Tech Support Guy banner
1 - 20 of 34 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,427 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Kerry Proposes Corporate Tax Cuts
Returning to Campaign, Senator Unveils Economic Plan


By Jim VandeHei
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, March 26, 2004; 7:43 PM

DETROIT, March 26 -- Sen. John F. Kerry returned to the campaign trail on Friday for a two-day swing though the battleground states of Michigan and Missouri to tout a new economic plan featuring tax breaks for U.S. businesses. ..............

Speaking at Wayne State University in Michigan, a state hit hard by unemployment, Kerry sounded like a tax-cutting Republican at times as he touted breaks for small business, manufacturers and "99 percent" of corporations. Kerry, hoping to convince voters he is not a tax-and-spend liberal, said he would reduce the corporate tax rate to 33.25 percent from 35 percent and provide small businesses tax incentives to hire new workers and provide health care to employees.

Full article HERE
(Note: Link only good for about 24 hours then you have to register to read it.)

The title to this thread could just have easily been "Kerry Tax Cuts for the Rich". He actually might be seeing the light on how to stimulate job growth. I could care less about his motivation for the cuts so long as he does the cuts. Bush didn't go far enough, IF Kerry is elected maybe he will.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
44,930 Posts
GB said:
The title to this thread could just have easily been "Kerry Tax Cuts for the Rich". He actually might be seeing the light on how to stimulate job growth. I could care less about his motivation for the cuts so long as he does the cuts. Bush didn't go far enough, IF Kerry is elected maybe he will.
I 'm not so sure from the article you posted.
I think we're going to have to see Kerry's final plan to judge how the 'rich' are treated tax wise.

from the link:
Kerry will offer a budget plan in the next month or so that will include additional tax cuts, but also a hefty tax increase on individuals and many small-business owners making more than $200,000 a year.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,427 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Originally posted by Stoner:
I 'm not so sure from the article you posted.
I think we're going to have to see Kerry's final plan to judge how the 'rich' are treated tax wise.
Aren't you the guy who told me that the rich don't pay taxes cause they have these high power lawyers who create tax shelters?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,427 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Originally posted by Stoner:
No , I think that was bassetman
Oh, that's right. The smart one of the two. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,427 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
Originally posted by Stoner:
Would you enjoy a joke for the nite.
I could do a search just for you :D
Thanks but not necessary. Reading the threads here is humorous enough. And thanks for not calling me a jerk. :D
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
44,930 Posts
Originally posted by bassetman:
Moi? ;)

I may have been referring to Leona Helmsly (sp)? ;)
Sorry If I was wrong, bassetman.
I remember Mulder was berating someone on the issue of tax shelters and it wasn't me :eek: .... :D
But you can see from the way this thread started out, there was an implication Kerry was appeasing the rich with further tax cuts.
Neither the article gb posted or the USA Today article(LINK )
suggest anything of a tax cut as gb implies.
Rather, Kerry seems to be tightening up the tax code to stop encouraging offshore job relocation LINK while giving corporate America the benefits of that action by about a 1.75% tax break and then a shift of tax cuts from the wealthy to the middle class. Tax cuts focused on the consumer( the majority of which are the middle/working class) may just be a spark that adds to consumer confidence and spending, while not running up such large deficits that tax cuts to the wealthy achieved without many positive results .

Titling the article to "Kerry Tax Cuts for the Rich" seems rather the opposite of Kerry's intent.

Jack
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,427 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
Originally posted by Stoner:
But you can see from the way this thread started out, there was an implication Kerry was appeasing the rich with further tax cuts.
Neither the article gb posted or the USA Today article(LINK )
suggest anything of a tax cut as gb implies.
Rather, Kerry seems to be tightening up the tax code to stop encouraging offshore job relocation LINK while giving corporate America the benefits of that action by about a 1.75% tax break and then a shift of tax cuts from the wealthy to the middle class.
I'm sorry but I didn't imply anything other then what is found in the part of the article I quoted. Kerry intends to cut the corporate tax rate. As I stated the reason for the tax cut doesn't matter to me so long as he does it. Maybe it would make you feel better if I said "Tax Cuts For the Rich Corporations". Candidate Kerry's stated purpose is to stimulate job growth here by proving incentives to bring jobs back to the US. Again, I don't care what his motivation is so long as he cuts the tax rate.

Stoner you're the one who shifted it from corporate tax rates to individual. I quoted only the section dealing with corporate rates you are the one that discussed raising tax rates for people making 200 grand a year. The Bush individual tax rate cuts really must bug you. :D
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
44,930 Posts
GB,

I think you are oblivious as to what you actually post.
From the article you linked to (again , sigh ]

Kerry will offer a budget plan in the next month or so that will include additional tax cuts, but also a hefty tax increase on individuals and many small-business owners making more than $200,000 a year.
Are you reading what you link to? ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,427 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
Originally posted by Stoner:
GB,

I think you are oblivious as to what you actually post.
From the article you linked to (again , sigh ]

Are you reading what you link to? ;)
Sigh. Can you read what I actually quoted from the article? I addressed his idea to cut corporate tax rates, someone else went off in another direction. :D

When you are ready to discuss his idea about cutting corporate tax rates let me know. ;)
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
44,930 Posts
Originally posted by gbrumb:
Sigh. Can you read what I actually quoted from the article? I addressed his idea to cut corporate tax rates, someone else went off in another direction. :D

When you are ready to discuss his idea about cutting corporate tax rates let me know. ;)
quote from gb's first post:

The title to this thread could just have easily been "Kerry Tax Cuts for the Rich".
further
Bush didn't go far enough, IF Kerry is elected maybe he will.
Seeing that the above statements do not relate to the article you posted gb, and the fact that I brought up the issue that Kerry's corporate tax cuts are based on a mechanism that seems to relate to the tightening up of tax code that encourges offshore job relocation, how do you figure I didn't bring anything to the 'topic'?

On the other hand, what have you brought?
You bring up 'Tax cuts for the Rich', and then acuse me of going off topic with it :D

You claim
I addressed his idea to cut corporate tax rates, someone else went off in another direction.
And I pointed out from your own link the error in your presentation and you claim I'm off in another direction that you actually initiated. :D

When you are ready to discuss his idea about cutting corporate tax rates let me know.
Ha ha ha ha ha!.............you funny guy, gb :D

Jack
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,427 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
You're just as funny Stoner! Since you just can't seem to let it go. I agreed I should have said "Tax Cuts for the Rich Corporations". I can see were a literal mind might have construed that as referring to individual tax rate cuts. That said, the remainder of the rest of what I posted and what I quoted from the article dealt only with a corporate tax rate cut.

I ask again, when you want to discuss corporate tax rate cuts let me know. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,427 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
Originally posted by Stoner:
I alway thought words were important in the legal system :)

Glad to hear we can edit our meanings when they don't work out :eek:
Third time, let me know when you want to discuss corporate tax rate cuts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,427 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
Originally posted by Stoner:
Hell, make it a 4th time :D

I've already contributed what the intentions of Kerry appear to be, unlike someone else :eek: ......:D................:p
Yes you have. Now would you like to discuss the issue of corporate tax rate cuts?

Should it appear that I'm only inviting "Smilin" Jack, I apologize. Any and all who would like to contribute are welcome not that my permission is necessary.

It appears that Candidate Kerry believes that providing an incentive to corporations by way of a tax break if they bring jobs back to the US will address the unemployment problem, at least, as perceived by him. Should we give tax breaks to corporations when many feel that corporations don't pay enough of their fair share?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
44,930 Posts
Yes you have. Now would you like to discuss the issue of corporate tax rate cuts?
From the outset, gb, I have been posting inregards to what Kerry's position is , which has yet to be fleshed out. I felt you gave an incorrect position of Kerry's stance. Actually, far off the mark.

From the earlier posts of mine, I have objected not to the concept of tax cuts, but rather what I view as excessive cuts to the very wealthy that I believe would not and have not had the desired impact projected.

Now you have changed the topic to be specific as to corporate tax cuts and appearently not necessarily in regards to Kerry's plan.

gb, you may not realize it, but I do read what you post in this regard and give it consideration.
I have no intention of arguing for tax increases that are over the levels that Bush inherited.

If you wish to focus on the issue of 'corporate tax' cuts,
I am more inclined to read what you think on the subjuct than argue
points. I am no tax expert.
As far as any tax cut goes, it needs consideration of at least the economic pressures, deficit, national debt, fairness of rates.
Currently, congress has been spending without much restraint, and I think tax cuts can only be applied where economic improvements are reasonably assured.
In a flush economy, I would applaud across the board cuts. That just isn't now.

sincerely

Jack
 
1 - 20 of 34 Posts
Top