Without it, those with passionate views on the corporate tax code could create an account and trash the forums with their political views.
Remember the #1 goal of this site.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Paid $6 Billion in Federal Income Tax in 2012, 1/40 of All U.S. Corporate Income Tax Collected
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Remember the #1 goal of this site.
But, when the last time they were in power they cut taxes and increased spending.... Reagan did the same thing( mostly from his 600 ship Navy and other military buildup spending to further compete against the USSR). They preach this crap, but they never practice it in the last couple of decades. Now we need to raise taxes( which we did) and cut spending to get out of this hole( though not confident in our government to wisely spend the increase revenue to help the situation).....
Last edited:
Fair enough, but Romney was an idiot too.
To be completely honest - they're all idiots....it comes with the job description.
How many are "many"? A large portion of that 40% should pay income taxes.
EVERYONE should pay income taxes. If you make a dollar, you should owe the government $0.17. Period. Everyone contributes.
I'm against a teared tax system, I like a flat or fair tax, but i'm willing to accept a teared system as a step in the right direction so long as no one gets off paying nothing.
I do see that point, we need to make our government more responsible with their spending before giving them more. It's too bad partisan politics will most likely mean that never happens until we hit a REAL crisis (not this "fiscal cliff" BS).
I'm not saying NOT to give to the Church, I give to both. But the Church can't meet every need across the entire country equally. I don't believe that all the Churches and support organizations across the country have the ability and the finances to meet all the needs of the people. To be honest, I think human nature at it's core is selfish and giving would never reach the amount that is necessary to fulfill all those needs.
You brought up the tea party by responding to my comment earlier. If you didn't vote when Bush was in office, you need to stop throwing around the word socialism, you're way too young for that indoctrination nonsense.
I'm not blaming Bush for everything. Yes, a spending problem as you admitted. I think you're spending too much time on drudge report. There is a lot of blame to go around in the government, so I don't have it both ways. But when you say things like "I vote to not socialize our government" well you just sound ignorant, and just kind of dumb to be honest.
The trouble is, if anybody were to try to introduce the scale of changes that are needed, it would probably be denounced as a coup d'état.
The government (though they'd never admit this in so many words) sets a median wealth and all those who make "too much" pay more to bring them to this median. This is supposed to affect those who make "too little" by bringing them up to this median.
In reality, everyone drops below the median because ambition is surpressed.
You can look up all the socialist nations in history on wikipedia....not too many made to to 2013
I am by no means saying this is happening tomorrow - I am saying there are policy shifts and ideologues in office that are slowly moving us this way.
Temporary tax cuts and "stimulus checks" are a bogus way to stimulate the economy and is usually a wash. On top of that statistically little of the extra money is ever spent and is usually saved so it really does little to help the economy.
As I've never seen a stimulus package offset with spending cuts - the government has to either borrow money or raise taxes to pay for the stimulus.
If you raise taxes to fund the stimulus - people will have less to spend and that offsets the stimulus. If you borrow the money, then people who buy those bonds will have less to spend and that offsets the stimulus etc.
Unless you're paid in cash, if you make a dollar you do contribute. But I do agree with your overall ideal.
The fact that a couple making $260,000 in California takes home less than half of that is ludicrous. I know that's still a lot of money, but is the government really responsible enough to take over half of someone's money?
Yeah, but the current numbers don't back your theory. (The rich aren't getting poorer and the poor are not getting closer to middle class). So you are saying this is where the government is headed?
----------
Simple. Leave CA.
I got a buddy that makes good money there complaining how he is struggling as well. Like I told him, you're the one that wanted to live in beautiful, sunny, OC. You could always move back and stop whining.
Lol - forgive me but I have a hard time taking this post seriously.
My experience (albeit limited, I am only 24) has been, when faced with an idea with which they do not agree or do not understand, those who lean left resort to the "you're ignorant" comment and generalize said ideas as "republican (or in this case "tea party) indoctrination.
I comment on discussions like this because it spurs my critical thinking and causes me to research and learn. I try to look past rhetoric at the deeper issue as to ascertain the total outcome.
For instance: Obama wants to help the middle class by asking the rich to pay "their fair share". That's a lovely sentiment - though one that doesn't turn out quite as the middle class would hope.
You can call me dumb all you like - I don't argue to change your mind. I'm not so dumb to think it's possible. I do, however, sincerely hope that something major happens to wake America up in the coming years. The US Government as it currently stands is a mockery of the ideal the Founding Fathers died for.
And I agree - BOTH sides are to blame for the mess we find ourselves in. It's troubling to go into an election faced with the choice of voting for the lesser of two evils. Though I suspect Romney wasn't entirely the monster he was portrayed to be during the campaign and though his camp did an awful job promoting his image.
Anyways - time to head home. I'll no doubt be flooded with notifications as I'm sure to have stirred the proverbial pot. Debates like this are constructive as long as those involved leave with something to think about.
Every time a Democrat is in power, this is what republicans spout off. Step away from the red scare tactics.
Reality is the wealthy have gotten richer and the middle class on down have gotten poorer. That's not socialism, that's a result of the free market being left unchecked. Republicans scream socialism=bad, free market= good. Reality is both are good if implemented correctly and balanced against each other. Going to one extreme to another is not good. There needs to be a balance and the financial collapse back in 2008 is a result of our government removing some Great Depression implemented checks on the free market and the system ran wild until it collapsed.
Last edited:
Yeah, but the current numbers don't back your theory. (The rich aren't getting poorer and the poor are not getting closer to middle class). So you are saying this is where the government is headed?
----------
Simple. Leave CA.
I got a buddy that makes good money there complaining how he is struggling as well. Like I told him, you're the one that wanted to live in beautiful, sunny, OC. You could always move back and stop whining.
I live in TX
but I don't make that kind of money While I may not share all your ideals, I feel the same...well said. Headed home myself.
----------
I live in TX
I don't either...but I'm pretty sure he does since he's constantly whining on FB about how Obama considers above $250k rich. I doubt he'd say that if he only made $100k.
Numbers about "inequality and stagnation" can also be miss leading as well as every study I've seen as it fails to take in account people who change classes (IE a poor person who becomes middle class etc) as it happens all the time.
It also fails to account for the price of progress and technology. Things that were only for the upper class years ago can be seen carried by the poorest of people. Homes are bigger today, cars are nicer, there are things like computers and iphones that didn't exist 40 years ago etc.
Big fan of Russ Roberts - he goes into more detail here.
i wonder if they have an internal account team that figures this stuff out or if its outsourced. I assume most of their accounting is outsourced and they have a small internal team to manage that relationship and do the internal stuff.
Lol props for being on topic. I'm sure a company like Apples has an army of financial "experts" and lawyers who come up with all kinds of statistics to ward off any type of bad PR/legal action
Good points and maybe I'll read that later. One thing your post made me think is how blessed even the poorest of American's are and we shouldn't take it for granted that we are blessed just being born here.
Edit: wait, we're getting back OT? DOH! Really going home now.
Except that according to reputable and serious sources like the Economist this happens less often in the US than any European country, including on some measures the UK.
And we have the class system.
----------
So everyone in the world has servants
.