|
|
#21
08-21-2007, 05:02 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Do corporations pay taxes?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Is the idea of "corporate taxes" is a laughable sham. Don't they just pass that cost on to the consumer? [/ QUOTE ] Not necessarily, in fact only under very specific assumptions this holds true. There's like a million papers on the incidence of corporate taxation though waiting for you via Google or your nearest Ecomomics library. [/ QUOTE ] They can't really 'pass the cost on to the consumer' anyway. That makes the assumption that corporations can raise prices and still maintain the exact same volume of sales. If that were the case, then they'd already be charging this higher price. So, they might raise prices to try and compensate, but that will come at a cost. Corporations really do lose out. They might not pay 100% of their tax burden, but as someone mentioned earlier in the thread, no one pays 100% of their tax burden. If I was untaxed I'd be able to work for much less than I'm being paid now, but instead I'm passing some of my burden on to my employer. 
|
|
#22
08-21-2007, 05:12 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Do corporations pay taxes?
Seriously, just look at your phone bills. Or cable bills. Or gas bills. You pay all sorts of damned taxes on those things. Not all companies can pass the taxes onto the consumer. But those that can certainly do, and we personally use those services a lot more often than normal......
|
|
#23
08-21-2007, 05:14 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Do corporations pay taxes?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Is the idea of "corporate taxes" is a laughable sham. Don't they just pass that cost on to the consumer? [/ QUOTE ] Not necessarily, in fact only under very specific assumptions this holds true. There's like a million papers on the incidence of corporate taxation though waiting for you via Google or your nearest Ecomomics library. [/ QUOTE ] They can't really 'pass the cost on to the consumer' anyway. That makes the assumption that corporations can raise prices and still maintain the exact same volume of sales. If that were the case, then they'd already be charging this higher price. So, they might raise prices to try and compensate, but that will come at a cost. Corporations really do lose out. They might not pay 100% of their tax burden, but as someone mentioned earlier in the thread, no one pays 100% of their tax burden. If I was untaxed I'd be able to work for much less than I'm being paid now, but instead I'm passing some of my burden on to my employer. [/ QUOTE ] This is so horribly wrong, like basically every sentence.
|
|
#25
08-21-2007, 05:07 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Do corporations pay taxes?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Is the idea of "corporate taxes" is a laughable sham. Don't they just pass that cost on to the consumer? [/ QUOTE ] Not necessarily, in fact only under very specific assumptions this holds true. There's like a million papers on the incidence of corporate taxation though waiting for you via Google or your nearest Ecomomics library. [/ QUOTE ] They can't really 'pass the cost on to the consumer' anyway. That makes the assumption that corporations can raise prices and still maintain the exact same volume of sales. If that were the case, then they'd already be charging this higher price. So, they might raise prices to try and compensate, but that will come at a cost. Corporations really do lose out. They might not pay 100% of their tax burden, but as someone mentioned earlier in the thread, no one pays 100% of their tax burden. If I was untaxed I'd be able to work for much less than I'm being paid now, but instead I'm passing some of my burden on to my employer. [/ QUOTE ] This is so horribly wrong, like basically every sentence. [/ QUOTE ] I guess it would be asking too much to expect some reasoning behind this statement. We'll take your word for it. Thanks, I feel smarter now.
|
|
#26
08-21-2007, 06:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Do corporations pay taxes?
[ QUOTE ]
I guess it would be asking too much to expect some reasoning behind this statement. We'll take your word for it. Thanks, I feel smarter now. [/ QUOTE ] If you have a simple understanding of tax incidence in a partial equilibrium model, why not... Assume you have am infinitely elastic supply curve and a "normal" demand curve for a certain good. Then: (a) can the tax burden be passed onto the consumers 100% by increasing the consumer price (b) sales volume will decrease (c) in the absence of the tax companies won't be able to charge a higher price than marginal cost (which is also the producer price in teh presence of tax, oof course) (d) companies won't lose out Basically tax incidence depends on supply and demand elasticities in the different markets - labour markets, capital markets, markets for goods, etc. Was this of any help to you?
|
|
#28
08-22-2007, 12:02 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Do corporations pay taxes?
No, you are the one that doesnt understand.
"I believe your understanding is clouded. For one, by using the SSI surplus to pay part of the yearly deficit, the govt. does not have to borrow from outside sources and pay interest the next year on the loan. <font color="red">The SS surplus does not pay part of the deficit. If you are talking about the investment in Treasuries, as you continue on later , then call it that. If SS didnt invest in Treasuries then they would be sold to someone else it is a spending vs tax revenue issue not a SS issue</font> By using the SSI surplus, they simply issue more "IOUs" the next year for the interest. <font color="red">which is exactly what they would do if the Treasuries were sold elsewhere, if spending is less than tax revenues. Again nothing to do with SS. </font> If the govt was not allowed to use the SSI surplus to pay the deficit, they would be paying interest on another 2 trillion dollars every year. <font color="red">Wrong, if historical spending and tax revenues remained the same, they would be paying the same interest they are paying now </font> At 5%, that is another 50B a year added to the General Budget. If the consequences of the govt.'s spending habits had to be addressed the next year (instead of just issuing IOUs) they would not be able to get away with the spending and tax cut habits they have. <font color="red"> nothing to do with SS </font> Secondly, the SSI surplus was not meant to be used to supplement the general budget this way. <font color="red"> It doesnt supplement the budget, it is an off budget item</font> If it was, they would not have needed Congress to vote in favor of doing so, it would have been done automatically. The Social Security Trust was intended to be a seperate entity, with its monies for the sole purpose of paying its recepients in the future. NO PRUDENT MANAGER OF THE FUND WOULD HAVE CONTINUED INVESTING IN U.S. BONDS, as it would have been transparent years ago that the U.S. would be unable to pay it back. <font color="red">it may be transparent to you, but it isnt to the rest of the world that gladly invests in Treasuries. </font> They would have been better off hiding it in a mattress and letting it decay from inflation." The only issue is whether it is good policy to invest the surplus in something other than US Treasuries. No matter what alternative investment you choose there are ramifications to the market for those investments. Investing in Treasuries ensures no governmental distortion of those markets. The biggest lobby for privatization of SS accounts were the brokerages. Why? Because the increased capital flowing into the markets would directly (through increased trades) and indirectly (through upward pressure on prices from the flood of mandatorily invested capital.) benefit them.
|
|
#29
08-25-2007, 03:29 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Do corporations pay taxes?
[ QUOTE ]
more misconceptions of yours that have been covered numerous times. Social Security does not "supplement the general budget", and the Social Security benefit formula is front loaded [/ QUOTE ] Positive proof that just because you have posted over 5800 times, doesn't mean you know what you are talking about. The SSI surplus is "invested" in U.S. bonds, which are used to pay the deficient and SSI fund gets IOUs (that cannot be repaid) in return. Stop embarassing yourself.
|
|
#30
08-25-2007, 01:13 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Do corporations pay taxes?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] more misconceptions of yours that have been covered numerous times. Social Security does not "supplement the general budget", and the Social Security benefit formula is front loaded [/ QUOTE ] Positive proof that just because you have posted over 5800 times, doesn't mean you know what you are talking about. The SSI surplus is "invested" in U.S. bonds, which are used to pay the deficient and SSI fund gets IOUs (that cannot be repaid) in return. Stop embarassing yourself. [/ QUOTE ] The deficit is caused by spending more than is collected in taxes. Who buys those bonds is irrelevant. The SSI funds are invested in bonds, are they "IOUs"? Yes, like any other bond. Can they be paid? When was the last time the US government defaulted? I know what Im talking about because I am one of a group that has peer reviewed the Social Security Trustees reports actuarial work. You have already been labeled one of the worst posters in politics in another thread, and you are strengthening that opinion when you parrot nonsense that you read somewhere else without the slightest understanding of what youre talking about.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
