The Observation Deck

The Obama economy has the US backing up from the iceberg. Mean while, the admin that brought you Operation Fast & Furious that resulted in deaths of 68 children. Has used its minions in the press to focus our attention on "gun control" rather than the approaching financial cliff. None of the laws being proposed would have prevented Sandy Hook. Many on the left that our debating the issue of "gun control" our clueless on how to fire a gun or how a gun works. Instead of gathering facts and asking questions, we have been barraged by knee jerk reactions from the left. It takes 2 seconds to remove and put a new clip into a rifle. Thinking that limiting the number of rounds "clip capacity" to 10 is going to impact a shooter or the carnage is absolutely ridiculous.
more ignorance...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=p ... bel4SASUPQ

clips are not reusable? LOL

Why focus on gun control rather than the sinking economy? .. Since Obama has taken office, the National Debt has increased at a rate never seen before in history. Bush took the National Debt from $5 Trillion to $10 T in 8 years. (and this was front page news) Obama has taken the National Debt from $10 T to $16 T in just 4 years. (wait, I can hear a pin drop) Obamacare and Obama economic policies have created much uncertainty for the economy. Over the course of the last 50 years, (before Obama took office) the unemployment rate in the United States was above 8 percent for a total of 39 months. Under Obama's reign the rate has been above 8 percent for a total of 43 months. Let's take a look at some of Obama's actions that have created an unfriendly business atmosphere in this country. He has issued 106 new major rules that have cost U.S. businesses $46 billion in new cost each year. He blocked Boeing’s new South Carolina factory from opening. He blocked the construction of the Keystone Pipeline that would have created thousands jobs for American workers. As a result of blocking the pipeline, gas prices have gone up. He funded Solyndra and many other failed green companies. Did this prevent many privately funded companies from entering the green market? at the very least, he wasted tax payer dollars. Obama also allowed the United States to become the highest corporate tax nation in the developed world. He also came up with couple of new taxes, a 2.3 percent excise tax on medical devices, a new investment income tax of 3.8 percent and he raised the Medicare Payroll tax from 2.9 percent to 3.8 percent. These taxes either hurt consumers or caused businesses more expense that result in less investment. He closed many profitable Dodge and Chrysler dealerships. He did not have budget for 3 years and then complained that $3.7 trillion is not enough for a budget while ignoring the fact that we only have about $2.7 Trillion in revenue coming in to spend. What happen to cutting the national debt in 1/2?

Our nation has been running the same policies for 32 years:
outsourcing
regressive income taxes for the wealthy and corporations
vast incentives and subsidy for ex-urban sprawl
rampant deregulation of the finance sector and ignoration of remaining regulation.

the results will continue to be the same:
growing national debt
growing household debt
regular collapse of financial sector giants, and their bailout.
regular oil wars/terminal oil addiction
increasing civilizational dysfunction.

Stephen Eisel wrote:Obama also allowed the United States to become the highest corporate tax nation in the developed world.

Not true. Japan and United Arab Emirates have higher tax rates on corporations. Pretty sure Japan is more developed than we are.

http://money.cnn.com/2012/03/27/pf/taxe ... /index.htm

--

On Sunday, the United States gets a distinction no nation wants -- the world's highest corporate tax rate.

Japan, which currently has the highest rate in the world -- a 39.8% rate on business income between national and local taxes -- cuts its rate to 36.8% as of April 1. The U.S. rate stands at 39.2% when both federal and state rates are included.

But while the companies are correct that America’s corporate tax rate is statutorily the highest in the world, what they aren’t noting is that few corporations actually pay the 35 percent rate. In fact, even as profits for American corporations hit a 60-year high in 2011, their effective tax rate hit a 40-year low, and the U.S. collects less in taxes as a percent of the total economy than every industrialized country in the world save Iceland. It’s been 45 years since corporations paid the full top tax rate, and 26 American companies avoided taxation altogether over the past four years.

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2013/0 ... ?mobile=nc

I can explain the difference between actual and statutory rate if you want.

Numbers and media hype aren't always what they seem.

Thealexa Becker wrote:I can explain the difference between actual and statutory rate if you want.

Yes, please do.

Obama also allowed the United States to become the highest corporate tax nation in the developed world

Not true. Japan and United Arab Emirates have higher tax rates on corporations. Pretty sure Japan is more developed than we are.

http://money.cnn.com/2012/03/27/pf/taxe ... /index.htm

On Sunday, the United States gets a distinction no nation wants -- the world's highest corporate tax rate. Japan, which currently has the highest rate in the world -- a 39.8% rate on business income between national and local taxes -- cuts its rate to 36.8% as of April 1. The U.S. rate stands at 39.2% when both federal and state rates are included.

I can explain the difference between actual and statutory rate if you want.

No need to be a condescending ****... I understand the difference between an actual and statutory rate. The first statement in this post is a true statement. Thanks!

Stephen Eisel wrote: No need to be a condescending ****... I understand the difference between an actual and statutory rate. The first statement in this post is a true statement. Thanks!

Dear Mr. Eisel,

Don't swear at me. It's rude and uncalled for. If you can't interpret the difference between someone being condescending and someone offering an explanation, then you need to take a step back before firing off a response.

Now, to answer the question that another asked, here is a nice definition of the difference. http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/key-elements/business/statutory.cfm

I will caveat this by saying that economists care more about effective tax rates than statutory rates. In my opinion, the "on the books" rates are often used to press a political point, on one side of the aisle or another, without really understanding how much people, I'm sorry, corporations, actually pay.

And before anyone jumps down my throat, I am not pressing a political point. I just don't think effective discourse can be had when we don't look at what these rates really measure.

Again, the statement that "Obama also allowed the United States to become the highest corporate tax nation in the developed world" is a true statement... but please keep on spinning.. You are very entertaining..

Our corporate taxes are pretty low.
given the write-offs and exemptions and loop-holes.

our CEO pay is among the highest in the world.
our progressive income taxes for the rich are among the lowest of any developed nation.

Switzerland recently passed a law allowing shareholders to vote on the CEO compensation packages of companies they own.

if you trace history, you will see that economic growth, employment rates, and household savings rates were also higher as corporate income tax rates were higher.
taxes on large corporations and the rich are about the lowest they've been in 80 years.

Swiss people are smart.

Many years ago, Ike Eisenhower said "We've got to keep taxes high to pay for the wars. and all these highways and new utilities and schools people want".

Later, The Fonz said "I like Ike, My Bike Likes Ike.".