Politics: Time To Move?!?

[way2fat]

Healthcare costs will only decline when medical and malpractice insurance on the health provider's sides decline, and THAT's only going to happen when nitpicky medical suits stop. Good luck. But I'm with you- leaving the US federal gov't. to run anything regarding money is the wrong way to go.

Yeah, might as well turn over SS to the corporations.

[walkerci]

I would move to a lower tax state.

Which is what I did last year when New Jersey's new governor decided to increase the income tax and sales tax and any other thing that he could instead of cutting state spending.

People with large incomes are running out of the high tax states as fast as they can.

Now, think about this.

Illegal aliens don't have health insurance.
Illinois has a huge population of illegals like NJ.

Guess who is paying for their health care, education, police protection, and incarceration?

You guessed it! American citizens!

It is impossible to stop the illegals from getting here.
We can and should bill their home countries for all of costs of providing government paid services to their citizens who are here illegally.

Yeah, their countries won't want to pay the bill.

We have many ways to encourage payment:

1. Threaten to slap a huge tariff on goods imported from their countries.

2. Stop all foreign exchange remittances to that country.

3. Require a Green Card or current visa to send money to their country.

Yada, yada, yada.

Oh no, then they won't like us anymore.
TFB, who cares if someone that is robbing you doesn't like it when you fight back.

[RSBro]

In Houston, we sold more big screen TV's and diamond rings than ever!

[ThudMaker]

What you're missing is that Corporations don't just "Eat IT" when they pay taxes. The tax expense is very much calculated into the bottom line when they decide what to sell their product/service for. So who actuallay pays the tax ? WE DO!!! Every time we buy that product or use that service!! Think it all the way through!!

You kind of miss the boat, because many corporations, including one of mine, isn't in the durable goods business. There is absolutely no friggin' way I can pass on anymore to customers without them throwing in the towel. Maybe it doesn't hit your wallet, but it sure is going to hit my corporate bottom-line. The Caterpillars and Motorolas of the world can pass it right along, but most "greedy" corporations are small, family owned enterprises. So not only do I take the hit just like you do, I will also get it with a G-rod vaseline job.

[RSBro]

Yeah, might as well turn over SS to the corporations.

Man I feel sorry for anyone paying into SS in the first place. It's just borrowed money from the Fed that's paid out as the money sent in has been spent long before you'll ever touch it.

[RSBro]

You kind of miss the boat, because many corporations, including one of mine, isn't in the durable goods business. There is absolutely no friggin' way I can pass on anymore to customers without them throwing in the towel. Maybe it doesn't hit your wallet, but it sure is going to hit my corporate bottom-line. The Caterpillars and Motorolas of the world can pass it right along, but most "greedy" corporations are small, family owned enterprises. So not only do I take the hit just like you do, I will also get it with a G-rod vaseline job.

 

 

What's funny is everyone associates this "Evil Corporation" thing to these old, fat white men sitting in some tower in the sky watching everything we little ants do.

A corporation is a piece of paper and it's members can be "Made up" entities as well. There's only a handful of companies that manufacture large quantities of items we use on a daily basis. Electing to run a corp just means you have liability and asset protection by the government. It's just a "legal" version of the Mafia- you pay them dues and fees to set you up, they limit your personal liability. It's no different. You pay, you get protection.

 

Thud is right on- most corps are people just using that election for it's tax benefits, which at least now in Texas we got dumped on as well w/ the Margins Tax.

[thebeatcatcher2]

 

I really disagree with the public education argument. It's not that they are underfunded, it's that the funds allocated are severly misused. Here in Michigan for the first time the number of non-educator staff has risen above 50%. We need better focus and effiency... simply dumping more money into healthcare or schools will do nothing but increase the amount of money that will be abused.

 

 

true, but how can you be sure that MI's non-educator staff isn't necessary based on student needs and numbers? they might not be able to afford enough teachers to fill appropriate needs. so if you had more money, couldn't you afford to replace some non-educator (para-educators is the new term i think) staff with qualified/certified people?

 

i agree with you totally that throwing money at it won't solve the problem, but a little more could help (if used wisely like you said) to curb class sizes, lack of facilities, and the diminishing resources for extra-curriculur activities and the arts.

[SunRaFan]

SPRINGFIELD -- Illinois would see the largest tax increase in its history under Gov. Rod Blagojevich's plan to provide health care for the uninsured and ramp up state support for education. He's on the radio right now (890AM in Chicago). This guy is clueless. He's proposing to raise corporate taxes by more than $7B. While it may play well with his constituents I've got a message for you Governor: Hey dumbass...corporations don't pay taxes!!!!

Serious question, how is a corporation paying taxes any different from an individual? By the logic you seem to be using, I don't pay income taxes, my employer does because I pass the cost along to him when I negotiate my salary.

[RSBro]

Serious question, how is a corporation paying taxes any different from an individual? By the logic you seem to be using, I don't pay income taxes, my employer does because I pass the cost along to him when I negotiate my salary.

It's not really. It's all about allocations. A corp has to have some "person" somewhere, whether it be a natural human or another entity, which is considered a "person" under the IRC.
But if you earn a W-2, you still pay SS and Medicare, which is the same thing, they're just not "readibly" refundable... Have to do some work for those!

[ThudMaker]

 

Serious question, how is a corporation paying taxes any different from an individual? By the logic you seem to be using, I don't pay income taxes, my employer does because I pass the cost along to him when I negotiate my salary.

 

As RSB stated it's not. However the corporation income tax is called a "Replacement" tax, corporations due pay income tax. It's just not the corporations themselves, who are cutting the check. . . . . the owners of the corporation are. Now RSB can correct me (since I am not a CPA)---For simplicity sake if I am a 50% shareholder of a corporation and that corporation makes a $10,000 profit for the year, I am personally responsible for paying the income tax on $5,000. What Blob-of-itch is proposing is taxing something that is essentially already being income taxed. Typical G-Rod circlejerk nonsense.

 

 

Oh . . . . FYI, in case you didn't know, when you look at your pay stubs, your employer pays 1/2 of your SS/Med taxes. You don't pay FUTA or SUTA. Your employer does. The owner off your company also gets screwed because his employer isn't picking up his half of FICA (SS/Med). Since he is the owner, he also picks up his other half, so essentially owners pay double what you do for their own SS/Med. Those evil corporations.

[SunRaFan]

It's not really. It's all about allocations. A corp has to have some "person" somewhere, whether it be a natural human or another entity, which is considered a "person" under the IRC. But if you earn a W-2, you still pay SS and Medicare, which is the same thing, they're just not "readibly" refundable... Have to do some work for those!

I'm having a hard time understanding this response. I don't know what IRC stands for. Is "readibly" supposed to be readily?

That said, I'm not even sure you are addressing my basic point which is that worker's salaries are negotiated to include the cost of taxes on them in the same way that corporations have to take into account taxes when trying to earn a profit. In both cases, an entity will try to get as much money as possible and will only be willing to continue an activity if it's worthwhile including the cost of the taxes.

[RSBro]

As RSB stated it's not. However the corporation income tax is called a "Replacement" tax, corporations due pay income tax. It's just not the corporations themselves, who are cutting the check. . . . . the owners of the corporation are. Now RSB can correct me (since I am not a CPA)---For simplicity sake if I am a 50% shareholder of a corporation and that corporation makes a $10,000 profit for the year, I am personally responsible for paying the income tax on $5,000. What Blob-of-itch is proposing is taxing something that is essentially already being income taxed. Typical G-Rod circlejerk nonsense. Oh . . . . FYI, in case you didn't know, when you look at your pay stubs, your employer pays 1/2 of your SS/Med taxes. You don't pay FUTA or SUTA. Your employer does. The owner off your company also gets screwed because his employer isn't picking up his half of FICA (SS/Med). Since he is the owner, he also picks up his other half, so essentially owners pay double what you do for their own SS/Med. Those evil corporations.

You are exactly right as far as points go. However (technically and yes I'm nitpicking! ) the corp writes the check, usually. C-corps (which are what most "corporations" as we refer to them are) do not have K-1s which are picked up on a variety of other forms. They pay or are refunded or balance-forward any tax due or credited. But if tax IS due, and the corp doesn't have money in it's account, then it's gotta come from somewhere and like we previously discussed, Caterpillar and Motorola don't have this problem. But me and 2 friends or whatnot who are running a corp (which I don't recommend, btw, as far as entity strategies go but for argument's sake) and owe $12,000, then we each fork out $4k personally to cover that balance.


And you don't know how {censored}ed up payroll taxes are. They have the highest interest and penalty rates and 941's are just destined to be screwed up unless you have someone competent running your payroll. Companies get racked over BAD with P/R tax, as they pay, now hear me out, all of your withholding and as was said, half of your SS and Medicare taxes.
It's rape. Plain and simple.

[bbl]

Yeah, we understand they technically pay taxes, but when their tax rate goes up do you think that actually cuts into their profits or is passed on to the consumer?

Both. Perhaps, in order to stay competitive, the Board of Directors might think twice before giving their executives HUGE compensation packages that they don't deserve. Or perhaps they may lay off employees. Or they may find some fat to trim somewhere. Or...

The assumption that companies always "pass additional costs on to the consumer" is flawed. Just as the assumption that lower costs results in lower prices. Costs do not directly drive prices.

[Les_Izzmor]

Folks tend to cite teacher's salaries, but teachers are paid pretty well overall. When adjusted for cost-of-living, I suspect teachers do okay. When looking at the salaries, keep in mind that teachers work about 8 months out of the year (all gov holidays off, a week off in the Spring, three months off in the Summer, and two weeks off a Christmas).

 

 

 

Please. 8 months. Any teacher will tell you that's total B.S. 8 months is 2/3rds of the year. That means teachers only work 34 weeks a year. Is that your contention?

 

Around here teachers are required to work until the last week in June. And. Must report back in the middle of August. That's about 7 weeks. They get one week off at Christmas. And. One in the spring. That's 9 weeks. Give them 5 gov't holidays during the year and you've got 10 weeks. And. 5 sick days is another week. That means they work 41 weeks a year. Which is more like 9.5 months. And. Most teachers will tell you they work more than a 40 hour week. And. They don't get overtime.

 

Granted. Only working 41 weeks is nice. But. There are also some disadvantages. You can't take vacation whenever you want. You can't pull the, "I'll be an hour late, but I'll stay an extra hour". You pretty much need to be at work when school's in.

 

And. Most importantly. Parents entrust teachers with their children. The most important things in their lives. (For most parents anyway) That's a big responsibility.

 

I'm not saying teachers are underpaid, over-worked, or have it tough. But. Saying things like "They only work 8 months a year" is a bit irresponsible. Especially for someone as smart as yourself, T-Broom.

[RSBro]

I'm having a hard time understanding this response. I don't know what IRC stands for. Is "readibly" supposed to be readily? That said, I'm not even sure you are addressing my basic point which is that worker's salaries are negotiated to include the cost of taxes on them in the same way that corporations have to take into account taxes when trying to earn a profit. In both cases, an entity will try to get as much money as possible and will only be willing to continue an activity if it's worthwhile including the cost of the taxes.

Readily, yes. And IRC = Internal Revenue Code. Sorry just hate writing it out!

Well I get your point, but in all reality that shouldn't be such a high priority. Increasing taxes corps will pay out is not a way to help them grow. That only means less money is available for anything else. Higher cost to operate with no additional income to supplement/offset those costs is not going to do anything good for anybody except those getting the taxes.

[SunRaFan]

Oh . . . . FYI, in case you didn't know, when you look at your pay stubs, your employer pays 1/2 of your SS/Med taxes. You don't pay FUTA or SUTA. Your employer does. The owner off your company also gets screwed because his employer isn't picking up his half of FICA (SS/Med). Since he is the owner, he also picks up his other half, so essentially owners pay double what you do for their own SS/Med. Those evil corporations.

 

 

I did know this, but I don't see how it's particularly relevant. Employees still have to consider what the take-home pay is when determining if a job is worth it. When I do work as an independent contractor, I bump up my hourly rate in order to cover the self-employment taxes. When I'm hired by a company, I get a lower hourly wage before taxes because the company has to cover it's share of FICA. After tax wages wind up being pretty much the same.

[RSBro]

I did know this, but I don't see how it's particularly relevant. Employees still have to consider what the take-home pay is when determining if a job is worth it. When I do work as an independent contractor, I bump up my hourly rate in order to cover the self-employment taxes. When I'm hired by a company, I get a lower hourly wage before taxes because the company has to cover it's share of FICA. After tax wages wind up being pretty much the same.

Right, so you should up it between 15-20% just to make it worthwhile. I guess I'm missing what you're saying is "relevant", I think.
Point is, jacking up taxes for the hell of it doesn't help anyone on the consumer side, which is everyone but the gov't.

[ThudMaker]

I did know this, but I don't see how it's particularly relevant. Employees still have to consider what the take-home pay is when determining if a job is worth it. When I do work as an independent contractor, I bump up my hourly rate in order to cover the self-employment taxes. When I'm hired by a company, I get a lower hourly wage before taxes because the company has to cover it's share of FICA. After tax wages wind up being pretty much the same.

Well, the relevance is that if it's not worth it for me to employ you, you aren't going to have a job. Since this thread is about a moron governor wanting to increase the financial burden on employers, I can't quite understand why all the taxes/cost of doing business would not be relevant. There's a big difference between being an employer and an independent contractor, but eventually you're going to bump your rate up high enough, that I'm not going to work with you as an independent contractor.

[SunRaFan]

Well I get your point, but in all reality that shouldn't be such a high priority. Increasing taxes corps will pay out is not a way to help them grow. That only means less money is available for anything else. Higher cost to operate with no additional income to supplement/offset those costs is not going to do anything good for anybody except those getting the taxes.

 

 

I don't necessarily disagree with this. I was just objecting to the idea that "Corporations don't pay taxes, people do". It seems to me to be a slogan that doesn't stand up to much scrutiny. It seems to me that both people and corporations respond in mostly the same ways. If we set personal income tax rates to highly people won't have much incentive to work.

[Mudbass]

Change the tax code, and you would see operations moved. It's a no brainer. Yes, they could pass on the tax to the consumer, but that would make them non-competitive, so it would be a death sentence in today's retail environment. No, the only way out would be to move the headquaters and all the employees, and all the monies that go with it, to a more reasonalbe state. And many are out there wooing new businesses to come, not chasing them away.

 

 

You betcha, just ask California. Nevada and Arizona just love California tax and spend socialists for all the businesses they've driven into those states.

[ThudMaker]

I don't necessarily disagree with this. I was just objecting to the idea that "Corporations don't pay taxes, people do". It seems to me to be a slogan that doesn't stand up to much scrutiny. It seems to me that both people and corporations respond in mostly the same ways. If we set personal income tax rates to highly people won't have much incentive to work.

+10,000

[bbl]

 

 

Since you're a teacher, could you tell us what's happened recently to physical education, financial education, arts, and nutritional education? All major factors in healthy living.

 

Is your school doing it's best to teach it's students how to live healthy lives? You know, so they can stay out of the hospital and reduce our tax burden?

 

Do you teach your students about the phamacutical industry? About how much profit it makes? About it's "relationship" with physicians?

 

Do you teach your students about fast food, trans fats, high fructose corn syrup? Diabetes?

 

Do you teach them about relationships, friendships, communication, trust, how to acknowledge repressed anxiety, anger, fear, and self doubt?

 

You know, education and prevention?

 

Just askin'.

[RSBro]

I don't necessarily disagree with this. I was just objecting to the idea that "Corporations don't pay taxes, people do". It seems to me to be a slogan that doesn't stand up to much scrutiny. It seems to me that both people and corporations respond in mostly the same ways. If we set personal income tax rates to highly people won't have much incentive to work.

Yeah I debunked that a page or so back. They certainly do, although it just comes from different places for each. Or can, but doesn't have to.
Someone has to decide where the check is written from, but bottom line is- it still gets written!

[SunRaFan]

Well, the relevance is that if it's not worth it for me to employ you, you aren't going to have a job.

 

 

My problem is that the opposite is also true. If the job doesn't pay enough money, nobody will take it. Taxes are a disincentive for anybody who is trying to make money. If we were just trying to get rid of this disincentive, we wouldn't have taxes. The problem with this is that then we can't fund the government.

 

I have no idea if corporate taxes in Illinois are too high or too low. I just don't think corporate taxes are inherently bad which was what the original statement seemed to suggest.

[bbl]

Hell yes. If you need ANY more proof of why this "let's all just get along and everyone will have money and we'll all be happy" Commie bull{censored} just need look at the Katrina absolute disaster when the gov't. was giving out free money to all of these victims, some of whom were spending it on booze, strippers and sex change ops. Yeah. That's what's wrong with this country. Everyone just doesn't have enough "blowing cash".

You can't use exceptions to prove a rule.