DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus General Electric seeks urgent asset sales as bond fears rise

I can only pray that someone, somewhere is writing this down.

Hence my word choices when replying to you.

You are so easily impressed. Your man is back and I can feel the love. You guys deserve each other. Just don't shop for a wedding cake in Indy.

I would suggest that first you should learn what all the words mean, in order to do so you may find it helpful to learn to spell them correctly.

Nelson, I've decided to intervene in the normal course of things and let you in on a secret. Let me first say that I do kind of like you because you are pretty damn smart and you often challenge my thinking. That said bro, you lack filters and good common sense. Not that you have no common sense, but little things like knowing when stuff is not going your way or when to quit... That's why you are so easily baited into blowing your top and catching long bans. That's about 50% of what happens around here. The other 50% is people wishing they could have real debates. WISHING.

But I'm going to declare you the winner in all of our debates today and future, so you can feel good about yourself and 40 can find new ways to worship you. You are welcome. You may leave quietly now, or continue rambling as if what you have to say is actually important to anyone but you.

So you admit you have no effective counter and have been reduced to hurling childish insults. Expected.

I have no use for filters and no concern whatsoever for bans. The only things I find upsetting here are the incredible levels of stupidity which are so tremendously common.

Your regular and increasingly nonsensical replies indicated a definite interest.

Your false statements have been destroyed as you raised them. You have nothing else to offer. So, you quit, while attempting to claim victory in your exit. Typical. Very Hue like of you.

You really think I have not been dealing with such crap my entire life? Seriously? To think there have been some on here who have claimed to have "schooled" me. Bizarre. This is what it looks like. Each individual invalid assertion obliterated, point by point. False narratives eliminated, attempts to obfuscate and confuse pierced, tottering belief systems shambolicized.

To give you your due, you are marginally more effective than Swish, who is simply not equipped for such a discussion. For me, there are not really very many who are.

It ain't bragging if you can do it.

As for real debates, haven't seen one here for a long, long time. There was the religion discussion with the guy who I swear was Jesuit trained. He ending up going off the deep end claiming everything was philosophy. Ah, well.

Nelson, I've shut you down a few times now. It always ends with you being banned. Whatever grandiose mental picture of yourself that you have created; the truth stands, I am much smarter than you.

Explain the loopholes to us. That seems to be a popular term for you.


Companies take whatever tax relief is allowed by law, just as you or I....at least I do.....so explain how they can get around the law by using loopholes...whatever that means.


My understanding is either you can claim a legal break or you can't

Listing their IP as registered in foreign countries to avoid American taxes. Remittance was a big issue a few years ago. I think most business have easy tax breaks that are not afforded to small business owners. The largest companies benefiting most from various tax breaks that they receive and negotiate that other, smaller businesses cannot do.

Intellectual Properties are registered in foreign countries in order to gain protection from their patent laws, and have little to nothing to do with taxes.

You think a lot of things that are just not true.

There are few, if any, tax breaks or laws that apply only to big corporations and not small ones.

The difference is that many only offer a very small percentage of relief, and for smaller companies or individuals the amount of benefit is not worth the effort. For larger companies, the small percentage is calculated on a much, much larger total amount of dollars, making the time and expense of qualifying for the break worthwhile.

Larger companies can take advantage of many levels of efficiency and economies of scale. Mass production makes products less expensive and more available to the consumer. Many smaller companies just cannot compete, unless they find a niche or additional benefit to the consumer, which the consumer is willing to pay for.

Walmart is not successful because they are huge and uncaring and trample competitors. Walmart is successful because they make available the products the consumer wants, at a price that consumers are willing to pay, which their competitors generally cannot match. Customers vote with their wallets.

Whatever. Spin this.


https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/09/business/economy/corporate-tax-report.html

Legal tax breaks and tax dodging are two separate things completely.

Tax Change Aims to Lure Intellectual Property Back to the U.S.
Tech firms and drug makers often hold foreign rights for their IP in a company based in a low-tax country
https://www.wsj.com/articles/companies-explore-whether-u-s-can-replace-double-irish-1516789801


The next time you feel the idiotic impulse to inject yourself into a conversation, you should at least check that you're right before posting.

You can't prove you're the smartest man in the room, when you're constantly wrong.

IP protections come through trade agreements, if they didn't everyone would register all their IP in China to totes "gain protection from their patent laws"

lmfao

Ok.

Less than 40%, paid no taxes, Once, or more, in an 8 year period. That would work out to a per-year frequency of around 5%.

That would mean 5, out of every 100, each year.

Oh, the humanity.

Ah, you are moving the goalposts.

The article discusses patent registrations, HELD BY FOREIGN SUBSIDIARIES. This would be a different discussion.

Companies own foreign subsidiaries for a wide variety of reasons. Almost all of which directly involve increased profits. Many countries understand the value of productive assets operating inside their borders, and move to attract them by taking a smaller percentage of what those companies earn.

Many socialist types look at profitable companies as simply a source of revenue they can milk until it runs dry. Then they will whine because the company closes its doors or moves elsewhere. Taxes are a cost of doing business, and a business, just like any individual, will act to reduce costs and increase profits.

You want companies to stay in the US, it's real simple. Make sure there is a benefit to them for doing so. Lower their taxes, as detailed in the article you posted. Provide a labor force with a good work ethic. Protect their factories and property rights. Offer them a stable currency, an accessible market, good infrastructure. Understand that their decision is a simple calculation. What you personally want or believe is a good thing is not relevant.

"Do not bind the mouths of the kine that treads the grain"

China has virtually no respect for any patent laws, of any kind. Browse Alibaba for cheap knock-offs of US patented items. Trade agreements do not change this, the knowledge that if they do it to us, we will do it to them, does, coupled with sufficient patented properties to make the exchange roughly equivalent.

You could make an effort to learn some basic economics, or just continue throwing insults and name calling, whatever blows your dress up.

Oh, and "work ethic" is not some hidden dog whistle for racism, it is simple, plain, easily understandable english for ............... WORK ETHIC.

So you're not going to tell me what legal bribe was paid to the city and state that actually landed those jobs your community didn't offer a big enough bribe for. That's what I thought.

Your example was a failed attempt to land those jobs. So we don't even know how much the company was paid at all do we? lmao

AGAIN, like most of what is called corporate welfare, instead of handing over actual cash for absolutely nothing at all, what actually happens is that, in exchange for THOUSANDS of jobs for the community, the city agrees to take less taxes, for a period of time, from a corporation.

If the corporation does not take the deal, and does not provide THOUSANDS of good-paying jobs to the community, for decades, then the city gets absolutely no tax dollars from that company whatsoever.

If you think that actual cash money was exchanged, then I guess you had never been to Marysville, Ohio before Honda built the factory there, have you? They could have provided a few buckets of horse poop but not much else.

I understand you dislike the concept involved with JOBS and would prefer to hand over buckets of cash to people who provide absolutely no benefit to the community whatsoever, but this type of arrangement is a business deal and not stealing from working people. Honda's location in that place absolutely transformed that community, and the jobs, that people work at, provided a source of tax dollars than can then be stolen, and gifted to people who have done no work to earn them, so it should make you happy.

If you were selling your house, and I offered to buy it right now, for cash, but wanted you to provide a cheeseburger, would you throw that in on the deal or complain about being asked to provide a bribe?

you know its a bad deal with Tucker Carlson agrees with Cortez that this is a bribe.

Just can't accept you are wrong, huh? lol@u

Which part did you fail to understand?

Be specific, and I will explain in more detail.

Generalized, non-specific immature whining I will ignore.

Do have yourself a good time trolling, though.

There you go and don't try to move the goalpost.

You want me to explain what somebody else said? From PerfectSpiral?

Well, OK, but maybe you could point out specific words or phrases you fail to understand?

I already posted a pretty complete response to that post, so, maybe, if you could point to what you failed to understand in what I, myself, posted, I can amplify and elaborate on those portions you did not get.

I was referring to this post. You do not like to be WRONG. Thanks for playing.

Again, point out the specific words or phrases you failed to understand, and I will attempt to explain more clearly.

If you are just trolling, again, while I do find it amusing it does get tiresome.

If you truly believe what I said was, in fact, wrong, point out exactly what you as characterizing as such. Is it the math? It is grade-school level, I have assumed in the past that most adults would get it, but sadly, I have come to realize that many do not.

If not the math, then what?

Third and last time I will ask.

The ice cream cone rape guy has no tolerance for immature whining.

Troll B Gone!

Coming soon to a location for mature, intelligent adult discussion near you!

New and Improved!

The ice cream cone rape guy is here for mature, intelligent adult discussion.

Nelson, this is called getting pwned.

That's right folks, New and Improved TROLL B GONE will eliminate the constant droning whine, and also prevents that nagging sensation that you need to scrape something from the bottom of your shoe! No annoying smell, no harmful chemicals! Safe for pets, too! (see label for restrictions on pets that are very old, and shiver a lot.)

New TROLL B GONE! Get some today!

Remember, our new Troll Targeting Technology won't miss the troll, and neither will you!

OldCold, I asked you three times, you failed. I shut YOU down. If you want to continue trolling, try someone else. If you want to quote the troll, go ahead, I have an extra can of TROLL B GONE ready to go.

One warning is all you get. Your choice.

What was your question?

You're not that stupid. I asked for specific details. Put up or shut up.

No more insults. No more name calling. Further trolling will not be tolerated.

I am not interested in juvenile, playground games. If that is the best you got, you're gone. Bring whatever you have. Make certain it's good, or don't bother.

To quote James Tiberius Kirk, "I grow annoyed at your foolishness".

Seriously, what was your question?

EDIT: Nevermind I went back and actually read the thread and the articles except the WSJ which was locked and I'm not going to subscribe.

You are right on most of your points throughout the thread. I'm not surprised but you are actually very well versed on the topic of corporate taxation.

The only places I see that you are at least partially wrong is:

Thinking corporations that take advantage of special taxation are the only ones practicing corporate welfare. Corporate welfare is primarily used as a term by the left to describe companies that pay a non-living wage to employees. Those employees often then need public assistance to survive and the companies take advantage of this situation effectively passing part of the employee cost/benefits on to the taxpayers dime.

The term Corporate Welfare is used in other ways, but best known on the left for what I described. Although the dictionary definition closely fits what you described; "government support or subsidy of private business, such as by tax incentives."

The second place I would argue with you is that companies do not use loopholes, tax incentives, and any other legal trick they can find to lower their taxes to zero. SURE THEY DO. Not all, I agree, but most with an tax attorney worth his salt do.

I don't like that, but it's absolutely legal. So with that available to them, why does GE continue to ask for tax breaks? Greed comes to mind, but you actually nailed it in your answer even if you don't understand that you did.

Corporations feel that taxes, any taxes, are bad for business. They are money spent without a direct return. But they are wrong.

Roads, schools, transport infrastructure, etc. are all built with tax dollars. These companies benefit from these things. Most benefit more than their employees or the communities they reside in because outside the walls of their facilities, these things are necessary for them to operate and conduct business. You can't run a business with no roads to ship products, no trains to bring materials, no schools to train your drones...

So when a company works hard to reduce their taxes to zero or much less than they should pay, they are taking advantage of people who pay taxes on their wages.

CEOs have a fiduciary duty to maximize profits and pay dividends. When they fail to do this they are running their company irresponsibly. The problem is that means the system is rigged for them to do whatever they can to pay as little in taxes as possible, pay the lowest wages possible, and drive profits come hell or high water.

When you demonize liberals for wanting to tax corporations, you are agreeing with this rigged system. Liberals however think that corporations and communities can have a much more symbiotic relationship where those tax dollars train better employees, provide better infrastructure, and more innovation. These things lead to a much higher profit margin and better living conditions for the working class. But that's some socialist BS that cons don't want to hear.

Anyway Nelson, You were 99.9 percent right as far as I'm concerned. I really was just in this thread baiting you and trolling you and 40. You can usually tell when I'm doing that by the brevity of my posts. I hope you can let this go now and toddle off to bed. You seem stressed and could probably use a good night's sleep.

Government Incentives To Attract Jobs Are Terrible Deals For Taxpayers

State and local governments often spend large sums of taxpayer money in order to convince a company to open a new factory, warehouse, or office in their community or even to keep an existing one there. These deals are beloved by politicians who get news coverage at the groundbreaking and can brag about bringing jobs to their voters' hometowns. Yet, when you examine the cost per job many of these state and local governments provide in tax breaks and infrastructure improvements, you often find that taxpayers are spending sums they have no hope of recapturing. Such overly generous business attraction incentive deals are terrible deals for taxpayers.

The recent enormous deal between Foxconn and the state of Wisconsin is currently placing this issue front and center. Wisconsin's state legislature has approved the deal's details and expects to pay out up to $3 billion over the next ten to fifteen years. As reported by Julia Horowitz for CNN, Foxconn, an electronics manufacturer based in Taiwan, stands to receive as much as $1.5 billion in wage subsidies, up to $1.35 billion toward factory and site construction, and a sales tax exemption on building materials they purchase that could be worth another $150 million. This $3 billion will be spent purportedly to attract somewhere between 3,000 and 13,000 jobs.

That works out to a mind-blowing $1,000,000 per job on the high end and a still expensive $230,000 per job on the low end if all 13,000 jobs materialize. Using data collected by the organization Good Jobs First in 2013, the chart included below displays the number of jobs attracted and the cost per job for over 200 of the largest business location-incentive deals done in the U.S. As you can see, it is very rare for government to give away $1 million per job and it has never been done for a deal with this many jobs. Even at the low end of the possible cost per job, the giveaway by Wisconsin to Foxconn is well above average.

Even worse, there is a big problem with deals such as this: unless the cost per job is quite low, they rarely payoff. To see why such deals make no economic sense, let's go through some numbers.

A $50,000 per year job produces perhaps $2,500 per year in state tax revenue and another $2,500 in tax revenue for local governments. When government gives away $100,000 per job, it would take 20 years at $5,000 per year in tax revenue to get the $100,000 back. However, the accounting gets worse in two ways: the government spending is likely to occur at the start of the time period so we need to account for the time value of money and those workers are also causing the government to spend money so not all of that $5,000 can truly be used to offset the tax breaks.

It is better to have money now rather than later; this is called the time value of money. If we adjust the tax revenue with a discount rate of 4% per year to account for this, the 20 year payback period becomes 42 years.

Then there is the question of if the jobs will be filled by locals or new residents moving in search of a job. If a currently unemployed Wisconsin resident already living near the Foxconn factory takes one of these jobs, great. Local governments are already paying to provide services to this family, so the tax revenue from their new income is gravy to the government and can be used to offset the incentives paid out to attract the jobs.

However, if the Foxconn factory brings new families to Wisconsin to fill some of those new jobs, local governments will have to pay the cost of providing additional services to those families. Roads, education, police protection, water and sewer services all cost money. In fact, local governments generally lose money on residential development; that is, homeowners don't pay cities and counties enough in tax revenue to cover the local government services they consume. In other words, none of the tax revenues collected by cities and counties from new families can really be used to "pay back" the incentives given to attract jobs; rather, they are used to cover costs. Some of the state tax revenue might be free for such purposes, but certainly not all of it.

What this means is that for every person filling one of these jobs who didn't already live in Wisconsin, the deal gets worse.

Typically in such deals, half the jobs go to people from outside the local community. Some of those might be from other areas of Wisconsin, but some will come from out-of-state. Wisconsin currently has an unemployment rate of 3.2%, so they are only so many workers available locally. Realistically, the payback period for a $100,000 per job deal is not 20 years, not 42 years, but somewhere between hundreds of years and never. At $230,000 or $1 million per job, there is no hope of recapturing the state funds spent from taxes on the company and its workers.

Politicians may try to convince voters (and taxpayers) that bringing in one major employer creates other jobs at companies supplying the first one, business support services such as printers and accountants, and local restaurants and shops. However, given the numbers we just went through, even a major employer like an automaker will not attract and support enough other jobs to make the numbers favorable for taxpayers. When politicians give away six-figure sums of taxpayer money to attract a new employer, don't think of it as an investment in the local economy. It is better thought of as a vote-buying scheme funded not with campaign contributions but with taxpayer dollars.



I am a professor of economics at The University of Georgia and consultant on economic issues to a variety of corporations and local governments. Taking a generally free market, libertarian perspective, I use economics as the lens to analyze government policies from the local... MORE

Jeffrey Dorfman is a professor of economics at The University of Georgia. His last popular press book is an e-book, Ending the Era of the Free Lunch.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffreydorf...s/#7633b666eff6

I hope these facts are specific enough.

Actually, they are not.

But, there is enough there to come to some nearly certain conclusions.

First, you read that, glossed over a LOT of details, and saw exactly what you wanted to see. I see what is actually there.

I read it carefully. I understand what all the words mean. I process all available information. You, Pit, did none of these things. As would a majority of people reading any article of similar detail, actually, it is a major reason so many of you are so confused and poorly informed.

The person who wrote this, is either strongly politically motivated, was paid to write a hit piece, or is incompetent to do his job.

Lets start with the title. Deals Are Bad. Not SOME deals are bad, not SOMETIMES these deals are bad, but DEALS ARE BAD, meaning all of them. Inaccurate.

Now, SOME of them certainly are, and this one certainly might be. I would need to see the actual contract language.

Lets look at those numbers. Is it 3 billion, or UP TO 3 billion? AS MUCH AS 1.5 billion in wage subsidies, and UP TO 1.35 in construction costs. COULD BE 150 million in sales tax waived, which is not an expenditure which is financed, it is uncollected taxes which would not exist if the deal was not done. Notice all those Qualifying Phrases. Here, buy a scratch-off ticket, you could win UP TO, even AS MUCH AS, a million dollars. Or Zilch.

Now, watch carefully. See if you can find the rabbit. This is a 3 billion dollar deal, after that initial paragraph. No qualifying phrases, the maximum payout is assumed. No "UP TO's" or "AS MUCH AS's", just the biggest possible number. AGAIN, up to 150 million is never paid out at all, under any circumstances.

The largest single piece, is 1.5 billion in wage subsidies. Now, wages are 1. tied to number of jobs, and 2. are paid out over a long period of time. Would it not make sense that the maximum amount of wage subsidies could only be paid out with the maximum number of jobs? And also be paid out over several years? This might not be so, at least with the time frame, though they usually are, but on maximum amount for maximum jobs, almost certainly.

But, he does calculations based on maximum payout, and minimum jobs, with immediate payout. This is almost certainly not the case, and is a clear scare tactic. He pulled the rabbit right out of his hat, or maybe someplace else.

He then does more calculations including the sales tax forgiveness, which is not an expenditure. Does not come out of pocket.

Next, he starts talking about cities losing money on RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. If he had used a period instead of a semicolon there, the next statement is a clear lie. Homeowners, IN NEW DEVELOPMENTS, maybe, but some at least will be using pre-existing homes. Perhaps a large percentage, maybe a small one, but certainly not ALL will be in new developments. You would almost think no city anywhere, ever, should ever grow in size.

Next, look at how follow-on benefits and increased revenue to other business are dismissed. Dude has been throwing around lots of numbers, and suddenly, has absolutely none to offer. No discussion of how extra money earned by the butcher is spent at the baker, the baker's extra money from the new jobs, AND THE BUTCHER, is spent at the candlestick maker, and so on and so forth. That money continues to circulate within the community, and any econ STUDENT reaching 2nd year understands this, a "professor" knows it so well that to omit it is an act of deliberate deception.

Now, I am somewhat familiar with Foxconn, they are a major player in my profession. Not a fan, somewhat of their products but mostly of their business practices. Fun Fact, they make a lot of Apple's electronics.

These arrangements are complex, and the cost and benefits are heavily layered. This may, or may not, be a good deal. What is CERTAIN, is that the information presented, and most importantly the information NOT PRESENTED, is just not complete enough to make a determination.

But, most certainly, if you have an axe to grind and do not read carefully, it will work for you. But not for me.

It would be like buying a used car, just looking at the outside and never looking under the hood or hearing the engine run. You can believe the sales pitch, or you can see it for what it is and refuse to be baffled by the bovine excrement.

I'm looking forward to the response.

Oldcold, if you would like a similar analysis of the errors and misconceptions in your post, I can do that for you.

But there will be a price to pay.

First, and by no means last, you will delete your response to me wherein you quoted the troll. If you EVER quote that virulent pustule to me again, you will disappear with it to the silent kiddy table where that garbage belongs.

I don't like trolls, they are dishonest lying sacks of crap that are worthless, useless wastes of space.

There's more, but that's a start. I gave you all fair warning a long time ago, as I have done many times and many places, you wanna play little-boy playground games, you will not like the way I play.

We love the way you play.

Cause you always end up getting yourself suspended lololol. I thought I held the record for most DT prison sentences, but you hold the record for longest sentences at a time.

Don't you dare take on more than you can handle!

Mans gotta know his limitations.