paid your taxes? these ten companies didn't

Foxrac said:
Well, If rich people buy less things so won't make any difference
Click to expand...
Why would rich people buy less? With the elimination of the income tax they will have more money to spend on things.
 
TXgolfer said:
Trust me they will raise their prices. It won't seem like much because they have so many products. But to the poor every penny counts.
Click to expand...

It is just old corporation tactic over high tax. :roll:

Let them to do it so I don't care because I'm understand that having bigger deficit is serious problem so budget need to be worked out to have surplus. I like to see budget to hit surplus without harmful to welfare and necessary spending.

I support Obama's plan to cut $4 trillions deficit but I doubt that will pass in congress for now.
 
Reba said:
Why would rich people buy less? With the elimination of the income tax they will have more money to spend on things.
Click to expand...

Rich people can do whatever they want to be less spending or a lot of spending, even they could buy used stuff without pay taxes.
 
Reba said:
Yes, I understand corporate citizenship but you mentioned corporate citizen which is not the same thing. That's why I asked what you meant.

FairTax would solve that. :D
Click to expand...
What do we call the entity that belongs a group that adheres to corporate citizenship attributes? Could it be a corporate citizen? Feel free to suggest an alternative that's more accurate.
 
Glenn said:
What do we call the entity that belongs a group that adheres to corporate citizenship attributes? Could it be a corporate citizen? Feel free to suggest an alternative that's more accurate.
Click to expand...
It would be called a corporation that adheres to corporate citizenship (social responsibility) attributes. It's still a corporation, not an individual citizen. A citizen is a person who is a native or naturalized inhabitant of a geo-political area, who has certain rights and responsibilities related to that area. A corporation entity is not a geo-political area, so it has no citizens. It has employees, stockholders, and managers.

Example:

Microsoft Corporation adheres to corporate citizenship (social responsibility) attributes such as....
 
Reba said:
It would be called a corporation that adheres to corporate citizenship (social responsibility) attributes. It's still a corporation, not an individual citizen. A citizen is a person who is a native or naturalized inhabitant of a geo-political area, who has certain rights and responsibilities related to that area. A corporation entity is not a geo-political area, so it has no citizens. It has employees, stockholders, and managers.

Example:

Microsoft Corporation adheres to corporate citizenship (social responsibility) attributes such as....
Click to expand...
What makes you right anyways?

There is nothing wrong with calling a corporation a corporate citizen when referring to corporate citizenship and social responsibility.

Otherwise, the term "corporate citizenship" would not exist. We seem to agree that it does exist, but not what it consists of.
 
Wow, this thread is just filled with trickle-down and supply-side economics.

To proponents of lowering income taxes and corporate tax rates - what makes you think companies would lower the cost of goods if their tax rates were lowered, rather than keeping the prices the same and keeping their newfound revenue as profit? Some things which people expect to have a more variable price and greater competition (groceries, gas, computers) would likely see some small changes. But things which people buy because they're a "name brand" or which only have one or two alternate options? There's only a down side for either company to be the "first" to drop their price (lowered profit, and their competitor would just match their price change quickly thereafter, thus giving them no more customers).
 
Booo on these companies and I was kinda hoping I'd see Tyson Foods, Inc. Appearently they play by Uncle Sam's rules only when they absolutely have to.
 
Dixie said:
Booo on these companies and I was kinda hoping I'd see Tyson Foods, Inc. Appearently they play by Uncle Sam's rules only when they absolutely have to.
Click to expand...
Don't we all?

Who would voluntarily pay income taxes if it wasn't required? Who doesn't take any deductions to which they are entitled?

If there were any legal ways for me to reduce my tax bill, I'd jump on it.
 
Reba said:
Don't we all?

Who would voluntarily pay income taxes if it wasn't required? Who doesn't take any deductions to which they are entitled?

If there were any legal ways for me to reduce my tax bill, I'd jump on

it.
Click to expand...

Yup, I recall a politician of renown but can't remember who, lol........He said that it is NOT patriotic to WANT to pay taxes.
 
Wirelessly posted (sent from a smartphone. )

Tousi said:
Reba said:
Don't we all?

Who would voluntarily pay income taxes if it wasn't required? Who doesn't take any deductions to which they are entitled?

If there were any legal ways for me to reduce my tax bill, I'd jump on

it.
Click to expand...

Yup, I recall a politician of renown but can't remember who, lol........He said that it is NOT patriotic to WANT to pay taxes.
Click to expand...

:lol:
 
Taxes were introduced first by the French King Louis (there were 16 of them, don't ask me which!) to have the citizens fund his royal bank account so that he could continue living a lavish lifestyle. After the Coup d'Etat/ Storming of the Bastille the new French government kept the taxes as a way to fund the government and build schools where French children were given access to education although a very basic one compared to the Bourgeoisie. (Actually the French Revolution started with the Bourgeoisie).
 
Back
Top