Thread: Triangle Shirtwaist Factory 2012. History repeats itself.

The way I've heard the "plan" described best is "kicking the can down the road".

Originally Posted by ReardenSteel

Simple, raise taxes for the wealthy, more government oversight, more deficit spending, and more people dependent on the government.

Sounds like something very scary .

Bob, Ever been to Japan ? normally I would agree with you but Japanese and Chinese Governments are not as short sited as America.

Believe me not bashing the states but nothing I see illustrates any desire by GOV to improve the pit that has been created.
Instead of sucking it up and dealing with a lost decade to ween government off the corporate teat and strengthen the sectors of the economy that can help improve conditions for the majority . I see a whole lot of weakness and selling of the county. reliance on war to secure resources and purposeful dumbing down of the populace.

Makes me sad.
Shayne.

Out Of sight,out of mind,you build it we americans will buy it,you see americans look at people in 3rd world countrys as being expendable,They have far to many people as it is,so 100 people die in a fire,thats the American attitude overall (not mine)
Anyone remember Bhopal, 1984,in a company owned by union carbide?

Shayne

I don't know about China but Japan's economy has been stagnant for 20 or more years which gives you plenty of time to come up with a plan. That is usually after numerous failed plans have been tried. Plans are all well and good but begs the question of will the next great plan actually work.

There is no doubt that corporations pay less tax per dollar than individual workers do. The only sticking point seems to be how much less PolitiFact | Facebook post compares corporate, individual tax burden in 1950, today . I don't think on that basis there is any need to do any corporate weening as they already pay less than an individual.

Bob

Originally Posted by BobH

I don't think on that basis there is any need to do any corporate weening as they already pay less than an individual.

Bob

Well why not ? According to the US Supreme Court they have the same rights as an individual to contribute to political campaigns. In effect .... the corporation is an individual ..... so says the law of the land.

Originally Posted by JimmyHAD

Well why not ? According to the US Supreme Court they have the same rights as an individual to contribute to political campaigns. In effect .... the corporation is an individual ..... so says the law of the land.

Point is then they should at least pay as much as individuals do per tax dollar collected. Contributing to political campaigns is not contributing to the Federal government's tax base, far from it. OTH corporations and their donations account for far more campaign funds that do contributions from individuals and are likely, as a result, to carry far more influence over what the candidate does if elected. So in effect they can exert more influence on government than individuals do while at the same time paying less actual taxes than the individual does per tax dollar collected. Seems fair to me. Deeming corporations to be individuals means little and maybe hides more.

Bob

Originally Posted by BobH

OTH corporations and their donations account for far more campaign funds that do contributions from individuals and are likely, as a result, to carry far more influence over what the candidate does if elected.

Exactly. Money talks and you know what walks.

Originally Posted by JimmyHAD

Exactly. Money talks and you know what walks.

Yea, sure do and I got the holes in my shoes to prove it.

Bob

We live in a capitalistic economic system and it's all about the guy who goes out and risks it all on a business or investment or a corporation. They should get to keep everything they earn because of the risks involved. Everyone else who takes the easy way out working for someone else, well...they're just a bunch of slugs who should be happy to earn what their boss feels like giving them. They should be taxed to death to support the country cause they took the easy way out.

That's what many would say.

Originally Posted by thebigspendur

We live in a capitalistic economic system and it's all about the guy who goes out and risks it all on a business or investment or a corporation. They should get to keep everything they earn because of the risks involved. Everyone else who takes the easy way out working for someone else, well...they're just a bunch of slugs who should be happy to earn what their boss feels like giving them. They should be taxed to death to support the country cause they took the easy way out.

That's what many would say.

I have one friend who is fond of pointing out that he has never gotten a paycheck from a 'poor man'. IOW, the shakers and the movers, the business men who invest their $ and time, are the ones who deserve to reap the rewards of their investments. Annoys me whenever he say it, and he says it whenever this topic comes up.