Jump to content

The U.S. Added 916,000 Jobs In March As Labor Market Comes Roaring Back


Recommended Posts

On 4/4/2021 at 7:50 AM, Toldya said:

You pay corporate taxes?

 

Yes idiot. You think corps eat the tax increase? LMAO

 

On 4/4/2021 at 7:50 AM, Toldya said:

Oh right, you're Stupid Inc.

 

Someone who thinks corps don't pass costs along to customers shouldn't be calling anyone else stupid

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 235
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

LMAO I knew that was coming.   You were the ones who established the rule that any economic improvement that occurs is always because of the person who is president at the time. You gave Tru

We have the  vaccine  because of  Trump.

Toldshit quotes a biased article which claims that because Cheerios cost the same in every state, General Mills does not raise national pricing when Oregon raises corp taxes   It would be fu

Posted Images

4 minutes ago, SixShooter said:

 

Yes idiot. You think corps eat the tax increase? LMAO

 

 

Someone who thinks corps don't pass costs along to customers shouldn't be calling anyone else stupid

Biden just claimed raising corporate taxes higher than China will make us more competitive against China.....😆

Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Str8tEdge said:

Your study was correlation only you fucking scientific illiterate. It DOES NOT claim what you or the study claims to begin with, retard. You don’t even understand even the most basic of scientific principles....

 

The study claims to have found no correlation, which is exactly true. Just because you're incapable of reading doesn't mean that it says something it doesn't say. Whatever you think you know about science, in order for it to be a correlation/causation fallacy, it would need to say 'no causation', NOT 'no correlation'.

 

Obviously there could still be some unknown variable out there that proves it's going to happen somewhere at sometime... BUT THE FACT IS THAT IT HASN'T ACTUALLY HAPPENED. So are you seriously trying to tell me that the fact that literally NO consumer in a state with a higher corporate tax rate pays higher prices is an absolutely meaningless observation?? It's all just a massive fucking coincidence that the exact thing that the anti-tax people argued would happen if corporate taxes were raised hasn't actually happened anywhere in the entire United States?

 

So tell me how do higher taxes raise prices if there is absolutely NO example of this actually happening? Do you have PROOF that there is a causal link? Or even a fucking correlation??

Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, SixShooter said:

Yes idiot. You think corps eat the tax increase? LMAO

 

Oh right, because corporations control prices, not the markets. And people just pay whatever the corporations tell them to pay, no matter what. This is definitely the reality we all live in.

 

36 minutes ago, SixShooter said:

Someone who thinks corps don't pass costs along to customers shouldn't be calling anyone else stupid

 

They pass costs along to consumers only when it's completely unavoidable... because every time they do that, they risk losing even more money from people who would simply stop buying their products... which is a pretty huge fucking risk, which is why they don't want to take it.

 

And you are clearly extremely stupid.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Toldya said:

 

The study claims to have found no correlation, which is exactly true. Just because you're incapable of reading doesn't mean that it says something it doesn't say. Whatever you think you know about science, in order for it to be a correlation/causation fallacy, it would need to say 'no causation', NOT 'no correlation'.

 

Obviously there could still be some unknown variable out there that proves it's going to happen somewhere at sometime... BUT THE FACT IS THAT IT HASN'T ACTUALLY HAPPENED. So are you seriously trying to tell me that the fact that literally NO consumer in a state with a higher corporate tax rate pays higher prices is an absolutely meaningless observation?? It's all just a massive fucking coincidence that the exact thing that the anti-tax people argued would happen if corporate taxes were raised hasn't actually happened anywhere in the entire United States?

 

So tell me how do higher taxes raise prices in places if there is absolutely NO example of this actually happening? Do you have PROOF that there is a causal link? Or even a fucking correlation??

A comprehensive study shows no correlation between taxes paid by large corporations and prices paid by consumers in that same state.
 

1. Their unstated claim is that taxes paid do not affect the prices of goods and services based on corollary evidence or the lack thereof. No corollary evidence is just as worthless as  corollary evidence in making a claim....

 

Zero causation, dummy. 
 

2. Most corporate taxes are paid at the federal level, not state level so why would the study be looking at prices at a state level to begin with? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/5/2021 at 11:42 AM, CrimeaRiver said:

 

 

Lots of waitresses and bartenders back to work....Denny's dish washers

 

Hardly a real economic come back

 

😆

they best brush up on "would you like me to 'supersize' that?"

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Toldya said:

 

Oh right, because corporations control prices, not the markets. And people just pay whatever the corporations tell them to pay, no matter what. This is definitely the reality we all live in.

 

 

They pass costs along to consumers only when it's completely unavoidable... because every time they do that, they risk losing even more money from people who would simply stop buying their products... which is a pretty huge fucking risk, which is why they don't want to take it.

 

And you are clearly extremely stupid.

That’s absolutely and ridiculously false.

 

You have proven you are just as ignorant on the science of economics as you are any other science. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Toldya said:

Oh right, because corporations control prices, not the markets. And people just pay whatever the corporations tell them to pay, no matter what. This is definitely the reality we all live in.

 

Of course corporations control their prices, based largely on their cost of doing business. You're the one arguing costs have no correlation to price.

 

11 minutes ago, Toldya said:

They pass costs along to consumers only when it's completely unavoidable... because every time they do that, they risk losing even more money from people who would simply stop buying their products... which is a pretty huge fucking risk, which is why they don't want to take it.

 

Right, and increased taxes - which is a COMPLETELY UNAVOIDABLE increase in cost - must be passed along.

 

11 minutes ago, Toldya said:

And you are clearly extremely stupid.

 

This from someone who can't put two and two together. Fucking laughable.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Str8tEdge said:

@Toldyadoesn’t believe in the LAW of supply and demand....😆

 

Toldshit quotes a biased article which claims that because Cheerios cost the same in every state, General Mills does not raise national pricing when Oregon raises corp taxes

 

It would be funny if it weren't so sad watching her lick the walls

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/4/2021 at 5:24 PM, theLion said:

We have the vaccine because hundreds of brilliant scientists developed it, based on research that had been ongoing for years. 

😆 The same experts that said Trumps plan and timeline would never work.😆

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, SixShooter said:

 

Of course corporations control their prices, based largely on their cost of doing business. You're the one arguing costs have no correlation to price.

 

 

Right, and increased taxes - which is a COMPLETELY UNAVOIDABLE increase in cost - must be passed along.

 

 

This from someone who can't put two and two together. Fucking laughable.

There are also many other potential factors at play, IE, layoffs, pay cuts, no increases, addl out of pocket benefits costs, no new hiring or expansion...

 

the funny comp of a box of cereal is laughable because prices are set by demographics...

 

the city I frequent has 100k people in the metro area. Kwik-Trip is a local fuel stop that expanded into the area recently setting up shop on what seems like every street corner...depending upon the location in town, I've seen their pricing vary by $.15 a gallon...they get their monies one way or another...

  • Thumb up 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Str8tEdge said:

1. Their unstated claim is that taxes paid do not affect the prices of goods and services based on corollary evidence or the lack thereof. No corollary evidence is just as worthless as  corollary evidence in making a claim....

 

'Unstated claim'?

You mean like what they didn't actually say, but you want to pretend they did?

That's so awesome.

3 hours ago, Str8tEdge said:

Zero causation, dummy. 

 

That's why they said CORRELATION.

Jesus fucking Christ.

 

3 hours ago, Str8tEdge said:

2. Most corporate taxes are paid at the federal level, not state level so why would the study be looking at prices at a state level to begin with? 

 

Because the states have DIFFERENT levels of corporate taxation but the country only has ONE.

 

Are you seriously asking this question?

Is this a joke?

Link to post
Share on other sites

If raising corporate taxes has no effect on what corporations charge, why is Yellen wanting every country to have the same corporate tax level?    Could it be because a country with a lower tax rate can provide their goods at a lower price?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, crazyhole said:

If raising corporate taxes has no effect on what corporations charge, why is Yellen wanting every country to have the same corporate tax level?    Could it be because a country with a lower tax rate can provide their goods at a lower price?

 

Because lower tax rates mean more perks for executives and more profits for CEOs and shareholders. We're not talking about sales taxes here.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SixShooter said:

Of course corporations control their prices, based largely on their cost of doing business. You're the one arguing costs have no correlation to price.

 

If corporations control their prices and consumers have absolutely no power, then why don't they charge 1 million fucking dollars for a hamburger and $6 billion for a cup of coffee?

 

Since apparently they control the markets and consumers have nothing to do with it and will buy at any price, why they fuck wouldn't they just jack the prices up as high as they can go in order to maximize their profits??

 

THINK about what you're saying, you fucking idiot.

 

3 hours ago, SixShooter said:

Right, and increased taxes - which is a COMPLETELY UNAVOIDABLE increase in cost - must be passed along.

 

Guess they won't be able to buy back their own stock and artificially inflate the markets then... and probably fewer executive perks too. The LAST thing they're going to do is price themselves out of the market or make themselves ripe for a price war with the competition.

 

3 hours ago, SixShooter said:

Toldshit quotes a biased article which claims that because Cheerios cost the same in every state, General Mills does not raise national pricing when Oregon raises corp taxes

 

If you weren't a complete illiterate and you had read the entire article, it's pretty much everything that costs the same... with some exceptions made for Alaska being remote and requiring higher transportation costs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Toldya said:

 

Because lower tax rates mean more perks for executives and more profits for CEOs and shareholders. We're not talking about sales taxes here.

I didn't say anything about sales taxes.   Just pointing out that raising corporate taxes isn't net neutral.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Str8tEdge said:

@Toldyadoesn’t believe in the LAW of supply and demand....😆

 

No, YOU'RE the one who thinks that demand doesn't control pricing.

 

You're literally arguing that people will gladly pay a higher price simply because something is for sale, regardless of whether or not they can afford it or are willing to spend that much.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, crazyhole said:

I didn't say anything about sales taxes.   Just pointing out that raising corporate taxes isn't net neutral.  

 

It isn't net neutral but that doesn't mean the cost always passes to the consumers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Toldya said:

 

It isn't net neutral but that doesn't mean the cost always passes to the consumers.

No, not always.   There are too many variables in any economic equation to be able to make blanket statements about given variable.  To that end, it's impossible to say that raising corporate tax rates will necessarily lead to increased tax revenues as well.   

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is great theatre watching/reading folks get so emotional/passionate about two taxes; estate tax (conservatives cry about this one) and corporate income tax (liberals feel that this is some sort of panacea). The irrationality of humans is on full display when these two are on the table. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, impartialobserver said:

It is great theatre watching/reading folks get so emotional/passionate about two taxes; estate tax (conservatives cry about this one) and corporate income tax (liberals feel that this is some sort of panacea). The irrationality of humans is on full display when these two are on the table. 

 

Inheritance taxes are immoral.    Other than that I think any tax should be up for open debate.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, crazyhole said:

Inheritance taxes are immoral.    Other than that I think any tax should be up for open debate.  

A bit too busy to hunt this down but read once that less than 1% of the population ever deals with the so-called death tax and only about .1% actually pay it. This is like bitching about flooding in death valley. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

A bit too busy to hunt this down but read once that less than 1% of the population ever deals with the so-called death tax and only about .1% actually pay it. This is like bitching about flooding in death valley. 

Good reason to eliminate it.    If some one inherits something of value, they should be taxed on active earnings it produces or capital gains at the time they sell it.  Preemptively taxing someone based on a balance sheet is not ok.   

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, crazyhole said:

Good reason to eliminate it.    If some one inherits something of value, they should be taxed on active earnings it produces or capital gains at the time they sell it.  Preemptively taxing someone based on a balance sheet is not ok.   

I do not care about the morality of that. You can post about that and have fun with that. I just think it is irrational on the part of a given Conservative to bitch about this tax day in and day out when it is very unlikely that they will ever encounter it or pay it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...