Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Campfire Soapbox. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Why No Fanfare On This Signing?; You think he'd be proud!
Topic Started: Oct 22 2004, 07:13 PM (255 Views)
corky52
Member
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...corporate_taxes

More tax cuts and GWB trys to hide them, wonder why GWB isn't proud of these give aways? Where are the spending cuts to go with them?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
pentax
Member Avatar
Kamloops - BC Interior
136 billion for businesses etc........ is he worried he might not be around to sign it soon?
Posted Image
(thumbnail)

Posted Image

"Kirk to Enterprise - Very funny, Scotty.... now beam down my clothes!"
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
olstuf
Bill
Big business moguls don't watch television. Poor people do. Perhaps he didn't think people would be interested. I wonder who he will pardon on his last day in office? Nominations anyone?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
cmoehle
Member Avatar
Chris - San Antonio TX
Nothing especially wrong with corporations. They are quite democratic in ownership, though sometimes too democratic to where individual stockholders have nothing to say and CEOs and minions run as they see fit.

Darn, I was enjoying getting away from election politics until I realized the above parallels it.
Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order.
--Barry Goldwater
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
teryt
Member Avatar
Missing in Action Member
cmoehle
Oct 23 2004, 02:20 AM
Nothing especially wrong with corporations. They are quite democratic in ownership, though sometimes too democratic to where individual stockholders have nothing to say and CEOs and minions run as they see fit.

Darn, I was enjoying getting away from election politics until I realized the above parallels it.

Thanks Chris. The idea often put forth is that corporations & business are just nameless, faceless entities, with no social conscience whatsoever. Therefore, they must be bad, and out to screw society with greed. Actually, they are the engine that drives the economy & are made up of people just like us. Businesses certainly does bad things, just like the people that make them up.

I can say that in my MBA studies, it is repleat with ethics & corporate conscience studies. We study many corporations who are doing their best to be good stewards. In fact, in order to compete in the long-run you have to be. Again, what hits the news is those that get caught doing stupid & dishonest things - that don't take care of the big picture & go for what they justify as a short term gain.
My Boast is Christ :pray:
Soon to have MBA (I'll perhaps be smart then)
Recovering Perfectionist
Christian Hedonist

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
tomdrobin
Member
pentax
Oct 23 2004, 01:16 AM
136 billion for businesses etc........ is he worried he might not be around to sign it soon?

To the best of my recollection, "business" is the gang that hires people and pays them for their work. It is in our best interest to make business in the USA an attractive venture. Or should we tax and regulate them until they leave? Talk about killing the goose that layed the golden eggs.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
teryt
Member Avatar
Missing in Action Member
Yes, and the biggest share of those employers is small business - like me & my wife.
My Boast is Christ :pray:
Soon to have MBA (I'll perhaps be smart then)
Recovering Perfectionist
Christian Hedonist

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
cmoehle
Member Avatar
Chris - San Antonio TX
To be more accurate, it's not small businesses but corporations. Personally, I feel this type of tax cut, supply-side, is preferred over small individual income tax cuts, demand-side, but it receives little fanfare because it doesn't pander to the populace. Still liberal unless matched with fiscally responsible spending cuts.
Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order.
--Barry Goldwater
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
teryt
Member Avatar
Missing in Action Member
cmoehle
Oct 25 2004, 11:11 AM
To be more accurate, it's not small businesses but corporations. Personally, I feel this type of tax cut, supply-side, is preferred over small individual income tax cuts, demand-side, but it receives little fanfare because it doesn't pander to the populace. Still liberal unless matched with fiscally responsible spending cuts.

And I think this is a key part of where we disagree. I still maintain that most all tax cuts are a good thing, and are not liberal. I guess it's because in my definition of "liberal," a key component is growing government, and tax cuts slow that growth.

And yes, I know all about Bush's gov. growing, but we're talking about tax cuts.

If I had my way, we'd return to a day when the fed only took care of the basics, and had zero debt. (I may entertain some very basic gov. safety nets for extreme situations - but that may be like allowing the proverbial camel's nose inthe tent.)

My Boast is Christ :pray:
Soon to have MBA (I'll perhaps be smart then)
Recovering Perfectionist
Christian Hedonist

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
cmoehle
Member Avatar
Chris - San Antonio TX
Tery "I guess it's because in my definition of "liberal," a key component is growing government, and tax cuts slow that growth. And yes, I know all about Bush's gov. growing, but we're talking about tax cuts."

But the fact is Bush has pushed tax cuts while spending liberally. That is not in any way whatsoever fiscal responsibility. It's irresponsible in a way not even liberals would be.

Study economic theory. There is demand-side, giving breaks to consumers, trickle up, long considered liberal. There is demand-side, giving breaks to producers, trickle down, dreamed up under Reagan; but even his economic advisers abandoned that as voodoo economics. Bush has with the new corporate tax cuts finally moved from demand- to supply-side, but he's arrived at the dock a decade or more late. As Friedman, as conservative as it gets, says tax cuts without spending cuts misses the boat. We won't get back to the basics of limited government until people vote these fools out.
Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order.
--Barry Goldwater
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
brewster
Member Avatar
Winemaker Extraordinaire
Chris:
Quote:
 
As Friedman, as conservative as it gets, says tax cuts without spending cuts misses the boat. We won't get back to the basics of limited government until people vote these fools out.

No, you can't have Ralph... :poke:
Posted Image My Favourite Campsite
Bow Valley Provincial Park, Kananaskis Country, Alberta
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
teryt
Member Avatar
Missing in Action Member
Understood Chris, but I'll still take tax cuts over nothing!
My Boast is Christ :pray:
Soon to have MBA (I'll perhaps be smart then)
Recovering Perfectionist
Christian Hedonist

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
corky52
Member
teryt,
What are you going to say when money costs you 12%? Think of your credit cards at 39%, still thinking happy thoughts?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
teryt
Member Avatar
Missing in Action Member
How else can I say it? Govenment just has a propensity to grow & raise taxes. I'm against both. (And besides, I have no debt, so - so what!)

Yes, for the umteenth time: I want spending cut, but in leu (sp?) of that, I'll take the cuts - then spending will likely have to drop (granted, if they don't borrow more).
My Boast is Christ :pray:
Soon to have MBA (I'll perhaps be smart then)
Recovering Perfectionist
Christian Hedonist

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
cmoehle
Member Avatar
Chris - San Antonio TX
Tery "but I'll still take tax cuts over nothing!"

What Corky is arguing is what happens when the foreign investors Bush's spending depends on demand payment? You might well end up with nothing.

Tery "I'll take the cuts - then spending will likely have to drop (granted, if they don't borrow more)."

You just countered your own false assumption. Tax cuts for today's voters paid for by stealing from their children.


Bruce, not sure Ralph could help here.

Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order.
--Barry Goldwater
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Soapbox · Next Topic »
Add Reply