amazon should pay more tax says trump

[dominatrixjane]

amazon should pay more tax says trump

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5937230/trump-amazon-us-taxes-paying-postal-service-delivery-boy/

 

[phrodeau]

Raise tax rates on corporations? OK.

 

[Hypoxia]

Raise tax rates on corporations? OK.

Only on enemy corporations. The ones that actually employ Americans.

 

[KeithD]

Trump should pay a lot more taxes too.

 

[BotanyBoy]

The longer his presidency goes on the more of a Democrat he seems to be.

LOL

 

[Veroe]

The longer his presidency goes on the more of a Democrat he seems to be.

LOL

LOL that's funny.

I was just thinking the longer he goes in the oval office the more he proves he's neither Dem or Rep...he's just in the party of whatever's best for Trump.

"Tax Amazon...yeah people like that.
Cut taxes on huge corporations...yeah people like that.
Hooray I am the bestest president ever, even bester than Abe Lincoln!"

~Donald J. Trump, POTUS~​

 

[NickStJohn]

•••••

 

[KeithD]

The longer his presidency goes on the more of a Democrat he seems to be.

LOL

Fooled you, didn't he? (which isn't hard.) He was a pretend Democrat before he became a pretend Republican.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Fooled you, didn't he? (which isn't hard.) He was a pretend Democrat before he became a pretend Republican.

Nah...I was rubbing that shit in the Trump haters faces from the get go.

There isn't anything he can do or say (D)'s won't flip out over.

http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/350/175/067.jpg

 

[KeithD]

You certainly do have a lot of shit to rub. You're covered in it. You're pretty much composed of it.

 

[BotanyBoy]

You certainly do have a lot of shit to rub. You're covered in it. You're pretty much composed of it.

Ohhhh name calling!!!

That makes you look like MUCH less of a twat for assuming things.

 

[Hypoxia]

Fooled you, didn't he? (which isn't hard.) He was a pretend Democrat before he became a pretend Republican.

He invited Clintons to one of his weddings. And they went. Hey, d'ya recall the old line that Clintons recruited their buddy Tromp to run so he'd destroy the Gups? That seems to be working out. Will Gups as a party still exist after the upcoming midterm wipeout? Wouldn't a veto-proof Dum takeover of Congress be entertaining? And a few states, too?

 

[Blue]

Amazon didn't pay any taxes at all last year.
Literally nothing. Not one cent.
One of the most profitable companies in the world, immense growth, CEO is the richest person on Earth now and has dominance over western online sales among other services and industries.
>Didn't pay one little penny in taxation in a year. They had taken advantage of so many tax benefits and deductions and loopholes that they had reduced their tax liabilities to zero.

What happens to you if you don't pay your taxes?
Oh right, you go to prison, if Amazon dodges all their taxes and then doesn't even pay their employees a living wage nobody seems to care.

Amazon doesn't g.a.f if their taxes are raised because they've got armies of lawyers and career tax dodgers scheming to get out of paying any taxes they owe. I would start with making sure there's a functional system in place to make sure that Amazon at least pays something in taxes before bothering to raise them.

 

[Carnal_Flower]

Waaa waaaa Trump's a Tyrant, he wants to execute drug dealers waaa waaa

Because only you have valid reasons to flip out.

Nah...I was rubbing that shit in the Trump haters faces from the get go.

There isn't anything he can do or say (D)'s won't flip out over.

http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/001/350/175/067.jpg

 

[Hypoxia]

Waaa waaaa Trump's a Tyrant, he wants to execute drug dealers waaa waaa

Because only you have valid reasons to flip out.

Suppose it was otherwise? Suppose it was TROMP CAUSES CANCER? Would they approve?

https://memegenerator.net/img/instances/68372424/smoking-causes-cancer-must-be-a-myth-made-by-the-chinese-to-steal-our-jobs.jpg

 

[BotanyBoy]

Waaa waaaa Trump's a Tyrant, he wants to execute drug dealers waaa waaa

Because only you have valid reasons to flip out.

I didn't flip out.

Doesn't change the fact that the guy could end world hunger....and Democrats would protest it.

 

[BotanyBoy]

Amazon didn't pay any taxes at all last year.
Literally nothing. Not one cent.
One of the most profitable companies in the world, immense growth, CEO is the richest person on Earth now and has dominance over western online sales among other services and industries.
>Didn't pay one little penny in taxation in a year. They had taken advantage of so many tax benefits and deductions and loopholes that they had reduced their tax liabilities to zero.

What happens to you if you don't pay your taxes?
Oh right, you go to prison, if Amazon dodges all their taxes and then doesn't even pay their employees a living wage nobody seems to care.

Amazon doesn't g.a.f if their taxes are raised because they've got armies of lawyers and career tax dodgers scheming to get out of paying any taxes they owe. I would start with making sure there's a functional system in place to make sure that Amazon at least pays something in taxes before bothering to raise them.

Hey maybe a fair tax where EVERYONE pays a %????

Nawwww.....Democrats would be outraged, paying their fair share just isn't fair!!!

 

[dan_c00000]

I didn't flip out.

You got triggered, as always.

 

[KeithD]

He invited Clintons to one of his weddings. And they went. Hey, d'ya recall the old line that Clintons recruited their buddy Tromp to run so he'd destroy the Gups? That seems to be working out. Will Gups as a party still exist after the upcoming midterm wipeout? Wouldn't a veto-proof Dum takeover of Congress be entertaining? And a few states, too?

It was his marriage to Melania and he more than invited the Clintons; he paid them $50,000 to show up. And we're seeing how well his marriage is working out, aren't we?

A veto proof Democratic takeover of Congress would be entertaining if the Democrats took advantage of it.

 

[Blue]

Hey maybe a fair tax where EVERYONE pays a %????

Nawwww.....Democrats would be outraged, paying their fair share just isn't fair!!!

Flat taxes are not "fair shares". One given group of people require different percentages of their income more or less than another given group.

E.g. let's say a 20% flat tax rate. It is not fair on the poorest members of society to tax them at the same rate as Jeff Bezos or Bill Gates because Bezos' (let's say monthly) income is more money than most people will make in their entire lives. - In fact I think he makes more money in an hour than we will make in our entire lives combined - Bezos needs a smaller percentage of his income or total wealth to live a life free from financial worry or hardship - than a poor person. A far higher percentage of his income is disposable than the income of a somebody making 20k a year. Exponentially higher income brackets the richer a person is, is literally a fair share.

An absolute 'fair share', as in as fair as 'fair' gets, would be taxing everybody in a way that makes it so regardless of what a person's income is, everybody receives a variable positive-tax or negative-tax to equalize everybody's income. So everybody ends up with, hypothetical number, 50k a year. Nobody makes less or more than anyone else. Which by the way, I am not advocating for. Just explaining it.

But that's economic Marxism so I imagine you're having a rabid fit by now at the mere mention of that word.

 

[BotanyBoy]

You got triggered, as always.

Your fantasies =/= the real world.

 

[BotanyBoy]

It is not fair on the poorest members of society to tax them at the same rate as Jeff Bezos or Bill Gates because Bezos' (let's say monthly) income is more money than most people will make in their entire lives.

That doesn't have anything to do with fair.

Why is it not fair on the poorest members of society? Should they not have to pay their fair share too??

If EVERYONE gives up the same %....that's as fair as it gets.

An absolute 'fair share', as in as fair as 'fair' gets, would be taxing everybody in a way that makes it so regardless of what a person's income is, everybody receives a variable positive-tax or negative-tax to equalize everybody's income.

That's not fairness that's punishing the rich and rewarding the poor in the pursuit of economic equality.

There isn't a god damn thing that's fair about that. It is the epitome of un-fair means being justified by impossible promise of fairness at the end.

But that's economic Marxism so I imagine you're having a rabid fit by now at the mere mention of that word.

It is very good!!

Not at all....you're just wrong. There is nothing fair about marxism, it is the ultimate in un-fair.

 

[Hypoxia]

Flat taxes are not "fair shares". One given group of people require different percentages of their income more or less than another given group.

I backed the Platypus Party's 1973 candidate for Mayor of the City and County of San Francisco, noted civil rights lawyer and tax resistor Tony Serra. His platform included eliminating local taxes and fees, replaced by taking over Alcatraz Island and turning it into a sex+drugs+rock'n'roll theme park of unlimited pleasures. No invasive taxes; money handed over freely by willing customers. Who could complain?

Extend that. USA could eliminate taxes by nationalizing casinos, brothels, music venues, thus raking in profits. Run the numbers and see.

Alas, USA is too uptight for that. So a progressive income tax is it. And tariffs on foreign condoms.

 

[Blue]

That doesn't have anything to do with fair.

Why is it not fair on the poorest members of society? Should they not have to pay their fair share too??

Actually read my explanation as to why it's not fair instead of skimming it please.

If EVERYONE gives up the same %....that's as fair as it gets.

Let me try and make it simpler:

Person A has 10x higher income than Person B - Both people live in the same market. Let's say it's equal to $20k and $200k.
Person B spends 10% of his income on basic living expenses. (BLE) Water, heating, housing, food, etc.
Person A spends 5% of his income on basic living expenses. This is equal to 5 times Person B's BLE's because we'll assume he has more assets/uses more expensive products.

95% of person A's income is now disposable, whereas 90% of person B's income is disposable. Note that Person A's total disposable income is $190k and person B's is 19k.

It is not fair to tax person B at the same flat rate as person A because their income is 10x more precious to them than person A. And this example isn't even nearly as extreme in real life, Bezos is making something like $60k a minute these days.

If in the case you didn't skim my post and you honestly believe taxing everybody at a flat rate is fair and can't understand how it is literally and blatantly not mathematically or economically true, then I can't see how continuing this conversation is worth my time.
You are taking a position that is genuinely on-par in its ridiculousness as "the earth is flat".

 

[Blue]

I backed the Platypus Party's 1973 candidate for Mayor of the City and County of San Francisco, noted civil rights lawyer and tax resistor Tony Serra. His platform included eliminating local taxes and fees, replaced by taking over Alcatraz Island and turning it into a sex+drugs+rock'n'roll theme park of unlimited pleasures. No invasive taxes; money handed over freely by willing customers. Who could complain?

Extend that. USA could eliminate taxes by nationalizing casinos, brothels, music venues, thus raking in profits. Run the numbers and see.

Alas, USA is too uptight for that. So a progressive income tax is it. And tariffs on foreign condoms.

I've never come across that idea before. That's extremely interesting.
Who knows, maybe 200 years in the future that will be the dominant model for future government revenue?