mitt Romney or anyone from the Republican Party. As we all know, that didn't happen. The majority of American voters rejected Mitt Romney and the Republican agenda.
The numbers you posted are a direct result of the uncertainty caused by Republicans in the Senate and the House. Where the effects because of the uncertainty does not matter. The end result was to remove the President no matter the casualties.
Now, many Republicans are saying, "I will not honor the Norguist pledge." Going from destroying the country, to agreeing to items they once showed extreme opposition. Means they were in extreme opposition going from day to night. From off to on. From Black to White. No matter how you look at it, the position of the House Republican and under the leadership of Reince Priebus, the Republicans have acted extreme. So the numbers who posted are a result of the actions by Republicans to cause uncertainty. Your arguing an intentional man-made crisis. A false debate. A Debate fashioned for people in the Bubble, a Bubble Citizen.
From one extreme position to another extreme position. Fighting against tax increases for the wealthy 2% of Americans to saying, yes, lets tax the rich. That is extreme by any measure. This causes uncertainty by any measure. And by any measure this is the cause of the Republicans in control of the House of Representatives. Uncertainty, they met the goal and killed the party.
....Bottom line, uncertainty is here because of Senate and House Republicans. Bottom line!
brtaylor,
Are you running to be the first wage redistribution czar in socialist America? What gives you the right to set pay for jobs in America?
Companies want to pay a competitive rate. If pay is too high then competition can have an edge in gaining a share of the market via price wars that drive high cost competitors out of business. If pay is too low then a company experiences higher employee turnover rates which is undesirable on many fronts. Many companies utilize wage & salary surveys conducted in the state where the company unit exists. Bottom-line, companies pay the going rate for each job class in that area of the country.
If you were to raise everyone's pay then each consumer will pay more for products & services offsetting the pay increase. Why? Because CEO's don't make collectively enough to pass out raises to every employee. Even taking all yearly union dues which is 2 1/2 times greater than CEO total pay it would not give employees but a few cents extra per hourly rate.
How much are you willing to pay for goods and services? That is the ultimate question. While everyone wants a "living wage", some fail to realize that it requires their participation.
Freeman asks brtaylor:
"Are you running to be the first wage redistribution czar in socialist America? What gives you the right to set pay for jobs in America?"
I say:
We the people. Been there, done that. from 1928 to 1984, we the people said no no no to making that much money. If you reinvested in the USA you were WORTH more, but yanking it out of the system would cost you.
Need to do it again.
No coincidence that unions were at their height of influence and the middle class thrived.
We really need to do it again.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/co...
JeffFromVegas,
Unions are a special interest group.
Union labor costs drove manufacturing companies overseas so companies could stay cost competitive with domestic and world markets. Unfortunately, companies like GM could not move all manufacturing overseas. Consequently, GM, who announced 11 plant closings in 1986 and in 1992, announced 21 more plant closings in 2009. Going from 54% of the market share in the 1950's to 18% today will cause a company like GM to downsize in order to survive. With its costs still too high, GM was not able to sustain in 2008 without government assistance and so a chapter 11 bankruptcy process was chosen to reduce some costs. Unfortunately American and worldwide consumers factor product price into their purchasing decision. In the 1950's, unions were present in 35% of the private sector now its around 7% so the trend is downward.
GM employed 877,000 in 1986, now 202,000. Lets see how much American Airlines shrinks next. It's important for companies to sustain and grow. Greedy unions inflate wages making companies cost-leaders which stifles growth, not an enviable position. Low-fare leader Southwest Airlines from the 1970's ate up American Airlines market share. Unions weaken a company's ability to compete in its market.
Freeman :
Greedy unions?
Ha!
You've lost the argument and are spitting in the wind. Workers have some of the blame to absorb, but on a scale-management and shareholders are the 800 pound gorillas who stampeded the middle class.
JeffFromVegas,
The loser in the argument are those 675,000 GM employees who lost their jobs from 1986 to 2009 due to union greed.
Manufacturing jobs have been lost because 700 million Chinese workers were willing to work for a few dollars a month. Now that Chinese wages have gone up by double digits for years manufacturing is coming back. Domestic manufacturing is at a 15 year high according to a recent report.
Without protectionism its hard to compete with workers that work for next to nothing. Try living here on Chinese and Indonesian wages.
Dave.....Good letter.
Corporate greed destroyed our middle class.
And greedy republicans are still using slave labor
in China and other countries out of pure greed.
Taxes are not the problem for these greedy
republicans.
Wages are their problem.
LIVE BETTER/WORK UNION!
We should follow the european model--tax and regulate ourselves to prosperity.
Freeman blamed unions for the 7 zillionth time...
"JeffFromVegas,
The loser in the argument are those 675,000 GM employees who lost their jobs from 1986 to 2009 due to union greed.""
...While displaying that most common trait of today's republican -- "The Fair and Balanced Syndrome" -- and completely avoiding the real culprits, and reality.
OK, explain it to me again. The many Posters who denigrated Romney for legally and legitimately avoiding taxes don't want to consider FIXING the tax code so that people can't avoid quite so much? There is a lot of sense in limiting deductions so that far fewer people itemize deductions. And there is a lot of sense to the revenue gains from limiting deductions, credits, special-interest social welfare in the tax code. I would support serious and significant changes that apply across the board, not just to the 2%, to all tax return filers. While the home-loan interest deduction seems sacred, in reality it is much like all the other deductions--the rest of us supporting your debt. Home ownership remains a real value although many Americans can not swing it right now. As soon as they can, many more Americans will get back into home ownership REGARDLESS of the tax code--what they need are good jobs starting with ANY JOBS. May we agree to concede the smaller "sacrifices" for ourselves to move forward with a more level tax structure and a healthier economy.
Roslenda claimed:
"The many Posters who denigrated Romney for legally and legitimately avoiding taxes don't want to consider FIXING the tax code so that people can't avoid quite so much?"
I say:
You are seriously incorrect. The liberal/progressive/true conservative/democrats are entirely in favor of taking away the tax advantaged status of Paris Hilton styled poolside income being taxed at a rate less than a ditch digger pays.
We are also in favor of tax credits so Mitt Romney can pay as little as a 0% tax if he puts enough Americans to work, instead of parking (hoarding it) the money in some foreign or domestic account.
Just needs to be verifiable NEW jobs.
Got it now?
Jeff: You didn't address THE issue. Will the "middle class" accept minimal restrictions on what they itemize and deduct or does it ALL have to be on the high-income earners? Where is the compromise, bipartisianship.....? Let's get a SIMPLER tax code while we're at it--let's work towards a flat tax. If you don't earn anything, you still pay zero.
Roslenda:
You mean I didn't address YOUR issue, which is penalizing the poor and not well off, alongside going after unions, teachers, firemen, policemen, veterans, in other words, Americans.
Poor and low income Americans are used to getting sucker punched. I think it is you who doesn't want to pony up any more money, you want everyone but you to pay.