Federal tax system that favors job creators

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by moonman239, Jan 19, 2015.

  1. moonman239 macrumors 68000

    Mar 27, 2009
    Discussion of our federal tax system tends to revolve around the wealthy people - capitalists argue that rich people are job creators, and therefore deserve the take-home pay they get; others see the rich as greedy people.

    Let's simplify the tax code. In the process, let's create a system that gives the true job creators a tax break. I say the government should deduct a certain amount of money from taxes for each person hired by a company. Under this system, Cook would receive a huge tax break - which, I would argue, he deserves; Apple employs millions, if not billions of people.

    Think about it: more jobs means a better economy and could mean more money going into government coffers.
  2. aaronvan Suspended


    Dec 21, 2011
    República Cascadia
    Eliminate the corporate income tax. None of the so-called "socialist" nations of Western Europe (i.e. Sweden) have a corporate income tax, yet they still manage to provide for their citizens.
  3. thekev macrumors 604


    Aug 5, 2010
    That makes little sense if you mean that Cook would receive a tax break on his personal income tax. That would essentially be bribery. You're also focusing on the wrong thing. Bigger companies are doing fine. Things need to be favorable for the smaller ones, and they aren't terrible here in that regard. For terrible see France.
  4. noodlemanc macrumors regular


    Mar 25, 2010
    Yep, the worst thing you can do to a low skilled worker starting out is make it really hard for their employer to fire them via regulations.
  5. Mac'nCheese Suspended


    Feb 9, 2010
    Don't they have really, really high income taxes instead? TLTGRN
  6. sodapop1 Suspended


    Sep 7, 2014
    I'm open to trying out different approaches to funding our government but the problem with simply eliminating corporate taxes is that it assumes companies will either reinvest the money in the business or increases their employee wages but in all likelihood the majority of it will probably go towards executive compensation. :)
  7. HarryPot macrumors 6502a

    Sep 5, 2009
    In theory the idea sounds good, but in practice, it would be nearly impossible to work.

    Are all the jobs equal? How do you differentiate if some jobs should deduct more from your corporate income than others? Salary? Job importance within the company?

    I believe that for big countries, where high taxes like those in Wester Countries don't necessarily work, the only real solution is for a more ethical workforce all around. Problem is, this is even a bigger utopia.

    Capitalism is all about increasing profits, and most companies get so big that the people on top lose the reality of the people at the bottom. They don't care if they are able to have a good and decent life, they are more concerned about profits and investors.

    I truly believe this is a flaw of capitalist democracy. Poor and rich people will always exist in this system, and the people in the middle will never be completely happy.

    I don't really see another way for big countries to work. Hopefully I'm wrong....

    Those Western Europe countries have some of the highest taxes around. They do have corporate income tax, and they also have higher personal income taxes.

    I'm no expert, but I have read the same as you.
  8. thekev macrumors 604


    Aug 5, 2010
    That does have the possible effect of tipping risk assessments. I'm not entirely sure what it will take, but a lot of the political nonsense always refers to giant corporations that will shop around. In their case I think competing on price is likely to be a futile effort if countries with third world living conditions are under serious consideration. Ideally the US would benefit from an increase in smaller businesses that generate value at the local, state, and federal level. The importance there is that money isn't constantly taken out of the local economy, and you don't have the situation where one company closing shop or going out of business can put a significant financial strain on that economy.
  9. zin macrumors 6502

    May 5, 2010
    United Kingdom
    Apple employs about 100,000 people. They already get a tax break in the form of loopholes.

    What is to stop companies from hiring as many people as possible with very low hours? This means they can cut their tax bill whilst providing no benefit to anybody. As a matter of fact, your proposal might even cost the Government money because of all the new people claiming assistance due to poor hours and wages.

    I can't actually tell if you're being serious, especially since you said that Apple employs "millions, if not billions" of people.
  10. jnpy!$4g3cwk macrumors 65816


    Feb 11, 2010
    The super-rich, worldwide, own roughly 50% of the world's wealth. (Source: Oxfam as reported on TV last night. ;) ) So, yeah, they are greedy. But, that is not why I want to raise taxes on them.

    Good intent, but, hard to get this to work in practice. Walmart and McDonalds jobs aren't the same as Apple jobs, but, the real problem is the decline of middle class jobs. This is referred to by some as "job polarization", and, I don't think anybody knows how to tweak this with the tax code.

    For once, we are agreed. Corporate income tax is not working as intended. Better to eliminate it.

    My proposal: eliminate corporate income tax, sales tax, and VAT, and replace with a strongly progressive income tax structured like the U.S. tax during 1945-1980. The "income" tax worked like a spending tax on the rich, penalizing the rich for excess consumption.

    Why do it this way? It worked during the 1945-1980 period. It is worth trying again.
  11. fitshaced macrumors 68000


    Jul 2, 2011
    Job creators are consumers, not employers. Without consumers, there is no demand and hence no jobs.

    If employers were given the responsibility to behave as job creators with the incentive of lower tax, they would have to be held to their obligation during times of recession or just slow economy activity. They don't do that. They wait for the consumer to generate belief in the economy when they spend their money and then the businesses react and start employing again. They don't, and neither should they, react to save an economy. They are there for the profit, that should be their sole reward. Corporate tax should be paid in order to compensate the tax payer for infrastructure, services that are available to these businesses. Do away with corporate welfare. They hold no moral sympathy for individuals. They just want your time and money.

    To be clear, I have no issue with their ruthlessness for profit, we just need to keep in context that they are not our saviour. They are a vessel responding to demand created by you and me.
  12. fitshaced macrumors 68000


    Jul 2, 2011
    I'd also like to recommend the documentary called 'inequality for all' by Robert Reich. It's on Netflix.

Share This Page