On Nov 6, 2:37*pm, Hawke wrote:


Use any other product you want as an example then. That's a theory not
the reality. Take Coca Cola. If they pay high U.S. taxes then some
foreign company that sells a competitive product in a low tax country
will grow and Coca Cola will decline. That's according to your tax
theory.

Correcting your misconceptions is a lot of work. I may give up.

Meanwhile the reason your example is wrong is that Coca Cola does not
pay high U.S. taxes on sales in foreign countries.


But we both know it doesn't work that way. Why? Because people
want Coca Cola more than the other product despite a price difference.
So the fact is the taxes a corporation pays in a country are just one of
many factors that determine its competitiveness. But we also know that
when you see where American taxes on corporations really are we know
that America is near the bottom when it comes to what it collects from
its corporations in taxes. That means in the tax area America is a low
tax environment compared to other countries.




er country, as a matter of fact.





You seem instead to have fallen for the simple idea that the middle and
working class should pay the taxes that used to be paid by highly
profitable corporations and the wealthy. And that if you give breaks to
those at the top the benefits will trickle down to everyone. They told
us that was going to happen when Bush was president. We're still waiting
for that to happen.

That is what you think I believe. *Sorry that you can not understand
more complicated reasoning.

What gives you the idea that your level of reasoning is complicated?

Easy, *I know what my reasoning is. *You on the other hand assume you
know.

You seem to buy into the Bush trickle down theory of economics. Not only
is that not a complicated system but I think it's been thoroughly
discredited. We tried it and it caused a host of giant problems for us.

Once again trying to define what I think so you can declare me wrong.
That is a well known debate tactic.

Reciting the arguments of the rich and corporations isn't exactly
anything new or complex. Anyone who knows the first thing about
economics has heard the one that corporations don't really pay any
taxes, they just pass them on to the customers in higher prices. That's
what they tell us. But then I hear CEOs say they can't avoid paying the
taxes and that the taxes affect their business decisions.

So first you say U.S. corporations pay very little in taxes and not
you say that CEO's can not avoid taxes and that taxes affect their
busness decisions.

The difference between us is I know the truth and you don't.

How presumptive.

It's not presumptive. It's confidence. I understand what was done and
what the results were. So I know the facts. Why wouldn't I? We just went
through the Bush era, it's recent history, and the facts are not hard to
find. We have statistics on everything that happened.

You still are presuming that you know what my thoughts are.

You believe
the lies that corporations tell you like when they lied about tobacco
not being addictive.

I never believed that.

I'm glad to hear that but why not? You believe other lies they tell you.

Okay. Please list the other lies that you say I believe.

Have you heard a very successful company with record profits say they
need tax cuts to be competitive? If they're already making record
profits then obviously they're more than competitive and the taxes
aren't hurting them at all. So that's a lie. They just would rather pay
nothing in taxes. Me too. You're just too trusting when it comes to
businesses.

Ha Ha Ha. Me trusting.

I don't. I know our corporations are not made
uncompetitive because of overly high taxes. I know it from their P&E
statements.

So now you have examined the finances of every U. S. corporation.
Somehow I think you are blowing smoke again.

I'm an investor. I look at the financials of corporations all the time.
It's one of the ways I know whether to invest in a company or not. I
don't have to look at all of them to know which are profitable and which
are not. I'm not interested in unprofitable companies. We have tons that
are and they all operate in the same tax environment.

Okay so what companies have you invested in? Since you look all the
time I could assume that you have forty or fifty different companies
that you are invested in. But I will let you tell me and not presume
to know.

Another false statement. Corporations do not all operate in the same
tax environment.

It's just a rule
of thumb that corporations always want to pay less. It means they get
even higher profits, which is what they are in business for. But I don't
believe them when they say that. They would lie if it made them more
money. You don't seem to understand that.

Please show where I do not understand.


I know they want to pay less in taxes. I know they don't
want to pay any at all. You believe them when they say they can't
compete unless they have lower taxes. Look up how little they really pay
and maybe you'll change your mind. You might not though.

Yes there are companies that use the loopholes provided by Congress
and pay very little in taxes. *But unlike you I actually do read the
yearly reports of some corporations and know how much some of them
pay. *Some of them pay a great deal of taxes. *Some do not.

When 2/3 pay none and 30 of the top S&P 500 companies paid zero for the
last three years that tells me our companies are lying when they say
they need tax relief. It's bull****. They just want to make more profits
any way they can and if they can lower their tax burden they want that.

You should try using real facts when posting here.

And you should learn more about the subject at hand before you post
something.

Well lets see. You don't know much about pipelines and don't seem to
know much about corporations. HMMM. I think I know more about the
subject at hand than you do.

Dan



Hawke

On 11/6/2011 2:10 PM, wrote:
On Nov 6, 2:37 pm, wrote:


Use any other product you want as an example then. That's a theory not
the reality. Take Coca Cola. If they pay high U.S. taxes then some
foreign company that sells a competitive product in a low tax country
will grow and Coca Cola will decline. That's according to your tax
theory.

Correcting your misconceptions is a lot of work. I may give up.

Meanwhile the reason your example is wrong is that Coca Cola does not
pay high U.S. taxes on sales in foreign countries.

That hasn't got a thing to do with it. It's not about the taxes it's
about the product. American corporations sell products all over the
world and are in high demand. The taxes they pay have nothing to do with
the demand for our products. People all over want Coke, Apple products,
and American movies. How much those companies pay in taxes doesn't
affect how much they are demanded and purchased globally.




But we both know it doesn't work that way. Why? Because people
want Coca Cola more than the other product despite a price difference.
So the fact is the taxes a corporation pays in a country are just one of
many factors that determine its competitiveness. But we also know that
when you see where American taxes on corporations really are we know
that America is near the bottom when it comes to what it collects from
its corporations in taxes. That means in the tax area America is a low
tax environment compared to other countries.




er country, as a matter of fact.


I don't know that that means.


You seem instead to have fallen for the simple idea that the middle and
working class should pay the taxes that used to be paid by highly
profitable corporations and the wealthy. And that if you give breaks to
those at the top the benefits will trickle down to everyone. They told
us that was going to happen when Bush was president. We're still waiting
for that to happen.

That is what you think I believe. Sorry that you can not understand
more complicated reasoning.

What gives you the idea that your level of reasoning is complicated?

Easy, I know what my reasoning is. You on the other hand assume you
know.

You seem to buy into the Bush trickle down theory of economics. Not only
is that not a complicated system but I think it's been thoroughly
discredited. We tried it and it caused a host of giant problems for us.

Once again trying to define what I think so you can declare me wrong.
That is a well known debate tactic.

It's not a tactic it's a matter of assumption. If you're an American and
you say you're not a Democrat then if I assume you're a republican the
odds are I'm right aren't I? But that is just an illustration. So if you
think that Obama's handling of the economy is all wrong it's normal to
assume you think the republican's way of handling it is?



Reciting the arguments of the rich and corporations isn't exactly
anything new or complex. Anyone who knows the first thing about
economics has heard the one that corporations don't really pay any
taxes, they just pass them on to the customers in higher prices. That's
what they tell us. But then I hear CEOs say they can't avoid paying the
taxes and that the taxes affect their business decisions.

So first you say U.S. corporations pay very little in taxes and not
you say that CEO's can not avoid taxes and that taxes affect their
busness decisions.

I have personally heard numerous CEOs on MSNBC interviews say that they
can't avoid all taxes and they have to plan accordingly. So the taxes do
affect them. That's one issue. The second issue is how much do the
corporations pay and that is not much. They only contribute 6.7% of the
total revenue to the government. That's a small share.



The difference between us is I know the truth and you don't.

How presumptive.

Is it? If I have the facts on my side, and I do, and you disagree with
me, how is it presumptive of me to think you don't know the truth?



It's not presumptive. It's confidence. I understand what was done and
what the results were. So I know the facts. Why wouldn't I? We just went
through the Bush era, it's recent history, and the facts are not hard to
find. We have statistics on everything that happened.

You still are presuming that you know what my thoughts are.

That's what naturally comes after reading your words. Have you heard the
term put your thoughts to paper? That's what you're doing. So that's
where I get the idea of what you think. From you.


You believe
the lies that corporations tell you like when they lied about tobacco
not being addictive.

I never believed that.

I'm glad to hear that but why not? You believe other lies they tell you.

Okay. Please list the other lies that you say I believe.

That companies need tax cuts so they can hire more people. That if we
allow them to repatriate overseas money at a low tax rate it will mean
more jobs will be created. There's a quick couple.


Have you heard a very successful company with record profits say they
need tax cuts to be competitive? If they're already making record
profits then obviously they're more than competitive and the taxes
aren't hurting them at all. So that's a lie. They just would rather pay
nothing in taxes. Me too. You're just too trusting when it comes to
businesses.

Ha Ha Ha. Me trusting.

Yeah, you're trusting as long as what you hear isn't from the Democrats.


I don't. I know our corporations are not made
uncompetitive because of overly high taxes. I know it from their P&E
statements.

So now you have examined the finances of every U. S. corporation.
Somehow I think you are blowing smoke again.

I'm an investor. I look at the financials of corporations all the time.
It's one of the ways I know whether to invest in a company or not. I
don't have to look at all of them to know which are profitable and which
are not. I'm not interested in unprofitable companies. We have tons that
are and they all operate in the same tax environment.

Okay so what companies have you invested in? Since you look all the
time I could assume that you have forty or fifty different companies
that you are invested in. But I will let you tell me and not presume
to know.

Mutual funds, corporate bonds, and some individual stocks such as Citi,
El Paso, GE, Cisco, Exide, just to name a few. But I have to look at a
lot of stocks to determine what I am going to buy or not.



Another false statement. Corporations do not all operate in the same
tax environment.

If they do business in America they do. All are subject to the American
tax system.


It's just a rule
of thumb that corporations always want to pay less. It means they get
even higher profits, which is what they are in business for. But I don't
believe them when they say that. They would lie if it made them more
money. You don't seem to understand that.

Please show where I do not understand.

You trust too much of what the corporations say. So you don't understand
how much they lie.

I know they want to pay less in taxes. I know they don't
want to pay any at all. You believe them when they say they can't
compete unless they have lower taxes. Look up how little they really pay
and maybe you'll change your mind. You might not though.

Yes there are companies that use the loopholes provided by Congress
and pay very little in taxes. But unlike you I actually do read the
yearly reports of some corporations and know how much some of them
pay. Some of them pay a great deal of taxes. Some do not.

When 2/3 pay none and 30 of the top S&P 500 companies paid zero for the
last three years that tells me our companies are lying when they say
they need tax relief. It's bull****. They just want to make more profits
any way they can and if they can lower their tax burden they want that.

You should try using real facts when posting here.

I am. The story about the 30 S&P 500 companies that have paid no taxes
for the last 3 years was all over the news. Don't ask me to show you
because it was all over. Look it up yourself. But why should I have to
inform you that at least 2/3 of American corporations pay no income
taxes? I thought you knew more about this stuff than me. Shouldn't you
be the one telling me what percentage of corporations pay taxes. If you
know what you are talking about shouldn't you have those figures instead
of having me give them to you so you can dispute them? You look up the
facts. Guess what? You'll find out what I told you is the truth. I don't
make **** up. I don't have to because I've go the facts. Try looking the
stuff up yourself before you question me about it.



And you should learn more about the subject at hand before you post
something.

Well lets see. You don't know much about pipelines and don't seem to
know much about corporations. HMMM. I think I know more about the
subject at hand than you do.


Santa Barbara, Prudhoe Bay, Gulf of Mexico. I know where there is oil
the companies moving it spill it. It's just a matter of when and how much.

When you start giving me the stats on things instead of questioning mine
then maybe I'll believe you know something about the subject we're
talking about. Until then I'll remain confident I know more about things
than you do. So put up or shut up, and quit questioning me if you don't
know the facts for yourself, because I don't say it if I don't know it's
true.

Hawke

On Nov 9, 4:59*pm, Hawke wrote:

a very long post , which has so much flawed reasoning that I am too
lazy to reply.\

Not a Democrat so must be a Republican. There may be stupider
statements, but I am hard pressed to think of one.


Dan