Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: slowhandluke

The country would be better served if every individual had the same limitations put on their political contributions. Churches that are also 501C3 corporations already have limits set.

Why should people be taxed on their earnings while corporations be allowed to sit on piles of untaxed profits?


24 posted on 11/11/2010 3:38:29 PM PST by freedomfiter2 (Brutal acts of commission and yawning acts of omission both strengthen the hand of the devil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies ]


To: freedomfiter2; All

‘Sitting on piles of untaxed profits’ benefits who exactly?

No employee, executive or shareholder can use those funds without them being taxed as either wages, dividends, or corporate expenses.

Therefore, there is no reason to tax money sitting in an account... unless the purpose is the govt just wants more

That pile of cash is the financial life’s blood insuring the company has the capability to continue employing it’s people while accomplishing it’s mission.

Again, I’m at a loss why the govt should or would want to rip out a chunk for it’s own purposes.


25 posted on 11/11/2010 4:42:20 PM PST by sten
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies ]

To: freedomfiter2
The country would be better served if every individual had the same limitations put on their political contributions.

Are you sure about that? As far as I'm concerned, one person with one good idea should be allowed to shout it as far and wide as wanted. Otherwise, that good idea gets swamped in the effort of trying to overcome the millions of mediocre ideas held by the rest of us, if it's held to the same volume as the single idea of the most stupid among us.

Suppose everybody is allowed to spend $1 in political considerations. Do you think the incumbent politicians are going to count their face time with the media as 'political contributions'? No. So every incumbent gets hours of media time for free, and the challenger gets next to none.

So maybe $1 is too little, but who do you think gets to set that amount? That's, right, it's the incumbent. It will be set low enough to make throwing the incumbent out very difficult.

Freedom is messy, but it works better than a controlled society.

Why should people be taxed on their earnings while corporations be allowed to sit on piles of untaxed profits?

Is that really the case? There's nothing stopping you from either owning Google, or starting your own business overseas. Corporations go through a lot of paperwork to make sure that those foreign profits are correctly setup as 'foreign'. You can do the same paperwork.

Oh, it's an insurmountable bunch of paperwork for an individual? I doubt that John F'ng Kerry thinks so. Oh, it's too much for a person with more humble means? Now that is true. The only way a person of humble means can participate in this is to join a group, like maybe the shareholders of Google.

It's the income tax that is the problem here. It will always introduce gobs of paperwork to try and figure out what is and isn't income for tax purposes. And the rich will always be able to afford more protection from the tax than the poor.

37 posted on 11/12/2010 1:15:34 PM PST by slowhandluke (It's hard to be cynical enough in this age.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson