The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 35

Thread: Credits for Outsourcing Jobs

  1. #11
    Senior Member Gerry Clinchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    6,927

    Default

    No, there is no specific break for moving offshore,
    So, you might agree that Obama was repeating a "talking point" which had some small grain of truth in it, but the wording was manipulated to make it sound like something different than it is?

    After looking at the facts, then, Romney's response was entirely appropriate.

    You and I agree, that there is enough incentive for cost-saving by moving offshore, that such expenses should not be allowed as an expense.

    corporations are sitting on $6 trillion in cash right now, $3 trillion of that is profits being held offshore untaxed.
    Jobs have been moving offshore for a LONG time already. I can't recall when I started speaking to call centers in India, but it's surely been a while ago. So, it is not surprising that corporations have a lot of $ sitting outside the US.

    And, the fact that they are sitting on so much cash right here, has to mean that they have reservations about how expanding their businesses in ways that will be profitable. Waiting for tax code to be changed in a permanent fashion might help them do their 5- and 10-year plans.

    It is possible that as long as their is a govt that will not cut spending (won't even produce a budget that reveals & commits to their intentions), but continues to look for ways to siphon off their profits to increase revenues available to spend on things which will further restrict business (like giving more $ to increase the size of the EPA to come up with more regulations), the incentive to use that cash is dampened.

    My own theory is that if Romney is elected, because business believes he will open up opportunity, they will immediately start planning for expansion. By the time Romney would take office, plans would be in place and the economy will get a rapid boost; similar to what happened with Reagan and the recession he had to deal with. If Romney then starts to make good on his promised policies, business/economy should start moving quickly. If Romney is elected, I'd expect the stock market to respond upward on Nov. 7.

    The hope would be that Romney wouldn't be quite as naive as Reagan in believing that Ds will cut spending AFTER they raise taxes. Romney's experience in MA as governor could help him there.

    Sweden's mode was to cut spending first ... then they were able to reduce taxes. They had no real choice since their taxes were already so high. When they cut spending it had to do with deficits growing too large. Since Sweden is basically a socialist-leaning govt, they may not even have realized that the GDP would grow as much as it did as the "secondary" consequence of reducing deficit spending. Growing GDP meant that they collected more gross revenue, with a lower tax rate.
    G.Clinchy@gmail.com
    "Know in your heart that all things are possible. We couldn't conceive of a miracle if none ever happened." -Libby Fudim

    ​I don't use the PM feature, so just email me direct at the address shown above.

  2. #12
    Senior Member menmon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    2,275

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gerry Clinchy View Post
    So, you might agree that Obama was repeating a "talking point" which had some small grain of truth in it, but the wording was manipulated to make it sound like something different than it is?

    After looking at the facts, then, Romney's response was entirely appropriate.

    You and I agree, that there is enough incentive for cost-saving by moving offshore, that such expenses should not be allowed as an expense.



    Jobs have been moving offshore for a LONG time already. I can't recall when I started speaking to call centers in India, but it's surely been a while ago. So, it is not surprising that corporations have a lot of $ sitting outside the US.

    And, the fact that they are sitting on so much cash right here, has to mean that they have reservations about how expanding their businesses in ways that will be profitable. Waiting for tax code to be changed in a permanent fashion might help them do their 5- and 10-year plans.

    It is possible that as long as their is a govt that will not cut spending (won't even produce a budget that reveals & commits to their intentions), but continues to look for ways to siphon off their profits to increase revenues available to spend on things which will further restrict business (like giving more $ to increase the size of the EPA to come up with more regulations), the incentive to use that cash is dampened.

    My own theory is that if Romney is elected, because business believes he will open up opportunity, they will immediately start planning for expansion. By the time Romney would take office, plans would be in place and the economy will get a rapid boost; similar to what happened with Reagan and the recession he had to deal with. If Romney then starts to make good on his promised policies, business/economy should start moving quickly. If Romney is elected, I'd expect the stock market to respond upward on Nov. 7.

    The hope would be that Romney wouldn't be quite as naive as Reagan in believing that Ds will cut spending AFTER they raise taxes. Romney's experience in MA as governor could help him there.

    Sweden's mode was to cut spending first ... then they were able to reduce taxes. They had no real choice since their taxes were already so high. When they cut spending it had to do with deficits growing too large. Since Sweden is basically a socialist-leaning govt, they may not even have realized that the GDP would grow as much as it did as the "secondary" consequence of reducing deficit spending. Growing GDP meant that they collected more gross revenue, with a lower tax rate.
    No I don't. Our tax code is very friendly to oversea business and workers working overseas. It was very beneficial to me when ML had me in Hong Kong.

    Barriers are never popular in business, but we have responsibilities to the stakeholders other than the shareholders. If we make it what is best for the business, the jobs will leave because business will always chase cheaper labor. If we give reason to stay by way of tax advantages and pentilize those that choose to take the work out of the country, maybe we keep the work here. Why should tax payers want to allow industry to benefit from our consumers while giving the work to someone else?

  3. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Shelbyville, Tn
    Posts
    1,455

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by menmon View Post
    No I don't. Our tax code is very friendly to oversea business and workers working overseas. It was very beneficial to me when ML had me in Hong Kong.

    Barriers are never popular in business, but we have responsibilities to the stakeholders other than the shareholders. If we make it what is best for the business, the jobs will leave because business will always chase cheaper labor. If we give reason to stay by way of tax advantages and pentilize those that choose to take the work out of the country, maybe we keep the work here. Why should tax payers want to allow industry to benefit from our consumers while giving the work to someone else?
    Ah, good old fashioned protectionism, lowering the standard of living of all to protect a few, with a touch of socialism thrown in for goodmeasure.

    By the way, who are the other stakeholders, and who is "our" that owns the consumer?

  4. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Oakdale,ct.
    Posts
    2,811

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ppro View Post
    Great so another thing Obama has not fixed in 4 years. If he knows of such things that are so important why doesn't he fix it.Answer, because he is not a fixer.
    He hasn't "fixed it" because the bill has not been passed by the legislature and sent to him for his signature.

    Laws are written, debated and voted on in the LEGISLATIVE branch. If passed, they go on to the EXECUTIVE branch to be signed into law.

    It's truly amazing how many people post on here who have no idea what the respective branches of government are charged with doing and where their power lies. Must've slept thru that part of Civics, I guess.

    Everybody is all fired up about the Presidential election. Nothing wrong with that. But, if you want real change, pay more attention to who is elected to the House and Senate. The President is really just a figurehead.-Paul
    there's no good reason to fatten up a retriever.

  5. #15
    Senior Member menmon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    2,275

    Default

    the american people are the stakeholders.

    I clearly know the arguments against protectionism, and it is anti-business. But not discouraging companies from taking their plants elsewhere, hurts america and america jobs. There should be a price for access to the american consumer is all I'm saying. Japan, China, Mexico, etc. do it and then have access to our consumer for nothing.

  6. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Wetumka, OK
    Posts
    585

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by menmon View Post
    the american people are the stakeholders.

    I clearly know the arguments against protectionism, and it is anti-business. But not discouraging companies from taking their plants elsewhere, hurts america and america jobs. There should be a price for access to the american consumer is all I'm saying. Japan, China, Mexico, etc. do it and then have access to our consumer for nothing.
    I keep wondering, while we argue that we should be friendly to business at home... how many of those companies who outsourced jobs to another country received bail out money....
    regardless of whether the bailout was right or wrong.... how much money went "out of town?"
    "I'm gonna lean up against you, and you lean up against me. That way we don't hafta sleep with our heads in the mud"
    Forrest Gump, 1994

  7. #17

    Default

    I appreciate Mr. Young your outstanding civics lesson. I vaguely remember something like that. You are so much smarter than I am and your condescending remarks are to be given much credence. I was responding to your president's remarks at his debacle,I am sorry, his debate.

  8. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Shelbyville, Tn
    Posts
    1,455

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by menmon View Post
    the american people are the stakeholders.

    I clearly know the arguments against protectionism, and it is anti-business. But not discouraging companies from taking their plants elsewhere, hurts america and america jobs. There should be a price for access to the american consumer is all I'm saying. Japan, China, Mexico, etc. do it and then have access to our consumer for nothing.
    No, the American people are not stakeholders in my business. I can quit. I can tell the employeed and the consumers THAT I QUIT, and not you or Obama or the American people have any say if I choose to quit. I can tell the American people, the gov., Obama, the consumer and even you that you must go somewhere else for my product or services.

    As to access to goods and services of China, Japan, ect., you are actually trying to deny the consumer access to goods and services they choose to buy to make their life better. You would hurt the consumer just as much as the supplier. History has shown that those who choose not to compete constantly ask for protectionism and that lowers the standard of living for the rest of the population. It never has worked and never will.

  9. #19
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Shelbyville, Tn
    Posts
    1,455

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by paul young View Post
    He hasn't "fixed it" because the bill has not been passed by the legislature and sent to him for his signature.

    Laws are written, debated and voted on in the LEGISLATIVE branch. If passed, they go on to the EXECUTIVE branch to be signed into law.

    It's truly amazing how many people post on here who have no idea what the respective branches of government are charged with doing and where their power lies. Must've slept thru that part of Civics, I guess.

    Everybody is all fired up about the Presidential election. Nothing wrong with that. But, if you want real change, pay more attention to who is elected to the House and Senate. The President is really just a figurehead.-Paul
    You were doing OK till you called the President a figurehead. Does a figurehead have the power of the veto requiring 2/3 majority in both houses to overide. Does a figurehead have the power of control over the executive branch and can utilize the power of the executive order. No, a figurehead, he is not.

  10. #20
    Senior Member M&K's Retrievers's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Royse City, TX
    Posts
    5,161

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by paul young View Post
    He hasn't "fixed it" because the bill has not been passed by the legislature and sent to him for his signature.

    Laws are written, debated and voted on in the LEGISLATIVE branch. If passed, they go on to the EXECUTIVE branch to be signed into law.

    It's truly amazing how many people post on here who have no idea what the respective branches of government are charged with doing and where their power lies. Must've slept thru that part of Civics, I guess.

    Everybody is all fired up about the Presidential election. Nothing wrong with that. But, if you want real change, pay more attention to who is elected to the House and Senate. The President is really just a figurehead.-Paul
    So I guess it wasn't Bush's fault after all. Wonder who had control of House and Senate since 2007?
    M&K's HR UH Tucker of Texoma JH
    M&K's SHR Prime Black Angus
    M&K's Miss Jessie Girl JH
    Sir Jacob of Lakeview-Jake
    Freeway JYD

    Mike Whitworth

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •