Occupy Wall Street - Success

[Shiftin]

Originally Posted by Aadill [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

*eradicate many of the tax loopholes that currently exist except for standard deductions for individuals/families and standard corporate deductions WHEN APPROPRIATE (I believe there is currently a percentage deduction available). These deductions set a fairly hard line for determining benefit to tax ratios. They are currently off as had been mentioned in another post on these boards in the sense that if you make less than $54k/year you're sucking money out of the system more than you're contributing. With this I would say, lower the standard deductions and rescale the tax code or remove the deductions altogether.

I listened to a senior tax partner at a big 4 firm talk on this a couple weeks ago. I'm also a CPA w/ a masters, etc. Believe me when I say that:

This is maniacally stupid and would eviscerate the economy. First, you people have to quit using the word loophole when you mean "tax expenditure" (things written into the tax code which reduce tax revenue collected either by deduction or credit). These are deductions or tax incentives put in place to encourage a specific behavior. You can't be against government encouraging behaviors it deems good through tax law in one breath and advocate huge tax credits for bringing jobs back from overseas in the next, because the principal is the same.

Do you realize what would happen to the real estate, construction, and countless related industries if you removed the mortgage interest deduction (the thirdlargest by overall dollar impact to individual tax revenue)?
They would collapse, almost immediately. Millions upon millions of people would lose their jobs.

I'm pretty sure the top tax expenditure, exclusions for employer-provided health care and insurance, isn't going away. Maybe you want to remove the second biggest in allowing people to put away pre-tax dollars for retirement? Yeah, let's quit incentivizing people to save for their own retirements, I can't see any long term negative effects from that.

After the top 6 or 7 tax expenditures, they to become immaterial on both an individual level and in aggregate to the budget. Removing things put in place to encourage behaviors we deem as a society to be good, either on a moral, environmental or economic level is not how you "fix" the budget or tax code. It's how you further screw the economy.

On the corporate side, the top three things the current administration identified as loopholes, if eliminated completely, only saves 130 billion total over 10 years (not time value adjusted). That's NOTHING.

The tax loophole stuff is talking point nonsense from people who don't actually understand the tax code and the federal budget. I know you're smarter than that, and people who do understand them aren't going to take you seriously if you're leading arguments with idealistic contradictory points which show a lack of understanding of the subject matter. I realize there aren't many people like me as a percentage of the popluation, and you're not really reaching out to us in the first place, but it makes my head explode.

[pickled_heretic]

Originally Posted by Shiftin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I listened to a senior tax partner at a big 4 firm talk on this a couple weeks ago. I'm also a CPA w/ a masters, etc. Believe me when I say that:

This is maniacally stupid and would eviscerate the economy. First, you people have to quit using the word loophole when you mean "tax expenditure" (things written into the tax code which reduce tax revenue collected either by deduction or credit). These are deductions or tax incentives put in place to encourage a specific behavior. You can't be against government encouraging behaviors it deems good through tax law in one breath and advocate huge tax credits for bringing jobs back from overseas in the next, because the principal is the same.

Do you realize what would happen to the real estate, construction, and countless related industries if you removed the mortgage interest deduction (the thirdlargest by overall dollar impact to individual tax revenue)?
They would collapse, almost immediately. Millions upon millions of people would lose their jobs.

I'm pretty sure the top tax expenditure, exclusions for employer-provided health care and insurance, isn't going away. Maybe you want to remove the second biggest in allowing people to put away pre-tax dollars for retirement? Yeah, let's quit incentivizing people to save for their own retirements, I can't see any long term negative effects from that.

After the top 6 or 7 tax expenditures, they to become immaterial on both an individual level and in aggregate to the budget. Removing things put in place to encourage behaviors we deem as a society to be good, either on a moral, environmental or economic level is not how you "fix" the budget or tax code. It's how you further screw the economy.

On the corporate side, the top three things the current administration identified as loopholes, if eliminated completely, only saves 130 billion total over 10 years (not time value adjusted). That's NOTHING.

The tax loophole stuff is talking point nonsense from people who don't actually understand the tax code and the federal budget. I know you're smarter than that, and people who do understand them aren't going to take you seriously if you're leading arguments with idealistic contradictory points which show a lack of understanding of the subject matter. I realize there aren't many people like me as a percentage of the popluation, and you're not really reaching out to us in the first place, but it makes my head explode.

SC johnson hasn't paid corporate tax in the last 9 years despite reporting corporate profits in the billions. you can take your "informational seminar," and shove it right up your asshole. thx

[Klath]

Originally Posted by Shiftin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The tax loophole stuff is talking point nonsense from people who don't actually understand the tax code and the federal budget.

Again, the wealthy are able to game the system in their favor. Case in point:

From: G.E.’s Strategies Let It Avoid Taxes Altogether
[...]

A review of company filings and Congressional records shows that one of the most striking advantages of General Electric is its ability to lobby for, win and take advantage of tax breaks.

Over the last decade, G.E. has spent tens of millions of dollars to push for changes in tax law, from more generous depreciation schedules on jet engines to “green energy” credits for its wind turbines. But the most lucrative of these measures allows G.E. to operate a vast leasing and lending business abroad with profits that face little foreign taxes and no American taxes as long as the money remains overseas.
[...]

[Shiftin]

Originally Posted by Klath [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Again, the wealthy are able to game the system in their favor. Case in point:

Why are you equating GE to the wealthy? Because the people who run it are wealthy? Because the company as a whole is large? There is a problem with scale in general that comes up when talking about things like this, health care providers, etc. People see a massive company that employes thousands and thousands of people making profit in the "million" or "billions" and think it's unfair. They don't look at the actual profit margin that company is operating on. If a sole proprietership made those same profit margins, they would be out of business. When a corporation is doing the same thing on a larger scale at a lower margin, they're suddenly evil if their overall profit has the "illion" in it somewhere.

(No I don't think GE should be able to avoid taxes on foreign earned income, but now you're talking about tax treaty problems, which are even more complicated. This is why the discussion is difficult to have with most people.)

[Klath]

Originally Posted by Shiftin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Why are you equating GE to the wealthy?

Because it's a huge company that wields massive amounts of money to solve its problems. They can afford lobbyists to bend the law to their favor. My small software company, on the other hand, is stuck with the laws as they are. People and companies with wealth can change the rules. The more they change them the more they entrench their position at the expense of the rest of us.

[pickled_heretic]

http://www.justplainpolitics.com/sho...for-child-rape

Tea party endorses child rape!

[Aadill]

Oh yeah and for more controversial topics.. I haven't forgotten them as they are key issues that critics think OWS and other Occupations are all about gimmegimmegimme:

I do not know what to think of single payer healthcare. The problem for me starts with the fact that the costs of things that require health insurance keep going up because there is a collective pool of money from which to grab. The system is inflating itself because everyone has to have it and the influx of new accounts as required with Obamacare has made operations even more expensive. It was a shit move that tried to tie in a socialist construct with only doing a halfassed job at it (the option bill cannot work).

Other entitlements are abused as well. I do not like this. They should be used for people who genuinely need it. Dorothea Dix was shut down a few years ago here in Raleigh. Some of the people who were being sheltered there are now in prison, homeless, or out on their own with no help whatsoever. This is akin to medieval times and the asylums. What the fuck, THESE are the people that need help. Those that abuse things such as EBT, welfare, etc. are the problem. The system itself wouldn't be abused if there was better oversight. These are conditional issues that have cropped up over the years. They are problems that need fixing by repairing the system, not eradicating it. I could maybe go for state-level reproductions of the same system but then you're going into more detail of unequal statehood. That should NOT be the case in this country.

[pickled_heretic]

you can't simultaneously say that the movement has no message while also saying that the message that the movement represents is full of extremist rhetoric.

unless you're a moran LOL

[vaylorie]

Originally Posted by pickled_heretic [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

you can't simultaneously say that the movement has no message while also saying that the message that the movement represents is full of extremist rhetoric.L

Do I honestly believe that all OWS protesters want the things in my initial post? No. Do some of them? Without question. It is impossible to definitively talk about what OWS really wants because OWS isn't a movement, it is an awareness campaign for literally hundreds of issues. This is the point.

Great, raise awareness, organize if you want to make a difference and stop 'occupying' streets, bridges, parks and talking about port shutdowns, revolutions, brainwashing, etc. if you have no real ability to define success or even clarify what you want changed.

If you have no message and no expectations, you can never define success and I can't relate to a 'movement' that is eternal and can't clarify what they are trying to do. What is the measure for 'corporate greed' being fixed? Etc.

[Aadill]

^ also this. you're reading bias, not evaluating, vaylorie. there is a massive difference.