what's your opinion? do you think that **** is right?

They should just treat corporations more like they treat people. If a person tries to renounce their citizenship purely for tax purposes, they're going to have some issues. If Burger King wants to move to Luxembourg, they can do it as long they take all their restaurants with them.

That doesn't really cover it. Burger King will still pay US taxes on US gains.

missed this. not on a super deep level, but i understand the concept and the effect on our economy.

obv change the rules. wtf? what? rules can't be changed?

burger king isn't the best example here. but i echo adebisi's sentiment.

The US should stop trying to tax income that is not generated by the US. The location of the HQ is irrelevant. Daimler pays US taxes on its Mercedes sales here. Ford pays German tax for Sales in Germany. The taxation of repatriated earnings is dumb the peoples budget is dumber.

That was in response to you saying Allergan's HQ was in Irvine. Allergan was acquired by Actavis whose global HQ are in Ireland I believe, which means Allergan's HQ, for all intents and purposes, is now located in Ireland(or w/e).

Well we could start annexing other countries like the Roman Empire if we want to steal other countries revenue. Expect push back.

what about when manufacturing is moved to the third world and the product is brought back here, lou?

ah... well, ya, that's ****ed. fwiw i'd finally caught up to what you were saying when i read that post.

It is handled via transfer pricing which is a way of aligning cost and revenue by tax jurisdiction. Big corporations are a large collection of legal entities (people if you will) established in large part to make sure the worlds tax men get there share. They all want their monies.
In your example the producer of the good would sell the product to the US company and recognize revenue when the product got to the US. The US firm would recognize revenue when it is sold to final consumer. A very generalized answer there are all sorts of factors.

other countries have nothing to do with what i'm saying (from the way i see it). all i'm saying is, companies should be held to a certain degree of patriotism. and the government could easily change the rules limiting their ability to fire americans, send off the factory to some fascist county, and profit all the extra labor costs, seemingly tax free.

There are laws that govern these things. Maybe we should just go back to subsistence farming. Full employment and little economic inequality.

My opinion is your solution is ******ed and will exacerbate the specific problem you purport to solve.

nice conflation bro.

my contention is you struggle to understand economics.

Also: lol financial transactions tax

lou, i need to know this. if you're brand of free trade was so good, why didn't burke tell england they should close down all the mills, fire the people, ship the factories to destitute areas they controlled, and exploit the poors?

i mean, this is where all these ideas originate from, right? why wasn't it good enough for them?

what you call free-trade is nothing more than corporate protectionism.

sounds like a decent way to address inequality.

Not sure. Am almost positve that no budget will work as long as there is so much government waste. Only way to reduce waste,imo, is to reduce government.

that's what the american fascists would have you believe. it's not true though. the only power capable of 'beating back' the oligarchs is? you guessed it, the government.

^^^ I agree to a point. Of course I don't want to go back to the federal government of, let's say, 100 years ago. It just seems that it has gone too far the other way. Certainly they could combine some agencies and do away with others. This is just the "A" list.


•AbilityOne Commission
•Access Board
•Administration for Children and Families (ACF)
•Administration for Community Living
•Administration for Native Americans
•Administration on Aging (AoA)
•Administration on Developmental Disabilities
•Administrative Conference of the United States
•Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts
•Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
•African Development Foundation
•Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)
•Agency for International Development (USAID)
•Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
•Agricultural Marketing Service
•Agricultural Research Service
•Agriculture Department
•Air Force
•Air Force Reserve
•Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau
•Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives Bureau
•American Battle Monuments Commission
•AmeriCorps
•Amtrak
•Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
•Antitrust Division
•Appalachian Regional Commission
•Architect of the Capitol
•Archives (National Archives and Records Administration)
•Arctic Research Commission
•Armed Forces Retirement Home
•Arms Control and International Security
•Army
•Army Corps of Engineers
•Arthritis and Musculoskeletal Interagency Coordinating Committee

Yes, when they are actually put in place. To quote RR "A rising tide lifts all boats".

Do you think wealth redistribution helps the 90%? If so why when it has been tried in other countries it hasn't help.

Merica is the single greatest nation at improving ones standard of living. It has been responsible for more wealth creation than any other country, you could point to China in the past 20 years, but where are they exporting the vast majority of goods produced?

I could also point to a closer time in the 90's when we had a balanced budget during the Clinton administration’s 2nd term. How strong was the economy then and where the 90% doing better at that time then the present?

Voodoo economics itt