A community of 30,000 US Transcriptionist serving Medical Transcription Industry

Big tax cuts for businesses at the expense of

Posted: Apr 26, 2017

Who cares about pollution as long as those businesses can make bigger profits and CEOs can get bigger bonuses.

;

This is a part of him making sure he can - cash in while he is in office

[ In Reply To ..]
A huge rich businessman's move!

How much does a billionaire need? - Ridiculous Trump needs to "cash in"

[ In Reply To ..]
Try to understand the math behind lowering taxes. Lower taxes for business means you get things cheaper and more people can afford to shop. Businesses can hire more people.

Closed minds and Trump haters are illogical.

Yet Democrats believe in the VAT tax which puts on a tax - on all phases of production.

[ In Reply To ..]
The tax is hidden in the purchase price and add sales tax on top of that.
How many ways to skin a cat.

After France adopted a VAT, the prices of all goods and services doubled within a year.

This is the same thing that led to the Boston Tea Party.

President Trump's proposal to cut the tax rates will - allow business owners to invest more

[ In Reply To ..]
of their resources in hiring, expansion, and their communities—keeping more money on Main Street rather than sending it off to Washington, D.C.

That's called...sm - Anon

[ In Reply To ..]
trickle-down economics and has been tried over the years and not found to work as well as they (the gov't) thought it would. I think it should be a smaller tax cut for corporations and a bigger tax cut for the middle class. Giving the middle class more to spend would for sure stimulate the economy. If corporations get to pay less in taxes, I think they'll just put that extra money in their own pockets.

Why does everyone equate all business with corporations? - Many of us have small businesses

[ In Reply To ..]
that are going to benefit from this.

"Trickle-down" economics does work. A keeps more of his/her money and hires B. That's trickle down. Democrats have done a good job of demonizing this. It's just common sense whatever you call it.

I have also heard he is giving big tax cuts - to businesses who offshore

[ In Reply To ..]
So what happened to penalizing them for offshoring? Obama tried to do that and the pubs wanted no part of that. Trump wanted to fight offshoring with penalties so what happened to that?

If tax rates are cut, businesses will come back here. If you had to pay a 40% - tax rate and you could pay 25% offshore

[ In Reply To ..]
who wouldn't do that. Think like a business owner.

Again, you keep believing that. - nm

[ In Reply To ..]
.

Why do you think hospitals outsource? Because it's - cheaper. Same concept.

[ In Reply To ..]
xx

So if business is getting a cheaper tax rate - they are stubbornly going to stay offshore?

[ In Reply To ..]
And you believe that why?

If you could earn more money in another state with a cheaper tax rate,where would you choose to work?

Trump bashers have no business sense. - It's all knee jerk because of Trump hatred

[ In Reply To ..]
The tax rates are WHY businesses move offshore.

But loser lefties have no reason, they just want to trash Trump, which is why they make close to minimum wage and Trump is a billionaire.

And what do you make? - You an MT too?

[ In Reply To ..]
we all are struggling to make good wages in this job and if you are on here you must be struggling right along with us and not a billionaire either, right? Or is that you Donnie?

I'm not rich but I don't resent them. In fact, I wish I was and - would like to learn from them.

[ In Reply To ..]
I do not believe in class envy.

Okay, think like an MTSO or - maybe Trumpy manufacturing?

[ In Reply To ..]
Sure, they'll come back here, where they can pay $10/hr, just because a little tax break (which most of them don't pay tax anyway).

OR, maybe they'd rather pay $1 per day to third world country workers? Maybe?

Lower corporate tax is not really gonna do anything for offshoring, I believe.

Corporate tax breaks without strings attached (such as: You MUST hire more people, NOT get that yacht or that island you want, OR give yourself more bonuses) are never going to work anymore.

I think the initial Reagan trickle down actually worked a bit, because corps were not so greedy yet. They've had many years to get wily and greedy and nasty and they are waiting to pounce. We are NOT going to see anything good with these tax breaks for billionaires.

Ugh. I hate Trump and his horrible policies. Plus his personality. I never in a million years would think Americans would vote in an a$$h#le, but they did. Not me, and he will NEVER be my president.

#Resist

Right, because you would much prefer corrupt, - lying Hillary in office...

[ In Reply To ..]
Mega eye roll.

As long as you are in this country, President Trump *IS YOUR PRESIDENT*

You hypocrite lefties constantly whine about being called names, yet you call our president of the United States an a**hole...?

Disgusting hypocrites.

Right now, ANYTHING would be better than Trump. - Absolutely anything.

[ In Reply To ..]

WHERE did you "hear" that? - Got a link?

[ In Reply To ..]
I don't trust hearsay from Trump bashers.

Like we don't trust fake "facts" from Trump - supporters?

[ In Reply To ..]

You go ahead and keep on believing that. What - you will really see is

[ In Reply To ..]
CEOs getting bigger bonuses.

It's pathetic to still believe "trickle down" economics - benefits anyone but those at the top.

[ In Reply To ..]

The Democrats have sure done a good job at convincing - people that supply side doesn't work because

[ In Reply To ..]
they need to keep people dependent.

Libs always lie on this. They try to bluff that spurring growth doesn’t work.

It's really simple. Business keeps money, hires more people - who then pay taxes which means more tax

[ In Reply To ..]
revenue.

"Trickle down" is a mischaracterization of tax reduction policies - that misstates both their intent and

[ In Reply To ..]
the normal result of their implementation.

One of the first uses of the term “trickle down” was by Franklin D. Roosevelt’s speechwriter Samuel Rosenman who lived and worked at the top of the economic pyramid, in the belief that prosperity would trickle down and benefit all. Income tax rates were increased to high levels in the belief that this would help finance World War I. Unfortunately this resulted in investments of the wealthy being directed to tax-exempt municipal bonds and other tax shelters. President Calvin Coolidge and Secretary of the Treasury Andrew Mellon considered this unfair and implemented sharper percentage cuts in tax rates at the lower income levels. They attempted to find the tax rates that would produce the most tax revenues and they succeeded in increasing tax revenues by reducing tax rates.

Efforts to increase income tax revenues through reducing income tax rates have been successful.

Even though low income tax rates now seem to be a partisan issue, throughout the twentieth century they were supported by liberal economists, such as John Maynard Keynes, and Democrats, including presidents Woodrow Wilson and John Kennedy. Unfortunately, many people continue to be confused about the difference between reducing tax rates on taxpayers and reducing tax revenues received by the government.

So this seems like it is from an essay by - Thomas Sowell, no?

[ In Reply To ..]
I have no problem with people quoting other sources, but please it would help to attribute them or claim them as your own, please?

As so many conservatives have so many websites they refuse to even look at by virtue of their names alone, I personally just would like to know what I'm reading, whether it's a fellow MT's opinion or what, that's all.

Thanks in advance.

It is a brief SUMMARY of Sowell's book ecomonics in one - lesson, and you're welcome.

[ In Reply To ..]
x

Why, thank you, but just the same - attribution, please

[ In Reply To ..]
You seem mad at me, why?

All it takes is a copy and paste and Google to figure out where these things come from, so many of which are lifted word for word from sources such as the Heritage Foundation.

I just for the life of me don't know how people can paste these huge screeds and not attribute them, either to the author or themselves. This one was not too bad, and interesting. Still, I would have liked to know who wrote it.

It is important to know the source and if there IS a source, i.e., if you write your own screeds that's fine too, but please attribute.

I usually do and I thought I did. My mistake. - I apologize. It was early morning.

[ In Reply To ..]
nomsg

Imagine yourself with a lot of money. If taxes are high you are - going to look for shelters from the tax.

[ In Reply To ..]
But if taxes are lower, you wouldn't take the effort needed to shelter your taxes as these are not profitable.

The tax system is another welfare benefit. You make X amount of - money, you get X back if you've overpaid.

[ In Reply To ..]
However now, we have EIT credit, economic opportunity credits, green energy credits, adoption credits, tuition credits, and on and on. All of those exemptions, credits, etc. is to get votes.

These are the people who are complaining about "the rich" and don't understand how business works.

Greed and envy are both bad.

I like the part where the marriage penalty is eliminated, - about time.

[ In Reply To ..]
xx

The proposal also eliminates the death tax. - That way my family farm can stay

[ In Reply To ..]
in our family. The death tax would cause us to sell just to pay it.

Really? I thought a farm/property had to be worth - like 5 million a person inheriting

[ In Reply To ..]
Before that tax came into play. Am I wrong on that?

Yes you are wrong. It will eventually be phased out. - NM

[ In Reply To ..]
xx

Not at the federal level though - Some states have different rules

[ In Reply To ..]
Federal "death tax" only applies to 5+ million per inheritant.

I realize where a farm is concerned, profits of the farm AND sale of the farm are not exactly, well, profitable at times, but still, that's a pretty hefty inheritance.

I like the fact that the marriage penalty will be gone and the - inheritance tax (death tax)

[ In Reply To ..]
will be phased out. That alone will stimulate economic growth.

People with a brain know tax cuts will raise revenue. It happened - during the Reagan years. More tax

[ In Reply To ..]
cuts means businesses will hire more people which means more people working which means more taxes are being paid. Even the Democrats know this, but they need people dependent on them so they have to demonize this. That's why they started calling supply side (or trickle down) bad.

They need dependent people to keep them in power.

During the Reagan years is when the middle - class wages began their downhill slide.

[ In Reply To ..]
Trickle down economics doesn't do anything for the worker - it only benefits the fat cat at the top.

Not true. The last two major income tax rate reductions were - in the 1960s and 1980s. Here are the

[ In Reply To ..]
results of those cuts and their effect on revenue collection.

Federal revenue in 1960 = $92.5 Federal revenue in 1968 = $153.0 Over a 50% increase in revenue!

Federal revenue in 1980 = $517.5 Federal revenue in 1989 = $909.0 Over a 70% increase in revenue!

So the FACTS show that cutting taxes in the 60's and 80's increased federal tax revenue.

Now you know the truth.

Unless I am mistaken, THOSE tax reductions - included the middle class, no?

[ In Reply To ..]
Every analysis of the Trumpy ones is that they will do very little for the middle and lower classes, mainly geared towards corporations and billionaires, so....

Reagan was popular with the middle class because he actually did something for them, despite the fact that the major benefit was to the rich and corporations.

It has been proven again and again that giving the middle class any kind of tax or income incentive is the way to spur the economy, but that the trickle down ways where only the rich and corporations get the benefits just increase the gap between the 1% and the rest of us and in fact do NOT encourage the new job growth and trickling down promised.

For the life of me I don't know why Trump can't throw the middle/lower classes a bone instead of the same old tired trickle down. He would be much more popular with EVERYBODY, not just those who believe everything he says and just love him, if he would truly give us a break, not just those at the top.

Eliminating the marriage penalty and increasing - exemptions and child care

[ In Reply To ..]
deductions does help the middle class.

Child care deductions will help the middle class, or - the Ivanka class?

[ In Reply To ..]
That child care thing is nothing more than again redistribution upward to Ivanka and her friends, NOT middle class and poor families.

From the linked article from Slate:

"But Trump’s child-care proposal, which Ivanka is currently trying to sell to Congress, would function more as a handout to wealthy families than as necessary support for families already struggling to afford child-care services. Parents would get the subsidy as a bracket-based tax deduction, meaning people with higher incomes would get more money back. When I wrote about the proposal in February, I surmised that the minimum-wage workers who pour Ivanka’s coffee and do her dry-cleaning would get less money toward their child-care expenses than Ivanka and her husband, who are multi-millionaires, would receive."

Nope.

You can turn it down, I'll take it. - nm

[ In Reply To ..]
xx

So, according to that article, most people - on MT salaries using child care

[ In Reply To ..]
Will get a grand total of $20 a year deduction! Whoopee! Don't spend it all in one place.

Per the article cited:

"The median family incomes in Trump swing counties hover between $61,000 and $73,000, and annual child-care expenses average around $6,000. Under Trump’s plan, these families would get barely anything—their deductions would top out between $0 and $20. (From the GOP’s perspective, the great thing about making this a tax deduction instead of a tax credit is that families too poor to pay income taxes don’t benefit at all.) The median family income on the Upper East Side, where child-care for two young kids regularly exceeds $20,000 a year, is $295,000. These families—the Trumps’ former neighbors—would get a $7,329 tax deduction under the Trump plan. Families earning up to $500,000 could claim a tax deduction under Trump’s plan, and those wealthier people would get an even larger sum."

Even the $61,000 to $73,000 income seems a lot to me, in a depressed rural community with both my husband and I struggling to make much more than minimum wage, but I guess maybe you are in the $250,000-500,000 bracket that actually nets you $7000? Good for you then, if not I guess you are happy with the $20.

I think it stinks, personally.

Yep and any cuts in spending will send the media and the left - (same thing) into meltdown mode,

[ In Reply To ..]
we know the drill.

And so it goes.

We have credits for solar panels, healh care, - deductions for housing interest,

[ In Reply To ..]
etc. I know a wealthy lawyer who is rich simply by consulting on tax details of the debt-structure of building cheap apartments under sec. 8 rules.

The tax code is power. Letting businesses reinvest their money into hiring is a good thing. Don't confuse huge corporations with all businesses, but we are all affected by this.

Apple, the good "social just warrior company" is overseas - so they don't have to pay taxes on

[ In Reply To ..]
300 billion. Maybe this will help bring them back.

Democrats have corrupted understanding of economics and - productivity. They want people

[ In Reply To ..]
dependent. They promote class envy.

Other "good" programs? The govt seems to think all money - is theirs. MSM is brainwashing

[ In Reply To ..]
sheeple into thinking that rate cut will worsen the deficit and reduce revenues. They will believe it too. The MSM is attempting to sway public opinion with out right lies. There are lot of people who don't understand the Laffer curve and tax revenues. It is pathetic.

Similar Messages:

Nov 19, 2013
How the New Health Care Law Affects Medical Expense Deductions by Sally Herigstad How the new health care law affects medical expense deductions in 2013 For 2013, new rules enacted under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 may affect how much you can deduct for medical expenses – or if you can take a medical expense deduction at all. Higher “floor” before you can start taking medical expense deductions Prior to 2013, you could only deduct medical expe ...

Dec 14, 2011
This is beyond crazy. Boycott is one thing, no problem with that. But legislation? California Senator Threatens Boycott After Lowe's Pulls Ads from Muslim-American Reality Show Published December 11, 2011 | Associated Press advertisement A state senator from Southern California was considering calling for a boycott of Lowe's stores after the home improvement chain pulled its advertising from a reality show about Muslim-Americans. Calling the retail giant's decision "un-A ...

Dec 13, 2012
An article on NPR talking about how added tax on some small businesses could lead them to hire more people or buy new equipment. It also talks about the flip side, how for some small businesses, the tax would make it harder for them to expand. "For some 97 percent of small business owners, that higher rate is irrelevant. They make less than $250,000 a year. And for those whose income works out to be just over that threshold, one way out of paying that higher tax rate could be to hire on ...

Dec 02, 2010
See article. ...

Nov 22, 2016
What are your thoughts on home-based businesses like with a multi-level marketing company? I have been hearing there is huge money making potential with these companies. ...

Apr 18, 2017
These folks are seeing the future in clean energy. So glad to see it. "The future is renewables and the large corporations that want renewables." ...

Feb 19, 2017
Farther down the board someone said that Trump's weekly visits to Mar-A-Lago are not hurting local businesses. I think I posted this link before but here it is again. Of course that person may not read it because it comes from NPR. Nevertheless, a number of businesses are suffering and if he keeps doing this every weekend, they will go out of business. ...

Jul 31, 2014
Blocked by 42 Republicans (see link below for senate roll call). This is a bill that would have potentially helped our profession of medical transcription by disallowing tax breaks for such as the big MTSOs on their overseas operations. They won't even let the teeniest incentive to get jobs back here come to a vote. I have come to the conclusion Republicans do not want Americans to have decent jobs, they also want to cut any benefits due to them taking away our jobs. What exactly do the ...

Aug 01, 2012
Hypocrisy out of the Romney camp? Perish the thought! In 1999 Gilchrist Metal Fabricating got $800,000 in tax-exempt revenue bonds to set up a second manufacturing plant and buy production equipment to produce High-def TV broadcasting equipment. They got a $550,000 SBA loan in the late 80s plus matching funds from federally-funded New England Trade Adjustment Assistance Center. He subcontracted with the US Coast Guard in 2008. Another Navy contract in 2011 was for $83,00 ...

Sep 30, 2012
If you go to the link, on the left hand side, maybe halfway down the page, is a video you can play or you can just read the rest of the article. ______________________ U.S. businesses that bought solar panels made in China earlier this year are retroactively being hit with unexpected tax bills, as they find themselves caught in the middle of a trade fight between U.S. and Chinese manufacturers. The unusual bills are the result of action by the U.S. Commerce Department, which slapped pro ...

Jun 21, 2017
A group of Baltimore businesses that sustained damage during the 2015 riots following the death of Freddie Gray is suing the city, alleging officials failed to suppress the riots. The nearly 700-page complaint was filed in Baltimore City Circuit Court in March but only recently removed to U.S. District Court at the request of the defendants. An untold amount of money must been lost by those business many of which were burned to the ground because of those riots and the city let this happen. ...

Feb 18, 2017
When Donald Trump jets off to Florida just the flight costs taxpayers 3 million dollars but it is also hurting local businesses. Roads are closed, local airports are closed and customers can't get to businesses. Some of said that if this continues every weekend they will go out of business. Way to make America great again. ...

Nov 26, 2014
Businesses will have a $3,000-per-employee incentive to hire illegal immigrants or native-born workers under President Obama’s sweeping action on illegal immigration. Because of a kink in ObamaCare, businesses will not face a penalty for not providing illegal immigrants health care, The Washington Times reports. Illegal immigrants are ineligible for public benefits such as buying insurance on ObamaCare’s health exchanges. Congressional aides condemned the loophole saying it puts ...

Apr 13, 2011
Salary of the US President...$400,000. Salary of retired US Presidents...$180,000. Salary of House/Senate...$174,000. Salary of Speaker of House...$223,500....Salary of Majority/Minority Leaders...$193,400..........Average US Salary...$33,000 to $77,000. HELLO! I think we found where some cuts should be made! ...

Dec 07, 2010
Talk Box: Tax Cut Extension Would Lead to More Borrowing From China 12/7/10 at 01:50 AM // MSNBC's Chuck Todd reported that the framework deal President Obama seems to have reached with Republicans on extending the Bush tax cuts will result in a loss of revenue totaling nearly $450 billion in 2011, more than the cost of the 2009 stimulus while Countdown guest host Sam Seder investigated the huge amounts the U.S. will have to borrow from countries like China, Russia and th ...

Aug 05, 2011
Quote from S&P on downgrade: Compared with previous projections, our revised base case scenario now assumes that the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts, due to expire by the end of 2012,remain in place. We have changed our assumption on this because the majority of Republicans in Congress continue to resist any measure that would raise revenues, a position we believe Congress reinforced by passing the act. ...

Dec 13, 2010
At 3:40 p.m., the vote was 54-6 in favor. They need 6 votes to pass. We shall see. Voting against it so far is Birgaman (D), Feingold (D), Leahy (D), Udal (D)l, Sanders(I) , and Gillibrand (D). ...

Dec 06, 2010
Extending the Bush tax cuts: Human nature? Of all the coverage of the debate over whether or not to extend the Bush tax cuts, and there is plenty today, given that the White House appears to be quietly giving ground to Republicans on extending the tax cuts temporarily, today's money quote comes via Howard Kurtz over at The Daily Beast. He quotes former President George W. Bush communications director Dan Bartlett as saying, "We knew that, politically, once you get [a tax cut] into la ...

Dec 03, 2010
"here’s what the public said about the Bush tax cuts, according to the exit polls last month: 40 percent said to continue ALL of the cuts, 36 percent said to continue them for families who earn less than $250,000 a year, and an additional 15 percent said to expire them for all. So a majority -- 51 percent -- backed either the Democratic position or wants all the cuts to expire." ...

Dec 02, 2010
So far, 211 yea, 173 nay. Mostly partisan votes. 13 dems Nay, 2 pubs yea. ...

Jul 26, 2010
Tax hikes for the rich: Can the economy afford them? By Jeanne Sahadi, senior writerJuly 26, 2010: 3:15 AM ET NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Would making the rich pay higher taxes next year hurt the economy? That question underlines one of the trickiest fiscal questions facing Washington policymakers: What to do about the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts, which are set to expire at the end of the year. President Obama wants to let the cuts lapse for joint tax filers who make at leas ...

Aug 21, 2012
If you don't think they should be encoded for all future American generations, ad infinitum, then don't vote for Romney. ...

Jun 25, 2017
Under the Senate health care plan, employers will no longer be required to offer health insurance. I am guessing the big transcription companies are already planning to use this to layoff employees--you know, "minimum wage is too high in your state, employee benefits too good in your state, now you want health insurance too?" Given the choice of not being required to provide health insurance, "not being able to find MTs willing to work for a pittance," and offshoring to some foreig ...

Oct 21, 2009
x ...

Mar 08, 2011
The first links is the House Appropriations document showing spending cuts and most show the reasons for the cuts. http://www.majorityleader.gov/uploadedfiles/FY2011_SUMMARY.pdf The second link shows the comparison from 2010 and the President's cuts. Note the differences on that. http://www.majorityleader.gov/uploadedfiles/FY2011CR_SUBCOM.pdf The third link shows the cuts inacted in 2010 and those requested for 2011. http://www.majorityleader.gov/uploadedfiles/FY2011_CUTS ...

Dec 17, 2010
They worked late into the night to pass it. It will cost $858 billion but it gives everyone a "breather" for a while. Reid pulled the Omnibus bill off the table; i.e., just died. John McCain, Tom Coburn, and Jim DeMint were the reason because they wanted the bill read page per page. Guess Reid didn't want the people to know what was really in the bill. I had forgotten some of the crap in there but thankfully, the John Murtha Foundation (biggest crook in PA) will not be funded, n ...

Dec 06, 2010
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/03/alan-grayson-fox-news-tax-cuts_n_791533.html Here's an excerpt: They want tax cuts for the rich because they want a tax cut for themselves. What do I mean by that? Let's take a look at the people who are really in charge, the ones who actually run the Republican party. Let's start with this gentleman here, the man with the cigar, Rush Limbaugh. Doesn't he look happy? According according to Newsweek, he makes $58.7 million a year, an ...

Aug 02, 2010
If the deficit hawks are truly sincere, maybe they should listen to their own financial guru--Alan Greenspan. www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/01/alan-greenspan-extending_n_666549.html ...

Jul 22, 2010
Democrats are considering a plan to delay tax hikes on the wealthy for two years because the economic recovery is slow and they fear getting crushed in November’s election. It could mean a big reprieve for families earning $250,000 and above annually. President George W. Bush’s tax cuts will expire at the end of the year unless Congress acts to delay their sunset. Some Democrats are now arguing forcefully that a delay is a win-win plan that would help the federal ...

Mar 08, 2011
This is one article: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is promising an up-or-down vote on the $61 billion in budget cuts passed by House Republicans — just to show that version of the spending bill is “dead” – even if the upper chamber has to debate until 1 a.m. to prove the point. “I hope we have a vote on this today,” said Reid to reporters. “If not, we’re going to go through all this procedural process. They cannot stop us from having a vote o ...