Representation WITHOUT taxation......

[Spinoza]

Spin, why do you think shareholders of corporations should be taxed twice for the same income?

Gus......
Why are you assuming that I "think shareholders of corporations should be taxed twice for the same income"?

When I turn on my computer, the first thing I see is what I believe is called a home page. But whatever it's called, it has numerous "news" items that I may click and read. A week or so ago I saw the article I cited in my lead post on this thread.
I noted it because I thought it might go salt and pepperish with the "taxation without representation" thread. In the interim, the amount of my personal time that I allow for playing on this board (and my limited keyboard skills) have been occupied on another thread.
Last night was the first opportunity I have given myself to "thread" the involved
article.

As for my personal opinions about American citizens being REQUIRED to hand over various amounts of their EARNED INCOME to federal, state or local governments/bureaucrats/fiscally irresponsible FOOLS...... I've previously detailed my thoughts on this matter (in this forum) in no uncertain terms.
No DAWG seemed interested/eager to debate my approach to the issue at the time.
But if you are REALLY interested in my ideas on this topic......
I'd be just as PLEASED AS PUNCH to hoe that row once again.

As always to you......
Cheers.

[Spinoza]

Interesting.

Did the article mention why/how they weren't paying taxes. Was it all tax loopholes or something?

NO......
But the referred to report is described as a (now released) government document that I ASSUME should be available to ANY COMPUTER SAVVY DAWG who is MORE INTERESTED in whatever FACTS it contains...... Rather than merely ATTACKING ANY MESSENGER.

AND BTW......
I do admit to being somewhat curious about NO DAWG mentioning this particular GOA report before I did so last night......
And even more curious this morning, when I read a host of speculative replies from DAWGS known to have "hyperlink" savvy......
But nary so much as a brief line of BOLD blue letters in any form of reply.

Go figure! :icon_wink:

[Spinoza]

They weren't making any money! They had losses! Sales mean nothing unless sales are greater than expenses! What was their net revenue?

Is that merely a subjective OPINION......
Or are you citing FACTS from the GOA report?
Are you not a computer SAVVY dawg with HYPERLINK skills?

[Spinoza]

Ditto


Taxes are paid on gross income.

Is that merely a subjective opinion......
Or are you citing FACTS from the GOA report.
Are you not a computer SAVVY dawg with HYPERLINK skills?

[Spinoza]

Actually the article is wrong. 100% of corporations paid no taxes. What corporations do is collect taxes from others. They have to set their prices so that they can make what they need to make even after paying taxes.

Corporate taxes are a way to hide taxes from those who really pay them -- often those who can't afford to pay them but think that they are benefiting because the "big bad corporation" is paying their taxes for them.

Is that merely a subjective opinion......
Or are you citing FACTS from the GOA report?
Are you not a computer SAVVY dawg with HYPERLINK skills?

[Spinoza]

Then what's he bitching about?

Your alleged/self-certain VERY UNIQUE powers of observation......
Have once again AMAZED my mortal mind.

I cited an article by a fourth estate author WORD FOR WORD.
I then asked a very simple and NOT ILLOGICAL question, with nary a sharp finger pointed in any particular political direction.

Would you care to explain how your SPECIAL SCRUTINY begot "bitching" in your itching imagination?

It's not anything important......
It's just that word selection always stirs my curiousity. :icon_wink:

[Bigdog13]

Your alleged/self-certain VERY UNIQUE powers of observation......
Have once again AMAZED my mortal mind.

I cited an article by a fourth estate author WORD FOR WORD.
I then asked a very simple and NOT ILLOGICAL question, with nary a sharp finger pointed in any particular political direction.

Would you care to explain how your SPECIAL SCRUTINY begot "bitching" in your itching imagination?

It's not anything important......
It's just that word selection always stirs my curiousity. :icon_wink:

Maybe I know you better than you know yourself.

..........Scary huh? :icon_wink:

[TechDawgMc]

Is that merely a subjective opinion......
Or are you citing FACTS from the GOA report?
Are you not a computer SAVVY dawg with HYPERLINK skills?

Actually, citing basic business law and economics. The article itself is irrelevant because it intentionally distorts reality by failing to understand the nature of corporations.

[Spinoza]

Actually, citing basic business law and economics. The article itself is irrelevant because it intentionally distorts reality by failing to understand the nature of corporations.

A quick check of your dawg profile......
Has reminded me that you are the college professor who has previously documented a grasp of history that is more than lacking.

It would be unfair of me to assume that your purported knowledge of "basic business law and economics" is equally flawed......
But the FACT that you report degrees in "computer science" does suggest to me that you could FIND the involved report and TALK TURKEY rather than mere personal pigeon poop......
If you were so inclined.

And BTW......
My knowledge of "business law and economics" (unlike history) is of little more than Jack and Jill caliber.
But I do know how to read (even the big words) and if you, or any other dawg, would care to HYPERLINK the actual report......
I'd be more than willing to do my "up the hill" best to carry any such "bucket of water".

Your FREE choice......
As always.

[Spinoza]

Maybe I know you better than you know yourself.

..........Scary huh? :icon_wink:

And "MAYBE" Alan Greenspan......
Refused to pack his briefcase for any FR meeting before contacting me for my sage advice. :icon_wink:

The bad news......
Is a D- for "scary".

The good news......
Is an A+ for your continued good sense of humor.

The other VERY GOOD NEWS......
I truly ENVY your ability to do what you did on another thread.

I'm going there next to again laud your skill, and beg a favor.

[Bigdog13]

And "MAYBE" Alan Greenspan......
Refused to pack his briefcase for any FR meeting before contacting me for my sage advice. :icon_wink:

The bad news......
Is a D- for "scary".

The good news......
Is an A+ for your continued good sense of humor.

The other VERY GOOD NEWS......
I truly ENVY your ability to do what you did on another thread.

I'm going there next to again laud your skill, and beg a favor.

Sarcasm??

[Spinoza]

Sarcasm??

Only the Greenspan play for fun...... :icon_wink:
The remainder is as honest as any GOOD cold beer.

Cheers once again.....
Until later!

[TechDawgMc]

A quick check of your dawg profile......
Has reminded me that you are the college professor who has previously documented a grasp of history that is more than lacking.

It would be unfair of me to assume that your purported knowledge of "basic business law and economics" is equally flawed......
But the FACT that you report degrees in "computer science" does suggest to me that you could FIND the involved report and TALK TURKEY rather than mere personal pigeon poop......
If you were so inclined.

And BTW......
My knowledge of "business law and economics" (unlike history) is of little more than Jack and Jill caliber.
But I do know how to read (even the big words) and if you, or any other dawg, would care to HYPERLINK the actual report......
I'd be more than willing to do my "up the hill" best to carry any such "bucket of water".

Your FREE choice......
As always.

Your act has gotten old, Spin. The point is made. Corporations are not people. They do not have wealth on their own. If they have to pay taxes, they will have to change their pricing structure to cover the taxes. Thus, they are merely passing the tax on to the consumer. If you want to argue that, feel free. Otherwise, stop trying to play games to make people dance to your tune. Frankly, you've become a bore.

And BTW, just because you don't understand history, doesn't mean that someone else's knowledge is lacking.