Quote:
Please, tell me why companies move manufacturing out of the country? Because it's more expensive? "Inversions largely occur on paper. Corporations typically do not move their executives or operations overseas" So what happened to all the manufacturing jobs that have been lost in the last 30 years? Are all the workers still in the US, hiding somewhere? What was going to happen if Carrier moved all those jobs to Mexico? God Almighty, anything to avoid admitting I am correct about anything. Put down the Kool Aid and think for two seconds... |
Quote:
Exactly. 5 years ago, my insurance company moved its "headquarters" to Bermuda. We rent a tiny, tiny office, and they have a Board Of Directors meeting there once a year, to prove that it is really the HQ. Even though the office is vacant 51 weeks out of the year. That saves us a few million each year in taxes. Much of which was used to grow the company, meaning more people have good, white collar jobs, with which they pay mortgages and put their kids through college. |
Seem you guys only like to focus on 1 part at a time
Business left for cheap labor little to no regulation and Inversions all combined to see these companys leave they made profits in the USA greed moved them from the USA |
Quote:
|
Quote:
A bail out that is paid back and a Tax deal that requires no re payment How are they the Same ?? and if Conservatives didn't like Obama doing this and they don't like Trump doing this... their awful silent in there opposition |
Quote:
If you dont see this unilateral disregard for US protocol or see it as Tough Talk towards China by the President elect or see the bigger implications on the world stage ... I can't help with that .. and to pull the if Obama did it card it would be seen differently is a weak argument Like But But Bush Looks like the American thinker Blog has a nationalistic appeal |
Quote:
|
Quote:
2) she is the democratically elected President of Taiwan...I assume she can call whoever she wants 3) F*@k the Chinese "policy makers"..a corrupt and authoritarian regime threatening everyone in the region |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Yes, you are right about why companies leave. Companies exist to make money. Do you not make decisions based on your financial self-interest? The solution, is to make it more attractive for companies to stay, and less attractive for them to leave. Do that, and more will stay. I presume you have never worked for a business that ever had to balance revenue with expenses. |
Quote:
The solution, is to make it more attractive for companies to stay.. By basically giving them what ever they want ? maximizing their profits by diminishing their Tax responsibilities reducing their regulation . pass the risk to the tax payer . to keep 1000 jobs with a low % they will be there when the tax incentives sunset .. not my idea of the Big picture .. I get it greed is good ... but these are muti billion dollar profit companies .. not the man on the street plumber company or guy who runs 4 trucks ... no ones giving them a thing Because they cant leave nobody cares about them.. they are sold the same BS about de regulation and taxes but the reality it never trickles down to them So dont even try to compare local business with Carrier |
Quote:
Again, you are responding to something that I never said (you have that habit, in case you didn't know). No - not give them whatever they want. But we need to take our boots off of their throats. Reasonable taxes, reasonable regulations. Stop acting like business is some limitless ATM that your labor union can raid whenever it feels like. Have you ever worked in the private sector? Ever? "to keep 1000 jobs with a low % they will be there when the tax incentives sunset " Oh, so now you're a fortune teller, too. Impressive. |
Quote:
In our high tech time, some (many) things are more efficiently and cheaply mass produced by large corporations rather than by small businesses. Does that necessitate big, all-powerful government to combat the expansion and consolidation of such corporations? Or is that combat merely a cover for those who prefer all-powerful centralized government? Can a model of self-government exist in a world dominated by giant corporations? I think so. I think those giants can only dominate in concert or collusion with giant government. I do not think they can dominate a free, self-governing people. That is obviously debatable. But I think that we can only be dominated if we allow ourselves to be, either by corporations or government . . . or their fascistic combination. Does less regulation and taxation of business, whether that business is small or huge, create more of a bond with it? Or does greater taxation and regulation create more of a bond between government and business. With lesser control, the bond is amicable, and protective of each for the other. With greater control, the bond is resentful, coercive, corruptive, and prone to consolidation, either by force of government, or necessity of business survival. The ultimate consolidation being business and government in a fascistic consolidation. The "big picture" is far bigger than talking points about "greedy" corporations and the little guys. It involves system of government, liberty, and the "road to serfdom." |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:16 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 1998-20012 Striped-Bass.com