Tim Cook says Apple won't repatriate money to US 'until there's a fair rate'

originally posted by: UKTruth
This is basically an endorsement of Trump.
It's not rocket science. If taxes are low for business then everyone wins.
I can never quite understand why people let jealousy of the rich cloud their judgement and seem to prefer punishment for the rich even if it means they are worse off themselves.

It's not jealousy. It's anger.

The concentration of riches is outrageous.

So much wealth in the hands of so few, combined with their insatiable desire to lobby, influence & direct government policy to their own advantage ... to the exclusion of everyone else ... is as corrupt as sin itself.

That's what people are really angry about. They feel disenfranchised by lobbyists and the rich, career politicians they serve.

It's time for change.

originally posted by: peck420

originally posted by: jacobe001
Likewise, if it is the consumers that pay the corporate tax, then it is also the consumer that is paying for Corporate Lobbying and we need to find a way to have that come out of shareholder and exec pay instead.

That still, ultimately, comes from the consumer.

The only way to end corporate lobbying is to end all political lobbying. I don't really know if that is good or bad, in the grand scheme of things.

You make it seem like we have consumer oriented capitalism, which we don't
It is Corporate Led Shareholder Driven Capitalism instead because they control the politicians.

It is a lot easier to control a couple hundred politicians than it is to control millions of consumers, hence lobbyists.

When we had Consumer Oriented Capitalism, we had higher wages, higher quality products and and business was competing to outdo each other with better products.

Since Corporations took over the government, wages have stagnated, the quality of products has dropped, and CEO and Shareholder Pay has gone through the roof.

A perfect example of this is Monsanto lobbying to not be required to have GMO Labels on their product.
They do not want the consumer to have a choice because they know they would loose money.

Corporations and Banks need to be thrown out of our government.
They are there to only serve themselves and their shareholders, not the citizens, consumers, nor this country.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: TheShippingForecast


It's not jealousy. It's anger.

The concentration of riches is outrageous.

I second this notion
30 Years ago during the cold war we were pounded in the head on how good we had it in this country compared to the Soviet Union where there was extreme income inequality.

In the Soviet Union, those connected to the government were well off while everyone else was worse off.
We are now the Soviet Union where Corporate and Banking Lobbyists along with their puppet politicians enjoy the spoils from an ever increasing extreme inequality.

The middle class is dying and with records amounts of money being handed to politicians by deep pockets, I see the situation only getting worse.

Those all for this arrangement are only ensuring an increasing base of people against them.

originally posted by: UKTruth
Not at personal percentage level. That would only be true if all other variables remain static, which of course is not the goal of lowering corporate taxes. The goal is to get more people into proper jobs (not the kind of jobs Obama has created that keep people in poverty whilst they work for peanuts). Better and more jobs means more income tax overall, whilst keeping rates low at the individual level.

That unfortunately is fantasy land unless we move away from a service sector economy. We can't move away from a service sector economy while remaining globally competitive though. It's only possible if we become isolationist so we're not competing with the quality of life and wages of poorer nations.

The problem there though is it means heavy government intervention into how companies function. It's the exact opposite of deregulated free market capitalism which have been the magic words in our government for the past 40 years.

originally posted by: UKTruth
What would you rather have:

1) an extra $3000 a year for you and an extra $100k a year for a business owner OR
2) nothing for you (or maybe even less than you have now) and business owners paying more

Can I vote for neither?

The problem with #1 is that of wealth inequality. When you have 3% of the gains of the business owner, they wind up with a disproportionate fraction of the lobbying power which means the government is going to favor their interests, not yours. It also makes for an "unfair" tax system, because the bulk of the income is on the business owner, which means they should be paying the bulk of the taxes. With a flatter system such as 30k for you and 73k for the business owner, everyone still profits and the owner is rewarded for their risk/work/luck/whatever, while it allows for a more balanced taxing system. In other words, at 3/100 they win, you lose.

The problem with #2 is that it's purely destructive, no one wins.

Since you seem to be thinking about this in a game theory sort of way, it's not #1 that you should rationally consider because everyone gets something. It's option #3. With the first two presented options you lose either way, so instead you should leverage the win that someone else can get from #1, to get yourself more.

originally posted by: jacobe001
You make it seem like we have consumer oriented capitalism, which we don't.

Consumers are the absolute power in the current economic structure. Funny how consumers have had no problems changing business' for , quite frankly, trivial slights, yet can't manage to do the same to a 'corporation'. Apparently, the average person is intimidated by size.

It is Corporate Led Shareholder Driven Capitalism instead because they control the politicians.

Until the 1% becomes the 99%, they will never 'control the politicians', unless the 99% are so apathetic that they allow it. Is the electoral college, themselves, not voted into their positions?

It is a lot easier to control a couple hundred politicians than it is to control millions of consumers, hence lobbyists.

See above.

When we had Consumer Oriented Capitalism, we had higher wages, higher quality products and and business was competing to outdo each other with better products.

Since Corporations took over the government, wages have stagnated, the quality of products has dropped, and CEO and Shareholder Pay has gone through the roof.

The only 'switch' that has occurred has been the complacency consumers currently exhibit.

A perfect example of this is Monsanto lobbying to not be required to have GMO Labels on their product.
They do not want the consumer to have a choice because they know they would loose money.

Yet, it is common knowledge that Monsanto makes GMO's. So, consumers have a choice. They make it. Generally for the most price effective product.

Corporations and Banks need to be thrown out of our government.
They are there to only serve themselves and their shareholders, not the citizens, consumers, nor this country.

The bulk of the shareholders in the US are consumers...and citizens.

You have explicitly expressed my point for me...it is always someone else's fault, no need for the average consumer to put their head up and pay attention. Just let someone else solve all the issues. Well, someone else is solving them. And, yup, just like the vast majority of average people, they are making sure that they benefit from it.

If you don't like how they are doing it, it is time to do it yourself.

they should have low corporate tax to encourage growth but extremely high tax on the profits that are made by shareholders.
shareholders don`t actually DO anything to create the profits that the company makes they are just parasites that suck profits out of the company. money making money should be discouraged through extremely high taxes.

originally posted by: peck420

originally posted by: jacobe001
You make it seem like we have consumer oriented capitalism, which we don't.

Consumers are the absolute power in the current economic structure.

We'll have to disagree
Politicians pay attention to those with deep pockets
The deep pockets get deeper
Politicians pay attention to those with deep pockets
The deep pockets get deeper

It is a never ending cycle with a bad ending

What we end up with is an aristocracy we fought to get away from and end.

The consumer is not organized and on the same page to fight back as corporations are that band together with politicians.
Look at the TPP, NAFTA, and so on, they were drafted and created by many organized business coming together of which labor, citizens, consumers did not have a say in.

That is right out of the Rockefeller playbook
"The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries"

These guys are not capitalists, but fascists where they think they should have all the power and wealth and noone else should have a say.

We would need to have Consumer groups come together so they are on the same page
The same way we need Organized Labor formed to fight back which is at an all time low in this country

You see, this is all REQUIRED under capitalism where everyone is entitled to bargaining power, but Corporate and Banking lobbyists want ALL THE POWER for themselves.

They need to be thrown out of the Government

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: UKTruth
What would you rather have:

1) an extra $3000 a year for you and an extra $100k a year for a business owner OR
2) nothing for you (or maybe even less than you have now) and business owners paying more

Can I vote for neither?

The problem with #1 is that of wealth inequality. When you have 3% of the gains of the business owner, they wind up with a disproportionate fraction of the lobbying power which means the government is going to favor their interests, not yours. It also makes for an "unfair" tax system, because the bulk of the income is on the business owner, which means they should be paying the bulk of the taxes. With a flatter system such as 30k for you and 73k for the business owner, everyone still profits and the owner is rewarded for their risk/work/luck/whatever, while it allows for a more balanced taxing system. In other words, at 3/100 they win, you lose.

The problem with #2 is that it's purely destructive, no one wins.

Since you seem to be thinking about this in a game theory sort of way, it's not #1 that you should rationally consider because everyone gets something. It's option #3. With the first two presented options you lose either way, so instead you should leverage the win that someone else can get from #1, to get yourself more.

Of course, it's better if its more than the 3% in the example. That's a variation on option 1. You have a CEO of one of the biggest companies in the world telling you what will happen if corporate taxes are lowered. It's really not that complicated, businesses need incentive not the punishment of heavy taxation.
We've reached a level of lunacy now where the notion of a successful business making more profit and growing to employ more people is seen as somehow a bad thing.
The harsh truth is the world is now full of lazy people who want hand outs and the terrifying thing is they have reached a critical mass.

originally posted by: TheShippingForecast

originally posted by: UKTruth
This is basically an endorsement of Trump.
It's not rocket science. If taxes are low for business then everyone wins.
I can never quite understand why people let jealousy of the rich cloud their judgement and seem to prefer punishment for the rich even if it means they are worse off themselves.

It's not jealousy. It's anger.

The concentration of riches is outrageous.

So much wealth in the hands of so few, combined with their insatiable desire to lobby, influence & direct government policy to their own advantage ... to the exclusion of everyone else ... is as corrupt as sin itself.

That's what people are really angry about. They feel disenfranchised by lobbyists and the rich, career politicians they serve.

It's time for change.

Is the average person able to run a hospital? If not, why should the average person own a hospital? I think that would be disastrous.

Do you know anything about running a restaurant? If not, why should you then own a restaurant?

That's what wealth is. That's why wealth is concentrated in such few hands.

Income is not even close to as concentrated as wealth is.

originally posted by: Tardacus
they should have low corporate tax to encourage growth but extremely high tax on the profits that are made by shareholders.
shareholders don`t actually DO anything to create the profits that the company makes they are just parasites that suck profits out of the company. money making money should be discouraged through extremely high taxes.

Now you are talking

There needs to be a drastic change to the corrupt investment practices that the elite enjoy - including putting a stop to the ridiculous levels of leverage that allow them to make fortunes from money they don't actually have in the first place.

You will notice that in the current economic model the big shareholders are making a fortune whilst everyone else suffers - a widening of the wealth gap.

a reply to: intrptr

Corporations don't pay taxes.

They just pass on the costs to the consumer.

originally posted by: UKTruth

The harsh truth is the world is now full of lazy people who want hand outs and the terrifying thing is they have reached a critical mass.

I look around this country and see hard working people making less and less wages so that shareholders and owners can make more and more money and they are the lazy ones?

I have friends in the construction industry that made twice as much 20 years ago until lobbyists flooded this country with illegal labor so that they could make bank and these hard workers are the problem wanting handouts?

I dare you to say that to some construction workers, working their butts off.

It is far from reaching critical mass until people organize and fight back which we are a long ways off from
That is how corporate lobbyists play the game.
They organize among themselves, build media brainwashing presentations and then go purchase puppet politicians


You have no problem with citizens doing the same thing?
Since most citizens do not have deep pockets, we'll settle for spreading the message on the Internet, friends and family

We do not have people like Trump gaining more popularity for nothing, though I think he is a plant...
Trump is to soft anyways

I'd vote for anyone that would say they would throw out Corporate and Banking Lobbyists out of DC

originally posted by: JDeLattre89
The corporate tax is fair?

No the corporate tax is at 40% with an additional tax for your individual taxes in your own bracket when you collect the profits. So almost half the money is immediately claimed by the gubbernment and then they tax you again for daring to claim what you made.

Wake up people! People go into business to make money, not throw it away. So if Ireland for example is giving a tax rate of say 15% in order to attract revenue and businesses, why would a company NOT go there and abandon a country with a 40% tax rate. I just wish I could do the same with a small business.

-Affordable care act.
-Worker's comp
-Financial book keeping overhead

Not going to hurt Apple,Dow Chemical,CitiGroup or Exxon much but will kill small/medium business and mom and pop stores.

What do you think a $15 minimum wage will do to small business?

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: UKTruth
Not at personal percentage level. That would only be true if all other variables remain static, which of course is not the goal of lowering corporate taxes. The goal is to get more people into proper jobs (not the kind of jobs Obama has created that keep people in poverty whilst they work for peanuts). Better and more jobs means more income tax overall, whilst keeping rates low at the individual level.

That unfortunately is fantasy land unless we move away from a service sector economy. We can't move away from a service sector economy while remaining globally competitive though. It's only possible if we become isolationist so we're not competing with the quality of life and wages of poorer nations.

The problem there though is it means heavy government intervention into how companies function. It's the exact opposite of deregulated free market capitalism which have been the magic words in our government for the past 40 years.

Your post suggests that Western countries can not compete with countries like China on manufacturing... you really believe that? Have you actually thought through what would happen if quality higher priced products (unlike the utter crap available form China) were the standard fare in Western countries?

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Tardacus
they should have low corporate tax to encourage growth but extremely high tax on the profits that are made by shareholders.
shareholders don`t actually DO anything to create the profits that the company makes they are just parasites that suck profits out of the company. money making money should be discouraged through extremely high taxes.

Now you are talking

There needs to be a drastic change to the corrupt investment practices that the elite enjoy - including putting a stop to the ridiculous levels of leverage that allow them to make fortunes from money they don't actually have in the first place.

You will notice that in the current economic model the big shareholders are making a fortune whilst everyone else suffers - a widening of the wealth gap.

Agree with you here
If you want to see who controls America, look no further than the financial sector

originally posted by: jacobe001

originally posted by: UKTruth

The harsh truth is the world is now full of lazy people who want hand outs and the terrifying thing is they have reached a critical mass.

I look around this country and see hard working people making less and less wages so that shareholders and owners can make more and more money and they are the lazy ones?

I have friends in the construction industry that made twice as much 20 years ago until lobbyists flooded this country with illegal labor so that they could make bank and these hard workers are the problem wanting handouts?

I dare you to say that to some construction workers, working their butts off.

It is far from reaching critical mass until people organize and fight back which we are a long ways off from
That is how corporate lobbyists play the game.
They organize among themselves, build media brainwashing presentations and then go purchase puppet politicians


You have no problem with citizens doing the same thing?
Since most citizens do not have deep pockets, we'll settle for spreading the message on the Internet, friends and family

We do not have people like Trump gaining more popularity for nothing, though I think he is a plant...
Trump is to soft anyways

I'd vote for anyone that would say they would throw out Corporate and Banking Lobbyists out of DC

I am talking about the lazy people who are only after hand outs - they are growing in number at a an alarming rate.
People who WANT to work can't get jobs because the jobs that are created are crap jobs - lowly paid and part time.
To bring jobs back to those that want to work, you need to encourage business. That is the only long term sustainable option.

originally posted by: jacobe001

originally posted by: UKTruth

The harsh truth is the world is now full of lazy people who want hand outs and the terrifying thing is they have reached a critical mass.

I look around this country and see hard working people making less and less wages so that shareholders and owners can make more and more money and they are the lazy ones?

remove all taxes and replace them with the fair tax system.

I have friends in the construction industry that made twice as much 20 years ago until lobbyists flooded this country with illegal labor so that they could make bank and these hard workers are the problem wanting handouts?

We need strong unions and worker owned coops to compete with them to drive up the wages
I dare you to say that to some construction workers, working their butts off.

It is far from reaching critical mass until people organize and fight back which we are a long ways off from
That is how corporate lobbyists play the game.
They organize among themselves, build media brainwashing presentations and then go purchase puppet politicians

They should ban corporate lobbying and earmarks. Buying government representation.

You have no problem with citizens doing the same thing?
Since most citizens do not have deep pockets, we'll settle for spreading the message on the Internet, friends and family

We do not have people like Trump gaining more popularity for nothing, though I think he is a plant...
Trump is to soft anyways

I'd vote for anyone that would say they would throw out Corporate and Banking Lobbyists out of DC

Lobbying should be banned.

originally posted by: John_Rodger_Cornman

-Affordable care act.

You can blame Obamacare on the Pharma and Insurance Industry Lobbyists
They were running out of other people's money and needed a bail out

Obama care never started with people protesting for "Free Healthcare"
It never started with the Middle or Lower Class

It started with Lobbyists and their Puppet Politicians and they needed a Media Campaign to sell it to the masses.
It is not unlike the wars we get involved with where "want anyone think of the children"

www.opensecrets.org...

Top Lobbying Industries

Pharmaceuticals/Health Products $3,146,090,212
Insurance $2,190,651,832

originally posted by: John_Rodger_Cornman

Lobbying should be banned.

Thanks, I agree with everything you said
It will be a site to see, the day I see a Wall Street Banker or Multinational CEO walking down the street in front of DC with a picket sign like every other American.