DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Everything Else... Obama labor department misleading on unemployment numbers

ok, so whats the solution.

I'll ask again. whats the solution. cause you keep mentioning taxes, and taxes keep getting lowered, yet companies are still leaving.


somethings not working.

The simple answer is jobs.

The complex answer is a need for human capital.

We have one of the highest tax rates in the world. We need to keep lowering them. We are on par with places like Chad and Camaroon.


http://taxfoundation.org/article/corporate-income-tax-rates-around-world-2014

Those are statutory tax rates, not effective.

Our effective corporate tax rate is around 12-15%.

Our tax system is extremely lax and easy to manipulate.

I was just posting the tax rates. I think as the 3rd highest, we better hope to hell they can be manipulated down. If not, we will be like Chad and Camaroon.

If we went by posted tax rates, my personal income tax would be listed at almost half of what I actually pay.

If the chart says X, but in reality I pay Y, then X isn't an accurate figure.

If I offer you a rose, and then slap a wad of horse manure into your palm, I didn't give you a rose.

Right. Deductions.

And people think going back to a 70% tax rate for the "rich" will solve problems. Heck, make it a 90% rate - no one paid that % in the past, did they?

I agree completely.

I mention taxes because you posted a ridiculously absurd article on.... wait for it.... TAXES. I didn't mention it, you did. I simply offered rebuttal to the hack job article you posted.

I gave you the solution.... find out WHY companies are really moving. Don't be befuddled if, however, you find that the reason is actually taxes.


Companies don't move their headquarters willy-nilly for no reason - they do it for one reason and one reason alone - money. So, find out how & why they are profiting from moving overseas, then you have your cause. Once you have a causation, then you can start thinking about ways to keep them here.

Clinton tried to get universal, government supported healthcare through ..... but for the most part, he just stole the Republican agenda, and signed it into law, while beating the on PR, and beating them over the head with their own passed laws. It was an amazing piece of adept political maneuvering.

In the late 40s and early 50s? National pride, end of a world war, followed by ramp up to the Korean War, more advanced manufacturing technology, higher shipping cost and risk... this notion that if Taxes do A, then B will certainly happen is an economic fallacy. There are a dozen other variables that can affect what happens.


Global economics. A lot of those companies that didn't move or relocate production in the 90s became the big companies that did move more recently. Why? Because cheaper labor countries came on line with the technology to make the same stuff we were making here only for a fraction of the cost. Back in the late 40s early 50s, Asian and 3rd world production facilities were crap, products were built to last, there was a sense of national pride. Several things have changed, first is that the products they made that people bought and kept for many years became disposable. We had the same phone on our wall at home for 20 years, how long does somebody keep a cell phone today? 2 years? Second Asian and 3rd world production is now almost indistinguishable from ours with things like electronics, only it's much cheaper. Lastly, there has been a shift to profit over national pride.

Throw in the fact that global shipping has become normalized and safer and cheaper due to larger tankers, greater cargo loads, etc.

Your argument is the equivalent of saying that you loved your wife when you were younger, poorer, hungry, and optimistic about the future, etc.. then you became wealthier, more successful, achieved many of your goals that the two of you had dreamed of but now you are divorced. Money must be the reason... No, dozens of other things changed in your relationship over that period, any one of them or some combination is the reason you are now divorced.

The effective tax rate is quite reasonable. What I think people fail to realize, is that in order to lower the stated rate, you would need to close some loopholes and deductions to even things out. A complete overhaul of the income tax system would need to take place.

When the effective rate is around 15% that does not make our tax rate that high on a global scale. Yet people seem to pontificate a rate that is not paid at all.

At least a part of the issue lies in the fact that companies still don't want to pay the 15% and will still move to save money. So those that pose that lower taxes will solve the problem are suggesting that we lower our taxes so much, that we would have a lower rate than almost anyone on the globe to solve this problem.

I believe that's a very unrealistic solution.

Pitt. You are as old a friend as I have on this board. Loopholes, schmoopholes. They are legit tax breaks. The USA was once THE safe haven to do business. Companies weren't worried about a takeover by the government and offered a business friendly environment, as well as the place you wanted to sell goods. We could tax at a higher rate.

That isn't the case today.


Some misguided souls can talk about personal tax rates when the discussion is about coporate tax rates. The fact is our coporate tax rates are high and companies are moving to placs that offer better rates and now provide the safe haven we once pretty much had locked up.


Too bad we don't anymore. So to compete, we can tax more or cut rates. You tell me which is what we better do. Here is a clue....why do you think places like Chad have high tax rates?



I'll tell you why. They are a bunch of dumb.... goofs who have to tax every last dime out of every last idiot to still be doing business there.

Some said jobs is the key.....it is, but to have those you better have coporations set up in your country. That is where the money is. You want the compamies located in your country where they are paying real money to people and not just paying for labor jobs. There is nothing wrong with labor job, just to make that clear, but you want companies hiring lots of engineers, accountants, chemists, managers, etc. Those are your middle class jobs. If you get rid of those, which we have been doing as good job of the last few decades, then you end up with a labor class workforce which can't compete on a world basis because you are kidding no one if you think our labor force can work cheaper than the force in China as an example.



Later.....time for me to bug out again

It's actually easier to shred corporate taxes via deduction than it is personal.

They can literally get to $0 paid with millions and billions of not only income, but profit.

Jobs didn't leave America because taxes got too high. They left because we outsourced entire industries, and many others were replaced by machines.

Excellent point

Here's a question, I heard Pat Buchanan on Hannity (back before the '12 election, I don't listen to any of them anymore).

He made the case that back in the 90's, China cut the value of their currency in half. Making their labor that much cheaper, and subsequently the goods they produce that much cheaper also.

How much would a Hi Def television cost if it were made here? An iPhone?

How on earth do we recover from something like that?

There are days I regret not going to college (at my age, I probably would've made it past the 'college degree but no job era), but then I'm glad I'm a highly skilled tradesman due to the fact that the people that still have money are hiring me.

Actually Peen, what many corporations are doing is buying a fledging company in another country simply to say that is now where they're headquartered to avoid paying taxes here.

http://billmoyers.com/2015/02/10/us-companies-stash-billions-overseas-tax-free/

They're called inversions. They are actually U.S. companies with the exception that they have officially "moved their headquarters". It's definitely a loophole in the tax code.

So it really doesn't change the jobs they produce, it simply exempts them from paying U.S. taxes.

I don't really know why I ever peruse the "Everything Else" forum but I feel like I see this thread or one just like every year or so regardless of administration.

There's no great conspiracy here people. The BLS put's out pretty little speadsheets and graphs every month that show U1 through U6 (unemployed + marginally/ under employed).

Super secret BLS data... they put on the internet every single month.


U3 is the official unemp rate but people who don't like the current administration will always point to U6 and say "THEY"RE LYING TO US!!!". People who want to get face time on Fox during Obama's administration will do with this line. If Romney were pres right now, it'd be some low level democrat pundit making the same hay on CNBC. Every point this guy makes is always true. People falling off the rolls will improve the numbers. Has been true since the BLS began keeping this data.

Yes, the gap between U3 and U6 is greater since the beginning of the financial collapse in 07... but not dramatically. In fact, it's been a pretty tight corollary for decades.

excellent chart.

i understand the situation now. thanks.