PDA

View Full Version : Senate Republicans Block Tax Incentives



brandywinelabs
09-28-2010, 04:10 PM
Senate Republicans Block Tax Incentives to Move Foreign-Based Jobs to U.S.

Senate Republicans blocked legislation that would create tax breaks for companies that move foreign-based jobs to the U.S. and penalize those that send jobs offshore.

There may be more to this, but...

Unbelievable!

WaterDogRem
09-28-2010, 04:16 PM
A 53-45 vote sounds like more than the 40 Republicans.

dnf777
09-28-2010, 04:23 PM
Actually, its highly believable. The republican party has always stood for the wealthy CEOs over the workers they employ, and their legislative actions follow suit. Actions like this are why under republican influence, the middle class shrinks, the rich get filthy rich, and more Americans lose sight of the American Dream. I have no problem with getting rich, I wish it would happen to me, but not due to legislation that encourages anti-American business practices.

duckheads
09-28-2010, 04:42 PM
Actually, its highly believable. The republican party has always stood for the wealthy CEOs over the workers they employ, and their legislative actions follow suit. Actions like this are why under republican influence, the middle class shrinks, the rich get filthy rich, and more Americans lose sight of the American Dream. I have no problem with getting rich, I wish it would happen to me, but not due to legislation that encourages anti-American business practices.


You call yourself an independant yet you spew the same liberal BS day after day. I guess if you keep telling yourself the same lie over and over you begin to believe it.

How many wealthy CEO's have made out like bandits under your supreme leader?

You wish you were rich. Awwwwwwwwwwwwe poor Jeff! You seem to be buying into the class warfare this administaton is pushing. Being a MD you are probably on the top end of the income scale on POTUS and good for you, but give me a break on the poor me, poor me.

subroc
09-28-2010, 04:48 PM
Senate Republicans Block Tax Incentives to Move Foreign-Based Jobs to U.S.

Senate Republicans blocked legislation that would create tax breaks for companies that move foreign-based jobs to the U.S. and penalize those that send jobs offshore.

There may be more to this, but...

Unbelievable!

senate republicans block another governemnt handout

road kill
09-28-2010, 04:49 PM
Actually, its highly believable. The republican party has always stood for the wealthy CEOs over the workers they employ, and their legislative actions follow suit. Actions like this are why under republican influence, the middle class shrinks, the rich get filthy rich, and more Americans lose sight of the American Dream. I have no problem with getting rich, I wish it would happen to me, but not due to legislation that encourages anti-American business practices.

:shock::shock::shock:


RK

dnf777
09-28-2010, 04:52 PM
You call yourself an independant yet you spew the same liberal BS day after day. I guess if you keep telling yourself the same lie over and over you begin to believe it.

How many wealthy CEO's have made out like bandits under your supreme leader?

You wish you were rich. Awwwwwwwwwwwwe poor Jeff! You seem to be buying into the class warfare this administaton is pushing. Being a MD you are probably on the top end of the income scale on POTUS and good for you, but give me a break on the poor me, poor me.

Jeff hasn't even posted on this thread yet.
I'm not into class warfare, but I haven't forgotten where I came from, and want to make sure that other kids have the same opportunities that I had, should they choose to work hard and strive to better themselves.

This thread has nothing to do with Obama. It was about the republicans blocking legislation. Good effort to divert, but I'm calling you on it.

As for rich, it depends on your definition. Rich, to me, means you only work because you find it amusing, not because you have to earn a paycheck and pay bills. I'm not talking >250k rich, I'm talking having-to-ask-your-people-how-many-houses-you-own rich.

YardleyLabs
09-28-2010, 05:00 PM
.... Awwwwwwwwwwwwe poor Jeff! You seem to be buying into the class warfare this administaton is pushing.....DNF is Dave. I'm Jeff and haven't contributed to this thread.

I have spent almost my entire life in the groups benefiting most from Republican tax cuts (following my graduation from Swiss boarding school and Ivy League University). I am hardly interested in attacking the wealthy. However, the numbers make it clear that, over time, the only class warfare in the US has been against the middle and lower income groups and they have lost consistently. The US has the greatest gap between rich and poor of any developed nation in the world and the gap has grown consistently over the last 50 years. The destruction of middle and lower class jobs and income earning power is a major factor in our current economic crisis. If we do not find solutions, we will become a backwater economy. I am not at all sure that the proposed bill voted on today would help. I can guarantee, however, that trickle down economics has not left many drops behind for the lower 80% of our families.

Gerry Clinchy
09-28-2010, 08:57 PM
In view of the way Congress operates, I wonder what other crap they threw into that legislation to make it unpalatable?

If there wasn't anything else involved, then the Rs are really cutting their noses off to spite their faces. Maybe the Tea Party is right ... throw 'em all out & start over. What we get can't be any worse than what we've already got.

Buzz
09-28-2010, 11:21 PM
Were on track to bring those jobs back home...

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-09-28/michigan-florida-lead-34-states-with-income-drop.html


Nationally, median household income fell 3 percent in 2009 to $50,221, the second straight annual drop, the Census Bureau said in its 2009 American Community Survey. Income in Michigan fell 6.2 percent to $45,255, while Florida followed with a drop of 5.7 percent, to $44,736, the bureau said in a report on its website.


North Dakota was the only state whose income rose in 2009. The state’s median climbed 5.1 percent to $47,827, for the eighth straight annual gain. Fifteen states and the District of Columbia showed changes that were statistically insignificant, the bureau said.




--Editors: Mark Schoifet, Mark Tannenbaum

To contact the reporter on this story: Alexandra Harris in New York at Aharris48@bloomberg.net

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Mark Tannenbaum mtannen@bloomberg.net

depittydawg
09-29-2010, 12:15 AM
Senate Republicans Block Tax Incentives to Move Foreign-Based Jobs to U.S.

Senate Republicans blocked legislation that would create tax breaks for companies that move foreign-based jobs to the U.S. and penalize those that send jobs offshore.

There may be more to this, but...

Unbelievable!

Republican Leadership has certainly become emboldened this year. It used to be they would lie about their true agenda because they understood well that a large majority of US citizens wanted no part of it. Now they just come write out and say it. You've got to give them credit. We are, first and foremost, for the Rich. We want the rich to pay less. We want your jobs to move out of the country We are against education. We are against Social Security... It's quite amazing. They must think Americans are pretty stupid. The scary thing is..... It's looking like they might be right!

ducknwork
09-29-2010, 07:20 AM
Republican Leadership has certainly become emboldened this year. It used to be they would lie about their true agenda because they understood well that a large majority of US citizens wanted no part of it. Now they just come write out and say it. You've got to give them credit. We are, first and foremost, for the Rich. We want the rich to pay less. We want your jobs to move out of the country We are against education. We are against Social Security... It's quite amazing. They must think Americans are pretty stupid. The scary thing is..... It's looking like they might be right!

The dems are still busy lying. It's just that they aren't good enough to hide it.

paul young
09-29-2010, 07:54 AM
it sure is a good thing the Republicans always are truthful. ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!-Paul

WaterDogRem
09-29-2010, 11:24 AM
DNF is Dave. I'm Jeff and haven't contributed to this thread.

I have spent almost my entire life in the groups benefiting most from Republican tax cuts (following my graduation from Swiss boarding school and Ivy League University). I am hardly interested in attacking the wealthy. However, the numbers make it clear that, over time, the only class warfare in the US has been against the middle and lower income groups and they have lost consistently. The US has the greatest gap between rich and poor of any developed nation in the world and the gap has grown consistently over the last 50 years. The destruction of middle and lower class jobs and income earning power is a major factor in our current economic crisis. If we do not find solutions, we will become a backwater economy. I am not at all sure that the proposed bill voted on today would help. I can guarantee, however, that trickle down economics has not left many drops behind for the lower 80% of our families.


So if the gap between the rich and poor continues to grow, wouldn't that mean the middle class is growing? That's a bad thing? Also per the U.S. Census poverty rates are below rates of the early 60's. 80's and 90's and it would appear your 80% is a little off.
http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/data/incpovhlth/2009/pov09fig04.pdf

Buzz
09-29-2010, 11:36 AM
So if the gap between the rich and poor continues to grow, wouldn't that mean the middle class is growing?


Can you show me the math on that statement?

WaterDogRem
09-29-2010, 11:49 AM
Can you show me the math on that statement?

Wasn't a statement but a Question, hence the ?

Buzz
09-29-2010, 12:31 PM
OK, I just want to know how a growing gap between rich and poor implies a growing middle class.

dnf777
09-29-2010, 01:14 PM
OK, I just want to know how a growing gap between rich and poor implies a growing middle class.

I believe its called "fuzzy math". ;)

If a huge gap between the richest and the poorest indicates a growing middle class, then all those cubans ought to be doing really well with their house and two cars in the garage. Yeah, that makes sense. :confused:

WaterDogRem
09-29-2010, 01:27 PM
OK, I just want to know how a growing gap between rich and poor implies a growing middle class.

A=Poor
B=middle
C=rich
A+B+C=100%

To have an increased difference ("gap") between A & C, B must increase.

I didn't state the middle class is increasing, but just asking Yardly to explain his comment about the gap increasing between the poor and rich.
If you believe the middle class is shrinking, then what's happening to the rich since the poverty rate has remained around the mean rate?

WaterDogRem
09-30-2010, 03:21 PM
Originally Posted by Buzz - Can you show me the math on that statement?I believe its called "fuzzy math". ;)



Too Fuzzy?

YardleyLabs
09-30-2010, 03:57 PM
A=Poor
B=middle
C=rich
A+B+C=100%

To have an increased difference ("gap") between A & C, B must increase.

I didn't state the middle class is increasing, but just asking Yardly to explain his comment about the gap increasing between the poor and rich.
If you believe the middle class is shrinking, then what's happening to the rich since the poverty rate has remained around the mean rate?
The "genie" index is a calculation used to measure the extent of income polarization. It focuses primarily on the percentage of income going to the top earners and the bottom earners. Other analyses focus on the percentage of total income being earned by each quintile (20%) of the population as well as the top few percent.

What the data show are that the percentages of total income earned are increasing steadily for the top 20%, remaining relatively constant for the second 20%, and decreasing for the bottom 60% (Data are readily available on the Census web site). The rate of increase in real dollar income for the top few percent has been more than ten times the rate of increase for those in the middle (i.e., the middle class). For the bottom 40% there has been virtually no real growth in income over the last 15-20 years -- that is trickle down didn't trickle.

This pattern is not unique to America and, to some extent, is inherent in globalization. One of the primary effects of globalization, is inevitably that capital is more mobile than labor. I can easily unload investments in America and move my money to Asia to take advantage of lower cost labor. However, it is much harder for the labor to follow the jobs.

It is ironic that we have removed almost all barriers to the movement of goods and money, but that the movement of people is tightly controlled, creating massive economic imbalances. If, for example, cheaper labor could enter the US more readily, jobs would have been less likely to leave and our economy would be stronger. Instead, our jobs are being sold to other countries. and our workers are increasingly facing long term structural unemployment.

Neither political party is addressing this long term issue substantively. Instead, both try to cast it in ideological terms. It is really a question of economics more than politics. There is no reversal of globalization. Communication and transportation costs are less and less important to the total cost of goods. Free movement of money isn't going to stop. The rest flows inevitably.

Buzz
09-30-2010, 04:03 PM
Communication and transportation costs are less and less important to the total cost of goods. Free movement of money isn't going to stop. The rest flows inevitably.

How does that stand up in a world of with at over $200/barrel?

I read an interesting article about shipping container costs when we were seeing gas at over $4/gallon. It was becoming an issue.

WaterDogRem
09-30-2010, 04:10 PM
It is ironic that we have removed almost all barriers to the movement of goods and money, but that the movement of people is tightly controlled, creating massive economic imbalances. If, for example, cheaper labor could enter the US more readily, jobs would have been less likely to leave and our economy would be stronger. Instead, our jobs are being sold to other countries. and our workers are increasingly facing long term structural unemployment.



And who, do you think, has caused this?

Buzz
09-30-2010, 04:34 PM
I'm thinking that you misread that line.

YardleyLabs
09-30-2010, 04:36 PM
And who, do you think, has caused this?
Actually, it was caused by other countries progressing rapidly while we progressed more slowly. India, for example, made massive public investments in the development of technology centers to train programmers and analysts efficiently and provide them with an environment where they could improve their skills over time.

The cash to support this initially came from systematic programs to offer staff as contract programmers throughout the United States and Europe. As open architectures became more important, India was a major beneficiary because it had previously had limited access to mainframe technologies and relied more on UNIX and microprocessor environments. Contract programming staff tended to remain out of the country in 18 month cycles, returning to India to work in technology warehouses for the next 6-12 months to gain experience in emerging technologies.

Those training warehouses eventually became highly competitive, beginning the era of large scale off-shore outsourcing. The revenues from this contnue to finance the development of India's general economy. By the late 90's, India's warehouses were among the best system development houses in the world.

By contrast, American always excelled in the development of new IT technologies and in the design and management of large scale systems. However, there was also always a tendency to veiw programming as somewhat unprofessional. In the 70's, COBOL programmers were hired from among former soldiers, which had learned their skills working on DoD systems, and through importation of programmers from Ireland. COBOL, which was initially developed as a language that could readily be used by people of average intelligence, was well suited to accounting and business reporting systems. However, it was poorly suited for more advanced systems.

With the emergence of microprocessor based systems, database tools and more complex languages such as C became more important. That led to an era of programmers as rock stars. In the early 90's, a programmer skilled in technologies such as relational databases and 4GL languages was earning $100-200,000/year while COBOL programmers were earning $45,000.. One side effect of this was that companies essentially stopped investing in skill development, preferring to terminate those whose skills were outdated and hire contractors with the requisite technology skills. Major corporations suddenly began to outsource the majority of their development activities even when IT technology was a central strategic asset. As a consequence, those strategic skills are now more likely to be found in Asia than in the US.

This is an example of how the world has shifted, but similar patterns have emerged in multiple industries. One of the more interesting phenomena to explore, would be the percentage of American defense systems that are now being developed and maintained by non-citizens. Outsourcing strategic activities has long term consequences that our market economy is not very good at considering.

WaterDogRem
09-30-2010, 04:51 PM
I'm thinking that you misread that line.

How so? Too fuzzy?

ppro
10-01-2010, 06:10 PM
Yardley if possible could you elaborate on this statement" If, for example, cheaper labor could enter the US more readily...." thanks

tom
10-05-2010, 12:32 PM
Yardley if possible could you elaborate on this statement" If, for example, cheaper labor could enter the US more readily...." thanks

That simply means that he wants you to work for acorns. (peanuts is what the "middle class" gets paid)
Remember those "jobs that Americans don't want"? (bet some would love to have them about now)