Chapter IV – Anything He Can Do, We Can Do Better

“Notorious BIG said it best: ‘Either you’re slingin’ crack-rock, or you’ve got a wicked jump-shot.’ Nobody wants to work for it anymore. There’s no honor in taking that after school job at Mickey D’s. Honor’s in the dollar, kid. So I went the white boy way of slinging crack-rock: I became a stock broker. ”

– Giovanni Ribisi (Boiler Room)

 Good ol’ tax reform. A topic no one really understands, everyone knows we need, and stupid people think they have the answer to. Mitt (ens) Romney released his today, as did Obama, with some “news outlets” calling them “competing tax reform plans.” Seriously though, if one guy is running for the republican nomination to become the President of the United States, and one guy is already the President of the United States, then the two of them releasing something similarly titled on the same day shouldn’t classify it as “competing”. Because he’s pretty much the leader of the free world, and what his proposal actually contains could become the framework used for tax reform, Obama kind of wins by default. That would be like me releasing a “tax reform plan”, and saying it competes’ with Obama’s. The only thing my tax plan would compete with is the space in my frontal lobe that it would take up if I were to care enough to actually draft a tax reform plan. 

 So as I was saying, Obama released a tax reform plan today that focused on business tax reform, which identified the following five elements (not listed in their entirety – entirety can be found here):

1. Lower corporate tax rate to 28% while eliminating dozens of tax loopholes and subsidies

2. Reduce the effective rate on manufacturing to 25% while encouraging greater research and development

3. Establish a new minimum tax on foreign earnings, which addresses issues of moving production overseas and shifting profits abroad

4. Simplify and cut taxes for America’s small businesses

5. Restore fiscal responsibility and not add a dime to the deficit

In the context of this discussion, lets consider #4 and #5 boring and bring those up at a time yet to be determined. However, we’ll briefly add a little more detail to #1 through # 3.

1. Lower corporate tax rate to 28% – Normally, the Republicans, some of those on the right, the Mitt (ens) Romneys’ of the world, and others with any type of interest in the corporate tax rate would be ecstatic about this. Two reasons specifically: First it has the word “corporate” in it. Second, the words “lower tax rate.” If a Republican had proposed this, a bouncy house would have been rented and it would be well on the way to Boehner’s office. Unfortunately for them, those words are directly followed by the words “eliminating dozens of tax loopholes and subsidies.” To you and me, and – although I don’t like lumping everyone into the same category, but in this case the shoe fits – the rest of the 99.9999% of Americans, this is a decent thing. However, many “news” organizations (I like to refer to them as “Entertainment Corporations Who Like You To Think They Are Providing You With News” or “EC-WLY-TTT-APY-WN” – I’ll work on that later) will immediately  point to the fact that this means increased taxes for oil & gas companies, which is (only slightly) true. The exact wording, via one of my favorites, “…oil and gas companies would reportedly see their taxes go up while losing many large deductions and subsidies.” (Fox News)

The response this is supposed to elicit from you is one of anger, as they ignore the fact that these companies have been raking in billions upon billions in profit while they hire accountants, pay them a few million dollars to read the tax code line by line, and find loopholes and deductions that will save the company $50 million dollars a year. They also manage to place the word “subsidies” inconspicuously as the end of the sentence – as though not to point out that those subsidies (payments) are paid for by us – those stupid non-tax paying tax-payers. In their world, when the word is applied to the poor, it means welfare – but if applied to a multi-billion dollar oil/gas company, it means support to help keep the cost down.

In an effort to place a time limit on my writings today, I’ll skip # 2. I’ll come back to it when I have a few more minutes, but # 3 is as important – if not more so – than the others.

3. Establish a new minimum tax on foreign earnings, which addresses issues of moving production overseas and shifting profits abroad

Many corporations and better-off individuals would like you to think that the shit you see in movies or on TV, or read in books that should have been banned about off-shore accounts doesn’t really happen. That stuff is made up and if anyone happens to do it, it would probably those pesky i-talian mobsters trying to keep their cash flow hidden. They would like you to believe that all the money they have is tied up in (legit) investments or sitting in the vault at Bank of America collecting the one percent interest rate on an AARP combined checking/savings account. Personally, I call BS. I’ll look into this further, and provide the details in a more in depth manner at that time, but I just want to say that this is a good thing. Again, it may not be perfect, but it is definitely a step in the right direction. Much more to come on this issue in the near future…

In others news:

According to this article (HotAir), religious freedom is the first casualty of the ObamaCare.

But, according to the study found here (Baylor University), religious institutions – specifically Catholic hospitals – have apparently been free to perform medical procedures that would – if strictly following the rules of their religion – banish them to hell for all eternity.

Hooray!!! Religious freedom lives another day in the good ol’ US of A!

 

Advertisements