Total Posts:46|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Bernie supporters--business taxes!?!?

Dark-one
Posts: 211
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/7/2016 3:39:57 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
How do you justify big taxes on businesses?

All costs of overhead, paying employees, taxes, are passed down to you, the consumer.

That's Economics 101.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/7/2016 3:50:11 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
Sutton's Law

The law is named after the bank robber Willie Sutton, who reputedly replied to a reporter's inquiry as to why he robbed banks by saying "because that's where the money is."

https://en.wikipedia.org...
slo1
Posts: 4,361
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/7/2016 7:25:07 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/7/2016 3:39:57 PM, Dark-one wrote:
How do you justify big taxes on businesses?

All costs of overhead, paying employees, taxes, are passed down to you, the consumer.

That's Economics 101.

It is not so much higher taxes. It is about how the code allows profitable companies not pay taxes.

Also if on was to measure tax income for gov by source business accounts for something like 10 percent. In the 50'S it was triple that. The burden did shift from business to individuals.

I find with tax discussions unless one is looking holistically at business, income, sales tax as well as outlays it is a rather futile effort.
Dark-one
Posts: 211
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/7/2016 7:59:51 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/7/2016 7:25:07 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 6/7/2016 3:39:57 PM, Dark-one wrote:
How do you justify big taxes on businesses?

All costs of overhead, paying employees, taxes, are passed down to you, the consumer.

That's Economics 101.

It is not so much higher taxes. It is about how the code allows profitable companies not pay taxes.

Also if on was to measure tax income for gov by source business accounts for something like 10 percent. In the 50'S it was triple that. The burden did shift from business to individuals.

I find with tax discussions unless one is looking holistically at business, income, sales tax as well as outlays it is a rather futile effort.

Where ever you tax a business, customers are the ones that end up paying it. What difference does the code make?

Individual income tax is a different story.
slo1
Posts: 4,361
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/7/2016 8:41:58 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/7/2016 7:59:51 PM, Dark-one wrote:
At 6/7/2016 7:25:07 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 6/7/2016 3:39:57 PM, Dark-one wrote:
How do you justify big taxes on businesses?

All costs of overhead, paying employees, taxes, are passed down to you, the consumer.

That's Economics 101.

It is not so much higher taxes. It is about how the code allows profitable companies not pay taxes.

Also if on was to measure tax income for gov by source business accounts for something like 10 percent. In the 50'S it was triple that. The burden did shift from business to individuals.

I find with tax discussions unless one is looking holistically at business, income, sales tax as well as outlays it is a rather futile effort.

Where ever you tax a business, customers are the ones that end up paying it. What difference does the code make?

All taxes eventually come from individuals. Owners, shareholders, employees, customers. It is just a matter of where in the cycle they are collected. There are repercussions at every collection point.

As far as the code, Cruz had the most simplified version which was to eliminate almost all deductions, loopholes, etc. It matters because our tax code has blown up to be a form of activism in its own right. Conguess should have to approve every credit or deduction each tax year as far as I am concerned.

Individual income tax is a different story.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/7/2016 9:19:14 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/7/2016 3:39:57 PM, Dark-one wrote:
How do you justify big taxes on businesses?

All costs of overhead, paying employees, taxes, are passed down to you, the consumer.

That's Economics 101.

Well, first as noted above, the issue is in large corporations NOT paying tax. However, in direct answer to the "passes down to you", yup. I have no issue with that. We can't just pretend that things don't have cost. If it costs more to have a... TV, well that is the breaks.
Dark-one
Posts: 211
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/7/2016 9:44:52 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
.

the issue is in large corporations NOT paying tax.

Once again--corporations don't pay tax, customers do.

All costs of production are passed on to the consumer.
Fly
Posts: 2,049
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/7/2016 10:08:09 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/7/2016 9:44:52 PM, Dark-one wrote:
.

the issue is in large corporations NOT paying tax.

Once again--corporations don't pay tax, customers do.

All costs of production are passed on to the consumer.

Not exactly. Because businesses are taxed only on profits, the costs of doing business have already been paid before the tax bill is due. And when it comes to raising prices, there is always a point of diminishing returns.

What you don't want to acknowledge is that there are also costs to taxing businesses too lightly-- they often opt to hold onto their profits rather than reinvesting them in the business in order to lessen their tax burden. We are not close to overtaxing larger corporations as it stands now.
"You don't have a right to be a jerk."
--Religion Forum's hypocrite extraordinaire serving up lulz
Rukado
Posts: 527
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/7/2016 10:10:10 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/7/2016 3:39:57 PM, Dark-one wrote:
How do you justify big taxes on businesses?

All costs of overhead, paying employees, taxes, are passed down to you, the consumer.

That's Economics 101.

All taxes are passed on. So, your argument is meaningless. If the government taxes sales ("fair tax"), that tax is passed on to the consumer. If income is taxed, that tax is passed on to employers. Etc.

Not taxing business makes it easier for the rich to avoid taxes. They could keep their income in the businesses they own, and avoid income taxes.

Both Democrats and Republicans want to use tax code to control people's behavior, that includes the behavior of businesses.

After bloated military spending, the biggest government function is wealth redistribution. That works for businesses, too. A struggling business doesn't have profits to pay taxes on, no cost of taxes to pass on.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/7/2016 10:25:57 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/7/2016 9:44:52 PM, Dark-one wrote:
.

the issue is in large corporations NOT paying tax.

Once again--corporations don't pay tax, customers do.

All costs of production are passed on to the consumer.

Semantics make for a dull debate. The fact is - Corporations pay taxes. Argue all you like, discuss how costs are passed along (they are, and I have no issue with that), but there is a corporate tax rate and large corporations are not paying the same taxes small and medium corporations ARE paying.
Dark-one
Posts: 211
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/7/2016 11:30:50 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/7/2016 10:10:10 PM, Rukado wrote:
At 6/7/2016 3:39:57 PM, Dark-one wrote:
How do you justify big taxes on businesses?

All costs of overhead, paying employees, taxes, are passed down to you, the consumer.

That's Economics 101.

All taxes are passed on. So, your argument is meaningless. If the government taxes sales ("fair tax"), that tax is passed on to the consumer. If income is taxed, that tax is passed on to employers. Etc.

Not taxing business makes it easier for the rich to avoid taxes. They could keep their income in the businesses they own, and avoid income taxes.


Taxes that affect the cost of production are always avoided by the business owners, and always paid for by the consumer. Said taxes do nothing but raise the price of goods, so they only serve the function of deterring customers.

Why is my argument meaningless?
Dark-one
Posts: 211
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/7/2016 11:34:55 PM
Posted: 6 months ago

Semantics make for a dull debate. The fact is - Corporations pay taxes. Argue all you like, discuss how costs are passed along (they are, and I have no issue with that), but there is a corporate tax rate and large corporations are not paying the same taxes small and medium corporations ARE paying.

Be specific about these corporate taxes please.

I'm talking about taxes that affect cost of production, which the corporation doesn't pay.
Rukado
Posts: 527
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/7/2016 11:39:28 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/7/2016 11:30:50 PM, Dark-one wrote:
Taxes that affect the cost of production are always avoided by the business owners, and always paid for by the consumer. Said taxes do nothing but raise the price of goods, so they only serve the function of deterring customers.

Why is my argument meaningless?

ALL TAXES ARE PASSED ON. Understand? It's meaningless to point out a characteristic of something that doesn't distinguish that something. I've already given you things that do distinguish business taxes.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/7/2016 11:44:44 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/7/2016 11:34:55 PM, Dark-one wrote:

Semantics make for a dull debate. The fact is - Corporations pay taxes. Argue all you like, discuss how costs are passed along (they are, and I have no issue with that), but there is a corporate tax rate and large corporations are not paying the same taxes small and medium corporations ARE paying.

Be specific about these corporate taxes please.

OK.
Tax Information For Corporations
https://www.irs.gov...


I'm talking about taxes that affect cost of production, which the corporation doesn't pay.

Yes they do. Like I said, play semantics all day if you please.
Dark-one
Posts: 211
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/7/2016 11:45:37 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/7/2016 11:39:28 PM, Rukado wrote:
At 6/7/2016 11:30:50 PM, Dark-one wrote:
Taxes that affect the cost of production are always avoided by the business owners, and always paid for by the consumer. Said taxes do nothing but raise the price of goods, so they only serve the function of deterring customers.

Why is my argument meaningless?

ALL TAXES ARE PASSED ON. Understand? It's meaningless to point out a characteristic of something that doesn't distinguish that something. I've already given you things that do distinguish business taxes.

If they're passed on, then they only directly affect the behavior of the last one on the chain.
Dark-one
Posts: 211
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/7/2016 11:49:18 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
I'm talking about taxes that affect cost of production, which the corporation doesn't pay.

Yes they do. Like I said, play semantics all day if you please.

Would you mind explaining to me how the cost of a product isn't included on the price tag once it's "on the shelf"?
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/7/2016 11:54:16 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/7/2016 11:49:18 PM, Dark-one wrote:
I'm talking about taxes that affect cost of production, which the corporation doesn't pay.

Yes they do. Like I said, play semantics all day if you please.

Would you mind explaining to me how the cost of a product isn't included on the price tag once it's "on the shelf"?

No. Since post one I have said that expenses will be passed to consumers, and I have no problem with that. Have you not bothered to read my post?
Fly
Posts: 2,049
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/7/2016 11:57:03 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/7/2016 11:49:18 PM, Dark-one wrote:
I'm talking about taxes that affect cost of production, which the corporation doesn't pay.

Yes they do. Like I said, play semantics all day if you please.

Would you mind explaining to me how the cost of a product isn't included on the price tag once it's "on the shelf"?

Again, businesses are only taxed on the profit margin. If you look at the profit margin as how much they are OVERcharging you, it should all start to make sense. The Koch brothers, oil companies, Heritage Foundation et al have been feeding you a line to serve their own profit margins...
"You don't have a right to be a jerk."
--Religion Forum's hypocrite extraordinaire serving up lulz
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2016 12:01:02 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/7/2016 11:57:03 PM, Fly wrote:
At 6/7/2016 11:49:18 PM, Dark-one wrote:
I'm talking about taxes that affect cost of production, which the corporation doesn't pay.

Yes they do. Like I said, play semantics all day if you please.

Would you mind explaining to me how the cost of a product isn't included on the price tag once it's "on the shelf"?

Again, businesses are only taxed on the profit margin. If you look at the profit margin as how much they are OVERcharging you, it should all start to make sense. The Koch brothers, oil companies, Heritage Foundation et al have been feeding you a line to serve their own profit margins...

His argument will be, and I still won't care, that business still have to raise the price to maintain profit margins. As I said, I still don't care. Pay the tax, and let the market decide what is "too high" as conservatives are so fond of saying.
Rukado
Posts: 527
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2016 12:13:33 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/7/2016 11:57:03 PM, Fly wrote:
Again, businesses are only taxed on the profit margin. If you look at the profit margin as how much they are OVERcharging you, it should all start to make sense. The Koch brothers, oil companies, Heritage Foundation et al have been feeding you a line to serve their own profit margins...

If a company is over-charging, it shows there's a lack of competition in the market (which often results from excessive government regulation).

Yes, only profits are taxed. But, those taxes are passed on to the consumer. What the author of the OP can't get through his thick skull is that all taxes are passed on, and so complaining that businesses pass on tax expenses doesn't distinguish business taxes from any other tax.
Fly
Posts: 2,049
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2016 12:16:30 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/8/2016 12:01:02 AM, TBR wrote:
At 6/7/2016 11:57:03 PM, Fly wrote:
At 6/7/2016 11:49:18 PM, Dark-one wrote:
I'm talking about taxes that affect cost of production, which the corporation doesn't pay.

Yes they do. Like I said, play semantics all day if you please.

Would you mind explaining to me how the cost of a product isn't included on the price tag once it's "on the shelf"?

Again, businesses are only taxed on the profit margin. If you look at the profit margin as how much they are OVERcharging you, it should all start to make sense. The Koch brothers, oil companies, Heritage Foundation et al have been feeding you a line to serve their own profit margins...

His argument will be, and I still won't care, that business still have to raise the price to maintain profit margins. As I said, I still don't care. Pay the tax, and let the market decide what is "too high" as conservatives are so fond of saying.

Yes, and it is still a simplistic view on his part. If prices go too high, they lose profit via lost sales (diminishing returns as I said earlier). Let's flip the coin-- let's say we cut corporate taxes solely to motivate lower prices. Will business lower prices by a commensurate amount as a little bonus to the already established consumer, or will they pocket the extra profit the lower tax would yield?

I know which way I would bet... granted they would probably lower prices by enough to get more sales and yet more profit, but not likely would it be commensurate to the tax decrease.
"You don't have a right to be a jerk."
--Religion Forum's hypocrite extraordinaire serving up lulz
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2016 12:21:36 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/8/2016 12:01:02 AM, TBR wrote:
At 6/7/2016 11:57:03 PM, Fly wrote:
At 6/7/2016 11:49:18 PM, Dark-one wrote:
I'm talking about taxes that affect cost of production, which the corporation doesn't pay.

Yes they do. Like I said, play semantics all day if you please.

Would you mind explaining to me how the cost of a product isn't included on the price tag once it's "on the shelf"?

Again, businesses are only taxed on the profit margin. If you look at the profit margin as how much they are OVERcharging you, it should all start to make sense. The Koch brothers, oil companies, Heritage Foundation et al have been feeding you a line to serve their own profit margins...

His argument will be, and I still won't care, that business still have to raise the price to maintain profit margins. As I said, I still don't care. Pay the tax, and let the market decide what is "too high" as conservatives are so fond of saying.

Profit margins versus tax margins are much lower in comparison with each other. Governments tend to make more money from the income of corporations than do corporations itself. That's why tax profit margins are considerably higher than profit margins, which are relatively low at around 3-8% on average. Some are lower and some are higher.
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.
Fly
Posts: 2,049
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2016 12:21:58 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/8/2016 12:13:33 AM, Rukado wrote:
At 6/7/2016 11:57:03 PM, Fly wrote:
Again, businesses are only taxed on the profit margin. If you look at the profit margin as how much they are OVERcharging you, it should all start to make sense. The Koch brothers, oil companies, Heritage Foundation et al have been feeding you a line to serve their own profit margins...

If a company is over-charging, it shows there's a lack of competition in the market (which often results from excessive government regulation).

Yes, only profits are taxed. But, those taxes are passed on to the consumer. What the author of the OP can't get through his thick skull is that all taxes are passed on, and so complaining that businesses pass on tax expenses doesn't distinguish business taxes from any other tax.

I need an example of what you mean actually. How do you pass on your personal income tax? Do you mean it's less money you use to lend to banks and buy goods?
"You don't have a right to be a jerk."
--Religion Forum's hypocrite extraordinaire serving up lulz
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2016 12:22:35 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/8/2016 12:16:30 AM, Fly wrote:
At 6/8/2016 12:01:02 AM, TBR wrote:
At 6/7/2016 11:57:03 PM, Fly wrote:
At 6/7/2016 11:49:18 PM, Dark-one wrote:
I'm talking about taxes that affect cost of production, which the corporation doesn't pay.

Yes they do. Like I said, play semantics all day if you please.

Would you mind explaining to me how the cost of a product isn't included on the price tag once it's "on the shelf"?

Again, businesses are only taxed on the profit margin. If you look at the profit margin as how much they are OVERcharging you, it should all start to make sense. The Koch brothers, oil companies, Heritage Foundation et al have been feeding you a line to serve their own profit margins...

His argument will be, and I still won't care, that business still have to raise the price to maintain profit margins. As I said, I still don't care. Pay the tax, and let the market decide what is "too high" as conservatives are so fond of saying.

Yes, and it is still a simplistic view on his part. If prices go too high, they lose profit via lost sales (diminishing returns as I said earlier). Let's flip the coin-- let's say we cut corporate taxes solely to motivate lower prices. Will business lower prices by a commensurate amount as a little bonus to the already established consumer, or will they pocket the extra profit the lower tax would yield?

I know which way I would bet... granted they would probably lower prices by enough to get more sales and yet more profit, but not likely would it be commensurate to the tax decrease.

Yup.

By any metric, large corporate profits are at historic levels.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2016 12:24:54 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/8/2016 12:21:36 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 6/8/2016 12:01:02 AM, TBR wrote:
At 6/7/2016 11:57:03 PM, Fly wrote:
At 6/7/2016 11:49:18 PM, Dark-one wrote:
I'm talking about taxes that affect cost of production, which the corporation doesn't pay.

Yes they do. Like I said, play semantics all day if you please.

Would you mind explaining to me how the cost of a product isn't included on the price tag once it's "on the shelf"?

Again, businesses are only taxed on the profit margin. If you look at the profit margin as how much they are OVERcharging you, it should all start to make sense. The Koch brothers, oil companies, Heritage Foundation et al have been feeding you a line to serve their own profit margins...

His argument will be, and I still won't care, that business still have to raise the price to maintain profit margins. As I said, I still don't care. Pay the tax, and let the market decide what is "too high" as conservatives are so fond of saying.

Profit margins versus tax margins are much lower in comparison with each other. Governments tend to make more money from the income of corporations than do corporations itself. That's why tax profit margins are considerably higher than profit margins, which are relatively low at around 3-8% on average. Some are lower and some are higher.

"Governments tend to make more money from the income of corporations than do corporations itself" - Show me,,
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2016 12:25:04 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/7/2016 10:25:57 PM, TBR wrote:
At 6/7/2016 9:44:52 PM, Dark-one wrote:
.

the issue is in large corporations NOT paying tax.

Once again--corporations don't pay tax, customers do.

All costs of production are passed on to the consumer.

Semantics make for a dull debate. The fact is - Corporations pay taxes. Argue all you like, discuss how costs are passed along (they are, and I have no issue with that), but there is a corporate tax rate and large corporations are not paying the same taxes small and medium corporations ARE paying.

You just proved why government favorability in a market is a bad thing. Corporations lobby for more regulations as they are able to afford it or can escape it while smaller ones cannot, thus killing competition.
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.
Dark-one
Posts: 211
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2016 12:26:42 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/7/2016 11:54:16 PM, TBR wrote:
At 6/7/2016 11:49:18 PM, Dark-one wrote:
I'm talking about taxes that affect cost of production, which the corporation doesn't pay.

Yes they do. Like I said, play semantics all day if you please.

Would you mind explaining to me how the cost of a product isn't included on the price tag once it's "on the shelf"?

No. Since post one I have said that expenses will be passed to consumers, and I have no problem with that. Have you not bothered to read my post?

You said in one part of your post that corporations pay the tax, not that expenses will be passed on the consumers.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2016 12:30:07 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/8/2016 12:26:42 AM, Dark-one wrote:
At 6/7/2016 11:54:16 PM, TBR wrote:
At 6/7/2016 11:49:18 PM, Dark-one wrote:
I'm talking about taxes that affect cost of production, which the corporation doesn't pay.

Yes they do. Like I said, play semantics all day if you please.

Would you mind explaining to me how the cost of a product isn't included on the price tag once it's "on the shelf"?

No. Since post one I have said that expenses will be passed to consumers, and I have no problem with that. Have you not bothered to read my post?

You said in one part of your post that corporations pay the tax, not that expenses will be passed on the consumers.

No I didn't. The thing you were chasing was a semantically argument - that is stupid. Corporations WILL pay the tax, that is a truth. It is you that keep barking that it is consumers that are paying the tax.
bballcrook21
Posts: 4,468
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2016 12:32:08 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/8/2016 12:24:54 AM, TBR wrote:
At 6/8/2016 12:21:36 AM, bballcrook21 wrote:
At 6/8/2016 12:01:02 AM, TBR wrote:
At 6/7/2016 11:57:03 PM, Fly wrote:
At 6/7/2016 11:49:18 PM, Dark-one wrote:
I'm talking about taxes that affect cost of production, which the corporation doesn't pay.

Yes they do. Like I said, play semantics all day if you please.

Would you mind explaining to me how the cost of a product isn't included on the price tag once it's "on the shelf"?

Again, businesses are only taxed on the profit margin. If you look at the profit margin as how much they are OVERcharging you, it should all start to make sense. The Koch brothers, oil companies, Heritage Foundation et al have been feeding you a line to serve their own profit margins...

His argument will be, and I still won't care, that business still have to raise the price to maintain profit margins. As I said, I still don't care. Pay the tax, and let the market decide what is "too high" as conservatives are so fond of saying.

Profit margins versus tax margins are much lower in comparison with each other. Governments tend to make more money from the income of corporations than do corporations itself. That's why tax profit margins are considerably higher than profit margins, which are relatively low at around 3-8% on average. Some are lower and some are higher.

"Governments tend to make more money from the income of corporations than do corporations itself" - Show me,,

Correction: profit, not income. Government makes more money out of 20 dollars of income in various areas, such as in retail, than the corporation does in profit as well. I forget where, but it stated that Walmart makes around $.39 in profits for 20 dollars but $1.29 for the government.
If you put the federal government in charge of the Sahara Desert, in 5 years there'd be a shortage of sand. - Friedman

Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself. -Friedman

Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program. - Friedman

Society will never be free until the last Democrat is strangled with the entrails of the last Communist.
Rukado
Posts: 527
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2016 12:32:37 AM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 6/8/2016 12:21:58 AM, Fly wrote:
I need an example of what you mean actually. How do you pass on your personal income tax? Do you mean it's less money you use to lend to banks and buy goods?

If I pay $30 in taxes, that $30 is my lost buying power, which sucks $30 out of the revenue of businesses.

If the government taxes $30 from a business, and they pass on that $30 to me, I again net $70 in buying power.

It makes no difference, per se, whether my income is taxed or the business profits are taxed. The government gets $30 dollars and the economy is robbed of $30.