Article

2010-01-27 Home Front: Politix

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Bobby 2010-01-27 16:42|| || Front Page|| [11146 views ] Top

#1 Sorry, I thought I selected non-WOT.

Posted by Bobby 2010-01-27 16:48|| 2010-01-27 16:48|| Front Page Top

#2 I fail to see how decreasing corporate tax rates can possibly cause increased employment in the US. US corporations seem hell-bent on exporting US jobs any way they can, and they've been very successful at this. The linkage between cutting corporate taxes and increasing US employment is driven by faith and wishful thinking.

Posted by Anguper Hupomosing9418 2010-01-27 17:13|| 2010-01-27 17:13|| Front Page Top

#3 Exactly AH. Even though I think corporate tax rates should be zero (people, not legal fictions, pay taxes) the $700B/year monetary drain that is killing the US economy is from the failure to control imports. The rest is just nibbling on the margins.

Posted by ed 2010-01-27 17:21|| 2010-01-27 17:21|| Front Page Top

#4 "The linkage between cutting corporate taxes and increasing US employment is driven by faith and wishful thinking."

It depends on what is considered a "tax". If you eliminate things like minimum wage laws that do nothing but drive up unemployment and increase poverty and maybe create a national "right to work" law that breaks the union stranglehold on wages in many industries, then yeah, we might get somewhere.

Otherwise the only increase in jobs we see are the white collar jobs from companies with a corporate headquarters in the US while their manufacturing is done elsewhere.

Posted by crosspatch 2010-01-27 17:37|| 2010-01-27 17:37|| Front Page Top

#5 I fail to see how decreasing corporate tax rates can possibly cause increased employment in the US.

Countries engage in tax competition for precisely this reason. In particular, it influences the location of head offices and other functions that could be located anywhere, such as IT.

So not only does it increase employment, it increases high wage employment.

Posted by phil_b 2010-01-27 19:34|| 2010-01-27 19:34|| Front Page Top

#6 IMPORT Duties could go a long way to creating jobs too... Just saying...

Posted by 3dc 2010-01-27 20:01|| 2010-01-27 20:01|| Front Page Top

#7 So not only does it increase employment, it increases high wage employment. You left out the key part about "in the US" plus another key part. A few corporate insiders sucking their bonus money out of corporate operations will do nothing to help the ~~bagholders~~ stockholders or the ~~peons~~ lower paid employees.

Posted by Anguper Hupomosing9418 2010-01-27 20:36|| 2010-01-27 20:36|| Front Page Top

#8 The main winners from low(er) corporate tax rates are stockholders*. Countries with low corporate tax rates such as Holland, get the money back from high personal tax rates.

* Although the real winners indirectly, are consumers. Prices are lower due to the lower cost of doing business.

Economists will tell you that taxing businesses at all is a bad idea, because all the money businesses make flows to employees, stockholders, the government or new investments.

Posted by phil_b 2010-01-27 20:49|| 2010-01-27 20:49|| Front Page Top

#9 The main winners from low(er) corporate tax rates are stockholders* More faith-based reasoning. When Goldman Sachs starts paying out dividends we can revisit this issue.

Posted by Anguper Hupomosing9418 2010-01-27 21:09|| 2010-01-27 21:09|| Front Page Top

#10 Economists will tell you just about anything. They are not believable as a group. The track record of economists up to the onset of the crisis in 2007 STINKS.

Posted by Anguper Hupomosing9418 2010-01-27 21:10|| 2010-01-27 21:10|| Front Page Top

#11 IMPORT Duties could go a long way to creating jobs too... Just saying...

yep trade barrier methods maybe? who knows I am not an economist.

Posted by Tyranysaurus Claiger7518 2010-01-27 21:29|| 2010-01-27 21:29|| Front Page Top

#12 Smoot-Hawley 2.0, anyone?

Does anyone (besides the Dim-ocRats) really think that's a good idea?

Posted by Barbara Skolaut 2010-01-27 22:00|| 2010-01-27 22:00|| Front Page Top

23:52 USN, Ret.
23:50 Old Patriot
23:38 USN, Ret.
23:19 Barbara Skolaut
23:18 trailing wife
23:17 USN, Ret.
23:15 USN, Ret.
23:02 Barbara Skolaut
22:56 3dc
22:38 Barbara Skolaut
22:30 Alaska Paul
22:29 Barbara Skolaut
22:28 Barbara Skolaut
22:22 Barbara Skolaut
22:03 Halliburton - Mysterious Conspiracy Division
22:02 Barbara Skolaut
22:00 Barbara Skolaut
21:46 Barbara Skolaut
21:29 Tyranysaurus Claiger7518
21:10 Anguper Hupomosing9418
21:09 Anguper Hupomosing9418
20:49 phil_b
20:47 Anguper Hupomosing9418
20:42 Anguper Hupomosing9418