Name: Anonymous 2006-12-10 13:44
As I hear this consistent talk about how the private sector is much more capable than government to operate social programs, and how tax cuts are needed to spur the economic growth so that the corporations can be later taxed, I present an interesting source.
http://www.pbs.org/now/politics/corptax.html
The American income provided for comparison is a family making $30,000 per annum, at a rate of 17% federal income tax. What is truely interesting is that many large corporations get substantially less federal taxation, and in some cases, are refunded for taxes they never paid. This is a strange case indeed, as it seems that these "tax cuts to spur economic growth" are rather redundant, as many corporations are paying less than the taxes of impoverished people.
Libertarian doctrine is obsessive about telling us that government should be weakened, and the spending of the government curtailed to allow the market to grow. It is rather amusing that the people who benefit most from this plan are not the people who pay the most relative taxes, but the people who pay the lowest percentage of taxes, despite how enormous that 1.8% may be (here's looking at you Microsoft).
It makes me wonder why so many middle class families believe the libertarians want to help them. The middle class bears the brunt of the highest taxes, and is the true "common men" of America. When libertarians argue that a graduated tax bracket makes it discouraging to become rich, they need only read the nice steady 1.8% that Microsoft pays to the federal government. Ah, what a burden it is to be rich.
American corporations are truely the scourge of the market. And they themselves are proof of the "high tide raises all boats" myth expounded by various corporations and economic theorists. Simply take a look at the GDP of various nations.
http://people.hofstra.edu/geotrans/eng/ch2en/conc2en/globalgdp.html
As the chart shows, America doesn't generate so huge a GDP as many would like to assume, and that it is about 3 times that of Japan and 5 times that of Germany. Now that you know the scale of global GDP, look at this source. (Click on Facts and Figures)
http://www.pbs.org/now/politics/executive.html
What is evidenced by the diagram is that in Japan, a corporation executive makes 11 times that of a factory floor worker, and likely with due cause (i.e. owning/starting the business), in Germany it is a larger 12 times. (Still reasonable) Now go over to American corporation executives......Hrm. It seems that American CEOs make a staggering 475 times more money than the factory floor worker. What is being drawn here is that the United States' policy of "rising tide" is not narrowing the income disparity, but widening it, making the rich MUCH richer, and the poor MUCH poorer.
Libertarians will sometime outcry that government facilitates this taxation, and must be weakened to prevent further injustice. But I ask Libertarians, with the current system, what empirical proof do you have that doing so will rein in the income disparity? What evidence do you have that doing so will not be what the corporations would prefer? Herein lies the evidence of pessimistic outlook of Libertarians, would not justice be achieved if politicians were honorable? Would not the corporate sway be stymied if politicians rejected their bribes and lobbying? Would not taxation be truely graduated if loopholes were closed for large corporations? Would not federal programs and funding increase if corporations actually started paying their share? Why, if they actually paid, lower taxes across the board would be actually JUSTIFIED. But of course, Libertarians will tell you that all politicians are corrupt, excluding themselves, and that the inherent evil nature of man evaporates in the private sector. Businesses should exist to make money, government should exist to enforce the people's will, and the people's will is the only sovereign power, without it's grace, business would not exist.
http://www.pbs.org/now/politics/corptax.html
The American income provided for comparison is a family making $30,000 per annum, at a rate of 17% federal income tax. What is truely interesting is that many large corporations get substantially less federal taxation, and in some cases, are refunded for taxes they never paid. This is a strange case indeed, as it seems that these "tax cuts to spur economic growth" are rather redundant, as many corporations are paying less than the taxes of impoverished people.
Libertarian doctrine is obsessive about telling us that government should be weakened, and the spending of the government curtailed to allow the market to grow. It is rather amusing that the people who benefit most from this plan are not the people who pay the most relative taxes, but the people who pay the lowest percentage of taxes, despite how enormous that 1.8% may be (here's looking at you Microsoft).
It makes me wonder why so many middle class families believe the libertarians want to help them. The middle class bears the brunt of the highest taxes, and is the true "common men" of America. When libertarians argue that a graduated tax bracket makes it discouraging to become rich, they need only read the nice steady 1.8% that Microsoft pays to the federal government. Ah, what a burden it is to be rich.
American corporations are truely the scourge of the market. And they themselves are proof of the "high tide raises all boats" myth expounded by various corporations and economic theorists. Simply take a look at the GDP of various nations.
http://people.hofstra.edu/geotrans/eng/ch2en/conc2en/globalgdp.html
As the chart shows, America doesn't generate so huge a GDP as many would like to assume, and that it is about 3 times that of Japan and 5 times that of Germany. Now that you know the scale of global GDP, look at this source. (Click on Facts and Figures)
http://www.pbs.org/now/politics/executive.html
What is evidenced by the diagram is that in Japan, a corporation executive makes 11 times that of a factory floor worker, and likely with due cause (i.e. owning/starting the business), in Germany it is a larger 12 times. (Still reasonable) Now go over to American corporation executives......Hrm. It seems that American CEOs make a staggering 475 times more money than the factory floor worker. What is being drawn here is that the United States' policy of "rising tide" is not narrowing the income disparity, but widening it, making the rich MUCH richer, and the poor MUCH poorer.
Libertarians will sometime outcry that government facilitates this taxation, and must be weakened to prevent further injustice. But I ask Libertarians, with the current system, what empirical proof do you have that doing so will rein in the income disparity? What evidence do you have that doing so will not be what the corporations would prefer? Herein lies the evidence of pessimistic outlook of Libertarians, would not justice be achieved if politicians were honorable? Would not the corporate sway be stymied if politicians rejected their bribes and lobbying? Would not taxation be truely graduated if loopholes were closed for large corporations? Would not federal programs and funding increase if corporations actually started paying their share? Why, if they actually paid, lower taxes across the board would be actually JUSTIFIED. But of course, Libertarians will tell you that all politicians are corrupt, excluding themselves, and that the inherent evil nature of man evaporates in the private sector. Businesses should exist to make money, government should exist to enforce the people's will, and the people's will is the only sovereign power, without it's grace, business would not exist.