Corporations and federal taxes

Post Reply New Topic

I've been wondering about this lately and then a Facebook friend posted this.
http://www.truth-out.org/you-have-more- ... taxes68094

well, peaceful protests won't work like usual, I can tell you that much right away. Its about time someone goes around murdering CEOs and s**t.

I like the idea of campaign finance reform. As long as politicians are in the pockets of these corporations and their lobbyists I don't see much hope of change. Greed is a powerful motivator.

Come and get me you economics impaired overlords

What I use in business gets used up, Evey dollar I pay for anything, people, materials, comes out of my pocket, and I want it back.

I also own my losses, which do not fit in a simple end of year accounting.

Losses like, buying machines, leasing space, hiring people, that does not come with instant income, or any sure income at all.

I bet my money, on my ideas, and only some work out.

Everyone gets paid long before that word Profit. Profits are taxed, Often several times. Local, State, National, and Dividends to investors, twice, first as company profits, then they get taxed on the Dividends.

The differance between us is, I pay to work here. I bought everything, pay for people, and I am the one who owns all the losses, and can be sued, or arrested.

Then people who do not understand Capitalism or Economics want to regulate me, People who are not my customers demand I supply them with the best parking spaces, special restrooms, ramps, at my expense.

People with holes in their bottom claim special rights,

I own a hammer, so regulations say everyone must wear steel toe boots, hard hat, and safety goggles.

So of course I do not have a location open to the public, jobs I could do are sent out, to avoid hiring people,

My choices in business are no longer about what I could do, they are about what I could avoid.

1% of the people make most of the money because they invested, made themselves educated, and did the work. Look around, no matter where you are, for every hundred people, one business.

Most of people do not work. They claim some Second Grade exemption, or Social Security, Others say the Warden will not let them. Drugs, drunks and Crazies cannot handle reality.

Of those who could work, they get Government jobs to regulate and tax me.

This leaves about ten people who want to work, for each business.

Most are only fit to say, "Do you want fries with that?"

Only a couple are self educating, will ask about what they do not know, and do the job to the best of their ability. Of course they get paid well.

While business is a machine to employ, which is all an expense, even if you lose money, workers with high incomes, are the most taxed people on earth. They have to pay for everyone else, who is exempt from work for some reason, and the Government workers who take from the few real workers, and give crumbs to the non functioning. For this they get well paid, health care, retirement, not Social Security, and can retire with full pay and benefits following a bad haircut.

Income tax is a tax on the competent.
Property tax is a tax on investors.

The vast majority avoid this by being incompetent consumers.

They do not see this as an open game, where there is always room at the top, they see the top, and claim that people who work are greedy, and should be forced to share.

People who do not work, invest, demand that those that do should be regulated, and government is glad to do so. People who cannot count set government pay, benefits, and retirement at twice the future income of the Town, County, State, and then when it is brought up, want to close the schools, and raise taxes, because they are owed more than was provided for when they were running things.

When the government is bankrupt, they seek to blame those who work.

When a business is bankrupt, it is sold off to pay a portion of it's rightful debts, It is liquidated, a one time ending of everything. Owners often lose everything. They are last in line.

It is not investing and working that has created this economic mess.

Here's a series of confused statements wherein I will doubtless contradict myself at least 27 times.

In theory the shareholders of a company that has been poorly run for about a decade (like Citigroup) can and probably should boot any member of upper management they want any time they want. Yet this only rarely happens. It did happen to the predecessor to the current CEO of Citi, Chuck Prince, but I'm honestly not sure how much the Board had to do with it as with the fact that he made some very indiscreet comments at the height of the subprime bubble....something along the lines of "as long as the music is playing you've got to get up and dance," meaning Citi was selling s**t investments Prince knew were s**t investments but they were just so durn profitable they couldn't not do it.


Quite frankly it doesn't bother me all that much if a company is losing money in reality and therefore has no income tax liability. After all, no income, nothing to tax. And if this goes on long enough, the company goes out of business...unless it is one of the anointed ones that the FED and Treasury seem to have sprinkled with holy water and absolved of all sins, past, present and I assume future.

There's a concept known as "fiduciary duty," where CEOs and other corporate officers are supposed to act in the best interests of company's owners, shareholders in the case of a publicly traded stock. It would be interesting to hear -- from his own lips -- how exactly Bank of America's whatever raking in six million bucks when the corporation is imploding is meeting this standard. Ought to offer an amusing sound bite, if nothing else. Quite frankly, this is what bugs me the most, but apparently its just the way things are done these days.

I'm actually a little curious regarding Boeing. After all, their main competition is Airbus which at one time was heavily subsidized by (I think) the French and German governments. If this is still the case, you've got two companies building airplanes who've got sugar daddies. Can't say I'm crazy about the concept, but something akin to that would go a long way toward me giving them a pass. And I do know that Boeing's run into an almost endless series of problems with what was supposed to be their "next big thing" the Dreamliner. If you dig around a bit you can probably still find articles heralding the Dreamliner as the "first Web 2.0" industrial product...which apparently turned out to mean Boeing's gullible management listening to overpaid consultants who had no idea what they were doing, but knew super-kewl buzzwords like "synergy."

GE probably should be broken up and set up as a bunch of separate companies. Jack Welch bamboozled the entire world for a decade or more that they could make lightbulbs, run television networks, build jet engines, medical equipment and toaster ovens and also be what amounted to one of the largest finance companies in the world. And do all of it well. Well, he knew when to bail, so give him credit for that. But it would not surprise me in the least if he's discussed in a few years the way Alan Greenspan is now: a Messiah who was really a Schmuck.

Eh, I could ramble on all day. And there are problems with US corporate law that do leave US based corporations at a competitive disadvantage, but yeah, in the cases mentioned I can't see it as anything but s**t thrown they hope will stick. Or at least distract.

That isn't even remotely funny.

That is borderline criminal. Watch what you type.

Murdering CEOs will do no good. We always have the government to put up with. Perhaps a bloody revolution now and again. As Thomas Jefferson once wrote: The tree of Liberty is nourished by the blood of tyrants and patriots. It is their natural manure.

ruveyn