Will someone please explain to me why the hell should I vote for a political party that DEFENDS companies and corporations outsourcing jobs to foreign countries only to sell the products to me at outrageous prices....AND get a tax break to do so?
During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.
George Orwell
WATERMARK, GREATEST OF THE TRINITY, ON CHIK-FIL-A
www.gunsbeerfreedom.blogspot.com
www.gunsbeerfreedom.blogspot.com
will someone explain why I should vote for politicians that enact laws and then allow exemptions for large corporations who employ the very people the law was supposed to help?
What kind of country have we become?
One in which federal prosecutors can take “evidence” before a “grand jury,”
and that grand jury can “vote to indict” a former president for 91 alleged “crimes”?
I asked this question a couple of years ago, the first time I had to talk to Sanji on the phone.
"There are many reasons foreign corporations are seeking to defeat Democratic candidates this November. The Chamber has repeatedly sent out issue alerts attacking Democratic efforts to encourage businesses to hire locally rather than outsource to foreign counties."
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/10/05/...mber-commerce/
My answer to why working people continue to vote against their own best interest and the best interest of their country is the anger, fear and half-truths that the right is so good at spreading. And they get their opinions from Glenn Beck and Rush.
War Is Peace
Freedom Is Slavery
Ignorance Is Strength
George Orwell
A perfectly legitimate question...but it requires no explanation....
If you're not inclined to vote for Democrats, don't...its understandable that you'd not want to vote for those that send jobs overseas,... and in many cases, force businesses to manufacture out of the country....
The U.S. already has one of the most punitive corporate tax regimes in the world and a Dem. advocated tax increase would make that competitive disadvantage much worse, accelerating the outsourcing of jobs.
American companies pay the corporate tax rate in the host country where the subsidiary is located and then pay the difference between the U.S. rate (35%) and the foreign rate when they bring profits back to the U.S.
The effective combined U.S. federal and state tax rate on new capital investment, taking into account all credits and deductions, is 35%. The OECD average is 19.5% and the world average is 18%.
As long as the U.S. corporate tax is 50% higher than it is elsewhere, companies will invest in other countries all other things being equal.
http://www.ohio.com/editorial/commentary/103810999.html
Last edited by NOVA; 10-14-2010 at 01:31 PM.
Put blame where it belongs
ATF decided it could not regulate bump stocks during the Obama administration.
It that time," the NRA wrote in a statement. "The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semiautomatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations."
The ATF and Obama admin. ignored the NRA recommendations.
Just like you Clarabelle....if you wanted the far left-wing, socialist answer to your question, why not just go to the far left links...you're more than familiar with them...
Think progress.....Huffington.....what the fuck, go right to the DNC and get what you want to hear.....and stop wasting the time of the rest of us.....you don't want the right and correct answer, you want the Obama answer.....
You crave the pinhead, peckerhead opinions, just google and leave this debate site completely.....
Last edited by NOVA; 10-14-2010 at 08:05 PM.
Put blame where it belongs
ATF decided it could not regulate bump stocks during the Obama administration.
It that time," the NRA wrote in a statement. "The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semiautomatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations."
The ATF and Obama admin. ignored the NRA recommendations.
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Will someone please explain to me why the hell should I vote for a political party that DEFENDS companies and corporations outsourcing jobs to foreign countries only to sell the products to me at outrageous prices....AND get a tax break to do so?
Now THINK about what you just posted....you just laid out all the expenses entailed for outsourcing.....so the logical question is that since you have people in your home country quite capable of performing the same task (and WITHOUT a heavy, sometimes hard to understand accent), WHY GO THROUGH THAT ADDITIONAL EXPENSE? And since the pay scale for outsourced personnel, say customer service to India, is a HELL of a lot lower than in America, with SERIOUS changes regarding benefits....the corporations are doing it SOLELY for the bucks! Yes, they are avoiding taxes....by having a tax break (our Federal tax dollars picking up the slack) for outsourcing their IT and HR support....and then including the service in the fees they charge customers.
So the corporation makes a profit, gets the American public to pay for the effort, charges the American public for the service, and deprives Americans that could use the jobs.
America's COLA is higher than anywhere else....as is our consumption of world resources, as is our pay scale, etc., etc. But that is no excuse for outsourcing while purely for a profit margin IN ADDITION to a hefty profit rate.
During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.
George Orwell
Why do working people continue to vote against their own best interests?
It's because they know they won't get anything back from the taxes they pay so they don't want to pay taxes. The Repubs have made it clear government is not there to help so the people know that even if they pay taxes to programs as soon as the Repubs take office they will cut or refuse to implement those programs.
One only has to remember Cheney's infamous words regarding the war with Iraq. "It was an option and we could afford it."
Is there anyone here who has benefited from the Iraq war? Tax dollars paid by each and every citizen was used with absolutely no benefit to the average person so it's natural people will vote for a government which offers the lowest taxes.
That's part of the concern behind HCR. The benefits of a universal plan is beyond debate. We have dozens of countries and the citizens in every country that has a universal plan, without exception, insist on keeping it. The problem is the adjustments people are making leading up to certain benefits coming into effect is no guarantee they will come into effect. In other words how can they believe/trust the government when the opposition is doing all it can to prevent such benefits coming into effect? How can they count on the government for anything when an election can negate what one government tries to implement?
So, the only alternative the average person sees is to constantly vote for lower taxes and expect nothing even though not only would they would benefit greatly from government programs but the dollars they are now paying offer little in return.
Hopefully, if Obama can manage to stay in office and the HCR benefits have a chance to come into effect the discussion will be moot as once citizens realize the benefits there will be no turning back.
"May your reality be as pleasant as mine."
Name one social program the Republicans cut.
Edit: It's damn near a rhetorical question because Republicans don't cut sh*t, they only spend.
And dude, the whole issue with supposedly 'voting against one's economic interest' isn't because people think they won't get anything from the government so they might as well vote for lower taxes (where did you come up with that one?). It's the social issues. Issues like abortion and guns and gays that lower income whites supposedly vote for the GOP on against "against their economic interest".
Last edited by cawacko; 10-14-2010 at 09:27 PM.
delete
Last edited by cawacko; 10-14-2010 at 09:46 PM.
Bookmarks