I call Bullshit on The Tea Party

[tinylittlegnat]

Obviously not for Obama's buddy, Jeffrey Immelt, enterprises.


General Electric filed more than 7,000 income tax returns in hundreds of global jurisdictions last year, but when push came to shove, the company owed the U.S. government a whopping bill of $0.


Can't wait to hear about MSNBC's returns

How much did exxon pay out to the U.S.?

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

Obviously not for Obama's buddy, Jeffrey Immelt, enterprises.


General Electric filed more than 7,000 income tax returns in hundreds of global jurisdictions last year, but when push came to shove, the company owed the U.S. government a whopping bill of $0.


Can't wait to hear about MSNBC's returns

Meme you ignorant fuck..

I notice you didn't say that GE didn't PAY any taxes, just that they didn't owe any additional on top of what they paid.

Guess what, not owing the government money at the end of the year indicates good accounting practices. It means that what was paid in throughout covered what you owed.

 

[MeeMie]

Meme you ignorant fuck..

I notice you didn't say that GE didn't PAY any taxes, just that they didn't owe any additional on top of what they paid.

Guess what, not owing the government money at the end of the year indicates good accounting practices. It means that what was paid in throughout covered what you owed.

Ignorant fuck? LOL!


GE did not pay the United States of America one red cent ... not before or after on top of or under ... NADA.

GE had plenty of earnings last year -- just not shown in the United States. For tax purposes, the company's U.S. operations lost $408 million, while its international businesses netted a $10.8 billion profit .. GE is "indefinitely" deferring US income tax payments on those profits.


The IRS is currently auditing GE's tax returns for 2003-2007

 

[Luk]

Ignorant fuck? LOL!


GE did not pay the United States of America one red cent ... not before or after on top of or under ... NADA.

GE had plenty of earnings last year -- just not shown in the United States. For tax purposes, the company's U.S. operations lost $408 million, while its international businesses netted a $10.8 billion profit .. GE is "indefinitely" deferring US income tax payments on those profits.




The IRS is currently auditing GE's tax returns for 2003-2007

Meemie, you misleading ignorant fuck. Better?

Here's the rest of the article that MeeMie posted but left out. Why? Because it gives the explanation as to why.

That left GE (GE, Fortune 500) with no U.S. profit left for Uncle Sam to tax. Corporations typically face a 35% federal income tax on their earnings. Thanks to its deductions and adjustments, GE reported an actual U.S. federal income tax rate of negative 10.5%. It got to add a "tax benefit" of $1.1 billion back into its reported earnings.

CNN LINK

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

The implication being there would be more hands out?



That's a constant.

If fact, one might even venture to say that the more hand-outs one has to offer, then the more hands out one will find...


__________________
“Everyone wants to live at the expense of the state. They forget that the state wants to live at the expense of everyone.”
Frederic Bastiat

If you consider correctional facilities handouts.

 

[Tungwagger]

Who benefits more from an interstate system. Me who seldom leaves his state or Walmart who uses the interstate system for shipping and receiving of their products? Who benefits more from paved roads and working street lights and signs? Me, who goes to work and shopping on occasion. Or dominoes pizza who delivers thousands of pizzas a day making a profit on each one?

Or instead of roads bridges and tunnels how about the electric grid. Who makes more profit off of it. Me or Google?

Who profits more from public schools. Me who went through it or the economy as a whole having a workforce who can read and do math without having to search or train for those skills?(actually we all gain from it)

Businesses gain more than the working class man.

Who pays more in fuel taxes to provide for the repair of the roads that you drive on? You? or Wal-Mart?

Who pays more in fuel taxes? You or Dominoes pizza?

Who pays higher taxes? You? or Google?

Businesses invest more capital in order to make more than the common man.

What's YOUR profit margin on your labor, and work investment, compared to Wal-Mart, Domino's or Google? (incidently, the search engine that basically costs you NOTHING)

 

[MeeMie]

Meemie, you misleading ignorant fuck. Better?

Here's the rest of the article that MeeMie posted but left out. Why? Because it gives the explanation as to why.



CNN LINK

What's your point?

GE paid not one red cent to the United States due to creative financing which shifted all $10.8 billion profit to its international entities claiming that the US operations lost $408 million. They even have a tax credit of $1.1 billion for future reporting.

"That's one way of escaping taxes," said Scott Hodge, president of the Tax Foundation. "Companies get to deduct their losses, so if there's no earnings, then they pay no income tax."


The creative accounting was devised to claim profits in countries that have lower tax rates. The company paid almost $23 billion in taxes to governments around the world from 2000 to 2009 - how much of THAT should have been in the US coffers?

Did I mention: The IRS is currently auditing GE's tax returns for 2003-2007


Yup. Robama Hood's change in progress ... take from the who and what???

 

[tinylittlegnat]

Who pays more in fuel taxes to provide for the repair of the roads that you drive on? You? or Wal-Mart?

Who pays more in fuel taxes? You or Dominoes pizza?

Who pays higher taxes? You? or Google?

Businesses invest more capital in order to make more than the common man.

What's YOUR profit margin on your labor, and work investment, compared to Wal-Mart, Domino's or Google? (incidently, the search engine that basically costs you NOTHING)

Thats the point. They benefit more so they should pay more. Simple enough.

 

[Luk]

What's your point?

GE paid not one red cent to the United States due to creative financing which shifted all $10.8 billion profit to its international entities claiming that the US operations lost $408 million. They even have a tax credit of $1.1 billion for future reporting.

"That's one way of escaping taxes," said Scott Hodge, president of the Tax Foundation. "Companies get to deduct their losses, so if there's no earnings, then they pay no income tax."


The creative accounting was devised to claim profits in countries that have lower tax rates. The company paid almost $23 billion in taxes to governments around the world from 2000 to 2009 - how much of THAT should have been in the US coffers?

Did I mention: The IRS is currently auditing GE's tax returns for 2003-2007


Yup. Robama Hood's change in progress ... take from the who and what???

The point was you used a C&P (per usual) and didn't credit the source nor give the entire article for perspective's sake.

And what I bolded was from the same article "Did I mention", don't try to pass it off as your own thought, we all know you're incapable of doing that.

 

[Sean]

What's your point?

GE paid not one red cent to the United States due to creative financing which shifted all $10.8 billion profit to its international entities claiming that the US operations lost $408 million. They even have a tax credit of $1.1 billion for future reporting.

"That's one way of escaping taxes," said Scott Hodge, president of the Tax Foundation. "Companies get to deduct their losses, so if there's no earnings, then they pay no income tax."


The creative accounting was devised to claim profits in countries that have lower tax rates. The company paid almost $23 billion in taxes to governments around the world from 2000 to 2009 - how much of THAT should have been in the US coffers?

Did I mention: The IRS is currently auditing GE's tax returns for 2003-2007


Yup. Robama Hood's change in progress ... take from the who and what???

So I take it you're in favour of closing tax loopholes for big corporations and regulating so this kind of thing doesn't happen?

 

[Tungwagger]

How are republicans going to pay down the debt, seeing how their constituents don't want to give up any of their benefits? Especially social security and Medicare. And military spending isn't getting cut.

Where are these cuts coming from that are going to get us back to surplus-ville?

Outlaw, earmarks....

Pass the balanced budget amendment.

Do away with:

Obamacare

EPA

NEA

Homeland security.

Department of Energy.

Every other "agency" that isn't enumerated in the Consitution.

Grandfather people 55 and older into Medicare.
Pay people 55 and below what they've paid into Medicare.
Then phase out Medicare.

Grandfather people 55 and older into Social Security.
Pay people 55 and below what they've paid into Social security.
Then phase out Social Security.

Get rid of the Earned income tax credit. If you don't make enough to pay income tax, you also shouldn't profit from the taxpayer as well.

This is just a start, initially the debt would go up, but overall the deficit and debt would be reduced if our Government would just get it through their head to quit caring about us so much, and return the powers to the respective 50 States.

I know, too draconian, and I'm just a greedy bastard. But when the "poor" in this country have a lifestyle that parallels the lifestyle of the average middle class family from the 50's, perhaps they really don't need as much help as they insist.

 

[Luk]

So I take it you're in favour of closing tax loopholes for big corporations and regulating so this kind of thing doesn't happen?

The only thing MeeMie wrote in that whole post was the last line, why ask him? Ask the original author.

 

[Tungwagger]

They were interviewing Tea Baggers on NPR, asking them about their ranting over government spending. They pretty much universally think there's too much spending.

When they asked what benefit they could do without or do with less of, they were silent. Instead, the protesters think we should balance the budget by eliminating "waste".

Do you take some sort of "stimulant" in order to listen to NPR?

 

[tinylittlegnat]

Outlaw, earmarks....

Pass the balanced budget amendment.

Do away with:

Obamacare

EPA

NEA

Homeland security.

Department of Energy.

Every other "agency" that isn't enumerated in the Consitution.

Grandfather people 55 and older into Medicare.
Pay people 55 and below what they've paid into Medicare.
Then phase out Medicare.

Grandfather people 55 and older into Social Security.
Pay people 55 and below what they've paid into Social security.
Then phase out Social Security.

Get rid of the Earned income tax credit. If you don't make enough to pay income tax, you also shouldn't profit from the taxpayer as well.

This is just a start, initially the debt would go up, but overall the deficit and debt would be reduced if our Government would just get it through their head to quit caring about us so much, and return the powers to the respective 50 States.

I know, too draconian, and I'm just a greedy bastard. But when the "poor" in this country have a lifestyle that parallels the lifestyle of the average middle class family from the 50's, perhaps they really don't need as much help as they insist.

Those are some of the stupidest suggestion I have ever read on lit. Thats pretty bad considering I read threads by Miles.

 

[Tungwagger]

Thats the point. They benefit more so they should pay more. Simple enough.

But if they profit at a net operating ratio greater than YOUR efforts at work, that's somehow unfair?

I would venture that a typical corporation would be very happy at a 94- 97% operating ratio. Probably ecstatic at 85-90%.

Yours is probably at 3- 6%

How many people do you directly employ?

 

[tinylittlegnat]

But if they profit at a net operating ratio greater than YOUR efforts at work, that's somehow unfair?

I would venture that a typical corporation would be very happy at a 94- 97% operating ratio. Probably ecstatic at 85-90%.

Yours is probably at 3- 6%

How many people do you directly employ?

Changing the subject does not help your argument.

 

[Tungwagger]

Those are some of the stupidest suggestion I have ever read on lit. Thats pretty bad considering I read threads by Miles.

Well fuck..

tlg has spoken....

Makes all the sense in the world

Well thought out, and articulated tlg...

Fuckin' Einstein you are..

We've been bastardizing the Constitution for so long, why bother trying to fix it now?

 

[Sean]

The only thing MeeMie wrote in that whole post was the last line, why ask him? Ask the original author.

I know, but it's fun to watch him try and defend himself without a c+p. For instance, according to MM, McCain was made Rep candidate because thousands of Dems registered as Republicans in the closed primaries.

 

[Tungwagger]

Changing the subject does not help your argument.

Yep, you win at this internet thingy...


You even say so...

 

[MeeMie]

Look at all the little loonies scramble away from the real issue ....

OBAMA claimed that the rich would be paying for all the expenses his administration has incurred. Yet in this thread alone, what has been illustrated is that taxes (new and increased) affecting the middle class is already at $670 Billion and Counting (courtesy of the Ways & Means Committee)… and that GE did not contribute one red cent to the United States revenue. Nothing.

How is that worth defending?

Yet the typical loonies do.

 

[Luk]

I know, but it's fun to watch him try and defend himself without a c+p. For instance, according to MM, McCain was made Rep candidate because thousands of Dems registered as Republicans in the closed primaries.

His reply to me was even a c&p from his original c&p.

And that McCain thingy, really? No fucking way he said that.

 

[B_Gus_Richards]

My Take on the Tea Party

Teabaggers are mad because:

1. The Nation is being brought back from precipice of disaster after 8 years of a Republican President and 12 years of a Republican Congress.
2. A black Democratic President is in office with a Democratic Majority that is finally just powering ahead with its agenda.
3. Teabaggers know that Bush and Cheney (and their Republican cohorts) screwed the pooch with an ill fated war, tax cuts for the rich, continued outsourcing of jobs, record deficits, an exploding national debt, and further de-regulation that nearly brought down the economy.
4. Teabaggers are especially seething with the knowledge that for 8 years El Rushbo got everything he wanted and instead of the conservative nirvana Rush promised it lead to fucking disaster.
5. Teabaggers did nothing the last 8 years but sit by and watch Bushco go to work fucking the country up and now when they want to "take back their country" they are exposed for the hypocrites they are.
6. They are powerless.
7. And mostly, they are angry that they unwittingly adopted a nickname synonymous with a homosexual activity (one they secretly crave) involving a man wiping his sweaty dangling nutsack across another man's face.

 

[Sean]

His reply to me was even a c&p from his original c&p.

And that McCain thingy, really? No fucking way he said that.

Oh yes he did. And when I asked for verification, he posted a link to Google and claimed he's provided proof. He never answered how McCain lost so many open primaries though.

 

[tinylittlegnat]

We've been bastardizing the Constitution for so long, why bother trying to fix it now?

Awesome give me 5 examples.

 

[RightField]

This is a sober and thorough discussion of the tea party phenomena. It's well done. I'm not sure what the tea party thing is about, I've been working too much lately to pay much attention to it. I do hear daily screeches against the tea partiers on the radio and in the news now and then, but I know better than to listen to those knuckleheads. This helped me get a greater understanding of it.

America's Constitutionalist Revolt
By Larry Kudlow

So much is being written in the mainstream media about who the tea partiers are, but very little is being recorded about what these folks are actually saying.

We know that this is a decentralized grassroots movement, with many different voices hailing from many different towns across the country. But the tea-party message comes together in the "Contract From America," the product of an online vote orchestrated by Ryan Hecker, a Houston tea-party activist and national coordinator for the Tea Party Patriots.

With nearly 500,000 votes recorded in less than two months, this Contract forms a blueprint of tea-party policy goals and beliefs.

Of the top-10 planks in the Contract, the No. 1 issue is protect the Constitution. That's followed by reject cap-and-trade, demand a balanced budget and enact fundamental tax reform. And then comes number five: Restore fiscal responsibility and constitutionally limited government in Washington.

Note that two of the top-five priorities of the tea partiers mention the Constitution.

Filling out the Contract, the bottom-five planks are end runaway government spending; defund, repeal and replace government-run health care; pass an all-of-the-above energy policy; stop the pork; and stop the tax hikes.

What's so significant to me about this tea-party Contract From America is the strong emphasis on constitutional limits and restraints on legislation, spending, taxing and government control of the economy. Undoubtedly, the emphasis is there because no one trusts Washington.

As I read this Contract, tea partiers are reminding all of us of the need for the Constitution to protect our freedoms. They're calling for a renewal of constitutional values, including -- first and foremost -- a return to constitutional limits on government. The tea partiers who responded to this poll are demanding a rebirth of the consent of the governed. The government works for us, we don't work for it.

All this makes me think of President Reagan, who never quite succeeded in gaining a constitutional amendment for a balanced budget, or for limits on spending, or for a two-thirds congressional majority for any new tax hikes. But throughout his presidency, and for many years before, the Gipper argued for constitutional limits on government, especially government spending.

And now this message is being echoed perfectly in the tea-party Contract From America. In effect, it picks up where Reagan left off.

The tea partiers, whom I call free-market populists, desire a return to Reaganism. In particular, their demands for a balanced budget (third plank), for restoring fiscal responsibility (fifth plank), for ending massive government spending (sixth plank), and for stopping the pork (ninth plank) all underscore the populist revolt against runaway government spending, and therefore runaway government power.

There are mentions in the Contract of tax reform and stopping tax hikes. But it is pretty clear to everyone nowadays that the massive run-up in spending of recent years will inevitably result in an equally massive tax-hike movement -- that is, unless the spending is strictly curbed and reduced.

Yet the tea partiers don't trust Congress to do this, so they want to bring in constitutional restraint.

A recent survey by the Brookings Institution spells out this spend-and-tax problem with great clarity. Under current spending trends, tax-the-rich efforts to bring the deficit to just 3 percent of gross domestic product -- not balance, mind you, but 3 percent deficit -- would require a nearly 80 percent marginal tax rate on the most successful earners. And if taxes are raised across-the-board, the marginal rate would rise to nearly 50 percent for the top earners, with state and local tax burdens bringing it up to 60 percent. Otherwise, a European-style value-added tax (VAT) would become necessary.

The tea partiers know this, and they don't like it one bit. And so, at bottom, they have formed a constitutionalist movement to revolt against big government and big taxes -- and oh, by the way, to stand against big-government control of large chunks of the economy, such as energy and health care.

Harking back to the Founders' principles of constitutional limits to government is a very powerful message. It's a message of freedom, especially economic freedom. The tea partiers have delivered an extremely accurate diagnostic of what ails America right now: Government is growing too fast, too much, too expensively and in too many places -- and in the process it is crowding out our cherished economic freedom.

It's as though the tea partiers are saying this great country will never fulfill its long-run potential to prosper, create jobs and lead the world unless constitutional limits to government are restored.