Taxes

Obama Is Calling for 'Economic Patriotism'. Don't Listen.

Where we stand on the issue of corporate taxation is no way to measure a person's loyalty to his country.

|

garrettt/Flickr

So President Obama is again using one of the most contemptible phrases in American politics: "economic patriotism." There are many credible reasons to despise this rhetorical construct. Patriotism, after all, is the attachment to one's homeland, a nationalistic devotion to one's country and the values that make it great. If a person not only resists things that are "patriotic" but opposes them, then logic dictates that the person is being unpatriotic.

So the president is really asking one question: Why do you hate America?

Instead of protecting tax loopholes that let corporations keep their profits overseas, let's put some of that money to work right here in the United States rebuilding America. We can rebuild our airports, create the next generation of good manufacturing jobs, make sure those are made in America.

A politician may rally millions of economic illiterates to his cause with this sort of speechifying, but these are not "loopholes"; they are "business decisions" that companies make when they face high regulatory burdens or high corporate taxes. Seeing as the goal of a business is not to become a more effective tax collector or health care provider, as this administration seems to believe, moving offshore, or tax inversion—which might mean $20 billion less for the Treasury over a decade—is becoming more popular.

But either way, a lack of new tariffs and taxes does not "reward companies for moving profits overseas" as much as U.S. tax and regulatory policy is a punishment for their staying. Besides, where we stand on the issue of corporate taxation is no way to measure a person's loyalty to his country.

Actually, logic would also dictate that if you're texting on your Samsung phone while driving your Honda or BMW, you are also complicit in unpatriotic behavior. You are, in most cases, sending your cash to companies that aren't pitching in enough to rebuild our airports. Plenty of companies that normally suck up to the administration—General Electric, IBM, Merck, and Microsoft, to name a few—believe that punishing foreign companies for doing business in the United States is a bad idea. Are all these companies unpatriotic, as well? Someone should ask the president.

But let's not forget that for Obama, the idea of "economic patriotism" is elastic. The contours of its philosophy are now identical to the president's own policy proposals. Which is curious, considering we're supposed to set aside "politics" to achieve our communal goal. Then again, though you may be knee-deep in politics, our president is guided solely by common sense. Here's how Obama explained economic patriotism on July Fourth:

It's a sort of economic patriotism where you say to yourself, 'How is it that we can start rebuilding this country to make sure that not only the young people who are here but their kids and their grandkids are going to be able to enjoy the same incredible opportunities that this country offers as we have?' That's our job. That's what we should be focused on. And it's worth remembering as we go into Independence Day.

Yes, thinking up new ways to create reliance on government is exactly what the Founding Fathers had in mind in 1776. How do we achieve this? A few years ago, Obama released a 20-page campaign stunt called "The New Economic Patriotism: A Plan for Jobs & Middle-Class Security." Thin on details, it was big on advocating new stimulus money to fund a slew of liberal hobbyhorses. The title, "New Economic Patriotism," oozed an authoritarian scent, and, fittingly enough, anyone who disagreed was "betting against America." This is just one of the accusations regularly thrown around these days to chill speech.

And as the president lets it rip, perhaps we should take his definition of patriotism seriously. Though the idea can be somewhat amorphous, patriotism, especially in this country, is driven by idealism rather than chauvinism or ethnic and religious considerations—the kind of idealism that soldiers go and die for. So if you believe that left-wing economic policies are synonymous with "patriotism" but religious freedom, freedom of speech, and economic freedom are antiquated notions in need of fixing, maybe it's your idea of American patriotism that is warped.

NEXT: Florida City Cops Told Not to Force Women to Shake Their Bras

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. “Economic Patriotism” = slimy lefty jargon for ‘we want all of it!’.

    1. ‘we want all of it!’. And we want YOU to get it for us. And we want you to acknowledge how great the plan is, while you sacrifice and praise “The Greater Good”!

    2. Patriotism = nationalism
      “Economic” = taxes for welfare programs + central planing and regulation, ie, socialism.

      “Economic patriotism” = national socialism.

      1. Doch!

      2. The funniest part is that progressives have no clue that they’re fascists, perhaps more ‘liberal’ fascists than the 30s fascists, but with all the same assumptions and fallacious premises intact.

        1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S…..r_brothers

          Nope, not all that different.

      3. ant1sthenes unbundled the Obama rhetoric nicely and much more concisely than Harsanyi.

        “It can’t happen here?” Yes it can and it is.

    3. Is anyone who disagrees with them now “unpatriotic” in addition to “racist”?

    4. Stop being so fucking greedy and give me your money.

  2. How strangely provincial of them. It’s almost as of they are doing just about anything to appeal to people’s baser instincts.

  3. Its amazing, they give all sorts or breaks to their favorite companies, like solar, but then get mad when companies actually use those breaks giving to them.

    How stupid can a group of people be?

    1. There are no limits.

      1. There are so many contradictions in their philosophy. Do they just not see it or are they just evil mendacious people?

        1. I think the reason they believe what they believe is precisely because they can’t detect logical contradictions.

          1. It’s not a matter of belief. There is no inconsistency. Those in charge pragmatically offer tax breaks, etc., while the rhetoric that’s causing you to think they are being hypocritical is for the gullible voters. I look at “comprehensive immigration reform” as one of the best examples. They has control of both houses of Congress and the Presidency for two years and there was nothing about immigration. They want the issue alive purely for political reason. Democrats, the ones making the decisions and pulling the strings, don’t give a rat’s ass about immigration.

        2. You’re average person who votes Democrat just doesn’t see it. Your average Democratic politician is an evil mendacious person.

          1. I’d venture to say that your average voter doesn’t see it. It’s not particular to Democrats.

    2. Well, strictly, a lot of the “economic patriotism” nonsense isn’t about breaks but about companies not actively screwing themselves over to satisfy the whims of political leadership. And perhaps the more important distinction is that those accused of being “economically unpatriotic” are non-cronies. If they were in the bag, then the rules would all of a sudden make sense. This isn’t about clear, objective, rules. It’s about ruling.

  4. It’s not our business to care about whether we have the revenues necessary to build and maintain a decent civilization… but we are tasked with worrying about the welfare of corporations?

    1. Tony|7.18.14 @ 5:29PM|#
      Translation:
      “I don’t care about laws; I want all the money I can steal from anyone under any circumstances!”

      Yeah, shitpile, we know.

    2. Tony:

      It’s not our business to care about whether we have the revenues necessary to build and maintain a decent civilization… but we are tasked with worrying about the welfare of corporations?

      They go hand in hand. Show me a decent civilization without corporations.

      Oh, your talking about the government revenue necessary to build and maintain a decent civilization.

      When government is doing only what’s necessary such that we have civilization, get back to me.

    3. Keerist Stony, the money is used one way or another, either by the companies to invest in expansion or to lower their prices, or by the government to build more bureaucracy.

      One of these is more efficient and targeted than the other.

      1. Tony thinks, the corporations are just going to swim in the money, you know, like Scrooge mcduck. Can’t have waste like that.

        1. And he’s prolly stupid enough to not know his damn retirement is invested in those corporations.

    4. Explain to me why money earned overseas is somehow owed to your latest unicorn farm. Explain why the US can’t adopt territorial taxation like the rest of the industrialized world. Why don’t you want to be like Europe, Tony?

      1. “That’s just Tory BS”
        -Tony

    5. but we are tasked with worrying about the welfare of corporations?

      The anthropomorphization of “corporations” grows tiresome. Legal personhood is a useful fiction; it does not magically make an abstract concept codified by some pieces of paper into a living being with moral agency.

      The concentration of capital is an essential element of economic productivity, and the corporation is just an instrument for doing that.

      Even in the workers’ paradise, there is still a “corporation”: the all-powerful government employing (and imprisoning) everybody.

      Not everything that is good for a corporation’s bottom line is morally good, but the failings of some people does not confer a magical grant of moral authority to arbitrary others in government.

      If your economic worldview wasn’t filled with fallacy from beginning to end you would understand that intentionally sabotaging “the welfare of corporations” will only impoverish people as a whole.

      1. “Even in the workers’ paradise, there is still a “corporation”: the all-powerful government employing (and imprisoning) everybody.”

        Those they don’t murder, that is.

      2. “The anthropomorphization of “corporations” grows tiresome. Legal personhood is a useful fiction;”

        ^^ This. And let’s face it, this is what drives people like Tony nuts, and not unjustifiably: corporations (naturally) want all the *rights* of an existing person, but their investors are less excited about having the *responsibilities* of existing people (not unique to corporations – all people prefer rights to responsiblities).

        I don’t think corporations should pay taxes, and I’m also not that convinced that their “speech” is protected by the First Amendment. But I’m open to argument on both points.

        1. …”and I’m also not that convinced that their “speech” is protected by the First Amendment.”…

          Corporations do not speak. The people who run and own corporations speak.

    6. Government doesn’t “build and maintain a decent civilization,” people do.

      Does government develop culture? No.
      How about Art? No.
      Morals? Technology? Trade? Writing? Economy and markets? No, no, no, no, and no.

      Government is one of the parts of a civilization, but it is not the builder nor maintainer of it. It has a part to play but running society is not that part.

    7. Tony, you ignorant, boot-licking rent boy slut:

      People build and maintain decent civilizations, DESPITE the efforts of governments and shitheads like you to impede them at every turn.

      -jcr

    8. No, you fucking dolt. The fed wastes money, private enterprise creates wealth that the government leeches off of.

      A statist fuck like yourself should be happy that you get what you are able to steal. At some point people will get smarter and ass wipes like you will be targets.

    9. If you really believe the maintenance of a decent civilization is that dependent on revenues gleaned from the profits of corporations, then yes, you do have to worry about the welfare of corporations.

    10. “It’s not our business to care about whether we have the revenues necessary to build and maintain a decent civilization…”

      Tony, you really are a mendacious sack of shit. First of all, government is not civilization! Civilization is the state of affairs based on the interactions of thousands of institutions. Business among them just as, or even more, assuredly than government. Secondly, it isn’t the responsibility of the taxpayer to ensure the government maximizes its take from him, any more than its the responsibility of a customer to pay more than the going rate for any other good or service. Thirdly, one should question whether a civilization that requires one to undermine your own interests, against the very rules it put in place, because FYTW should be properly characterized as “a decent civilization”. Finally, if the government can’t finance itself on some $3 trillion, it might want to take a good, long hard look at the expenditures side of its income statement.

    11. Tony, you have a knack for making even the most steeled stomached libertarians gag.

      At no point have I ever seen you display any semblance of cogent logic, economic erudition, or common sense.

      You need to go out for coffee with Mr. Obama. I am certain he will find/create a job for you in his administration, so much will you two agree on.

  5. Every single one of my leftard friends at work drives a foreign make car. Every. Single. One. And they honestly believe everything that Barry says. The stupidity is worse than Ebola.

    1. Some “foreign make” cars are more American than “domestic” ones…

  6. Patriotism = love of one’s land and people.
    Nationalism = love of and devotion to the government.

    Obama’s idea of economic patriotism is elastic

    Duh. Progs are all about twisting and perverting language until it means nothing at all.

    1. Good points.

  7. Everyone wants to be a ‘patriot’. However, they aren’t smart enough to decide for themselves what it means to be ‘patriotic’. They need someone to tell them what they have to do to earn the label.

  8. It’s not our business to care about whether we have the revenues necessary to build and maintain a decent civilization… but we are tasked with worrying about the welfare of corporations?

    Well, beyond what’s already been said, I’ll add that it’s absolutely laughable to claim that our government doesn’t collect enough money to carry out basic functions. The problem isn’t doing that at all. The problem is that people have added so many non-essential functions, and too many others are taking a slice of that for themselves.

    You aren’t being asked to worry about the welfare of corporations. What you want is to the right to take whatever you want from corporations with no rhyme or reason because you don’t like them. That’s as simple as it can be said. You want to steal from them, and you justify it by calling them evil and corrupt. You are willing to grant the government even more arbitrary power to see this done. Who cares where the legal authority comes from, though, right? As long as you agree with it now, it can’t possibly come back to bite you or others in the ass later!

    From a pragmatic view, the government created these tax laws. They are then turning around and complaining that they didn’t have the foresight or competency to see this coming.

    1. Basically, taxes from 0-10% (in non-war time) would be enough to provide the co-operative services people associate with government. Any amount greater than that is an instrument to control and centralize behavior. It negates the behavior of the producer and rewards the behavior of the non-producer/rent seeker, and rewards the agent who performs the transfer. So, with taxes rates on the middle class – taking into account all levels and every kind (including fees, etc) – is approaching 50%. For the corporate owners, the rates are also very high. So the notion is this – patriotism is now subsuming yourself to the collective and gladly allowing your value system, and associated behaviors, to be negated. Patriotism is allowing yourself to be enslaved. This is what Obama is saying.

      1. The sick thing being that government revenue began with protective tariffs in the first place – the tariffs were put in place for the sole purpose of protecting northeastern manufacturing interests from foreign competition.

        A frequent political problem in the 19th century was “what in Sam Hell are we going to do with this surplus money from the tariffs?”

        Now the question is “what new taxes can we devise in order to meet our government’s ever-increasing revenue needs?”

        1. The sick thing being that government revenue began with protective tariffs in the first place…

          Just off the top of my head, I’m thinking excise taxes like that which caused the Whiskey Rebellion are even older. That wasn’t passed to protect anyone, but to take advantage of the farmers who had found a more profitable way to dispose of their bumper corn harvests.

        2. A frequent political problem in the 19th century was “what in Sam Hell are we going to do with this surplus money from the tariffs?”

          A surplus in the Treasury was definitely considered to be a problem during the times of President Grover Cleveland’s administrations. Back when gold and silver were money, a surplus of it in government hands could make money difficult to obtain in the private sector – unless the government spent it.

  9. When the Intellectual Left went collectively silly over Obama’s convention speach in 2004, I determined to pay as little attention to his further utterences as possible. I have, as yet, learned of no reason to regret the decision.

  10. Fuck 0bama. Fuck Holder. 2017 can’t come fast enough.

    1. I have a cynical, Hillary-related response to that.

      1. Hillary is DOA in 2016. Everybody assumes that all the women will run out and vote for her, but nobody understands the nature of women; these precepts are inseparable. The last person a woman will vote for is another woman, because they know (whether they admit it or not) that women are shitty leaders and have no place occupying the office of POTUS.

        Obozo is a feminized leftoid beta male, and that’s one reason why he is so horrible. *That* is the only constituency who will be voting for Hillary in ’16: ball-tucking beta leftoids like Tony.

        1. Keep talking about the “nature of women.” That will surely drive them to your side, what with your extensive knowledge of and empathy with their “nature.”

          And you do know that referring to people with Greek letters means you’re an automatic douchebag, right?

      2. I have a cynical, Hillary-related response to that.

        Obama’s been terrible, but so was Bush. And so will Hillary.

        Even if we get four years of Rand Paul (hell, even if we get eight), there will be yet another douchebag waiting to fuck things up some more.

  11. Once again – just for reminders…..
    Reason proves…..

    “The modern conservative is engaged in one of man’s oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.”

    Let’s see – the modern “libertarian” movement is financed by BILLIONAIRES who have, time and again, stated their opposition to most ALL forms of taxation and regulation.

    You’d have to be an idiot to think it’s even ideology (which is bad enough). It’s nothing but pure selfishness. Being worth 50 or 60 billion, thanks to THIS COUNTRY, is not enough for these a-holes.

    They have to sow seeds of discontent – all the way up to the SCOTUS, until they make certain they can buy off ALL our institutions and politicians.

    It’s really sad. I think the good guys (hint” NOT the Kochs and Libertarians) will eventually win out, but so many will suffer in the meanwhile…and it doesn’t have to be…

    Modern society is about having a balance between our selfish instincts ( mostly suppressing them, since they often involve dragging women away, beating up people, and enslaving others ) and our better nature.

    That’s where Patriotism comes in.

    Of course, Libertarians are really just the anarchist du jour – so Patriotism does not apply in any way, shape or form. I wonder if Rand Paul wears a flag pin?

    1. You are an idiot.

      1. Read Your Hero Reagan’s comments below – about tax fairness, patriotism, corporate loopholes, etc.

        Of course, I don’t expect members of the modern John Birch Society to think….well, like Americans. But still…give it a try.

        1. 1) I don’t debate idiots.
          2) Reagan is not a hero of mine nor do I have a thing to do with the John Birch Society.
          3) You are an idiot.

          1. The average troll around here will bring up Reagan or Bush for obvious reasons. Libertarians are, in their mind, all just Republican Tea Baggers.

            It’s the same as if I brought up Stalin every time I had an argument with a progressive. It would be ludicrous and nonsensical, and they’d immediately say so. They are completely incapable, for the most part, of noticing that’s exactly what they are doing…

            1. Or, they would tell you that Stalin was “right wing”
              They will say anything.

        2. craiginmass|7.18.14 @ 8:59PM|#
          “Read Your Hero Reagan’s”

          BTW, asshole, NOT ENOUGH CAPS!

      2. Nuff said about this dolt.

    2. Sooo. . .

      You want all the billiunayres to pony up and be less selfish.

      And you’re not saying this out of any self-interest.

      You want them to pony up for *other* needful people.

      Because you see the value of self sacrifice.

    3. This whole post is like a mating call for shitlibs.

    4. The modern progressive movement is funded by the coercive tax system, which predominantly exists via the wealth confiscation of corporations and productive people (I do recognize the component of state employees that pay a portion of what they receive back into the system as taxes).

  12. This stuff is funny, funny, funny. It’s as if the writers have absolutely no grasp on history or reality.

    There was once another dude who called for such fairness…
    http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=38697

    He said:

    “The tax system is crucial, not just to our personal, material well-being and our nation’s economic well-being; it must also reflect and support our deeper values and highest aspirations”

    “It must be an expression of both America’s eternal frontier spirit and all the virtues from the heart and soul of a good and decent people?those virtues held high by the Statue of Liberty standing proudly in New York Harbor.”
    “We’re determined to cut back on special preferences that have too long favored some industries at the expense of others. We would repeal the investment tax credit and reform the depreciation system. Incentives for research and experimentation, however, would be preserved.”

    “There is one group of losers in our tax plan?those individuals and corporations who are not paying their fair share or, for that matter, any share. These abuses cannot be tolerated. From now on, they shall pay a minimum tax. The free rides are over.”

    “Under our new tax proposal the oil and gas industry will be asked to pick up a larger share of the national tax burden.”

    1. Reagan was an idiot. Don’t you agree?

    2. What are you gonna do next, go to a Wiccan gathering and lecture them for worshipping Zeus?

    3. craiginmass|7.18.14 @ 8:57PM|#
      “This stuff is funny, funny, funny.”

      craig is stupid, stupid, stupid. It’s as if he has no brain to examine what he posts!
      This shitpile thinks a term like “fairness” (which he cannot define) means something to people with an IQ higher than his 50 or so.

    4. Of course, there is one problem with this. After Reagan got the rates cut, his Apostles quickly started to work on putting all the special tax breaks in and increasing taxes on labor and cutting them on capital. So was Reagan genuine or was he just another skirmish in the war to make sure only labor is taxed?

  13. “The modern conservative is engaged in one of man’s oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.”

    The modern progressive is engaged in one of man’s oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for tyranny.

    See how easy that is?

    Who is selfish – the person who wants to keep what they already have, or the person who wants to take what someone else has? Most ‘liberals’ are very quick to call for charity…when someone else is paying for it.

    Regardless, this isn’t even about (just) corporate taxation. When you have attempts to create retroactive laws, and basic demagoguery, that’s a more important issue to me than taxation of the rich.

    As someone stupid enough to fight for this country overseas, I will gladly say that appeals to patriotism are cheap and moronic. It’s even worse to question the patriotism of others because of their beliefs.

    More importantly, why is it that the group of people who complain the loudest about corporations moving overseas are the ones who tend to buy the most foreign goods? Why is it only the corporations patriotic duty to pay more money to support the country when so many of those attacking them don’t live up to those ethical standards?

    I don’t expect much of an answer. I expect more of the same drivel as above. Appeals to emotion, cheap insults, and a complete lack of logic.

    1. I don’t expect much of an answer. I expect more of the same drivel as above. Appeals to emotion, cheap insults, and a complete lack of logic.

      The shitlib cries out in pain when he strikes you.

  14. ‘How is it that we can start rebuilding this country to make sure that not only the young people who are here but their kids and their grandkids are going to be able to enjoy the same incredible opportunities that this country offers as we have?’

    The first item on the agenda would be to stop selling ‘their kids and their grandkids’ into indentured servitude til the end of the universe for the debt the government class is racking up today.

    1. Which is exactly what Obama said when he voted against raising the debt ceiling as a Senator.

      Amazing how a few years later, his political opponents were terrorists for doing the same.

  15. The oldest, stalest precept of moral philosophy is the (existentially unsubstantiated) claim that morality consists of self-sacrifice for others. There is no fact of reality that you can point to and say, “That is why man has to be his brother’s keeper”; but the case for selfishness can be derived directly from experience, from the fact that only a “self”–an individual–exists, and no person can exist in the stead of another. It begins with metaphysics–only individuals exist.

  16. A politician may rally millions of economic illiterates to his cause with this sort of speechifying, but these are not “loopholes”; they are “business decisions” that companies make when they face high regulatory burdens or high corporate taxes.

    Actually, no they are not.

    They are the result of specific affirmative action taken by our representatives in Congress. Saying that they are business decisions strips Congress of it’s agency, reversing cause and effect.

    Furthermore, since they are the result of Congressional action, it is logical to conclude that the government, collectively, wants businesses to exercise these ‘loopholes’. If that is not the case, then why were they enacted in the first place?

    In short, people that complain about ‘loopholes’ are either being disingenuous or hate democracy.

    1. It is hardly “democracy” when they are slipped in during the dead of night and only the lobbyists and Congressmen know about them.

      1. You mean like when you deliberately shove an omnibus healthcare “reform” act through Congress before anyone has time to read through it? Would you be referring to Congressfolks like Nancy Pelosi and lobbyists from health insurance companies? Yeah, I think that’s downright evil, frankly, and flies in the face of the principles of a free people. You should stop voting for them.

  17. ‘How is it that we can start rebuilding this country to make sure that not only the young people who are here but their kids and their grandkids are going to be able to enjoy the same incredible opportunities that this country offers as we have?’

    Ummm… not spend their money in advance?

    1. I think that’s a little too simple and sensible for our betters on Capitol Hill. You silly simpleton, you.

  18. “reward companies for moving profits overseas”

    I guess I know where the word inversion comes from. This characterization is an exact inversion of reality. In most cases the money is earned overseas. And taxed overseas. Companies don’t repatriate the earnings because they would get stuck with an additional 35% tax on repatriation. I went to a conference of corporate treasury staff last week. These guys would be delighted to be able to repatriate this money without getting punished for doing so. This is the equivalent of a bully complaining that the kids who are avoiding the schoolyard are getting an unfair advantage.

    1. The corporations also play games to make sure the money is “earned” over there, even when it really isn’t so it is only subject to much lower taxes. Expecting an honest answer from corporate officers is like expecting one from government officers.

      1. What you’re talking about can happen. But it doesn’t happen very often. The tax authorities have lookthrough to intercompany transfers. And they will disallow things. And this was a conference of corporate treasury staff. They weren’t talking to the public. They were talking to themselves.

  19. Yep, once again we have utter economic illiteracy from the Left. The policies that made Detroit the great city that it is will soon be coming to all of America, just vote Democratic…

    Republicans may be evil, but at least they aren’t stupid (as a class, individuals may vary of course…). The Democrats have a near monopoly on stupid, and stupid does ever so much more damage to everyone than evil could even dream of doing.

    Remember, the people and businesses of the US are there to serve the needs of the US government. The US government does not exist to serve the needs of the people or their businesses…

  20. Never in history has Marxist policy increased the standard of living for a nation. As a matter of fact it has greatly reduced it?every single time.
    And the next anti reason statement from the Progressive will be that Obama is not a Marxist. Feel free to look up the definition of Marxism. From each according to ability?to each according to need. Like ACA?where one who earns more supplements with higher premiums for one who does not. And attempted takeover of means of production. Demanding businesses follow this proposed policy or that one for the “inequality” of pay on whatever victim they choose for that week.
    Marxism. Exactly the above. And with continued implementation we will continue to plummet. As it was once said: “Eventually you run out of other peoples’ money.” Obama’s entire agenda was to take from the producer and give to the non producer. That’s what he has done since day one. And we have an entire youth that is fine with it?as long as they have enough for a shack and bottle of vodka. And pretty soon the rest of us will look like Russia as well.
    I predict total economic collapse in my fiction followed by tyranny. Not because I’m a sage, but because I based my work on this wonderful professor known as History. And the thing with this lecturer is he tends to repeat himself on the podium.

    Charles Hurst. Author of THE SECOND FALL. An offbeat story of Armageddon. And creator of THE RUNNINGWOLF EZINE

    1. You’re all so fucking stupid it’s painful.

      1. Tony|7.19.14 @ 10:51PM|#
        “You’re all so fucking stupid it’s painful.”

        Oh, Tony, you’re so cute when you’re angry!
        Stuff it up your ass, twit.

  21. If any politician, regardless of party or ideology wants American businesses to return to the shores of the United States, then I recommend the following:
    1. Lower the corporate tax to one to five percent, or better yet, eliminate it entirely.
    2. Eliminate the EPA and all its fascist rules, regulations, restrictions, etc. and allow the states to initiate environmental laws.
    3. Have the income tax restricted to one percent to every citizen or eliminate the income tax altogether. If the income tax is terminated, then start a sales tax of one percent on all purchases except medicine, food and clothing that has a bill over twenty dollars.
    4. Initiate a tax amnesty to all people and corporations who are holding their money overseas.
    These recommendations may not a cure all to bring back American businesses overseas, but it would be a good start.

  22. The effective corporate tax rate has always been about 16%. Any more than that and companies use loopholes or head for the exits.

  23. You greedy corporations pay for my force monopoly-backed incompetence, or else you’re committing treason!

  24. People are facing different challenges in their daily lives. They need to come up with good results to prove themselves or somebody else that they are worthy of doing so. Basically, these tasks are evaluated according to their degree of effectiveness and efficiency. Whether you are in a business owner, an employee, or an ordinary person at home, it is highly essential to management effectiveness well.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.