Yes, we can.

[Morrigoon]

I think they're just amused by their "not surprised"-ness. Because nobody expects that you would like a democrat's spending plan. Hey, you have every right to be freaked out by it, and you have a political history that indicates you would be.

[JWBear]

Well, somebody has to pay for Mr Bush's little war. Personally, I'd rather it be the rich and the big corporations than the poor and middle class.

[NirvanaMan]

Originally Posted by JWBear

Well, somebody has to pay for Mr Bush's little war. Personally, I'd rather it be the rich and the big corporations than the poor and middle class.

Who are these rich and big corporations exactly, and who do they employ? Is it all rich people that work for the rich corporations? Seems like that wouldn't really work. One would likely need to have middle class folks employed in a large corporation, but perhaps they exist just the same. If so, please post the top 5 so I can ready some resumes.

Thanks!

[Kevy Baby]

I am going to have to do the research again (I think all the work I did last time was on Fab's board which crashed), but the wealthy ALREADY pay most of the taxes.

And why should "Big Corporations" be subject to higher tax rates? This has never made any sense to me. It will just drive more work (JOBS) overseas as well as other effects detrimental to the US Economy.

And the question that so far I have never been able to get anyone on this board to answer is: what is wealthy? Is the top 10% of wage earners consider wealthy? 5%? People who make over $100,000? $200,000? $1,000,000?

[scaeagles]

Big Corporations don't pay taxes. If big corporations are hit with a tax increase, it is simply passed along to the consumer.

Visibile mojo to Kevy. When the top 10% of the population pay 80% of the taxes (or whatever it is exactly), of course that's where the tax reductions go.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

Big Corporations don't pay taxes. If big corporations are hit with a tax increase, it is simply passed along to the consumer.

Only goods with perfectly inelastic demand curves is this true.

[Kevy Baby]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

Only goods with perfectly inelastic demand curves is this true.

I disagree. I think you would find that ultimately, almost all tax increases to corporations are passed on to the consumer.

And the funny thing about "Big Corporations" is that a good majority of the spoils goes to the common man. Most of the largest shareholders in large companies are mutual funds where you and I and other regular people have at least some of their retirement finds in. When Exxon/Mobile makes an "obscene" amount of money, that means that Joe Blow's pension just improved.

Also, Big Corporations typically employee a shytload of everyday people. Last I head, being employed is a good thing.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by Kevy Baby

I disagree. I think you would find that ultimately, almost all tax increases to corporations are passed on to the consumer.

Then you disagree with the generally accepted rules of economics.

reference

[Kevy Baby]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

Then you disagree with the generally accepted rules of economics.

Maybe so. I meant to add to my original post that the passing on may not be 1:1, but it will be significant.

Also, the passing on may not be direct either. Big Company A gets hit with a 10% increase in their taxes which results in a 2% overall increase in bottom line costs (I am using hypothetical numbers here). They may only be able to pass on 1% (half the additional burden) on to consumers. Then they extract another .5% from their vendors who must then tighten their belts in the form of layoffs or other such economic impact, another .25% in the form of internal layoffs, and the last .25% in the form of lower dividends to their institutional stockholders (read: your and my retirement funds).

There you have it: all 2% of the increased tax burden passed on to the consumer.

[Kevy Baby]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

When the top 10% of the population pay 80% of the taxes (or whatever it is exactly), of course that's where the tax reductions go.

If I recall correctly, it was a lower number than 10% that payed 80%. I gotta look it up again.