Corporate tax breaks do NOT create jobs
invite response
2017 Sep 4, 10:59am 20,597 views 87 comments
« First « Previous Comments 8 - 47 of 87 Next » Last » Search these comments
8
joeyjojojunior
2017 Sep 4, 12:26pm
FortWayne says
OK, please educate me.
(just kidding--we all know that isn't going to happen)
That's not how business works. You know so little, just means you are a Democrat
OK, please educate me.
(just kidding--we all know that isn't going to happen)
9
HEY YOU
2017 Sep 4, 12:34pm
Blasphemy!
The Great Free Market Conservative Right Wing God will
send j..j..j..j to Socialist/Communist Left Wing Liberal Hell.
The Great Free Market Conservative Right Wing God will
send j..j..j..j to Socialist/Communist Left Wing Liberal Hell.
10
FortWayne
2017 Sep 4, 1:47pm
FortWayne
2017 Sep 4, 1:47pm
Yes we both agree, you are hopeless.
joeyjojojunior says
joeyjojojunior says
FortWayne saysThat's not how business works. You know so little, just means you are a Democrat
OK, please educate me.
(just kidding--we all know that isn't going to happen)
11
joeyjojojunior
2017 Sep 4, 1:59pm
FortWayne says
I'll take that to mean you cannot express why you think I'm incorrect.
Yes we both agree, you are hopeless.
I'll take that to mean you cannot express why you think I'm incorrect.
12
bob2356
2017 Sep 4, 2:00pm
Strategist says
That actually biases the study toward job creation. Coming out of a severe recession hiring picks up a lot.
They started this study right in the middle of the Great Recession. Now who had this bright idea?
That actually biases the study toward job creation. Coming out of a severe recession hiring picks up a lot.
13
bob2356
2017 Sep 4, 2:01pm
FortWayne says
Great job making your case. I really like all the research you've presented and the careful examination of the facts. LOL.
Yes we both agree, you are hopeless.
Great job making your case. I really like all the research you've presented and the careful examination of the facts. LOL.
14
bob2356
2017 Sep 4, 2:02pm
Strategist says
That argues even further against corporate tax breaks for job creation doesn't it?
WTF. 80% of the workforce is employed by small businesses.
That argues even further against corporate tax breaks for job creation doesn't it?
15
bob2356
2017 Sep 4, 2:11pm
joeyjojojunior says
Corporate tax breaks are spent on stock buybacks, executive compensation, and stockholder dividends. That's been researched and documented many times.
A worthwhile read would be Flying High: The Story of Boeing and the Rise of the Jetliner Industry by Eugene Rodgers which documents in great detail Boeing's business decisions at various levels of taxation. A 20% tax rate in the 60's would have meant no 747 or 737 which have been the backbone of Boeing's profits and jobs for over 40 years. The decision to invest in the development of these planes was driven by the higher tax rates at the time.
Yep, and taxes are on PROFITS.
Actually higher tax rates encourages investment, which actually does create jobs. If you want more jobs, you should be pro-higher corporate tax rates.
Corporate tax breaks are spent on stock buybacks, executive compensation, and stockholder dividends. That's been researched and documented many times.
A worthwhile read would be Flying High: The Story of Boeing and the Rise of the Jetliner Industry by Eugene Rodgers which documents in great detail Boeing's business decisions at various levels of taxation. A 20% tax rate in the 60's would have meant no 747 or 737 which have been the backbone of Boeing's profits and jobs for over 40 years. The decision to invest in the development of these planes was driven by the higher tax rates at the time.
16
lostand confused
2017 Sep 4, 4:15pm
lostand confused
2017 Sep 4, 4:15pm
Yeah right, lets raise taxes and give it to the Gubmnt workers-when is enough enough?? Village managers making 300k a year with full pension at those rates or ya want 500k a year.
In today's globalized world, it is complex. If you had a big business and had to run a factory/establishment here and face all the rules, regulations, equal employment, affirmative action, blah, blah or instead you could just shift the whole thing to China or India-where people work 7 days a week, sleep in the factory, go home 2-3 times a year for holidays and no rules and regulations and then bring the [product back into the US for free with no taxes-what would you do. Even if there is only a 10% difference, you would escape all the regulatory/democrat headaches.
Either reduce regulations and/or start mandating all products shipped to US must meet the regulatory hell we go through. We need new ideas-I am excited by trump's tax overhaul-lets see.
In today's globalized world, it is complex. If you had a big business and had to run a factory/establishment here and face all the rules, regulations, equal employment, affirmative action, blah, blah or instead you could just shift the whole thing to China or India-where people work 7 days a week, sleep in the factory, go home 2-3 times a year for holidays and no rules and regulations and then bring the [product back into the US for free with no taxes-what would you do. Even if there is only a 10% difference, you would escape all the regulatory/democrat headaches.
Either reduce regulations and/or start mandating all products shipped to US must meet the regulatory hell we go through. We need new ideas-I am excited by trump's tax overhaul-lets see.
17
HEY YOU
2017 Sep 4, 4:53pm
Anyone that is for any taxes is a SOCIALIST.
Anyone that is not worth at least a $trillion is a failure.
Go ahead & make excuses for you incompetence.
You are happy with your debt and having to work most of your life
for a pittance compared to America's Rich and you don't want more than what you have.
Nice try.
Anyone that is not worth at least a $trillion is a failure.
Go ahead & make excuses for you incompetence.
You are happy with your debt and having to work most of your life
for a pittance compared to America's Rich and you don't want more than what you have.
Nice try.
18
Strategist
2017 Sep 4, 5:36pm
Strategist
2017 Sep 4, 5:36pm
bob2356 says
Not really. When a large company expands production it creates a multiplier effect. A lot of it's work gets subcontracted to small businesses. Workers also spend their money on homes, cars, groceries etc creating lots of jobs for mom and pop stores.
Strategist says
WTF. 80% of the workforce is employed by small businesses.
That argues even further against corporate tax breaks for job creation doesn't it?
Not really. When a large company expands production it creates a multiplier effect. A lot of it's work gets subcontracted to small businesses. Workers also spend their money on homes, cars, groceries etc creating lots of jobs for mom and pop stores.
19
lostand confused
2017 Sep 4, 6:00pm
lostand confused
2017 Sep 4, 6:00pm
Obama and the dems are like Queen Marie Antoinette of France. When the broken, hopeless people came to him for help, he said go get training-while negotiating the tPP -the you talk about tarriffs.
20
lostand confused
2017 Sep 4, 7:03pm
lostand confused
2017 Sep 4, 7:03pm
Oh please you and your stupid little games. The country is burning and you play word smith games. Ok dems and corporate republics-you cna see the fury on the sites like breitbart and gateway pundit on that decision. There is a reason that repubs have been through so much churn-because their base has had enough-Trump may , may not deliver- this issuewill not go away and will explode. You keep palying these gamnes-the base is mad at the corporate repubs as much as dems and have been trying to get different type of candidates-the dems do nothing-all you wnat bring in millions of illegals -racist, racist,r acist.
21
WatermelonUniversity
2017 Sep 4, 10:00pm
WatermelonUniversity
2017 Sep 4, 10:00pm
for most businesses, expanding simply means stealing other businesses' customers. this might be good for those that expand (like Amazon) but it is bad for those that will be out of business. Amazon didn't improve the country's economy. they took revenues from other stores, online and offline.
for companies like Google, Apple, Microsoft, expanding can mean really great new products that the rest of the world wants (what will really grows the economy). but these companies are relatively a small portion of the economy.
using higher tax rates to force companies to expand will make them move offshore even more. a lot of one sided views in here.
for companies like Google, Apple, Microsoft, expanding can mean really great new products that the rest of the world wants (what will really grows the economy). but these companies are relatively a small portion of the economy.
using higher tax rates to force companies to expand will make them move offshore even more. a lot of one sided views in here.
22
anonymous
2017 Sep 5, 5:33am
Trump is Bob Rumson.
"I've known Bob Rumson for years, and I've been operating under the assumption that the reason Bob devotes so much time and energy to shouting at the rain was that he simply didn't get it. Well, I was wrong. Bob's problem isn't that he doesn't get it. Bob's problem is that he can't sell it! We have serious problems to solve, and we need serious people to solve them. And whatever your particular problem is, I promise you, Bob Rumson is not the least bit interested in solving it. He is interested in two things and two things only: making you afraid of it and telling you who's to blame for it. That, ladies and gentlemen, is how you win elections. You gather a group of middle-aged, middle-class, middle-income voters who remember with longing an easier time, and you talk to them about family and American values and character."
Only instead of the President's girlfriend, he uses illegal aliens.
"I've known Bob Rumson for years, and I've been operating under the assumption that the reason Bob devotes so much time and energy to shouting at the rain was that he simply didn't get it. Well, I was wrong. Bob's problem isn't that he doesn't get it. Bob's problem is that he can't sell it! We have serious problems to solve, and we need serious people to solve them. And whatever your particular problem is, I promise you, Bob Rumson is not the least bit interested in solving it. He is interested in two things and two things only: making you afraid of it and telling you who's to blame for it. That, ladies and gentlemen, is how you win elections. You gather a group of middle-aged, middle-class, middle-income voters who remember with longing an easier time, and you talk to them about family and American values and character."
Only instead of the President's girlfriend, he uses illegal aliens.
23
bob2356
2017 Sep 5, 5:51am
Strategist says
Want to show the correlation between corporate tax cuts and corporations expanding production?
bob2356 saysStrategist says
WTF. 80% of the workforce is employed by small businesses.
That argues even further against corporate tax breaks for job creation doesn't it?
Not really. When a large company expands production it creates a multiplier effect. A lot of it's work gets subcontracted to small businesses. Workers also spend their money on homes, cars, groceries etc creating lots of jobs for mom and pop stores.
Want to show the correlation between corporate tax cuts and corporations expanding production?
24
anonymous
2017 Sep 5, 6:27am
lostand confused says
There is a reason repubs have been through so much churn
What churn is that?
You mean in the all powerful U.S. Senate? How many of those Republicans Swamp Monsters have been churned? Lolol
Oh please you and your stupid little games. The country is burning and you play word smith games. Ok dems and corporate republics-you cna see the fury on the sites like breitbart and gateway pundit on that decision. There is a reason that repubs have been through so much churn-because their base has had enough-Trump may , may not deliver- this issuewill not go away and will explode. You keep palying these gamnes-the base is mad at the corporate repubs as much as dems and have been trying to get different type of candidates-the dems do nothing-all you wnat bring in millions of illegals -racist, racist,r acist.
There is a reason repubs have been through so much churn
What churn is that?
You mean in the all powerful U.S. Senate? How many of those Republicans Swamp Monsters have been churned? Lolol
25
anonymous
2017 Sep 5, 6:58am
BorderPatrol says
Higher tax rates don't force expansion--they make investment more financially prudent than stock buybacks or CEO bonuses. As a country, it is preferable for companies to invest in new products/processes rather than hoarding cash.
using higher tax rates to force companies to expand will make them move offshore even more. a lot of one sided views in here.
Higher tax rates don't force expansion--they make investment more financially prudent than stock buybacks or CEO bonuses. As a country, it is preferable for companies to invest in new products/processes rather than hoarding cash.
26
zzyzzx
2017 Sep 5, 7:10am
zzyzzx
2017 Sep 5, 7:10am
So according to OP, all those corporate HQ's moving to Ireland, etc don't create any jobs in Ireland?
27
joeyjojojunior
2017 Sep 5, 7:45am
You tell us--why don't you post all the jobs that Irish people took
28
anonymous
2017 Sep 5, 8:13am
I agree that tax rate cut do not directly create jobs.
Fist must be Demand and then Profitability.
What I see from Trump plan and agree, reduction of maximum tax, to make it comparable to other countries is for purposes of:
1. Reduce/eliminate incentives to move entire headquarters to other countries purely for Tax purposes. Years ago that was e.g. "Stanley" to Caribbean and recently "Pfizer" to Ireland. With that action, domestic workers are left with unemployment and foreign a hired. Some corporates with wide business variety don't have that problem e.g. GE because can use many loopholes to reduce tax obligation to "0".
2. Allows bring profit made in other counters back to US and possibly reinvest here, e.g. Apple. Now than have to pay match higher US tax, and hold them back with that decision.
3. Promote rather interstate movement of business, where they can use state tax only as an incentive., e.g. Toyota headquarters recently moving from CA to TX.
Fist must be Demand and then Profitability.
What I see from Trump plan and agree, reduction of maximum tax, to make it comparable to other countries is for purposes of:
1. Reduce/eliminate incentives to move entire headquarters to other countries purely for Tax purposes. Years ago that was e.g. "Stanley" to Caribbean and recently "Pfizer" to Ireland. With that action, domestic workers are left with unemployment and foreign a hired. Some corporates with wide business variety don't have that problem e.g. GE because can use many loopholes to reduce tax obligation to "0".
2. Allows bring profit made in other counters back to US and possibly reinvest here, e.g. Apple. Now than have to pay match higher US tax, and hold them back with that decision.
3. Promote rather interstate movement of business, where they can use state tax only as an incentive., e.g. Toyota headquarters recently moving from CA to TX.
29
FortWayne
2018 Aug 3, 9:23am
FortWayne
2018 Aug 3, 9:23am
Article by 2 digit IQ author who never ran a real business.
This is why liberals can’t be taken seriously.
This is why liberals can’t be taken seriously.
30
Strategist
2018 Aug 3, 9:27am
Strategist
2018 Aug 3, 9:27am
joeyjojojunior says
Hey Joey,
Guess what? We had bigly tax cuts, quickly followed by a record number of new jobs.
Are you ready to vote for Trump now?
Corporate tax breaks do NOT create jobs
Hey Joey,
Guess what? We had bigly tax cuts, quickly followed by a record number of new jobs.
Are you ready to vote for Trump now?
31
LeonDurham
2018 Aug 3, 9:32am
Fresh from today's headlines:
https://www.politicususa.com/2018/08/03/trump-flops-as-jobs-president-as-job-growth-numbers-post-5-year-low.html
"The U.S. economy added a disappointing 157,000 jobs in July, and the unemployment rate fell to 3.9%. This is the slowest job growth in five years, as the numbers fell shot of expectations.
Economists predicted 190,000 jobs, instead the number is 157,000. 157,000 is not good, according to Donald Trump grading President Obama back in December of 2012."
Care to revise that statement?
https://www.politicususa.com/2018/08/03/trump-flops-as-jobs-president-as-job-growth-numbers-post-5-year-low.html
"The U.S. economy added a disappointing 157,000 jobs in July, and the unemployment rate fell to 3.9%. This is the slowest job growth in five years, as the numbers fell shot of expectations.
Economists predicted 190,000 jobs, instead the number is 157,000. 157,000 is not good, according to Donald Trump grading President Obama back in December of 2012."
Care to revise that statement?
32
FuckTheMainstreamMedia
2018 Aug 3, 9:41am
FuckTheMainstreamMedia
2018 Aug 3, 9:41am
How is (and citing the article itself) unemployment reduction rate supposed to continue at the same high levels as it approaches zero?
Btw a highly biased opinion piece is not “todays headlines”.
Btw a highly biased opinion piece is not “todays headlines”.
33
Strategist
2018 Aug 3, 9:42am
Strategist
2018 Aug 3, 9:42am
LeonDurham says
Not at all. More available jobs than takers. You can't get better numbers than that. No point creating more jobs.
What we need to do is kick the fat asses of welfare queens to do some work. Someone posted an article here just yesterday stating avocado pickers can make $400 per day. Sadly, the only thing welfare queens are willing to pick is the next Twinkies that look good.
Fresh from today's headlines:
https://www.politicususa.com/2018/08/03/trump-flops-as-jobs-president-as-job-growth-numbers-post-5-year-low.html
"The U.S. economy added a disappointing 157,000 jobs in July, and the unemployment rate fell to 3.9%. This is the slowest job growth in five years, as the numbers fell shot of expectations.
Economists predicted 190,000 jobs, instead the number is 157,000. 157,000 is not good, according to Donald Trump grading President Obama back in December of 2012."
Care to revise that statement?
Not at all. More available jobs than takers. You can't get better numbers than that. No point creating more jobs.
What we need to do is kick the fat asses of welfare queens to do some work. Someone posted an article here just yesterday stating avocado pickers can make $400 per day. Sadly, the only thing welfare queens are willing to pick is the next Twinkies that look good.
34
LeonDurham
2018 Aug 3, 9:51am
Strategist says
lol--but this is what you said:
Strategist says
So, now you agree that the tax cuts didn't create jobs. Good.
How do you square your theory that there are more jobs than people with this though:
Not at all. More available jobs than takers. You can't get better numbers than that. No point creating more jobs.
lol--but this is what you said:
Strategist says
We had bigly tax cuts, quickly followed by a record number of new jobs.
So, now you agree that the tax cuts didn't create jobs. Good.
How do you square your theory that there are more jobs than people with this though:
35
Onvacation
2018 Aug 3, 9:56am
Onvacation
2018 Aug 3, 9:56am
joeyjojojunior says
Taxing corporations does not create jobs either.
Corporate tax breaks do NOT create jobs
Taxing corporations does not create jobs either.
36
LeonDurham
2018 Aug 3, 9:58am
Onvacation says
Actually it does. It encourages investment which typically creates jobs.
Taxing corporations does not create jobs either.
Actually it does. It encourages investment which typically creates jobs.
37
Goran_K
2018 Aug 3, 9:58am
Goran_K
2018 Aug 3, 9:58am
LeonDurham says
So why not just tax corporations at 100% and create lots of jobs?
Actually it does. It encourages investment which typically creates jobs.
So why not just tax corporations at 100% and create lots of jobs?
38
LeonDurham
2018 Aug 3, 9:59am
Goran_K says
I think trolling is against the rules here.
So why not just tax corporations at 100% and creates lots of jobs?
I think trolling is against the rules here.
39
Goran_K
2018 Aug 3, 10:01am
Goran_K
2018 Aug 3, 10:01am
LeonDurham says
It is. So you going to answer the question?
I think trolling is against the rules here.
It is. So you going to answer the question?
40
LeonDurham
2018 Aug 3, 10:04am
Goran_K says
The question is an obvious troll, but I'll play.
If raising tariffs is good for the economy, why not put a 1000% tariff on everything?
It is. So you going to answer the question?
The question is an obvious troll, but I'll play.
If raising tariffs is good for the economy, why not put a 1000% tariff on everything?
41
Strategist
2018 Aug 3, 10:06am
Strategist
2018 Aug 3, 10:06am
LeonDurham says
Simple. The participation rate takes into account those who cannot work. If you cannot work you will not be a job taker.
LeonDurham says
Where did I say "tax cuts didn't create jobs." I said we don't need to create more jobs. Even tough we do create more jobs.
How do you square your theory that there are more jobs than people with this though:
Simple. The participation rate takes into account those who cannot work. If you cannot work you will not be a job taker.
LeonDurham says
Strategist saysNot at all. More available jobs than takers. You can't get better numbers than that. No point creating more jobs.
lol--but this is what you said:
Strategist saysWe had bigly tax cuts, quickly followed by a record number of new jobs.
So, now you agree that the tax cuts didn't create jobs. Good.
Where did I say "tax cuts didn't create jobs." I said we don't need to create more jobs. Even tough we do create more jobs.
42
LeonDurham
2018 Aug 3, 10:09am
Strategist says
Interesting. So all those people got disabled from 2008 to 2014 and then suddenly the disease stopped? Did we create a new vaccine when I wasn't looking? How do you account for that?
LeonDurham says
You didn't. The data did.
Simple. The participation rate takes into account those who cannot work. If you cannot work you will not be a job taker.
Interesting. So all those people got disabled from 2008 to 2014 and then suddenly the disease stopped? Did we create a new vaccine when I wasn't looking? How do you account for that?
LeonDurham says
Where did I say "tax cuts didn't create job
You didn't. The data did.
43
Strategist
2018 Aug 3, 10:15am
Strategist
2018 Aug 3, 10:15am
LeonDurham says
Look closely at your participation rate chart. We hit a new low just before the 2016 election. As soon as Trump won, the trend changed for the better.
Yes, we created a new vaccine when you weren't looking. It's a not so secret formula called "Trump's Tax Cuts"
Strategist saysSimple. The participation rate takes into account those who cannot work. If you cannot work you will not be a job taker.
Interesting. So all those people got disabled from 2008 to 2014 and then suddenly the disease stopped? Did we create a new vaccine when I wasn't looking? How do you account for that?
Look closely at your participation rate chart. We hit a new low just before the 2016 election. As soon as Trump won, the trend changed for the better.
Yes, we created a new vaccine when you weren't looking. It's a not so secret formula called "Trump's Tax Cuts"
44
Strategist
2018 Aug 3, 10:23am
Strategist
2018 Aug 3, 10:23am
LeonDurham says
Goran did not ask you to "play" He just asked you to answer a very simple question, but you didn't because you couldn't.
Raising tariffs is not good for any county, which is why Trump wants ALL tariffs eliminated by all our trading partners. Temporarily raising Tariffs is a good negotiating tactic that forces the other side to the negotiating table.
Goran_K saysIt is. So you going to answer the question?
The question is an obvious troll, but I'll play.
If raising tariffs is good for the economy, why not put a 1000% tariff on everything?
Goran did not ask you to "play" He just asked you to answer a very simple question, but you didn't because you couldn't.
Raising tariffs is not good for any county, which is why Trump wants ALL tariffs eliminated by all our trading partners. Temporarily raising Tariffs is a good negotiating tactic that forces the other side to the negotiating table.
45
Goran_K
2018 Aug 3, 10:38am
Goran_K
2018 Aug 3, 10:38am
LeonDurham says
Trump is not using tariffs because "they're good for the economy" he used them as a bargaining tool to gain leverage in negotiations with the EU which obviously worked since there is a new deal between the EU and the United States where the EU gave the US some of the concessions Trump was looking for and the tariffs are now going to disappear.
See? That's how you answer a question. One which I was not afraid to answer because I'm not trolling.
You on the other hand...
If raising tariffs is good for the economy, why not put a 1000% tariff on everything?
Trump is not using tariffs because "they're good for the economy" he used them as a bargaining tool to gain leverage in negotiations with the EU which obviously worked since there is a new deal between the EU and the United States where the EU gave the US some of the concessions Trump was looking for and the tariffs are now going to disappear.
See? That's how you answer a question. One which I was not afraid to answer because I'm not trolling.
You on the other hand...
46
marcus
2018 Aug 3, 10:55am
marcus
2018 Aug 3, 10:55am
Strategist says
I don't see a trend change at all. I see it flattening out at a low level, A process that started before the 2016 election. I do see a lowest low in mid 2015, but then the next five "highs" of the little gyrations are at about the same level.
A change in trend would show higher highs.
Look closely at your participation rate chart. We hit a new low just before the 2016 election. As soon as Trump won, the trend changed for the better.
I don't see a trend change at all. I see it flattening out at a low level, A process that started before the 2016 election. I do see a lowest low in mid 2015, but then the next five "highs" of the little gyrations are at about the same level.
A change in trend would show higher highs.
47
Strategist
2018 Aug 3, 12:04pm
Strategist
2018 Aug 3, 12:04pm
marcus says
A downward trend that goes to a flat trend, is still a change in trend.
Strategist saysLook closely at your participation rate chart. We hit a new low just before the 2016 election. As soon as Trump won, the trend changed for the better.
I don't see a trend change at all. I see it flattening out at a low level, A process that started before the 2016 election. I do see a lowest low in mid 2015, but then the next five "highs" of the little gyrations are at about the same level.
A change in trend would show higher highs.
A downward trend that goes to a flat trend, is still a change in trend.
« First « Previous Comments 8 - 47 of 87 Next » Last » Search these comments
https://www.thestreet.com/story/14284462/1/corporate-tax-cuts-promote-ceo-pay-raises-and-stock-buybacks-not-jobs.html
"Researchers looked at 92 publicly-held companies that reported a U.S. profit from 2008 to 2015 and paid a federal income tax of less than 20%, the rate proposed by House Republicans, by exploiting loopholes in the current tax code.
The 92 companies examined saw median job growth of negative 1% over an eight-year period, compared to 6% across the entire U.S. private sector. Moreover, half of those firms eliminated jobs during that time, downsizing by a combined total of 483,000 jobs.
At the same time, average CEO pay among the 92 firms rose by 18%, compared to a 13% increase across the entire S&P 500"
But, cutting corporate tax rates would ABSOLUTELY enrich Trump himself. When the Trumpcucks realize that he cares not for the average American. Everything he does, he does for one reason alone. To enrich himself and his family.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-promised-put-american-workers-142940732.html
is another interesting article detailing how Trump has screwed the American worker but helped his businesses.
#MAGA