First of all fair share is determined by the tax department and likely somewhere near the amount
before the rich got those big tax cuts.
That rate(s) is a moving target depending on your income. Quite frankly, the comment about 'fair share' is merely paying lip service to fairness and equality.
This isn't about motivation its about being part of a society,
and doing your part.
People in every tax bracket are motivated by how much they can keep in their jeans... Some people get a GST rebate cheque in the mail and, if you make over a certain amount of money, you don't get that cheque... Tell me there's no motivation in that equation
Lets not get into they give to charity either, they get in charity because they
get an additional tax break.
Think about what you just wrote: that someone gets a tax break for donating to a charity... They pay the dollars regardless so does that qualify as some magical tax break?... Hardly, you pay the same dollars, just to a charity rather than gvt
BTW - there's nothing stopping you from doing the same and getting
As far as the balance of the unspecified tax breaks that seem to be referred to but never really articulated, those are pseudo-bribes designed to get these private groups to spend money and hire individuals. As far as I know, these tax breaks are, at best, deferrals of the full payments and not forgiveness of them (read: all the tax revenues will eventually be paid)
I am not suggesting to gouge the rich but they should be paying a higher portion to the common
good.
That's exactly what you're suggesting; all under the guise of 'fair share' - (whatever that really means)
As for getting the nations all on side, not to worry, governments in Europe limit the flow of funds
coming and going. Deal with the countries here first, if they decide to leave that is fine but they
pay back every tax break they got from government first. Besides governments, are made up of
the people and they are quirt capable of dealing with corporations in a more civilized manner than
threatening each other.
'If they decide to leave that's fine?"
You do understand the consequences of this, right?... Apple, Nike, HP, Haliburton, Dell, et al, all have sourced their mfg needs offshore to take advantage of cheaper labor and materials and sell right back into their domestic market. Think of the massive amount of jobs that might have been benefiting the USA right now had there been an economic environment that motivated them to remain.
Not only would the parent company be paying more real dollars into the system, you'd have more people with gainful employment and they, as individuals would also be contributing into the tax base as opposed to collecting from it.
Ever noticed, when a government makes a law the companies cry foul
and when the companies threaten society that is somehow excused or people become fearful.
Haliburton threatened that and made good on it... Their global HQ is in the UAE (?)... All of their global revenues are paid into that nation's tax system and - you guessed it - go to the exclusive benefit of that society and not the US where the company originated.
Now, all you have to do is multiply that effect by Apple, Google, Nike, etc and you'll start to see what the macro picture starts to look like
At least Obama is sticking to his guns on the latest round, and if the Republicans let this thing go too
far they will be blamed for the mess and disaster it will create. Should that happen the Republicans
won't elect a President for fifty years.
If this backfires on Obama - and I think it will - this will be the issue that will dog him long after his career and taint his effectiveness as president.
