Jump to content

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


Recommended Posts

  • 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

9 hours ago, Toldya said:

 

'Unstated claim'?

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

That's so awesome.

 

That's why they said CORRELATION.

Jesus fucking Christ.

 

Your too stupid to know what the unstated clam is kid, even though you are using it lol....

9 hours ago, Toldya said:

 

 

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?


 

 

Corporations operate in several states, countries etc and their prices are not set by state you fucking moron. This completely invalidates the “study”. 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Toldya said:

 

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.

 

 

No, that's the argument you're making up for me. :lol:

 

Listen kid. EVERY SINGLE expense, including ALL taxes, are built into the price of a service of goods you purchase. 

 

Do a little research on a P&L statement and how it drives and budgets a business. 

 

I RAN a business for 9 years. Literally every penny of expenses is budgeted a year in advance, including ALL taxes. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, crazyhole said:

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.   

 

If more loopholes are created or if the economy takes a turn for the worse, then it is safe to say that revenues will be lower. You would have to look at the long-term trends.

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

 

If more loopholes are created or if the economy takes a turn for the worse, then it is safe to say that revenues will be lower. You would have to look at the long-term trends.

Even without those factors,  there is obviously a point of diminishing returns.   

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

Your too stupid to know what the unstated clam is kid, even though you are using it lol....

 

Or I'm not saying what you think I am saying because you are too stupid to understand.

 

Nobody can say that a corporation is literally incapable of raising the prices of its own goods to try to compensate for a tax hike-- obviously it is capable of doing that, and it is possible to raise the corporate tax so high that the corporations would have no choice but to do that. Maybe you could even envision a scenario where they're run by rich RWNJ assholes who cater exclusively to RWNJ assholes who will agree to pay higher prices because they all want to feel like they're right and want to prove that corporate taxes suck.

 

So yes, obviously corporate tax hikes CAN cause higher prices... this is not up for debate. But this is just so absurdly obvious and the scenarios in which it occurs so absurdly implausible under the current economic conditions that it isn't worth studying... but correlation is.

 

4 hours ago, Str8tEdge said:

Corporations operate in several states, countries etc and their prices are not set by state you fucking moron. This completely invalidates the “study”. 

 

I didn't say prices were set by the state.... WTF are you talking about?

 

Once again, the point is that the higher tax rates in different states have not made the prices of goods higher. OF COURSE the fucking corporations set the prices... but they set the prices based on research into what people are willing to pay, not because they're typical emotional, impulsive conservatives who think it isn't fair that they have to pay more taxes so everyone else should suffer too.

 

So okay, yes, genius... the corporations set the prices of goods, but they don't have free reign in that because they need to set the price based on the market value. It doesn't matter if something costs millions of dollars to produce for any reason... if nobody wants to buy it, it's worthless. 

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

Listen kid. EVERY SINGLE expense, including ALL taxes, are built into the price of a service of goods you purchase. 

 

Do a little research on a P&L statement and how it drives and budgets a business. 

 

I RAN a business for 9 years. Literally every penny of expenses is budgeted a year in advance, including ALL taxes. 

 

So what's your point?

 

I honestly have no idea why you're even talking about any of this.

 

Are you trying to say that corporations use money to pay their taxes? You think this is a point that needs to be made?

 

I already addressed this and explained it wasn't what I meant... obviously the corporations use some of the money that people give them to pay their taxes.

 

I was saying that the consumers don't typically pay for corporate tax increases through higher prices. 

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

 

What is it?

Hard to say exactly.   I'd say going from 21% to 28% or vice versa probably has marginal effects on the economy and tax revenues in general.  My gut feeling is that if we got to a 40% range it would probably have a net negative effect generally speaking but that isn't an absolute, it's just based on how the economy has worked over the last 30 or so years.   

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

 

Or I'm not saying what you think I am saying because you are too stupid to understand.

 

Nobody can say that a corporation is literally incapable of raising the prices of its own goods to try to compensate for a tax hike-- obviously it is capable of doing that, and it is possible to raise the corporate tax so high that the corporations would have no choice but to do that. Maybe you could even envision a scenario where they're run by rich RWNJ assholes who cater exclusively to RWNJ assholes who will agree to pay higher prices because they all want to feel like they're right and want to prove that corporate taxes suck.

 

So yes, obviously corporate tax hikes CAN cause higher prices... this is not up for debate. But this is just so absurdly obvious and the scenarios in which it occurs so absurdly implausible under the current economic conditions that it isn't worth studying... but correlation is.

 

 

I didn't say prices were set by the state.... WTF are you talking about?

 

Once again, the point is that the higher tax rates in different states have not made the prices of goods higher. OF COURSE the fucking corporations set the prices... but they set the prices based on research into what people are willing to pay, not because they're typical emotional, impulsive conservatives who think it isn't fair that they have to pay more taxes so everyone else should suffer too.

 

So okay, yes, genius... the corporations set the prices of goods, but they don't have free reign in that because they need to set the price based on the market value. It doesn't matter if something costs millions of dollars to produce for any reason... if nobody wants to buy it, it's worthless. 

Once again.... large corporations have set prices based on all tax rates. They do not raise the cost of goods or services in one state and lower them in another based on state tax rates

 

Thats why even the corollary evidence of the study is worthless. 
 

2. There’s many ways a business can offset costs. They can lower hours of employees, cut fringe benefits, they can change to cheaper suppliers, spend less in other areas of the P&L but literally every way either affects the cost of the goods or service, hurts the employees or another business. 
 

You progressive retards think you can just raise taxes on a business and it will simply be taken out of the profit but the exact opposite is true. Everything else is affected with profit being the last to be sacrificed.... That’s how business stays in business....

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

 

So what's your point?

 

I honestly have no idea why you're even talking about any of this.

 

Are you trying to say that corporations use money to pay their taxes? You think this is a point that needs to be made?

 

I already addressed this and explained it wasn't what I meant... obviously the corporations use some of the money that people give them to pay their taxes.

 

I was saying that the consumers don't typically pay for corporate tax increases through higher prices. 

The point is you will pay 100% of those tax increases the business collects on your behalf. 😆

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

Once again.... large corporations have set prices based on all tax rates. They do not raise the cost of goods or services in one state and lower them in another based on state tax rates

 

It's because they can't sell a product above its market value and taxed profits do nothing to remove the incentive to sell more units. Knowing you can only have 73% of your profits, would you rather have 73% of $1 million or 73% of $500,000?

 

That's why corporations don't fuck with the prices too much... because selling more is always better than selling less and fucking with the prices risks hurting sales.

 

In fact, sometimes when taxes go up there's actually a bigger incentive to LOWER the prices slightly so that the sales volumes increase and you end up with a bigger pie-- because even if you still lose the same amount of pieces, you still end up with more than you otherwise would have.

 

11 minutes ago, Str8tEdge said:

There’s many ways a business can offset costs. They can lower hours of employees, cut fringe benefits, they can change to cheaper suppliers, spend less in other areas of the P&L but literally every way either affects the cost of the goods or service, hurts the employees or another business. 

 

OK so now you're finally admitting that it isn't just about prices or even consumers. If the tax rates go up but the prices stay the same, then it isn't really the customers who are paying for the tax increase, is it?

 

29 minutes ago, Str8tEdge said:

You progressive retards think you can just raise taxes on a business and it will simply be taken out of the profit but the exact opposite is true. Everything else is affected with profit being the last to be sacrificed.... That’s how business stays in business....

 

Which is why Biden plans to use the money to create better jobs.

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

 

It's because they can't sell a product above its market value and taxed profits do nothing to remove the incentive to sell more units. Knowing you can only have 73% of your profits, would you rather have 73% of $1 million or 73% of $500,000?

Sure they can and corporations like Apple generally set their prices due to brand value. You ever heard of product elasticity? 😆

 

 

Quote

 

That's why corporations don't fuck with the prices too much... because selling more is always better than selling less and fucking with the prices risks hurting sales.

Absolutely false. Every sale comes with a COST and every business has different break even point...

 

 

Quote

 

In fact, sometimes when taxes go up there's actually a bigger incentive to LOWER the prices slightly so that the sales volumes increase and you end up with a bigger pie-- because even if you still lose the same amount of pieces, you still end up with more than you otherwise would have.

Once again, false. See above:

Quote

 

 

OK so now you're finally admitting that it isn't just about prices or even consumers. If the tax rates go up but the prices stay the same, then it isn't really the customers who are paying for the tax increase, is it?

What part of you’ll pay for it one way or another did you not understand? If a tax raise costs your business your largest buyer in an effort to save money, that harms you. If the business lays people off, cuts hours, fringe benefits all of those affect the rest of the economy. 

Quote

 

 

Which is why Biden plans to use the money to create better jobs.

Create “better jobs” while lowering our businesses ability to compete with other countries? ROFL! That’s fucking brilliant you retard....

 

Seriously, kid. You have zero economic education and it’s ridiculously apparent. I used to love watching my economics professor embarrass snot nosed little kids like you with your warped progressive economic ideology. 😆

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, superds77 said:

It seems that one aspect @Toldya is missing is the concept of profit MARGIN. Many companies run on 3% margins (or less). They cannot, and will not just absorb the higher taxes.

 

Corporate taxes are applied to profits, not to the business itself or whatever it is you're talking about... it doesn't matter what the profit margin is because whatever the profits are, that is what is taxed.

 

Seriously-- if this tax hike is so apocalyptic, then what were these precarious businesses doing in 2016 when the corporate tax was even higher than Biden's proposed rate? Did all of these companies just pop into existence after 2017?

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

Corporate taxes are applied to profits, not to the business itself or whatever it is you're talking about... it doesn't matter what the profit margin is because whatever the profits are, that is what is taxed.

You are making my point. The profit margin (the remaining profit after all expenses including taxes / total gross income) will indeed be smaller if the taxes are increased.

 

11 minutes ago, Toldya said:

Seriously-- if this tax hike is so apocalyptic, then what were these precarious businesses doing in 2016 when the corporate tax was even higher than Biden's proposed rate? Did all of these companies just pop into existence after 2017?

This is akin to what Psaki said the other day when asked whether or not this tax would generate enough increased revenue (or any increased revenue). She replied (paraphrasing) " it does not matter because it is the RIGHT thing to do".

 

Do you think business would remain in, or come to the USA if the corporate tax rate was 35% or 21%?

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, superds77 said:

You are making my point. The profit margin (the remaining profit after all expenses including taxes / total gross income) will indeed be smaller if the taxes are increased.

 

You said that businesses are running on a profit margin of 3% or less...  profit margins don't include expenses.

 

9 minutes ago, superds77 said:

This is akin to what Psaki said the other day when asked whether or not this tax would generate enough increased revenue (or any increased revenue). She replied (paraphrasing) " it does not matter because it is the RIGHT thing to do".

 

I haven't looked into that story, but I highly doubt that this what was she meant.

11 minutes ago, superds77 said:

Do you think business would remain in, or come to the USA if the corporate tax rate was 35% or 21%?

 

So do you think that the primary reason that businesses remain in or come to the USA is because of its corporate tax rate? I don't think it is.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Toldya said:
1 hour ago, superds77 said:

You are making my point. The profit margin (the remaining profit after all expenses including taxes / total gross income) will indeed be smaller if the taxes are increased.

 

You said that businesses are running on a profit margin of 3% or less...  profit margins don't include expenses.

NET profit marginsdo, and that is the most important number, the "bottom line" so to speak. I should have been more specific.

 

 

https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/031815/what-formula-calculating-profit-margins.asp

Net Profit Margin

The infamous bottom line, net income, reflects the total amount of revenue left over after all expenses and additional income streams are accounted for. This includes COGS and operational expenses as referenced above, but it also includes payments on debts, taxes, one-time expenses or payments, and any income from investments or secondary operations. The net profit margin reflects a company's overall ability to turn income into profit.

 

The formulas for net profit margin are either:

 
Net Profit Margin Formulas
1 hour ago, Toldya said:
1 hour ago, superds77 said:

This is akin to what Psaki said the other day when asked whether or not this tax would generate enough increased revenue (or any increased revenue). She replied (paraphrasing) " it does not matter because it is the RIGHT thing to do".

 

I haven't looked into that story, but I highly doubt that this what was she meant.

She said it and many democrats have said essentially the same thing over the years. Crap like "pay their fair share" and "it (higher corporate taxes) is the right thing to do" etc. Typical class warfare.

 

1 hour ago, Toldya said:
1 hour ago, superds77 said:

Do you think business would remain in, or come to the USA if the corporate tax rate was 35% or 21%?

 

So do you think that the primary reason that businesses remain in or come to the USA is because of its corporate tax rate? I don't think it is.

Primary reason? Maybe, maybe not, but it is A reason.. Certainly not the ONLY reason but A significant reason. How could it not be?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, superds77 said:

NET profit marginsdo, and that is the most important number, the "bottom line" so to speak. I should have been more specific.

 

My point is that they can cut expenses and still be profitable.

 

8 hours ago, superds77 said:

Crap like "pay their fair share" and "it (higher corporate taxes) is the right thing to do" etc. Typical class warfare.

 

If it DOES work, then yes, it is the right thing to do. Society will collapse if the wealth gap continues to grow... because wealth is power, and when too many people feel powerless, they start to fight back.

 

8 hours ago, superds77 said:

Primary reason? Maybe, maybe not, but it is A reason.. Certainly not the ONLY reason but A significant reason. How could it not be?

 

The question is whether or not it's enough to keep businesses away or force them to relocate. The massive and largely wealthy American consumer market is a pretty big draw.

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...