Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

OK, Richie, apply a little "solid thinking" to the situation with General Electric. GE didn't pay any taxes on their income in the U.S. at all last year. In fact, GE got a tax refund of $3.2 billion on taxes paid on prior years' income. This company should love doing business in the U.S.

So how many jobs has GE created in the U.S.? Sadly, even though GE can't get a better tax deal than paying nothing, they also haven't created any jobs in the U.S. since 2004. In 2004 GE employed 165,000 people in its U.S. operations. That employment declined steadily each year until the end of 2011, when GE's U.S. employment totaled only about 131,000 people.

So with maybe the most favorable tax deal of any large company--no taxes at all--GE cut it's U.S. employees by 34,000 jobs, a 21% cut in American employment. So in spite of enjoying a tremendously favorable tax deal, GE didn't create any jobs at all. In fact it cut jobs!

I don't know how you can cut GE's taxes to less than nothing, Richie. So again, like the MSNBC ad says, "Don't tax the job creators?...where are the jobs?"

Go ahead, apply a little solid thinking to this one Richie and tell us your findings and conclusions.

Then maybe you can take a crack at my original two questions. Your answers won't take a lot of words, but they will require a little "solid thinking".

Common sense tells me you're missing something important, whatever it is. If the business climate was the most favorable in the U.S. the jobs would be here. There's can be no other explanation.

If you want to take it personally that I think there's something not quite right with something you've written, that's you problem.

You can get into all the minutia if you want, I've got my own style and it's served me well.

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

OK, Richie, apply a little "solid thinking" to the situation with General Electric. GE didn't pay any taxes on their income in the U.S. at all last year. In fact, GE got a tax refund of $3.2 billion on taxes paid on prior years' income. This company should love doing business in the U.S.

So how many jobs has GE created in the U.S.? Sadly, even though GE can't get a better tax deal than paying nothing, they also haven't created any jobs in the U.S. since 2004. In 2004 GE employed 165,000 people in its U.S. operations. That employment declined steadily each year until the end of 2011, when GE's U.S. employment totaled only about 131,000 people.

So with maybe the most favorable tax deal of any large company--no taxes at all--GE cut it's U.S. employees by 34,000 jobs, a 21% cut in American employment. So in spite of enjoying a tremendously favorable tax deal, GE didn't create any jobs at all. In fact it cut jobs!

I don't know how you can cut GE's taxes to less than nothing, Richie. So again, like the MSNBC ad says, "Don't tax the job creators?...where are the jobs?"

Go ahead, apply a little solid thinking to this one Richie and tell us your findings and conclusions.

Then maybe you can take a crack at my original two questions. Your answers won't take a lot of words, but they will require a little "solid thinking".

You take on only one party on this issue. I find fault with two and wonder why you choose only one GE has been doing the same thing for years and years...INCLUDING THOSE WHEN DEMOCRATS CONTROLLED BOTH HOUSES and to my knowledge they put forth no tax code changes. NONE. So, how did this become a Republican issue only ?

This issue is being presented now as a one sided deal and clothed in class warfare language in the last few years. This tax code was not invented by Republicans.

This President appointed what he called a blue ribbon committee and they came up with some ideas, all rejected by this president....the Ryan budget, while certainly not very specific is simply pushed aside and the call goes out to the house Republicans as not doing anything, meanwhile the Dem Senate will not even discuss a budget and have not for three years.

I really have a problem with the presentation for sure. This kind of rhetoric is class warfare and will allow us to join the European countries in total upheaval. We do not even talk about spending cuts any longer.....all that is done is to bash the tax code and try things like the Buffet Rule, and I know VK that you are smart enough to know that was a political ploy entirely.

My opinion, this President has done a simply fantastic job in tying us all up in our shorts fighting over who makes more...instead of talking about cuts...it is NOT EVEN TALKED ABOUT ANY LONGER. He is a master at all of this, including the show he is putting on in other arenas.

I surely may get him re-elected and then we can all fight in the streets to even everything out and see who will get the most.

GE and APPLE did not just begin what they are doing..this is not new.....if you think the Dems are non complicit in whatever you are charging the Republicans with (and I am not sure what that is actually) then I submit to you with all respect, you are ignoring facts.

Both parties in congress are guilty...BOTH...and our current President, at this stage, has won the battle of the media to convince all that only one party is watching the store and the other is robbing it.

The class rhetoric you may pooh pooh, but spend most of the day in Tampa today, and spoke directly with about 5/6 of the Occupy group out there protesting today.

NONE of them worked...ALL of them were collecting some form of subsidy from the Government and a number of them told me it was the Republicans fault they dont get more.....because they put into place tax breaks for the rich only. Now, that is what is happening in this country.


I suppose all I can say is somehow someone better insure that this man is not reelected.....he did this kind of thing in Chicago when a young man and he has it perfected. Even his new motto...FORWARD...is steeped in history in Europe relative to the socialist movement there.

There will now be a few posters who will come on and make two or three sentence smart cracks and then leave...but if you people actually think that the Apple and GE thing just now began...if you really believe all of this, and ignore things like NAFTA....power of unions, etc.....and you believe our economic woes can be laid at the feet of just corporations then so be it. I am not the economic thinker you are VK and do not pretend to be, but not only my gut but also the rhetoric that is going on right now in this country is EXTREMELY DANGEROUS. THAT I know is right...maybe I dont understand the numbers as you do but the language being used by this WH is simply hateful and dangerous from someone who is supposed to LEAD.

Your original two questions by the way spoke ONLY to tax code and not to any reduction in spending...it mentioned the unemployment rate which is higher than 8% and NOW is accepted as normal......the rhetoric is NOT about creating jobs but about how much APPLE OR GE paid or didnt pay in taxes. The rhetoric does not mention that we, as a country, have not even tried to make a budget for THREE YEARS.

Why does not this President talk about Simpson Bowles...why does not this President have both sides of the aisle discussing anything good from the house budget ?

PS....just to add.....the Presidents recent remarks about what he will do relative to corporate taxes, he ALSO SAID IN 2008 but that will be forgotten I fear with our media.....he is resaying what he said in 2008, well most of it.....but he had complete and total control over everything for two years and put forward NOTHING. I will give him credit..he is a master at this politicing but I would rather have a president who is not ALWAYS politicing.....he is spending BILLIONS of our money to fund something that he can find not even one organization to back and the CBO said publicly that it was a mistake, but he is doing it anyway....know why ? It will cover the first pubic show of his health care bill right before the election...NO other reason but that kind of thing seems to be accepted just like the current unemployment rate.

Originally Posted by Bucco

You take on only one party on this issue. I find fault with two and wonder why you choose only one ...

Bucco, that's the second time in this thread that you've accused me of finding fault with only one party and favoring the other guys. In fact, in an earlier post in this thread, you accused me of saying something that supported the growth and re-energization of unions. How you somehow morphed unions into this discussion of tax policy is beyond me. Perhaps you were comiserating on Saul Alinsky and his favorite student Barack Obama again.

Yes, I have accused the Republicans of droning on and on about further reducing the taxes on the richest individuals and businesses because such action would hamper job growth. I'm critical because I believe it's baloney! If they want to argue that they don't want to increase taxes because the oft-agreed upon matching spending cuts never happen, then they should do so. Or if they wish to argue the details of a broad-based reform of tax policy including the elimination of benefits and loopholes placed in the IRS Code by special interests, they'd get a big hurrah from me.

The problem with their arguments and accusations of the Democrats is that they demonstrate that they're not only bad negotiators and drafters of legislation, but probably are in favor of maintaining the spending at current levels or even greater for personal political purposes, just like their bitter enemies, the Dems. Are you telling me that 535 people, a majority of whom are lawyers, can't draft legislation that documents the agreements they reach with their political opponents in the smoke-filled rooms of the Congress? If they can't do that, they're a whole lot more incompetent than I've given them credit for.

If the GOP wants to argue that they believe that the taxation of companies that actually increase the employment of Americans should be reduced, that's fine. But somewhere along the line, they need to explain how such proposals are either "revenue neutral" or actually begin to cut into the deficit. If the taxes are cut for one group of taxpayers, what spending cuts will occur or what other groups will have their taxes increased or loopholes eliminated? But do they ever say those things in a serious way? No. They never get beyond the "don't tax the job creators" soundbite, even though the aritmetic of our fiscal problem is compelling.

I know you're going to say that the Republicans put forth the Ryan budget proposal. The problem with that proposal is that politically it's DOA in the Congress because it attacks all the things dear to the Democrats and none important to the Republicans. Sooner or later, if there is to be bi-partisan support for any fiscal legislation, both parties will have to agree that their oxen will be gored, just like the other guy's.

If not in this thread, in many others, I've been critical of both parties and all their elected members in Congress as being ineffective and self-serving. I've said that I won't vote for any of them. I haven't taken sides except to discuss specific issues.

So just read what I write and try not to read hidden meanings into it. I say what I think and argue the points I think are important to the country, trying to keep the politics out of the discussion. I sure wish everyone would do the same.

Richie: One of the things you might be 'missing', and I certainly don't mean that as a slam, is something that has been occurring in ALL business - worker productivity. Whether it's a robot replacing an assembly line worker or software on a PC that allows one person to do a job that used to take two people, it's been on the increase for a long time in the US.

As I recall when I saw some statistics a ways back, the US *is* number one in the world when it comes to this. Part of it is the squeeze put on labor, but automation has had a huge hand in this.

This can easily explain some of the "bigger profits from fewer workers" equation.

Originally Posted by djplong

Richie: One of the things you might be 'missing', and I certainly don't mean that as a slam, is something that has been occurring in ALL business - worker productivity. Whether it's a robot replacing an assembly line worker or software on a PC that allows one person to do a job that used to take two people, it's been on the increase for a long time in the US.

As I recall when I saw some statistics a ways back, the US *is* number one in the world when it comes to this. Part of it is the squeeze put on labor, but automation has had a huge hand in this.

This can easily explain some of the "bigger profits from fewer workers" equation.

This is why many incorrectly assume we don't manufacture much in this country anymore, when in fact, we one of the largest manufacturers in the world. We just do it with less labor who work longer hours for more days a year than comparable workers in the other top manufacturing nations.

I'm just saying if the business atmosphere were more attractive, businesses would blossom and grow and employment would expand exponentially.

Higher and higher taxes in the form of business, corporate, capital gains, etc., coupled with high fees attached to all the rest of business start-up minutia is stifling business creation and expansion.

To me, this is pure common sense. Higher costs stifle business from the creation of it to the consumption of it's products.

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

Bucco, that's the second time in this thread that you've accused me of finding fault with only one party and favoring the other guys. In fact, in an earlier post in this thread, you accused me of saying something that supported the growth and re-energization of unions. How you somehow morphed unions into this discussion of tax policy is beyond me. Perhaps you were comiserating on Saul Alinsky and his favorite student Barack Obama again.

Yes, I have accused the Republicans of droning on and on about further reducing the taxes on the richest individuals and businesses because such action would hamper job growth. I'm critical because I believe it's baloney! If they want to argue that they don't want to increase taxes because the oft-agreed upon matching spending cuts never happen, then they should do so. Or if they wish to argue the details of a broad-based reform of tax policy including the elimination of benefits and loopholes placed in the IRS Code by special interests, they'd get a big hurrah from me.

The problem with their arguments and accusations of the Democrats is that they demonstrate that they're not only bad negotiators and drafters of legislation, but probably are in favor of maintaining the spending at current levels or even greater for personal political purposes, just like their bitter enemies, the Dems. Are you telling me that 535 people, a majority of whom are lawyers, can't draft legislation that documents the agreements they reach with their political opponents in the smoke-filled rooms of the Congress? If they can't do that, they're a whole lot more incompetent than I've given them credit for.

If the GOP wants to argue that they believe that the taxation of companies that actually increase the employment of Americans should be reduced, that's fine. But somewhere along the line, they need to explain how such proposals are either "revenue neutral" or actually begin to cut into the deficit. If the taxes are cut for one group of taxpayers, what spending cuts will occur or what other groups will have their taxes increased or loopholes eliminated? But do they ever say those things in a serious way? No. They never get beyond the "don't tax the job creators" soundbite, even though the aritmetic of our fiscal problem is compelling.

I know you're going to say that the Republicans put forth the Ryan budget proposal. The problem with that proposal is that politically it's DOA in the Congress because it attacks all the things dear to the Democrats and none important to the Republicans. Sooner or later, if there is to be bi-partisan support for any fiscal legislation, both parties will have to agree that their oxen will be gored, just like the other guy's.

If not in this thread, in many others, I've been critical of both parties and all their elected members in Congress as being ineffective and self-serving. I've said that I won't vote for any of them. I haven't taken sides except to discuss specific issues.

So just read what I write and try not to read hidden meanings into it. I say what I think and argue the points I think are important to the country, trying to keep the politics out of the discussion. I sure wish everyone would do the same.

VK...I cannot write as eloquently as you, nor do I have your financial background.

Here is what I know....the Republican party has put forth at least two proposals to change the tax code. While I do not agree with them in total, nobody will even discuss them. To my knowledge the Democrats have put forth only the Buffet Rule, which is easily the most shallow and transparent political ploy in years, while the President is spending 8 BILLION dollars to fund an experiment that NOBODY, including the CBO who issued warnings about the expenditure, says one single positive thing about.

I also know that the Democratic senate will not even try to pass a budget nor even discuss it. THREE years and no budget in this country.

So from my perspective, one party has made serious proposals and the other has offered only Buffet.

I also know that what you talk about cannot be taken and discussed as if it were an "island".

I also know that we now accept 8% as an unemployment figure and that we have stopped talking about spending as a problem., and only seem to discuss rich versus poor, etc.

I know the President appointed a blue ribbon group to look at tax policy and we all know it simply pushed them aside. And you can criticize them all you want and I will join you, but NEVER even a discussion.

I think the President has thus far done an outstanding job in framing the issues. He no longer has to defend spending....as with the 8 Billion he is spending. He no longer has to defend having no budget and has made it matter not to anyone. I mention the union because he now can take the rich versus poor fight to the unions and they love it. He has the Republicans framed now as the only party that can fix the tax code. He has convinced everyone that anything done with the tax code will mean raising taxes, but IN HIS WORDS, only on the "rich"

I give the President a lot of credit. We no longer in any media circles discuss spending...we no longer discuss deficits...we now discuss rich versus poor as if that will solve all the problems. He has framed the topic so that he does not have to show any leadership whatsoever....he just needs to keep the pressure on with the voters about how he will punish the "rich" and take care of the "poor".

Democrats have done a great job with this framing. He is using the media very well and deserves credit for that !!!

Big news today. The Dow is up highest levels in 4 years!........wow!!!

I'm sure all the people who've given up on finding appropriate employment, and the record number of people on the public dole are quite exited about this.

Originally Posted by RichieLion

Big news today. The Dow is up highest levels in 4 years!........wow!!!

I'm sure all the people who've given up on finding appropriate employment, and the record number of people on the public dole are quite exited about this.

Our current unemployment rate seems to have suddenly become the accepted norm !!!

Originally Posted by Bucco

Our current unemployment rate seems to have suddenly become the accepted norm !!!

That's because the sheeple haven't been riled up to view it as unacceptable, as they are when lower unemployment numbers are decried by the lame-stream media only when the Administration is Republican.

You (or was it FOX News "bashing of the day") consider it insignificant when the Dow is at it's highest point in 4 years? Look at your stock portfolio and tell me you would rather see it as of today or when the Dow was at 6000? I am pretty happy to see mine where it is now.

More investors equal more consumer confidence which means the economy is going in the right direction. More consumer confidence means more spending, more manufacturing, and more jobs.

GE closed its incandecent bulb manufacturing plant in US because the Greens banned incandecent light bulbs. Stock up on the few remaining when you can. It was not GE management it was Enviromental whackos. They mandated these curlly top CFL's with Mercury and low light output, so that it is hard to read by. When one is broken, per US EPA, you need a HAZMAT team to dispose of them.

What is trully unfair is that close to 50% of the people in the US do not pay any Federal Income Taxes. You can dance around and say they pay sales taxes, etc. But so does everyone else. When the majority don't pay Federal Income Taxes they will vote to raise them and get more handouts. We need the Flat Tax where everyone pays.

Raising taxes on Dividends, which were already taxed at the Corporate level and Capital Gains will hurt retired people who are using their dividends and capital gains to live on. Saved the money while working, no need to start withdrawing it.

Richie,I didn't realize your hatred of Obama would wish me financial ruin. We should all be happy the market is doing well.....it's good for America not just me. Take your hatred somewhere else.

Originally Posted by Bucco

...So from my perspective, one party has made serious proposals and the other has offered only Buffet.

I also know that what you talk about cannot be taken and discussed as if it were an "island"....

I'll differ with you on which party has put forth the most thoughtful, logical and actionable proposals....neither one of them. The GOP made proposals that included no changes in personal tax rates at all, the Democrats' hottest button. The Democrats only put forth a proposal to increase the taxes on the wealthiest Americans (the Buffett Rule), knowing full well that such an idea would be an anathema to the Republicans. Neither party has made proposals that have a chance of being acted upon.

When the parties, either one of them, put forth proposals that include things they want as well as things they don't like but would be willing to put on the table, then there will be the possibility of progress negotiating the resolution of our fiscal problems. Until that happens, forget it. No amount of trying to say one party has better, or more ideas than the other is at all valid. They both can and should be blamed for negotiating in extremely bad faith.

Frankly, the only politicians who put any sort of balanced proposals "on he table" in recent memory were John Boehner and President Obama, at the outset of trying to negotiate a $5 billion "grand bargain". That whole negotiation fell apart when neither Obama or Boehner coud deliver their own parties to support what they said they'd be willing to discuss. Then when the grand bargain negotiations fell apart so publicly, all the discussions turned to finger-pointing on who was at fault for causing the negotiations to ail.

Nothing is going to happen, Bucco, until both parties put some things in the table that will demonstrate their willingness to compromise. There appears little chance that's going to happen anytime soon.

Originally Posted by Villages Kahuna

I'll differ with you on which party has put forth the most thoughtful, logical and actionable proposals....neither one of them. The GOP made proposals that included no changes in personal tax rates at all, the Democrats' hottest button. The Democrats only put forth a proposal to increase the taxes on the wealthiest Americans (the Buffett Rule), knowing full well that such an idea would be an anathema to the Republicans. Neither party has made proposals that have a chance of being acted upon.

When the parties, either one of them, put forth proposals that include things they want as well as things they don't like but would be willing to put on the table, then there will be the possibility of progress negotiating the resolution of our fiscal problems. Until that happens, forget it. No amount of trying to say one party has better, or more ideas than the other is at all valid. They both can and should be blamed for negotiating in extremely bad faith.

Frankly, the only politicians who put any sort of balanced proposals "on he table" in recent memory were John Boehner and President Obama, at the outset of trying to negotiate a $5 billion "grand bargain". That whole negotiation fell apart when neither Obama or Boehner coud deliver their own parties to support what they said they'd be willing to discuss. Then when the grand bargain negotiations fell apart so publicly, all the discussions turned to finger-pointing on who was at fault for causing the negotiations to ail.

Nothing is going to happen, Bucco, until both parties put some things in the table that will demonstrate their willingness to compromise. There appears little chance that's going to happen anytime soon.

Now, we can agree 100% on what you say here !

I apologize if I misread your presentation, because the Buffet rule is almost funny if it was not real life.

NOBODY talks about spending...all tax the rich guy. Again, hope I am wrong but in my opinion, the rhetoric points dangerously close to a situation that is not something I would have ever imagined and there is NO leader !

Originally Posted by buggyone

You (or was it FOX News "bashing of the day") consider it insignificant when the Dow is at it's highest point in 4 years? Look at your stock portfolio and tell me you would rather see it as of today or when the Dow was at 6000? I am pretty happy to see mine where it is now.

More investors equal more consumer confidence which means the economy is going in the right direction. More consumer confidence means more spending, more manufacturing, and more jobs.

I wasn't being selfish.