I see. Well, maybe he’s off studying up on what a strawman actually is before continuing on.
Just to clear things up: This is a strawman argument.
We’re talking about income taxes, not welath taxes right?
income taxes might increase the hurdle rate for investments but right now the hurlde rate is unbelievably low, people aren’t growing their businesses because noone is buying anythign they are selling.
Taxes are NOT the reason bsuinesses aren’t growing. Taxes are the least of your concerns when you aren’t earning any profits.
So, you are saying that taxes help?
Or at the very least you are saying that more taxes can’t possibly hurt?
So you are saying that you can’t deal with what people actually post, and your only recourse is the “In other words…” strawman creation defense?
That seems to be happening a lot in this thread. Either that or all of us seem to be arguing that taxes are great and the more the better!
So what you’re really saying is that wife-beating should be legalized?
Taxes are just another cost of doing business, which happen to be a function of how well your business is doing.
Taxes also do things. Businesses function and profit in the US because of the environment established over the past 200 years. And part of that environment includes an reasonably involved government, that charges taxes, and provides a variety of socialized services.
The bulk discussion of taxes in the US reflect a lack of perspective. A failure to understand what it actually means to be over taxed, or over regulated. There is also a complete failure to understand what environment is created without the socialized services that the Americans take for granted.
Something as simple as sidewalks *can *make a dramatic improvement to an area. Beside an aesthetic appeal, they provided safety, and a means for travel. They can improve the quality of living for a neighbourhood, or they can increase foot traffic in a commercial area. They also cost money, require appropriation of land. Retail space could be another 300 sqft if the shop when straight out to the curbe. Sidewalks also require continuity. They do little good if you have to go back and forth across the street , are at different heights, different widths. There is utility to having the government involved.
Taxes can help a business make more money.
Precisely.
Then come out and explain what you mean. Also if taxation had a direct correlation with “how well your business is doing” then I’d be all for them.
They are not however.
I didn’t see any complicated phrases or overly long words in what he wrote. What part confused you?
" Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
Taxes are NOT the reason bsuinesses aren’t growing. Taxes are the least of your concerns when you aren’t earning any profits."
The confusing part must have been where he didn’t offer anything other than unsubstantiated rhetoric to back his claim of… well either part.
We currently have the lowest taxes in 60 years. Where are all the jobs?
If your product is not in demand, you won’t sell much of it. If your taxes are cut, but you don’t reinvest it back into your company, it won’t grow. If your taxes are cut, and you reinvest it back into the shareholders instead of directly into the business, it won’t grow.
[My Name]It is really surprising that these examples, and many others, haven’t been pointed out before in this or any other thread.[/My Name]
but but but
If we cut taxes, we can increase demand. And the increased demand will generate more taxes. It’s a win win situation!
Or how about the classic, “demand is low because people are scared of what Obama will do.”
I’ve always found that one to be amusing-“I didn’t know what kind of car to buy, but since I found out that Ford got a great tax break that they used to move another plant from the United States to Mexico I think I’ll get one of theirs!”
Who would have thought offering tax breaks to lure businesses in would work?
And who could have predicted that raising the mileage requirements would drive American manufacturers to seek a manufacturing facility capable of making a car cheap enough for people to buy. When Ford announced they would sell the Lincoln MKZ hybrid for the same cost as the regular model how did you think that was going to happen if the car costs more to make? GM couldn’t give a volt away at it’s selling price if tax payers weren’t forced to subsidize the costs. We can’t afford to make the car here and we don’t have the electrical infrastructure in place to feed a nation of electric cars. It’s a poorly thought out and tax funded wish upon a star.
Where, exactly, is the logical conclusion of your thought process here? If less taxes = more business = more jobs = better for America, then where does that stop? Why wouldn’t we just reduce all taxes to zero then? Wouldn’t all the worlds business then flood to America, the land of no taxes?
If not, then when would you consider taxes to be low enough? It just seems that for a certain part of the population, no matter how low taxes will go, they will still be crying for more tax cuts. So what would be the ideal for you? I’m just curious? When would they be low enough, and what would be the repercussions for the deficit and government services?
I know you didn’t ask it of me explicitly but I’ll give you my take on it.
I’m human, I want to pay taxes on the things I utilize. With that said, that doesn’t mean I am thoroughly against anything that doesn’t directly benefit me, what it does mean is that whether or not it directly effects me or not it better be run proficiently and efficiently.
Neither of these things happen.
Pork and Pet projects are thrown into just about every bill from every side of the political spectrum. If these projects make the cost of every bill rise, then we are asked to pay more. That should not be the case. That should not be the norm, but it is.
And yes to answer your question, in some cases if taxes were lowered in America there would be businesses scrambling to move here (As long as the moving business could compete on the labor side of the equation)