Tax cuts create jobs. Paul Ryan and the Republican nominee Mitt Romney told a group that Canada just cut their corporate taxes to 15%.
Paul Ryan was obviously insinuating that these tax cuts put America at a disadvantage, and that the Canadian economy is going to explode and take all of our jobs. Corporate taxes in 2006 were already just 21%. In January 2011, Canada cut the corporate tax rate to 16.5%, then cut them again to 15% January 2012.
Overall, Canada has cut corporate taxes by almost 30% in 6 years.
The only problem is, the Canadian economy isn’t blasting off at all. It is still stuck in an anemic recovery. just like the United States. The Canadian economy only grew 1.8% in the second quarter of 2012. The United States on the other hand has a much higher statutory corporate tax and the economy grew at 1.7% in the same quarter. How can this be? Higher taxes hurt job creation, right? Yet both countries are stuck in the same slow recovery.
It couldn’t be that it’s all more complicated than just one factor like tax cuts, could it?
Elect Romney and line up to be fucked – unless you’re wealthy and can afford a tax shelter.
NO tax holiday for outsourcing businesses! OBAMA 2012!
Wow… That article is total bullshit. Yet again MORE proof that Uncle Dave has lost it if he even had it…
Canada has recovered ALL of its numeric jobs that were lost in the recession and THEN some. Also, there is a higher labour participation rate in Canada now, compared to 4 years ago. Furthermore, Growth in Canada is FAR more real than in the US where much of it is driven by deficit spending from the government.
And lastly, Canada was NOWHERE NEAR the unemployment rate of the rest of the world OR the US. We had far less to fix as we were not out of control. Not to mention that the U6 # is FAR more representative in the US and shows an unemployment rate of over 15%.
Suck it. Cutting taxes DOES help and as it is, ANYONE that thinks that businesses actually pay corporate taxes is an idiot. WE, the CONSUMER, we are who pays those taxes. Those costs are passed directly on to us by the companies. If you think otherwise, you are either naive or an idiot.
Wouldn’t have anything to do with businesses being scared shitless of the Government would it?
It would be much more informative if they compared the effective corporate tax rates between the US and Canada. GE has shown us that the stated corporate tax rate is effectively only a suggestion instead of the law.
If you double the income of the poor and the rich, you have doubled the gap between the poor and the rich.
Democrats seek to reduce the gap between the poor and the rich.
The founding fathers saw the problems of huge discrepancies in wealth, the corruption it causes in society, from the European monarchies. That’s why they wrote the inheritance tax into the constitution, in order to prevent such problems in America.
But perhaps you know better than the founding fathers…
Good luck educating the simple minds.
Good luck on your bus ride to Obomba’s rally, sheeple
Dallas, as you and both know, US dollars are imaginary and the US can print money at will.
And I’m all for a social safety net, btw and that’s something I believe in.
Now, knowing US dollars are imaginary, why hasn’t President Obama established a climate that is beneficial to US-based companies and jobs?
Do I think both Romney and Obama know US dollars are imaginary? Absolutely.
But Obama hasn’t established growth policies and this royally pisses me off. There are several “protectionist” methods that he could have done this. For instance, in the bank bailout, limited bailout funds to US-only banks.
And in the GM bailout, we don’t have full “free-trade” with Mexico on auto exports until 2017. Instead, GM closes US plants and expands their operations in Mexico.
This is beyond belief.
Growth is desired only as to getting Obama reelected. Having people be poorer makes them look to the government for benefits.
For one, investing in American infrastructure is a tried and true growth policy. You might disagree and that cutting taxes for the rich yields better results but growth policy it is.
…So is investing in green energy, retaining manufacturing of the auto industry, tax incentives for keeping jobs in the US and of course continuing the Bush tax cuts – ALL of which is part of growth incentive policies. Do any of these count or are you standing by your point that Obama hasn’t established a growth policy?
I’m all for strong US based protectionism at this point too. However, it is not so easy to start a manufacturing holy war with China, India and Mexico. Do you feel there are protectionist methods that economists and lawmakers failed to see? I’m not so sure. Tariffs is one protectionist tool that a president can employ and has been done. There are pros and cons because the other party can do the same. Sorry, there are no silver bullets.
I would say that a democrat government is more inclined to implement jobs protectionism than a Republican government. With a Romney presidency, even more so – he has the Bain legacy and profit-at-all-costs mindset that spells this out pretty good.
I could not find such a provision in my short google. “The power to tax” including all kinds of taxes–yes.
specifically an inheritance tax?===no.
It is a good idea, just as you say. One it looks like we will reflect on looking from the welfare lines into the gated communities of our new landed aristocracy.
Where in the Constitution do you find this inheritance tax?
Phydeau, your an idiot and so is Dallas. Thank you Pedro and NewformatSux!
What the founding fathers saw was inequality of power, that comes from having a big government with the ability to decide everything. If men were angels, no government would be necessary; if angels were to govern men, no controls on the government would be necessary.
If a government taxes at 100%, the people will starve and die.
If a goverment taxes at zero%, the people will be invaded, conquered, and die.
Obviously–taxes must be some number between zero and 100%.
NO ONE counsels more taxes in a vacuum.
Pukes currently counsel less taxes all the time no matter what the issue is.
CURRENTLY–the Federal Budget is based on a tax schedule that calls for the SUPER RICH to pay an average of 35% on their billions of dollars… but they pay from zero to 13% and some of the richest corps get tax money as a form of welfare.
IE–set the services desired, calcultate the progressive tax rate needed to achieve balance==tax and collect without loophole, fraud, and criminality.
Easy Peasy.
Overlooked is the simple fact we spend too much…as Democrats think the Clinton years were Nirvana, lets go back to the tax AND spending in effect his last year of office, Bush’s first year.
Then we will have a surplus to pay down the debt.
We won’t have Obama’s bundlers being well taken care of though…
Overlooked is the simple fact we spend too much
Agreed. How big a military spending is just right?
Today, we spend MORE that the next 25 nations combined (23 of which are allies).
Let’s go down the list of expenditures and agree on what’s a good number.
Hong Kong has some of the lowest taxes going and is rated as having the most freedom and it has the fastest growing economy around but you can try Obama’s ideas which unfortunately aren’t all that different from the ones used by Fidel, Mao, and others. They’ve never produced much job growth or good wages in the past but maybe you’ll get lucky this time. Only thing is if he fails you will hurt. At the rate he’s going out deficit will be 20 trillion by the time he leaves office and I have a feeling this will impact our credit rating and the interest rate we pay unless we just fold but if we do that we will have a balanced budget because no matter what we do nobody but a total lune would loan the US used spit.
We rate 9th on the freedom scale and are falling.
Feel free to go to the party website. I thought Obama was from the top down as in from the WH down. Central planning and 4/5 programs are what the well run Socialist states do but Obama is not that organized. Nobody votes for his budgets.
Democratic Party Releases 2012 Platform
Charlotte, NC— Today the Democratic National Committee announced that it has posted online the 2012 Democratic Party Platform, which will be officially adopted by the Delegates to the Convention tomorrow, Tuesday, September 4. The Party Platform articulates clearly President Obama’s vision for moving our country forward by restoring economic security and building an economy that is built to last.
The Democratic Party Platform reflects President Obama’s vision for the future. Meanwhile, the Republican Party, led by Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan, approved a platform that supports the same top-down economic policies that hurt the middle class and embraces extreme positions on issues and policies from Medicare to immigration to women’s health.
In July, the Platform Drafting Committee, chaired by former Governor Ted Strickland, met in Minneapolis to receive input from the public and to write the first draft of the Platform. Then on August 11, members of the Platform Committee, chaired by Mayor Cory Booker and retired Lt. Gen. Claudia Kennedy, met in Detroit. At the Platform Committee Meeting in Detroit, committee members submitted amendments to the draft Platform before unanimously approving the draft and sending it to Charlotte for the vote by delegates tomorrow.
You can read the Democratic Platform [at the DNC website]
Below please find excerpts from the Preamble of the Platform, which lays out the President’s vision for our country.
Moving America Forward
“Four years ago, Democrats, independents, and many Republicans came together as Americans to move our country forward. We were in the midst of the greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression, the previous administration had put two wars on our nation’s credit card, and the American Dream had slipped out of reach for too many.
“Today, our economy is growing again, al-Qaeda is weaker than at any point since9/11, and our manufacturing sector is growing for the first time in more than a decade. But there is more we need to do, and so we come together again to continue what we started. We gather to reclaim the basic bargain that built the largest middle class and the most prosperous nation on Earth – the simple principle that in America, hard work should pay off, responsibility should be rewarded, and each one of us should be able to go as far as our talent and drive take us.
“This election is not simply a choice between two candidates or two political parties, but between two fundamentally different paths for our country and our families.
“We Democrats offer America the opportunity to move our country forward by creating an economy built to last and built from the middle out. Mitt Romney and the Republican Party have a drastically different vision. They still believe the best way to grow the economy is from the top down – the same approach that benefited the wealthy few but crashed the economy and crushed the middle class…
“The Republican Party has turned its back on the middle class Americans who built this country. Our opponents believe we should go back to the top-down economic policies of the last decade. They
think that if we simply eliminate protections for families and consumers, let Wall Street write its own rules again, and cut taxes for the wealthiest, the market will solve all our problems on its own. They argue that if we help corporations and wealthy investors maximize their profits by whatever means necessary, whether through layoffs or outsourcing, it will automatically translate into jobs and prosperity that benefits us all. They would repeal health reform, turn Medicare into a voucher program, and follow the same path of fiscal irresponsibility of the past administration – giving trillions of dollars in tax cuts weighted towards millionaires and billionaires while sticking the middle class with the bill. But we’ve tried their policies – and we’ve all suffered when they failed…
“The problems we’re facing right now have been more than a decade in the making. We are the party of inclusion and respect differences of perspective and belief. And so, even when we disagree, we work together to move this country forward. But what is holding our nation back is a stalemate in Washington between two fundamentally different views of which direction America should take.
“We must keep moving forward and doing the hard work of rebuilding a strong economy by betting on the American worker and investing in a growing middle class.”
Wow! I didn’t realize that the DNC was so out of touch with reality. Who, I wonder put the rape of Libya on the national credit card and mean to do the same with Syria and Iran?
And can you name the Nobel Peace Prize winner who is keeping us in Afghanistan even though bin Laden was killed on his courageous order?
And what party made up mostly of limousine liberals just gave the banks the power to write the regulations that apply to themselves when it comes to consumer protection.
And Solyndra! Don’t even get me started on Solyndra!
What we saw with the 111th congress was FEEDING not LEADING.
And if you are stupid enough to believe these swine again, well at least YOU deserve the government WE are getting.
The NATO liberation of Libya and investment loss in clean energy American company, Solyndra, are in your top 5 gripes with Obama?
You should vote for him!!
d0-ill irrelevantly reading from his talking points says:
9/3/2012 at 7:19 pm
Hong Kong has some of the lowest taxes going and is rated as having the most freedom and it has the fastest growing economy around /// yes, a Communist Controlled City State ripping off the level playing ground of international fair trade with their sweat shop labor (you are free to otherwise starve) and patent thieving manufacturing system. Just the model for the USA to follow. Which 100 sq foot apartment would you like to share with two other familes?
but you can try Obama’s ideas which unfortunately aren’t all that different from the ones used by Fidel, Mao, and others. /// Other than not being in the Republican Party==specifically state how Obama’s ideas aren’t all that different from those genocidal commies. Your failure to respond will be answer enough.
They’ve never produced much job growth or good wages in the past /// Obama has in 3.5 years created as many jobs as GWBushtheRetard did in 8 years.
but maybe you’ll get lucky this time. Only thing is if he fails you will hurt. At the rate he’s going out deficit will be 20 trillion by the time he leaves office and I have a feeling this will impact our credit rating and the interest rate we pay /// that does look like the path we are on. Sadly, everyone else in the world still sees the USA as the best place to invest ….
unless we just fold but if we do that we will have a balanced budget because no matter what we do nobody but a total lune would loan the US used spit. /// That doesn’t make any sense. Did you remember to breathe?
We rate 9th on the freedom scale and are falling. /// Yes–lack of medical services, secure retirement, income disparity and so forth==the very bad policies the Pukes want to make even worse. From somewhat of a free fall, we will enter an accelerated decline under the Pukes.
Say–Do-ill, you can’t have your head any farther up your ass. Why do you want so much company?
Idiot self destructive Republicans: RICH = CRIMINAL.
Vote your own SELF INTEREST. Stop letting the rich steal from you by calling it Freedom (to starve).
Amazing! Showing how little you know about anything. Your comments about Hong Kong are so amazingly off the mark they’re not even funny.
What you are right about though is that, for the average Chinese you Dumbbo are a filthy rich criminal living out of their proletariat sweat. Enjoy your iPhone.
Educate us all Pedo. What did I get wrong? I did blow this one out my ass so if you EVER have a chance to be relevant, this is it.
GO!!!!
Educate you? It’s easier to educate a stone; but here’s a hint for you: go to Hong Kong for 4 years in a row staying more than a month each time and maybe I’ll consider wasting my time calling your bluffs with more substance.
Democratic leader announced last year that the plan is to ‘kill Romney’. Expect new negative talking points to be released daily, blast e-mailed to blogs and media supporters. They expect blogs to then follow through with posts of the day;s talking points.
So what will happen if Obama is reelected? Blaming Republicans and George Bush for all the problems. No change and no hope for change. They think that Republicans will change their tune once Obama is reelected. This is from the same people that tell us Republicans are hyper partisan.
Obama goes golfing without having to worry about re-election pressures.
A “conservative Neanderthal” in real life who views me with suspicion sinceI was very pro-Obama in 2008, was keen to mention that Bush stopped golfing after the invasion of Iraq, while President Obama golfs all the time while our economy is in the shitter.
Metaphorically.
and the relevance of this is what?
connect it to anything that makes any sense at all, and I will return +1 Point.
This site was angry with George Bush for giving up golf and calling it a sacrifice while the war was on.
I’d rather Obama be golfing than governing, as it limits the damage he can cause.
..goes golfing without having to worry about re-election pressures…
I think you meant basketball and Church’s Fried Chicken outings but point taken.
Another scenario is that Obama can always do the above because he is, after all, rich. IMHO, he can implement swift and strong executive orders even as Boehner cries a river. A little dictatorship to get the ship going is something we all agree we need.
No, we don’t agree.
Move to cuba idiot sheeple. You have your nice, beloved dictatorship already going strong
This should be a rhetorical question if you’ve studied comparative economics.
Canada is either 10th or 11th by GDP. In either case, there are key differences in cultural diversity, geography, productivity, as well as government policies which would explain how one thing that would work in the U.S. would not work elsewhere or “overnight”.
But generally speaking, if you want to bring the jobs in to your country to help grow your economy and decrease unemployment then by all means entice corporations to set up shop. Dropping the corporate taxes is one good way. In the meantime, the liberals choose to bite the hands that feed them.
If lowering corporate taxes was the answer to economic prosperity, then Ireland should be Europe’s crown jewel. Hasn’t it been demonstrated that most US corporations have figured out how not to pay the going tax rate? Apple parks billions overseas to avoid US taxes as an example. Heck, just allowing small to medium businesses to organize as LLC vs INC eliminates an entire layer of taxation. BTW Somalia has no corporate taxes.
One only has to look to the Euro zone for the effects of high tax rates. The rich most often fork over up-to 75% of their income.
Even that is not enough to support the ever growing not-working class.
With cradle to grave care promised to most Euros who has the motivation to work. Most businesses are punished when they let employees go. Businesses recieve few real incentives to hire when employees become a life long liability.
During the Reagan years, taxes were drastically cut and revenues to the treasury increased several fold.
Canada is a much smaller economy. One thing the Canandian have not suffered is the housing bubble. Most home values did not crash as they have in the states.
“During the Reagan years, taxes were drastically cut and revenues to the treasury increased several fold.”
Let’s compare the figures from 1988 (Reagan’s last full year in office) to 1980 (the year just before he took office). The figures I’m using are all from this 368-page document:
http://whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2013/assets/hist.pdf
(all these dollar amounts are in millions)
In 1980 the U.S. government collected $244,069 individual plus $64,600 corporate income tax revenue (page 34 of the pdf), for a total of $308,669 from those two sources. In 1988, the receipts were $401,181 individual and $94,508 corporate (also page 34), totalling $495,689. This represents a 61% increase (not adjusted for inflation, which would lower the increase). Do you understand that this is NOT a severalfold increase as you claimed? And if you compare the total of ALL combined revenue rather than just the individual and corporate taxes that I think are much more relevant, the increase in revenue from all sources increased by 76%, still at odds with your claim.
Now let’s look at the debt during the Reagan years. In 1980, the Gross Federal Debt stood at $909,041. By 1988, that same debt figure had ballooned to $2,601,104 (page 143 of the pdf). Bingo! I think we found that severalfold increase you were looking for!
It looks like we borrowed a little bit of that gold during Reagan’s “golden era.”