Letters to the Editor

Corporate tax

February 11, 2010


To the editor:

While the economic crisis continues, I have seen no elected official mention an increase in the Kansas corporate income tax as a mechanism of balancing the state budget. Neither has this occurred at the federal level.

In the 1950s, corporate income tax yielded one-third of federal tax revenue. What changed? Who is working for whom? By 2007, corporations paid only about 7 percent of total federal revenue.

In 1979, Kansas state corporate income tax was about 11.9 percent of total revenue. By 1989, 7.9 percent and, by 2007, only 5.6 percent of total taxes were contributed by corporate income tax. Perhaps business needs to pay its fair share for education.

Pre-emptive wars with tax cuts, mismanagement of Federal Reserve system controls, deregulation of policies at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the loss of more than 7 million jobs to China and a whopping 24 million jobs lost during the Bush-Cheney administration — all of these factors, with a dose of Enron on the side, should have alerted us to the need for better gatekeepers. That was what we learned from Enron, was it not?

While we are being told of possible neighborhood school closures, “Save Our Schools” rallies families and the community moves to support the Lawrence Community Shelter in this time of need. The community responds, where is leadership?

Contact everyone you know across the state and help to make a strong request to the Kansas Legislature to include increased corporate income tax as part of the budget solution.

Sven Erik Alstrom,



Richard Heckler 8 years, 2 months ago

TABOR is one big problem for Kansas tax payers. The state chamber of commerce and the large majority of legislators are supporting TABOR without declaring it policy. The billionaire Koch brothers and Grover Norquist are the money losing genius team behind this idea without foundation:


The billionaire Koch brothers are also financing that new republican party group aka teabaggers.

If teabaggers were real they would not be against fair vote and public finance. Both would eliminate less government in our lives by eliminating special interest group financing of our elections.

And they would not be against medicare for all as that would require fewer tax dollars at all levels of government.

Richard Heckler 8 years, 2 months ago

State and local taxpayers need to become aware of the impact tax incentives have on our local public services such as public schools.

Small town economies cannot afford big city thinking such as the "Free Lunch" http://www.democracynow.org/2008/1/18/free_lunch_how_the_wealthiest_americans

Richard Heckler 8 years, 2 months ago

Improved Medicare for All would cut public school budgets dramatically yet providing excellent care such as:

long term care such that cancer demands prescription drugs hospital surgical outpatient services primary and preventive care emergency services dental mental health home health physical therapy rehabilitation (including for substance abuse) vision care hearing services including hearing aids chiropractic durable medical equipment * palliative care

IMPROVED Medicare for All eliminates co-pays and deductibles

IMPROVED Medicare Health Insurance is an extraordinary deal that would free up more expendable cash to be spent elsewhere thus creating new jobs. Things like birthdays, home improvements, investments,wellness programs or a fuel efficient automobile

Social Security and Medicare are two very smart insurance plans

VTHawk 8 years, 2 months ago

The US has the second-highest corporate tax rates among developed countries, so complaining about a declining percentage of total revenue from corporations is a real misnomer. Below are the tax rates of selected developed countries (from OECD data):

Japan 39.54 United States 39.10 France 34.43 Belgium 33.99 Canada 31.32 Germany 30.18 Australia 30.00 New Zealand 30.00 Spain 30.00 Luxembourg 28.59 Mexico 28.00 Norway 28.00 United Kingdom 28.00 Italy 27.50 Sweden 26.30 Finland 26.00 Netherlands 25.50 Austria 25.00 Denmark 25.00 Greece 25.00 Korea 24.20 Switzerland 21.17 Czech Republic 20.00 Hungarye 20.00 Turkey 20.00 Polandg 19.00 Slovak Republic 19.00 Iceland 15.00 Ireland 12.50

GardenMomma 8 years, 2 months ago

Are those effective tax rates? That is, do those tax rates take into account tax deductions and write-offs? The U.S. may have the second highest tax rate but after all deductions, write-offs, and tax breaks are corporations still paying 39%?

labmonkey 8 years, 2 months ago

We need to quit taxing those who provide the jobs. Lower the corporate tax rate.

Flap Doodle 8 years, 2 months ago

Relax & have a popsicle, Sven. It's a cool and fruity treat on a winter day.

cowboy 8 years, 2 months ago

66% of US corporations pay absolutely nothing in taxes ! Not one dime ! Dear Sven , if they can write it off , invest it , pay it to the CEO's shareholders , etc . there is no profit to tax. The problem is not the rate but the exclusions.

cowboy 8 years, 2 months ago

Additionally in decades past a company was valued by their cash reserves , due to these tax structures there is no value to holding cash plus the CEO's just see it as extra bonus money , then when the corps hit hard times they just frigging fold up .

svenway_park 8 years, 2 months ago

This comment was removed by the site staff for violation of the usage agreement.

puddleglum 8 years, 2 months ago

soon, all of the manufacturing jobs will be in china, and we can begin to export all of our unemployed peoples to the republic of cheap labor.

course, then somebody is gonna have to be the trash man around here. Oh yeah, and we probably won't have jobs anymore.

KSManimal 8 years, 2 months ago

VTHawk (Anonymous) says…

"The US has the second-highest corporate tax rates among developed countries, so complaining about a declining percentage of total revenue from corporations is a real misnomer."

What PART of corporate dollars do those other nations listed actually tax? Sure, US corporations have a 39.1% tax rate; but that tax is on PROFIT not INCOME.

Individuals pay tax on INCOME, not PROFIT. Here's the simple version:

Corporations earn money, pay bills, and then pay taxes on what's left. Individuals earn money, pay taxes on it, then pay bills with what's left.

Unless you know what actual dollars those corporate tax rates are applied to, the raw number comparisons between the US and other nations are meaningless.

Jason Bailey 8 years, 2 months ago

Now here's a solution for ya! Let's increase corporate taxes in KS!

Sven, ever think that maybe (just maybe) those corporations would shutter their operations in KS and move to, say, Nevada or Texas? The company I work for did this a few years back. We still operate in KS but are domiciled in TX.

Companies will work around your tax increase thus decreasing the total collected income taxes even further. Guess what else that would do? Jobs would leave the state.

Those on the "tax! tax! tax!" side see the world through such a simple prism that bears no resemblance to reality.

Lastly, who ultimately pays corporate income taxes? Consumers. Companies will not forfeit profits by keeping prices lower and just absorbing a tax increase. They will pass it on to the consumer via higher prices for goods and services.

Please refrain from submitting another "Hey, I got the answer!" letter when the subject is economics until you at least take a basic business and economics course.

Flap Doodle 8 years, 2 months ago

For every complex issue, there is a simple sound-bite sized answer that is completely wrong. Congrats to Sven for finding this one.

KsTwister 8 years, 2 months ago

There needs to be a distinction for Corporate Taxing: Those that provide jobs in the US and those who import most of the goods from other countries. Hence, a Corporation gets tax breaks from government, but squirrel the United States out of income from their few employees, because most of their other employees do not live in this country. They import the goods back in at lower import prices because the fascade it here, the jobs are there,and they can afford it with the cheap labor. Made in USA? ...well do your research, not necessarily. If tomorrow the entire world put America in an embargo,now what? What did not use to be a problem has become a big one. Protectionism?...No. Common sense.....that left with Nafta and Cafta.

Boston_Corbett 8 years, 2 months ago

Looks like fairy dust and ground unicorns are getting rolled up with the dried oregano once again.

George Lippencott 8 years, 2 months ago

How about an income tax increase - Kansas Income tax - progressive?? - becomes flat above $60K

bisky1 8 years, 2 months ago

corporations do not pay taxes, they collect taxes from you

tomatogrower 8 years, 2 months ago

labmonkey (Anonymous) says… We need to quit taxing those who provide the jobs. Lower the corporate tax rate.

Kansas has been lowering the corporate tax rate for several years now, try reading the news. Where are all the jobs that were promised? We're waiting...... gone to China.... gone to the east coast... gone to the West coast... we're waiting.

Oh, and the list of corporate tax rates listed above; although misleading, as others pointed out, really doesn't make a good case for lowering tax rates. Why aren't the countries with low tax rates booming with new businesses and jobs? Hmmm.

If you believe that corporations have the best interest of our country and it's people as their core value, you are either a corporate flunkie or you are very naive.

tomatogrower 8 years, 2 months ago

Still waiting for that huge influx of business. Still waiting.

Boston_Corbett 8 years, 2 months ago

I always enjoy reading taxation policy missives from authors who have little or no income.

georgiahawk 8 years, 2 months ago

Ask not what corporations can do for you, ask what you can do for corporations!

think_about_it 8 years, 2 months ago

Where do all of you simpletons buy your goods and services? From evil corporations. Yes even your beloved Community Mercantile, Inc. Do you for even one second think that raising corporate taxes will make them pay more? Any person with a hint of logic knows that those costs will be passed on to the consumer, you.

Learn some economics.

tomatogrower 8 years, 2 months ago

Get a clue. Corporations get a tax cut, but they don't lower their prices. And comparing the Merc with corporations who make billions of dollars a year, paying their bottom of the pile employees zilch, paying tax lawyers to not have to pay taxes, giving huge bonuses to their execs, is just crazy. There are corporations out there who do care about their community and the stability of the company. The Merc is not going to pick up their store and move to Nebraska if Nebraska lowers their tax rate. Get a clue. I try my best to only support companies who are farsighted and feel a sense of community responsibility.

think_about_it 8 years, 2 months ago

Yet by raising the corporate tax rate the Merc's taxes will increase also, thus forcing them to charge you more. Do you have some aversion to logical thinking?

think_about_it 8 years, 2 months ago

Oh I get it. You are just against large corporations that make billions. They don't produce or provide anything you use or need. Riiiiiiiight.

PosseComitatus 8 years, 2 months ago

Spending is the problem... Do you balance your personal budget by demanding that you get a raise?

State government spending in 2005 was 4.6 billion, last year the state spent 6.06 billion...

tomatogrower 8 years, 2 months ago

So we could close down all the schools, and if parents can't afford private schools, then they can just become your wage slaves. Uneducated citizens are easier to control, aren't they? Is that why conservatives only want education for those who can afford private schools?

Our budget problems began when they lowered corporate taxes on the promise that doing so would bring jobs to Kansas. Well, that hasn't happened, has it? When the corporations the big corporations got that tax cut, did they expand? no Did they lower their prices for goods and services? no They used the extra money to move their jobs to other countries. Let's tax corporations who take jobs out of the country at a very high rate, then give them cuts when they really do create jobs. We paid for a service before we got it. It's like, hey, give me a bunch of money and I'll put a new roof on your house, instead of getting a roof on your house, then paying for the job. We've been played for fools.

think_about_it 8 years, 2 months ago

pssst. Don't tell anyone this but most of the products sold by the Merc and every other store are produced by corporations.

Richard Heckler 8 years, 2 months ago

Most Corporations Don't Pay Income Taxes

Tuesday 12 August 2008

by: Richard Rubin | Congressional Quarterly

Most corporations, including the vast majority of foreign companies doing business in the United States, pay no income taxes, according to a Government Accountability Office report released Tuesday.

During the eight-year period covered by the report, 72 percent of foreign-owned corporations went at least one year without owing taxes, and the same was true for 55 percent of domestic corporations.

Small companies were much more likely to pay no taxes than larger companies. Still, more than 3,500 large domestic corporations - with more than $250 million in assets or $50 million in gross receipts - did not pay taxes in 2005.

The report said about 80 percent of the companies studied paid no taxes because they didn't generate any profit after expenses. Money-losing companies can legitimately owe no tax, and others can use provisions of the tax code to lower or eliminate their liability.

But the lawmakers who sought the data seized on the report as proof of corporate gamesmanship.

"It's shameful that so many corporations make big profits and pay nothing to support our country," said Byron L. Dorgan , D-N.D., who requested the report along with Carl Levin , D-Mich. "The tax system that allows this wholesale tax avoidance is an embarrassment and unfair to hardworking Americans who pay their fair share of taxes. We need to plug these tax loopholes and put these corporations back on the tax rolls."

The report covered the period from 1998 through 2005. During that time, corporate income taxes as a share of gross domestic product dipped, from 2.2 percent in 1998 to 1.2 percent in 2003, the lowest share since 1983. But receipts jumped after that, hitting 2.7 percent in 2006 and 2007, according to the Office of Management and Budget. That was the highest share since the late 1970s.

Another possibility could be the use of transfer pricing, which companies use to account for transactions between subsidiaries in different countries. Creative, rule-stretching use of transfer pricing can allow companies to push their profits into lower-taxed jurisdictions. The report does not attempt to examine whether illegal transfer-pricing caused the difference between foreign and domestic companies.


puddleglum 8 years, 2 months ago

think_about_it (Anonymous) says…

Yet by raising the corporate tax rate the Merc's taxes will increase also, thus forcing them to charge you more. Do you have some aversion to logical thinking?

sure, they can payout less profits to their shareholders or succumb to competition. Same goes for wal-mart. Same goes for dillons. same goes for every gas station. a few percent isn't going to kill off your sacred capitalist free-martket most-competitive entity wins all ideal is it?

think_about_it 8 years, 2 months ago

Or just raise prices to you. A few percent won't kill you.

Richard Heckler 8 years, 2 months ago

Those medical insurance corporations love to get into our pockets by raising prices and allowing consumers to pay what they should have paid for= back door price increase.

And tax dollars wow do they love tax dollars or what. That $1.2 trillion tax dollar gravy train is their chief client. Without socialism where would they be? If it were not for socialism they would NOT be interested in medical insurance.

Big time corporations love those tax dollars so long as they have loopholes allowing them not to pay.

Jeremy DeBoard 8 years, 2 months ago

Corporations are people too, except when the subject is taxes...or having a conscience...or a heartbeat...

tomatogrower 8 years, 2 months ago

think_about_it (Anonymous) says… pssst. Don't tell anyone this but most of the products sold by the Merc and every other store are produced by corporations.

Think a little further. Then why aren't our prices cheaper when we give them tax breaks? Where are the studies that show that the tax cuts enacted in Kansas in the last 20 years have brought jobs to our state? Show me the evidence.

notajayhawk 8 years, 2 months ago

Stain (Anonymous) says…

"75% of U.S. corporations pay zero taxes. None.

"Think about that when you are paying your taxes this year."

Do the 40% of those tax filers who not only pay NO taxes, but get more back than they paid in, have to think about that, too?

Maybe the bottom 50% of taxfilers, whose combined contribution in taxes didn't equal what Exxon/Mobil - just ONE corporation - paid in taxes, should think about how much they didn't pay because of that.

That 75% is ridiculous to cite. As the merrill-bot's cut-and-paste reflects, those numbers said just over half of U.S. corporations paid no income tax in at least one of the 8 years they studied. For instance, a vehicle manufacturer who regularly pays multimillions in taxes, and one year due to, oh, say, a major recall, they have a loss instead of a profit - THEY would be included in that percentage who 'pay no taxes'.

Most corporations are small businesses who are incorporated only to avoid the double-tap of taxation that sole proprietorship and partnerships get hit with. They pay no taxes because they don't make any money.

And as a couple of other folks have alluded to, do any of you 'tax tax tax!' geniuses think corporations aren't going to pass on any tax increase to you?

jafs 8 years, 2 months ago


It seems to me that the only way to change corporate culture is to create maximum wage levels.

Otherwise they will, indeed, simply raise prices and continue to pay executives ridiculous sums of money, while shipping jobs overseas.

At the very least, we should begin rewarding companies that keep jobs in this country.

And, I'm not talking about small businesses here, obviously.

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 8 years, 2 months ago

"It seems to me that the only way to change corporate culture is to create maximum wage levels."

To that end, here's my proposal-- find the lowest paid employee in a given company, and any wages paid to any other employee more than 7 times that amount are not tax-deductible as a business expense by the company.

They can still pay any exec however much they want-- it just won't be considered a legitimate business expense, which it isn't.

Scott Drummond 8 years, 2 months ago

Why was the middle class expanding when we did tax corporations at higher rates?

Also, if the corporation is free of most taxes, then aren't we, the human persons in our society, being forced by government policy to subsidize the corporation's business model? The objection to taxing corporations is that they will simply raise prices to pass on any tax they may have to pay. But in doing so they at least pass the price on to those customers who wish to support the business, rather than placing the burden on all of us (many of whom are not their customers.)

George Lippencott 8 years, 2 months ago

tomatogrower (Anonymous) says…

It would help if you did your homework. Tax revenue in Kansas is declining in some part because corporations are paying less but mostly because personal and corporate income tax payments are declining because people do not have jobs or are earning less and therefore buying less. Economics says that if you sell less you must reduce costs or reduce prices to significantly increase sales volume. If you cannot do the latter, the only way you can keep people employed is to charge more. That appears to be the path we are on - like it or not.

Unfortunately, Mr. Obama's stimulus program mostly retained jobs so it did not get worse but has not really led to much new hiring to increase demand.- yes there has been some. Some of us think that throwing money at the problem is less effective than establishing predictable tax and regulatory environments so that business will be able to make rational decisions on hiring and consumers can make larger purchases knowing they will not be placed in a financial bind by extensive new taxes or regulatorily imposed new costs (wind energy in power rates for example).

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 8 years, 2 months ago

Obama's stimulus package hasn't worked, and probably won't, because it doesn't assume that the current economic system is broken, but merely needs a patch job.

The global, corporate race to the bottom is beginning to take full effect. For at least the last thirty years we have been in direct competition in a cut-throat battle with outsourced slave-labor. The cheap goods we can buy at Wal-Mart (and elsewhere) have allowed us to behave like frogs in slowly heating water, but that water is finally getting hot enough that maybe we should consider jumping out-- but in a government of, by and for corporations, there's no place to jump.

notajayhawk 8 years, 2 months ago

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (Anonymous) says…

"They can still pay any exec however much they want— it just won't be considered a legitimate business expense, which it isn't."

Of course to Herr Klowne, the salary of anyone with their jack-booted heel on the throat of the proletariat is not a legitimate business expense.

Right, Herr Klowne, someone who spent years in school at their own expense, risked their own savings and economic future, who worked their rear-end off developing a new product and building a company from scratch to make and market that product, should be limited to $100K/year because there might be someone cleaning the bathrooms making minimum wage. Brilliant as always.

"The global, corporate race to the bottom is beginning to take full effect. "

Psssst - boohoohoozo - I don't want to be the one to shatter your dreams, but Marxism beat it to the bottom.

jafs (Anonymous) says…

"It seems to me that the only way to change corporate culture is to create maximum wage levels."

I was talking about taxes (as was the LTE writer). I'm not sure I get the connection on how maximum salaries would help alter the percentage of government revenues that comes from corporations.

What happens, jafs, when someone decides YOU make too much money? The pyramidal nature of our society pretty much dictates there are always going to be more people below you than above you, inless you're at the absolute bottom - and some day they're going to think YOUR salary should be capped.

"At the very least, we should begin rewarding companies that keep jobs in this country.

"And, I'm not talking about small businesses here, obviously."

What about small businesses who buy their raw materials, components, sub-assemblies, supplies, etc., etc., etc. from overseas?

bearded_gnome 8 years, 2 months ago

Hey Sven, those new trees going in behind the Lionsbowl, they have crows or ... [wait for it] ... Ravens in them?

this LTE is amazingly poorly organized, mostly unsubstantiated screed.

"Corporations don't pay taxes, they just collect them." You raise corporate taxes, you raise prices and you depress employment, yes it is that simple. Corporations will pass on their taxes along with other costs because they are in business to make a profit.

btw, Boozo doesn't even understand what brofit is, he thinks profit is just the money reinvested in a business and what you pay supervisors and managers! If you look at his posting history, he doesn't even understand that profit is gain, the payback/reward for investment of money, effort, acceptance of risk, etc.
further, his posts indicated that he and Jafs think they should be empowered to decide how much money other people can make.

this concept is completely unamerican. we do not want central planning or the benevolent citizens committee to decide when we have enough money.

and if Sven wants to bring up Enron, I'll raise him a Global Crossing, far more money involved but was liberal connected so not covered in the media and didn't get the liberal media's hate machine after it. or, AlGore with his climate scam, has become a massive millionaire because of the global warming hoaxe.
he has organizations like lawrence all across the country buying the fake carbon credits. often these actually serve to increase hungar in underdeveloped countries.

so, Sven/arky-tek, you clearly have no expertise to support this LTE and its claims. plus, you don't pay local property taxes to support the school, do you?

instead, you attacked the school district, forced it to spend way over $10,000 on a vapid meaningless lawsuit. Now, you're concerned about somebody's budget? riiiiight.

bearded_gnome 8 years, 2 months ago

hundreds of pieces and calculators on harm of increased corporate tax: http://search.heritage.org/search?q=%22corporate+taxes%22&site=default_collection&proxycustom=_ADVANCED%2F_Privacy_Policy-http%3A%2F%2Fwww.heritage.org%2Fabout%2Fprivacy.cfm&output=xml_no_dtd&sort=date%3AD%3AL%3Ad1&client=heritageorg&oe=UTF-8&ie=UTF-8&proxystylesheet=heritageorg

if that link is too cumbersome: go to: search.heritage.org and in the searchbox just type "corporate taxes."

bearded_gnome 8 years, 2 months ago

Hey Boston and Svenway, remember not that long ago, some guy called us "winguts?" [sic] in his online postings.

said we just popped up on the internet saying all kinds of things. remember: turf, injuries, night games [the other guy], drainage, the toilets, the lights, the parking, the tennis center got moved to make more parking but some guy protested moving it while protesting the lack of parking, sound, press box, oh, a very long list. then, there were the pictures!
the lawsuit was already mentioned. agitating neighborhoods, repeated false posts on a public forum, no, we won't go into that, tht just wouldn't be very 'cool.'
I wonder if he's cooking with more driedoregano these days.

Scott Drummond 8 years, 2 months ago

"Corporations will pass on their taxes along with other costs because they are in business to make a profit."

Why is it not preferable for them to pass those costs along to their customers who desire the service or goods they provide, rather than sticking all of us with the consequence of their shirking of their responsibilities.

LoveThsLife 8 years, 2 months ago

I am just going to put this out here because I think it is an issue that needs to be heard.

I think American Companies are treated unfairly. My father was approached by an Asian owned company in his field of work a few years ago to lay the ground work for their business in the states. He decided to take the job and about 6 months into it realized they were evading taxes in the United States. When he went to a tax attorney he was told that even though it is probably illegal there wasn't much that could be done because of trade agreements we have with said country. How they were doing it was in some kind of gray area. He was warned as well that if he chose to blow the whistle he could be sued for libel by the company and it could take years to battle in the courts. When he went to his state Senator's office they pretty much blew him off, I am guessing because it's really not something they want to deal with. He ended up quitting because he didn't really want to be involved in something like that, but it opened his eyes to some of the shady things going on.

Anyways, I am sure their are other foreign companies doing the same thing which gives them a huge advantage over American companies operating in the US. I think before we place more taxes on corporations we need to straighten out our agreements with other nations...especially China.

bearded_gnome 8 years, 2 months ago

very good post None2! yes, those three are nonprofit, nontaxpaying entities too. and vangent does almost all its work as a contractor for government I think.

BC, Snap, Svenway, et al,

remember the adapted poem "the raven" user Ravens adapted for the Lionsbowl? I oughta repost that here!

you suppose Sven Erik Alstrom is reading these comments?

p>www.askheritage.org has related answers to questions on the negative impact of raising corporate taxes.

bearded_gnome 8 years, 2 months ago

Here's a golden oldie:

30 December 2008 at 9:33 p.m.

Suggest removal Permalink Anonymous Ravens (Anonymous) says…

Once upon a forum dreary, while I pondered weak and weary, Over many a quaint and curious volume of forgotten lore, While I nodded, nearly napping, suddenly there came a tapping, Come to Lawrence, said Sven, posting. “Look: mice and fox and more.” 'Some dippy poster,' I muttered, Just like Cool and Spiderman before -Only this, and nothing more.' And this raven, never flitting, still is sitting, still is sitting On the pallid bust of Sven just above the chamber door; And his eyes have all the seeming of a demon's that is dreaming, ready for another CNA meeting. And the lamp-light o'er him streaming throws his shadow on the floor; And my take from what I'm reading, as the foxes go on breeding, not far from Chesty's door. His case will lose. The Raven says — It'll be nevermore!

jafs 8 years, 2 months ago


The point made was that corporations will simply raise prices, rather than make other adjustments if their taxes go up.

Capping wage levels would provide some disincentive to do that, as the folks at the top wouldn't be able to make more by raising prices.

The ratio of top pay to average pay is much greater than it used to be, even though worker productivity has grown substantially.

CEO's manage to get contracts with guaranteed generous severance packages regardless of performance which hold even if they're fired.

The folks at the top walk away happily from corporate bankruptcies while the average worker gets screwed.

Corruption is rampant (think Enron) in corporate culture.

How anyone can defend this is truly beyond my comprehension.

Are you a CEO? Do you have aspirations to be in the top 1% of wage earners?

bearded_gnome 8 years, 2 months ago

Are you a CEO? Do you have aspirations to be in the top 1% of wage earners?

---aspiration? of course, who wouldn't unless they lived with bizaro liberal guilt!

what about the massive money Mr. Obama made from his books. per hour of work on those was very very high.

and capping pay is just another way to squelch the free market, punish achievement. not what we need especially in current conditions. just as banks get their legs under them, the wacko Obama administration wants to hit them with a punitive tax that is only a political swipe and will actually harm the economy.

no wonder small businesses aren't hiring. people like this are in charge and they don't want to risk adding personnel in this environment! throwtax credits etc., for hiring just meaningless. there has to be work for your hirees to do!

bearded_gnome 8 years, 2 months ago

worldwide, the chinese and europeans are doing much better on cutting corporate tax rates than we are. our last cut was under our beloved President Reagan:


bearded_gnome 8 years, 2 months ago

After the Irish dramatically cut their corporate tax rate (several years ago) their economy went from bust to boom almost over night.

here is another useful analysis:

George Lippencott 8 years, 2 months ago

Might just point out to the economically disadvantaged that corporate income can come in the form of stock options which as capital gains is taxed much lower than salary for them would be.

Maybe we shoul just change tax policy so that people using stock options to avoid taxes can not do so any longer. Maybe we could make our income tax more progressive (it caps at 200K) so that people making such large sums get taxed more?

Maybe we can set some sort of requirement for public corporations that corporate benefits have to be approved by the small stockholders rather than institutional investors who are prone to "log rolling"?

Maybe we should elect senators with economic status like us rather than millionaries?

There is nothing wrong with our system that a new centrist party with requirements that candidates are like those they would represent would not fix. The old parties are broke and focused only on their own political and economic advantage.

jafs 8 years, 2 months ago


I have no aspirations to be in the top 1% of wage earners - apparently you do.

Good luck with that - it's a pretty small club, and hard to get into.

If CEO compensation were in fact directly related to achievement (or failure) it would be somewhat better. But it clearly isn't.

CEO's manage to negotiate contracts that include guaranteed severance packages with pension plans even if they run the company into the ground and are fired.

How is that not simply wrong?

George Lippencott 8 years, 2 months ago

jafs (anonymous) says...

It is wrong - very wrong. Whoops, did we just agree on something???!!!

Richard Heckler 8 years, 2 months ago

If these people will not pay taxes who makes up for what they will not pay? plus our own?

Where's the justification?

Take tax incentives for example. When these expire the business says adios.... we were used.

So every tax incentive must be backed up with property ownership or no tax dollar give aways.

The business should agree to stay 15 years beyond expiration date so the community gets some back. If not the business must forfeit the property to the city taxpayers.... a no loophole lien on the property.

George Lippencott 8 years, 2 months ago

merrill (anonymous) says...

OMG, we may agree on something - I think - not sure I fully understand your post.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.