The fact that Chinese and Indian individuals are returning to their native countries after receiving an education in the U.S. is, in my opinion, an indication that the standard of living in these countries has improved to the point where it makes sense to return to the land where your family, friends and cultural comfort zone exists not that the U.S. is such a horrid place. Eventually their universities will be as attractive as those in the U.S. and Western Europe. This is the natural evolution that one would hope for and expect as living conditions on every level continue to improve globally. Due to the nature of news, it might appear that there is more disease, illiteracy, war, murder, rape, mayhem, etc. in the world today but quite the opposite is true. In the U.S. women matriculating for medical degrees on every level is either equal to or exceeds men. Gradually more and more women are entering the hard sciences. However, I feel it is a mistake to belittle the arts and social sciences and careers in education. I will agree with you that the U.S. has a culture based in anti intellectualism and Christian fundamentalism that is very disturbing, especially given the power we exert internationally.
Originally posted by vivify http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/may/12/us-taxpayers-subsidising-worlds-biggest-fossil-fuel-companies
Shell, ExxonMobil and Marathon Petroleum got subsidises granted by politicians who received significant campaign contributions from the fossil fuel industry, Guardian investigation reveals
[b] U.S. taxpayers subsidizing world's biggest foss ...[text shortened]... d gas industries benefited from subsidies of $550bn, four times those given to renewable energy.
I've been complaining about this for years. Big oil sucks billions of $$ in free cash from the taxpayers, and in return the taxpayers get what? The "privilege" of purchasing from big oil. Small and medium business employ over 80% of American's, yet it's the Fortune 500 that sucks the most of the corporate welfare money (which by the way is nearly twice as much as social welfare!) I agree, this corporate welfare needs to stop. The Fortune 500 needs to play by the same rules as everyone else! Sadly...the conservative element in America doesn't see it that way. 😞
Originally posted by bill718 I've been complaining about this for years. Big oil sucks billions of $$ in free cash from the taxpayers, and in return the taxpayers get what? The "privilege" of purchasing from big oil. Small and medium business employ over 80% of American's, yet it's the Fortune 500 that sucks the most of the corporate welfare money (which by the way is nearly twice as mu ...[text shortened]... es as everyone else! Sadly...the conservative element in America doesn't see it that way. 😞
In the U.S. today the rule is some corporations are too big to fail and those who control them are too rich to jail.
Originally posted by bill718 I've been complaining about this for years. Big oil sucks billions of $$ in free cash from the taxpayers, and in return the taxpayers get what? The "privilege" of purchasing from big oil. Small and medium business employ over 80% of American's, yet it's the Fortune 500 that sucks the most of the corporate welfare money (which by the way is nearly twice as mu ...[text shortened]... es as everyone else! Sadly...the conservative element in America doesn't see it that way. 😞
Big oil sucks billions of $$ in free cash from the taxpayers
Most of that is in rebates for the excessive corporate taxes the US charges.
You probably also gripe about US not having energy independence. Should subsidies end, and I think they should, you will gripe about high gas prices.
corporate welfare money (which by the way is nearly twice as much as social welfare!)
But corporations do pay taxes, and largely social welfare recipients pay none.
Originally posted by normbenign [b]Big oil sucks billions of $$ in free cash from the taxpayers
Most of that is in rebates for the excessive corporate taxes the US charges.
You probably also gripe about US not having energy independence. Should subsidies end, and I think they should, you will gripe about high gas prices.
corporate welfare money (which by the way is near ...[text shortened]... welfare!)
But corporations do pay taxes, and largely social welfare recipients pay none.[/b]
They should not be getting money from government coffers. The US has one of the lower corporate tax rates in the world [1][2][3]. Sorry, but your statement doesn't bear up to the facts. Further in the US you have sales taxes [4], recipients of welfare have no way of avoiding those taxes. So I'm rather gleeful to say that you are wrong on all points.
Originally posted by DeepThought They should not be getting money from government coffers. The US has one of the lower corporate tax rates in the world [1][2][3]. Sorry, but your statement doesn't bear up to the facts. Further in the US you have sales taxes [4], recipients of welfare have no way of avoiding those taxes. So I'm rather gleeful to say that you are wrong on all points.
...[text shortened]... ist_of_countries_by_tax_rates
[4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sales_taxes_in_the_United_States
Near the bottom of the initial page:
At 35%, the United States has the highest nominal top corporate tax rate in any of the world's developed economies
Sales taxes are often avoided, and in almost all State food and basic necessities are excluded.
Your glee is short lived. I wasn't wrong on all points, but correct
Originally posted by normbenign http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_tax_in_the_United_States
Near the bottom of the initial page:
[b]At 35%, the United States has the highest nominal top corporate tax rate in any of the world's developed economies
Sales taxes are often avoided, and in almost all State food and basic necessities are excluded.
Your glee is short lived. I wasn't wrong on all points, but correct[/b]
And in the sentence after that it said:
However, the average corporate tax rate in 2011 dipped to 12.1%, its lowest level since before World War I, largely due to the great recession and a bonus depreciation tax break.
Corporation tax in the UK is 20% flat. So you are relying on the highest possible figure for your argument.
Food is excluded from most sales taxes, however most of us require more than just food to live. So you are still wrong on all points.
Originally posted by Phranny Wouldn't fuel prices be higher if the government did not subsidize fossil fuels but instead subsidized renewable and safer forms of energy which would open up jobs in that area of commerce? The U.S. government also subsidizes corn which is one reason processed and junk food is so cheap. Why not subsidize organic farmers and those producing fruits and produce that do not need to be processed to be ingested?
There are no renewable sources of energy at this time that can provide the volume of dependable energy that fossil fuels do.
Originally posted by DeepThought And in the sentence after that it said:
However, the average corporate tax rate in 2011 dipped to 12.1%, its lowest level since before World War I, largely due to the great recession and a bonus depreciation tax break.
Corporation tax in the UK is 20% flat. So you are relying on the highest possible figure for your argument.
Food is excl ...[text shortened]... , however most of us require more than just food to live. So you are still wrong on all points.
I've already said that the so called breaks are rebates on tax rates that are rarely collected.
At 20% the British pharma giant Pfizer thought it advantageous to move from Ann Arbor, MI back the UK with its headquarters.
Part of the trick is that many US States and even localities add onto the federal corporate tax rate. Small corporations can find ways of reducing corporate income, but large ones are stuck with strict accounting rules.
Originally posted by normbenign I've already said that the so called breaks are rebates on tax rates that are rarely collected.
At 20% the British pharma giant Pfizer thought it advantageous to move from Ann Arbor, MI back the UK with its headquarters.
Part of the trick is that many US States and even localities add onto the federal corporate tax rate. Small corporations can find ways of reducing corporate income, but large ones are stuck with strict accounting rules.
I don't know about Pfizer, but you have both have State and Federal taxes and they seem to vary, although something similar happens in the U.K. with business rates (local council taxes), it may be the predictability that they are responding to rather than absolute taxation rates.
Originally posted by DeepThought I don't know about Pfizer, but you have both have State and Federal taxes and they seem to vary, although something similar happens in the U.K. with business rates (local council taxes), it may be the predictability that they are responding to rather than absolute taxation rates.
My main point in this thread is that the money isn't given to oil companies out of US tax coffers, but is usually breaks on the 35% nominal rate, that almost nobody pays.
Truly, I'd like to see a more honest and transparent code, so that we actually know who does and doesn't pay, and the elimination of subsidies for anyone by the government.
For example it seems insane to spend big $ on PSAs denouncing smoking, while at the same time subsidizing tobacco growers.
Many of those tax breaks benefit small oil companies more than the larger ones. My concern is that taking those tax breaks away could put the small companies out of business and reduce competition and that would only benefit big oil.
Originally posted by Metal Brain Many of those tax breaks benefit small oil companies more than the larger ones. My concern is that taking those tax breaks away could put the small companies out of business and reduce competition and that would only benefit big oil.
14 May '15 23:54
U.S. taxpayers funding oil companies
Back to Top