- advertisements -
Hmmm, opportunity, bitchez?
Taxiation without representation, bitches!
no matter what the law seems to say, the u.s. has low corporate tax rates. wage earners, from the poor to the n.b.a., are screwed. the owners of capital not so much. said as the latter not the former.
GE 14b in profits tax bill zero not one dime
US TAX FREE INCOME FOR overseas generated income by US companies ( even if the income was from selling goods to America).
WHAT? Thank you Republicans (Bush)for creating it, and Thank you Democrats for maintaining it. Both of you keeping your loyal fans happy.
All income should be taxed AS IF generated IN the US, and THEN the foreign taxes ( if any) deducted from the amount and the balance paid with honor ( hahaha) by the companies.
This CRY-ME-A-River the companies (and politians) pull about the supposed high taxes they pay makes me sick. And, who covers their ass when their is a problem doing business in these foreign lands....why the sucker American joe-blow taxpayer.
Look at the recent comment by John Chambers, Cisco, that "he would bring jobs back to America if the US would lower taxes to 5%" Hey John FUCK YOU and the billions you have made off America...you shameless shit. I'll laugh my ass off when China nationalizes you ASS-etts or their servers eat your alive.
No FU, if a company like Cisco wants to escape the fascist/socialist parasitic state...good for them, quit defending the complete BS Wellfare/Warfare nazi country this has become....so I and others should be taxed to death to fund the endless wars, the endless debt and money printing ponzi scheme, the endless welfare handouts... that productive companies like Cisco which produce real products that people want on the free market should be hosts to parasitic totalitarian fuckheaded socialist/fascist utopian delusions by the political class or their parasitic political supporters that relies on the blood siphoning they do to purchase their support. Yea, just tax everyone, tax em tax em tax em, that is the fucking solution....that will bring utopia....our problem is that we do not tax enough...you have fucking convinced me you dumbshit. Just FU to hell you moron.
Fuck whoever junked you for that.
Nobody is as screwed as the property owners. They are the true serfs: "bound to the land".
Buying property is the same as dropping ones drawers, bending over and asking a predatory tax regime to take you from behind.
Please raise your hand if you were previously bewildered by the concept of higher taxes = higher prices before you read this Magnum Opus of Obviousness Stating.
Those of you raising your hands, please exit that way ===>
May I suggest a basic course in 3rd grade math before you decide to re-visit?
Thank you, drive through.
I am Chumbawamba.
+1 agreed. I don't read this blog to find out shit I already fucking know. That would mean I re-learned shit I already knew and that... well that's just unacceptable.
P.S.,How many minutes do you think you've spent re-writing your username? We get it. You are Chumbawamba. You get knocked down, you get up again. We're never going to keep you down.
Oh what the hell. Nevermind.
My Profile, Edit, Signature...does the repeating for you, for you...
Funny thing about that. I set my signature early on when I first created my account but, you know what? It never worked. So yes, each and everytime you've seen it, I typed it.
It is a conscious and overt act in which I am signing my moniker to what I write. It is my seal.
brb, reliving memories of 8th grade sock hop..
Chumbawamba+Third Eye Blind+Sugar Ray+MatchBox 20+Goo Goo Dollas+Gin Blossoms+Backstreet Boys
I wish I got to live during the 1950s :(
America has been on a rapid spiraling decline for 2 generations now.
Sounded more like a pitch to expatriate to Singapore.
yes, you will love the jail sentencing for spitting, cussing, singing in public, smoking anything, expressing 'christian' views.
It does not seem to bother Jimmy Rodgers.
Jim Rogers lives in Shanghai.
and "Japan has added more to it's balance in two weeks than the Fed has in its entire history." Welcome to "the petri dish of finance." The Bernank's theories are about to be put to the test: release the slide rules!
Then why didn't prices go down when they extended the Bush era tax cuts? Why don't prices ever go down on any tax cut? Because your logic is flawed. There is no direct connection between prices and taxes other than narrative. Management thinks customers will believe that prices had to go up because taxes went up so they pass them on to increase or maintain profitability. Managements will do anything other than reduce profitability and bonuses you know. Any bogus excuse will do. Thanks for forwarding yet antother bogus excuse. If you assume that managements were already charging the maximum that the market would bear then all increased taxes would do is decrease corporate profitability because they were already and always charging as much as they could.
"There is no direct connection between prices and taxes other than narrative. "
Your premise is flawed. Ask the blue States that are bleeding populace.
Plus, tax rates were kept level, not cut, on the extension.
Dude, you might be on the wrong blog.
now, now. that's the beauty of it. arguments get critiqued.
That wasn't an argument, but rather convolution concentrate.
Hey Paul DumbF#@k (PDF) YOUR logic is flawed. PDF has a lack of logic (LOL)
"There is no direct connection between prices and taxes" - PDF
Classic. Anything you say after that becomes irrelevant.
sometimes you get to raise prices because of higher taxes, etc. etc. and sometimes you don't. is that a direct connection? sure you'd always like to raise prices, taxes or no. but that's not the same thing.
and, at least for me, it's not the taxes that really piss me off. it's the hideous shit they spend it on.
How in the hell did you figure that raising sales tax wouldn't have a direct effect on prices?They have to get the money somehow. The exception of course is the wealthy who has everything they want shipped and billed to their tax exempt foundations but really, they don't count anyway. The mere idea of them getting little people's food and little people's leisure items is simply bowling alley behavior
I think you completely missed the point. He's speaking of the inflation of taxes, and how it decreases disposable income - not necessarily how it impacts the prices of individual goods.
For instance, when a road gets tolled for the first time, that's inflation of taxes paid. Does it impact the price of a banana, no. But it reduces the disposable income an individual has, and therefore leads to further economic decline (unless you believe in taxation and big government). A highway in my area is getting a $2.50 to $5.00 each way toll in the next couple of months. Commute 200 days a year, and that might add up to $1,200 in after-tax dollars. That's not insignificant.
His example of sales taxes seems to suppose a base level of necessary spending. So, if you have to spend $20k on necessities per year, a 1% sales tax rise would cost you an extra $200. You don't have a choice. This reduces your other spending proportionally.
Does it impact the price of a banana, no.
It will impact the price of the banana if any of the costs of bringing the banana to market were increased by having to pay the toll.
So the chances are it will impact the price of bananas (and everything else) sold locally.
Black is quite correct - taxes raise prices generally, because they raise costs.
Raises costs for non-productive activity.
now, this is productive activity by just one company... Around the trun of the year, I wrote that I had been noticing many grocery items adopting the new 13.5 ounce-is-the-new-pound packaging.
I first noticed this at Thanksgiving, unknown number of friends for dinner, and didn't want to be caught short of sweet potatoes. I looked at a brand of instant potatoes which included sweet. All the boxes were 9.5 to 8 ounces each...cheese 'infused' the lower weight. I thought 1.98 for a box of instant sweet potatoes...pricey. Well, I was in the same delima at Christmas and those same boxes were now 7.2 to 6.8 ounces for the same price.
Yesterday at the store, a big display of "NEW FLAVORS!". Well, new and old were now 4.6 to 6.2 ounces for the same price. Tht is near 50% price vs weight difference in under 6 months.
It really hit me at how the American consumer is being inflated without their being aware of it. I have mentioned these obversations to most I know, and none even look at the package weight on anything.
Heaven help the ordinary bread winner with kids trying to make ends meet. Americans don't understand what is being done to them...mostly by the Fed.
So folks...look around you, you are being screwed by deception.
It's clear that most of these people have never had the benefit of a 300 level economics course in their lives. Therefore all the invective and "dude" this and "dude that. If you want to get technical any product with a non-zero cost of production where unit cost is variable depending on economies of scale has a cross over point where all increased costs will do is reduce gross profit. The term "taxes" is also nebulus. What kind of taxes? VAT tax, % of revenue or income? Now VAT and % of revenue like they have in Canada go to the consumer in much higher proportion than a tax based on income. Additionally for those that fancy themselves "investors" if any of your companies has a non-zero cost of the product they sell and would have to pass on an increase in income tax to the customer then the product being sold is by definition not priced at one of the maxima. In other words their pricing is off to begin with if they can just increase the cost (for whatever reason) and not suffer a loss of sales or income. Anyway I didn't realize that most of the posters here were so uneducated. Like I said the propaganda is paramount anymore. A good narative. Facts don't matter.
Actually, in economics the market sets the price of anything and everything. It doesn't matter what the taxes or production costs are. You can try to pass them on but in the end the market says the product has a certain value. You can move along the price-demand curve by varying the price but it is not based on inputs like taxes. Some products may cost more to produce than the market will bear in which case the producer is out of business.
What does happen is that taxes tend to have negative impact in many areas besides price, but they should generally be deflationary in that they reduce consumption and put extra internal pressures on production and sales. It is a prime motivation for moving overseas to reduce production costs...cheaper labor, lower taxes, fewer rules/regs. Look at the recommendation here to head for Singapore. Capital searches relentlessly for its best return.
Methinks that most ZH'er believe that anyone with advanced education in economics has abandoned any and all connection to reality, e.g. Chairsatan Bernanke and his FRB minions.
Thank you Mr. M. for that succinct observation.
Luckily I have never had the benefit of a 300 level economics course, so I don't feel bad when I tell Paul Bog. to 'Go fuck yourself'.
If you examine the post I was replying to, I was arguing that a new toll on a road might very well add to the price of bananas.
Congrats on completing your 300 level economics course!
Now I suggest you go back and do the 100 level English comprehension course.
@traderjoe "and when corporate and payroll tax rates increase, those increased costs get passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices." If he isn't talking about taxes increasing the price of individual goods then he isn't talking about anything at all, which of course he isn't
So if everyone in a town of 30k has $200 less to spend, based only on your 1% salex tax increase, will the consumer's buying power increase or decrease? Add in various other tax hikes, and that consumer would have suffered greater than 1% in their purchasing power. If everyone in the town of 30k residents is now purchasing less at the local mom & pop coffee shop, will the demand for the shop's products increase or decrease? If by some miracle, it were to decrease (heavy sarc), would the coffee shop increase or decrease prices in order to drum up revenues to make up for the lost business? Basic economics dude.
Add in various other factors, including the coffee shops increased input costs, basically across the board (sans employees wages - stagflation baby), and you have a mom and pop shop laying off employees, and closing up shop.
One reason Amazon.com is so popular, is the lack of paying sales taxes (but not in every state), helping to make an item cheaper, and a reason competitors are bitching to all across the nation regarding the unfair advantage Amazon.com has. If items weren't cheaper, why would Amazon's competitors complain?
Trader Joe, THAT IS NOT WHAT he is saying. You could, I suppose, argue whatever you tax, you get less of and therefore prices would tend to rise.
Your arguement is deflationary, not inflationary and so is his; he just does not realize it.
You can phrase anyway you want but if you ask a person how much something costs, they are not going to say "well pretax, this banana cost x and then after tax net was X+T calculated on a percentage basis of sum(ST x PTB)+B=FT". Ever hear someone say that?
Move to a lower COL area if you don't want to pay "taxes" for commuting to work.
You are absolutely correct. There are any number of examples of local drops in sales tax with no corresponding drop in local prices. This was nonsense.
'Any number'? Some examples, please.
Though I guess 'zero' is a number too.
Anyway, saying that any increase in the costs of bringing something to market will ultimately be met by the consumer, is not the same as suggesting that businesses won't take advantage of the 'stickiness' of the public's perception of what items cost, when some of the businesses' costs decrease. Above all else, businesses respond to competition when it comes to pricing. This is why, when taxes go up, it may be weeks or even months before retail prices reflect the rise - individual companies will attempt to keep their prices lower than their competitors until they risk losing actual money.
Furthermore, we are in a broadly inflationary environment (except for things bought on credit). If VAT is reduced by 2.5%, a business is not going to bring its prices down by 2.5% if its other costs have been increasing at 8% per annum.
Of course a business is not going to reduce the sales price of an item. Not with inflation staring them in the wallet. Or, at least, they will not without competition from someone like, oh, say, "WalMart"?
...so you are saying that the price I pay (which includes the sales tax) does not go down if the sales tax is reduced?
It is also not just the taxes that hurt, it is the levels of bureaucracy and regulation in states such as CA that drive folks to do start up companies elsewhere...or out of the U.S. completely. Entrepreneurs get treated as though they were some sort of criminal that must prove their innocence first before being permitted by these gatekeepers to proceed. They are are all anti-business, but they demand their share of the profit...crazy.
Well said. Government writes rules for companies that it has no ownership rights in and has no responsibility for the results. It's a great situation and its intoxicating in its power. Once we become the USSA with another 80,000 pages of regs, 40,000 more pages of tax laws and not the second, but the number one highest corporate tax rate in the world we will see if the modern statist-liberals can produce economic nirvana. Wanna take bets?
Don't forget another 16,000 IRS employees.
Oh, excellent point! They are here to help us, I believe. You would think just maybe anything that comes with 16000 new agents/law-enforcers would raise a few eyebrows...especially since we are not dealing with criminal law. Not these days it seems.
Then why didn't prices go down when they extended the Bush era tax cuts?
Help me out here - are you really this clueless?
You do realize that extending tax cuts is not actually lowering taxes, right? That it's just not raising taxes; i.e. it's not changing anything - right? If no changes is made - then why would this lack of change cause prices to change?
Not to mention - the Bush tax cuts were cuts in income tax, not corporate taxes. So the only "prices" that could feasibly be changed by changes in these taxes are the wages that you charge your employer. Hypothetically they could have changed - e.g. if you all of the sudden were paying more in taxes to the government, then you might demand a higher salary from your employer, in order to maintain the same income level and therefore the same standard of living. Good luck with that though. The effect of that would be (is) to push jobs overseas.
Don't confuse the hyperventilating trolls with data! Like pouring a gallon of water into a shot glass
Tips: tips [ at ] zerohedge.com
General: info [ at ] zerohedge.com
Legal: legal [ at ] zerohedge.com
Advertising: ads [ at ] zerohedge.com
Abuse/Complaints: abuse [ at ] zerohedge.com
Advertise With Us
Make sure to read our "How To [Read/Tip Off] Zero Hedge Without Attracting The Interest Of [Human Resources/The Treasury/Black Helicopters]" Guide
How to report offensive comments
Notice on Racial Discrimination.