Republicans block bill to keep jobs from going overseas.
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 06:24:16 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  Republicans block bill to keep jobs from going overseas.
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2
Author Topic: Republicans block bill to keep jobs from going overseas.  (Read 6387 times)
Bull Moose Base
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,488


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: September 28, 2010, 01:20:47 PM »

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/09/28/gop-chamber-of-commerce_n_741970.html
Logged
Lief 🗽
Lief
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 44,876


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: September 28, 2010, 01:29:18 PM »
« Edited: September 28, 2010, 02:22:43 PM by Lief »

Of course they did. Why would they support ending redistribution from the middle-class to the super rich?
Logged
SvenssonRS
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,519
United States


Political Matrix
E: 8.39, S: -4.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: September 28, 2010, 01:41:59 PM »

This is Senate Republicans, people. No chance in hell they wouldn't block it.
Logged
Grumpier Than Uncle Joe
GM3PRP
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 45,081
Greece
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: September 28, 2010, 02:35:55 PM »
« Edited: September 28, 2010, 02:37:29 PM by Bible Study with Joe Republic »

"But four Democrats and one Democratic-leaning independent joined 40 Republicans to filibuster the bill, arguing that it was too blunt an approach to a very delicate problem. Among the opponents was the chairman of the Finance Committee, Sen. Max Baucus, Montana Democrat, who had said the bill would put U.S. companies at a "competitive disadvantage."

So the Pubs weren't the only ones......

When is Obama going to get some balls and get control of his people?
Logged
tpfkaw
wormyguy
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,118
United States


Political Matrix
E: -0.58, S: 1.65

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: September 28, 2010, 02:40:25 PM »

This, among other things, is why I am never, ever, ever going to either vote for or donate my time and money to any Democrat again.  What this idiotic piece of legislation would do is eliminate write-offs for taxes paid in foreign countries - for example, if Ford has a subsidiary in the UK, and that UK subsidiary pays business taxes in the UK, then Ford can write off the amount they were taxed in the UK when they are taxed again on the same income in the US.  This is what every country in the world does.  Furthermore, if a US company is earning net income from a foreign subsidiary, that means that they are net exporting to the foreign country in which that subsidiary exists, as opposed to net importing.  This bill would therefore tax exports and not imports.  I can't believe that such a ridiculous idea, which goes beyond the merely misguided to being literally insane, is actually being "seriously" proposed, but given the brain trust we have in the congressional Democrats, I guess I have to believe it.
Logged
Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee
North Carolina Yankee
Moderators
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 54,123
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: September 28, 2010, 07:20:26 PM »

Dumbass solution to a problem to a hyped up problem just to give politicians a populist stick. There is no such thing as a "tax break to send jobs overseas". If one is in law, it is the unintentional result of a tax law change. Fixing it is not something to be done by any means necessary, including damaging crucial exports of manufactured goods. 
Logged
Citizen (The) Doctor
ArchangelZero
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,391
United States


Political Matrix
E: -3.23, S: -4.52

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: September 28, 2010, 07:25:18 PM »

Which Dems voted against this (except Ben Nelson of course)?
Logged
memphis
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,959


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: September 28, 2010, 07:27:14 PM »

When is Obama going to get some balls and get control of his people?

Many of the Dems constantly voting against Obama are going to lose in their conservative districts. We're going to see a more unified Democratic Party next Congress.
Logged
Beet
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 28,805


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: September 28, 2010, 07:50:11 PM »
« Edited: September 28, 2010, 07:52:27 PM by Beet »

Here is the overall description of the bill:

The legislation would have raised taxes on corporations that shift operations overseas, costing U.S. jobs. It also would have awarded companies that bring jobs back from abroad by offering a two-year hiatus from payroll taxes for those positions.

The tax bill under consideration Tuesday included three parts: an end to tax deductions for expenses incurred when companies shutter a U.S. operation and shift the work abroad, a new tax on products once made in the United States but now manufactured by foreign workers and the payroll tax holiday.

Here's another, more detailed description:

The legislation has three parts. First, a two-year break on payroll taxes for every new employee that businesses can certify is "replacing an employee who had been performing similar duties overseas." (Quotations are from a summary the Democrats are circulating.) In other words, a business would get a tax break if it could show that a new hire in Georgia was replacing someone they fired in India.

Currently, businesses can defer the taxes on income earned abroad until they bring that money back home to shareholders. That means they can invest it for awhile and earn interest before paying taxes on it. That gives firms a reason to move their income -- and at least some of their operations -- to low-tax countries. It's why the Netherlands, Bermuda and Luxembourg receive so much income from multinational corporations, despite having very little in the way of economic activity from those corporations.

The bill ends deferral "for companies that reduce or close a trade or business in the U.S. and start or expand a similar business overseas for the purpose of importing their products for sale in the United States."

Then there's another policy to keep corporations from taking a tax deduction or credit when they close a domestic plant in order to open a similar plant elsewhere. Once again, it is hard to imagine that the money we'll spend on enforcement will match the money the policy will generate.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/09/the_senate_democrats_disappoin.html

Overall, Klein is critical of the bill, saying that it's scale is too small to make enough of a difference.
Logged
Dgov
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,558
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: September 28, 2010, 09:07:05 PM »

Wow.  I wonder if Republicans are ever going to fix this loophole that lets the Democrats claim that there are tax breaks for companies that work overseas.

For those of you who don't know how corporate taxes work for international companies, the usual method is that each company pays taxes for the country they're doing business in, so a Japanese company selling in France would pay France's Corporation tax and not Japan's.

However this is not the case in the US.  The US corporate tax requires companies based in the US to pay the US corporate tax on all their income, along with the tax on foregin income that they have to pay to other countries.  However, this was removed rather sloppily by passing a separate law stating that US corporations don't have to pay Corporate tax on Out-of-country income.

So the only reason there is a "Tax cuts for companies that send jobs overseas" is because Congress decided to pass a law to take precedent over another law rather than to actually fix the first law.  If this was a legitimate tax break for outsourcing, the Democrats would have tried to repeal it in January 2009 when they could have easily done so rather than 5 weeks from an important midterm election, where they can score political points by holding US exports hostage.
Logged
TheDeadFlagBlues
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,990
Canada
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: September 28, 2010, 09:13:43 PM »

So instead of trying to push for something that is good policy, but would still give them a slight boost before the midterms the Democrats tried to pass a bill that had no chance of gaining cloture, that would be horrible policy and that would get little to no coverage from the media. Good job guys!

Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,612


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: September 28, 2010, 10:14:46 PM »

Those 45 Senators who voted to filibuster this should have their jobs offshored.
Logged
tpfkaw
wormyguy
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,118
United States


Political Matrix
E: -0.58, S: 1.65

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: September 28, 2010, 10:16:26 PM »

Those 45 Senators who voted to filibuster this should have their jobs offshored.

Anyone who thinks this bill is a good idea should be deported.
Logged
Frink
Lafayette53
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 703
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.39, S: -6.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: September 28, 2010, 10:51:55 PM »

Those 45 Senators who voted to filibuster this should have their jobs offshored.

Anyone who thinks this bill is a good idea should be deported.

I thought you were a libertarian?
Logged
tpfkaw
wormyguy
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,118
United States


Political Matrix
E: -0.58, S: 1.65

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: September 28, 2010, 11:00:48 PM »

Those 45 Senators who voted to filibuster this should have their jobs offshored.

Anyone who thinks this bill is a good idea should be deported.

I thought you were a libertarian?

I am.  Read the thread.
Logged
Queen Mum Inks.LWC
Inks.LWC
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 35,028
United States


Political Matrix
E: 4.65, S: -2.78

P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: September 28, 2010, 11:01:10 PM »

This bill would've hurt companies trying to expand overseas.
Logged
Frink
Lafayette53
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 703
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.39, S: -6.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: September 28, 2010, 11:04:54 PM »

Those 45 Senators who voted to filibuster this should have their jobs offshored.

Anyone who thinks this bill is a good idea should be deported.

I thought you were a libertarian?

I am.  Read the thread.

I have. You take a libertarian view at first but suddenly contradict it and say that anyone with a dissenting opinion to that of your own should be deported. Saying those people are stupid, dumb, ignorant, etc. wouldn't have been a contradiction.

Good to have you standing up for free speech as long as its only for people who aren't opposed to you ideologically.
Logged
tpfkaw
wormyguy
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,118
United States


Political Matrix
E: -0.58, S: 1.65

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: September 28, 2010, 11:07:35 PM »

Joke [johk] –noun
1.
something said or done to provoke laughter or cause amusement, as a witticism, a short and amusing anecdote, or a prankish act: He tells very funny jokes. She played a joke on him.
2.
something that is amusing or ridiculous, esp. because of being ludicrously inadequate or a sham; a thing, situation, or person laughed at rather than taken seriously; farce: Their pretense of generosity is a joke. An officer with no ability to command is a joke.
3.
a matter that need not be taken very seriously; trifling matter: The loss was no joke.
4.
something that does not present the expected challenge; something very easy: The test was a joke for the whole class.
Logged
Frink
Lafayette53
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 703
United States


Political Matrix
E: -2.39, S: -6.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: September 28, 2010, 11:09:32 PM »
« Edited: September 28, 2010, 11:11:15 PM by Foster »

Joke [johk] –noun
1.
something said or done to provoke laughter or cause amusement, as a witticism, a short and amusing anecdote, or a prankish act: He tells very funny jokes. She played a joke on him.
2.
something that is amusing or ridiculous, esp. because of being ludicrously inadequate or a sham; a thing, situation, or person laughed at rather than taken seriously; farce: Their pretense of generosity is a joke. An officer with no ability to command is a joke.
3.
a matter that need not be taken very seriously; trifling matter: The loss was no joke.
4.
something that does not present the expected challenge; something very easy: The test was a joke for the whole class.

Your post was none of those things. Much like if I advocated the deportation of all Libertarians none of you would find it very funny.
Logged
Zarn
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,820


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: September 28, 2010, 11:13:34 PM »

People joke about deporting other Americans all the time.
Logged
Badger
badger
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 40,252
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: September 29, 2010, 08:40:58 AM »

This bill would've hurt companies trying to expand overseas.

Good.
Logged
Grumpier Than Uncle Joe
GM3PRP
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 45,081
Greece
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: September 29, 2010, 08:49:49 AM »


Expanding overseas does not not equal exporting jobs overseas (we already do enough of the later).
Logged
Queen Mum Inks.LWC
Inks.LWC
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 35,028
United States


Political Matrix
E: 4.65, S: -2.78

P P

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: September 29, 2010, 06:08:24 PM »


So American companies shouldn't try to sell products we use here overseas?  In that case, lets stop selling those American-made mosquito nets in Africa!
Logged
Franzl
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 22,254
Germany


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: September 29, 2010, 07:08:08 PM »


Don't understand why anyone would be against expanding into new markets.
Logged
Verily
Cuivienen
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,663


Political Matrix
E: 1.81, S: -6.78

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: September 29, 2010, 07:44:18 PM »


Don't understand why anyone would be against expanding into new markets.

But this isn't a penalty tax or something. It's removing government subsidies. The whole point of subsidies, if there is a point, is to develop domestic economic strength. It is completely reasonable to only subsidize companies that operate within the country (provided you think it is reasonable to have subsidies at all).
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.063 seconds with 12 queries.