"Inflation Reduction" Bill signed

[Horseman 2,438]

1 minute ago, vomit said:

Agreed, but a corp is better at it than you or me.  I can't hire a team of accountants to get me every break.  I can't buy a house in Ireland where the tax rate is cheaper to avoid paying US taxes.  But yes, everyone does what they can to pay less taxes, great observation.

Sure you can.  Lots people hire accountants to do their taxes and own homes in other countries.

[Bert 1,128]

Just now, RLLD said:

This.

The tax laws afford people multiple means by which to lower their taxes, and people naturally do so.  Corporations are apparently evil for doing it.

The entire "companies are evil" stuff is really tired at this point.  Meanwhile, the actual villains (politicians) have somehow managed to elevate themselves into hero status, which is bizarre

Absolutely.  People get pissed when I tell them the biggest "loophole" in the tax code is the mortgage interests deduction and exemptions related to children.

[vomit 502]

4 minutes ago, Horseman said:

I'm not assuming anything.  The price will reflect maximizing profit with demand.  That's economics 101.  Do I really need to explain that to you?

 

Yes please explain to this to me.

Apple paid $3B in taxes last year.  If they pay $0 this year, how much will they reduce the price of an iphone?

[Hardcore troubadour 15,257]

5 minutes ago, Horseman said:

I'm not assuming anything.  The price will reflect maximizing profit with demand.  That's economics 101.  Do I really need to explain that to you?

 

Gutterboy and Mooney don’t understand what profit is. 

[vomit 502]

8 minutes ago, Horseman said:

Sure you can.  Lots people hire accountants to do their taxes and own homes in other countries.

We're talking about the average person, and does it make sense.  Is Average Joe gonna hire a team of accounts for $20K to save him $100 in taxes?

Also If you're a US citizen, you pay US taxes, regardless if you own a home elsewhere.

[vomit 502]

1 minute ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Gutterboy and Mooney don’t understand what profit is. 

Yeah I need someone to teach me what profit is.  I'll just never get it.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,257]

2 minutes ago, vomit said:

Yeah I need someone to teach me what profit is.  I'll just never get it.

Obviously. You seem to think significantly less profit is no big deal for a business because they remain profitable. 

[vomit 502]

Just now, Hardcore troubadour said:

Obviously. You seem to think significantly less profit is no big deal for a business because they remain profitable. 

Oh would you just shut your mouth about the Disney stuff for focks sake.  You lost.  You get nothing.  Good day sir.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,257]

23 minutes ago, vomit said:

Oh would you just shut your mouth about the Disney stuff for focks sake.  You lost.  You get nothing.  Good day sir.

You think it’s about Disney still. Your stupidity has made it about your stupidity. 

[Horseman 2,438]

18 minutes ago, vomit said:

Yes please explain to this to me.

Apple paid $3B in taxes last year.  If they pay $0 this year, how much will they reduce the price of an iphone?

If they could charge $1,000,000 for an iPhone and people would still buy it, they would.  There is a price between $1,000,000 and $0.01 that maximizes profit and it's not $1,000,000 because demand would be near zero.  That calculation includes the company's cost to make an iPhone.  The company's cost includes taxes.  Economics 101.

If lowing cost will increase demand enough to bring the total profit's higher, that's what they will do.  Companies ALWAYS maximize profit.  

 

 

[vomit 502]

1 minute ago, Horseman said:

If they could charge $1,000,000 for an iPhone and people would still buy it, they would.  There is a price between $1,000,000 and $0.01 that maximizes profit and it's not $1,000,000 because demand would be near zero.  That calculation includes the company's cost to make an iPhone.  The company's cost includes taxes.  Economics 101.

If lowing cost will increase demand enough to bring the total profit's higher, that's what they will do.  Companies ALWAYS maximize profit.  

 

 

OK, so we don't know what they will do, because we're not execs at Apple and we don't have all this data.

My gut tells me the price won't go down much if anything, and they will just keep the extra money or invest it in something else.

[Horseman 2,438]

1 hour ago, vomit said:

OK, so we don't know what they will do, because we're not execs at Apple and we don't have all this data.

My gut tells me the price won't go down much if anything, and they will just keep the extra money or invest it in something else.

There is no such thing as keeping extra money in your imaginary tax cut.  The price adjusts, again, to maximize profits.  All other things equal, if production costs go down and the price doesn't go down then the price wasn't maximized in the first place.  Everyone wins in the end.  You don't have to use your guts, this is Economics 101.

In real life taxes went up so everyone is going to suffer a little bit.

 

 

[craftsman 1,045]

On 8/17/2022 at 11:30 AM, MTSkiBum said:

 

Two different economic organizations say that it will not effect inflation.

 

 

The CBO estimates it will have a “negligible effect on inflation” in 2022, and in 2023 it will change inflation somewhere between 0.1 percentage point lower and 0.1 percentage point higher than it is currently.

...

According to the Penn Wharton Budget Model (PWBM), there’s low confidence the legislation will have any impact on inflation. PWBM is a nonpartisan, research-based organization at the University of Pennsylvania that creates economic analysis of public policy’s fiscal impact.

Not a bad take by Carlson yesterday on this "Inflation Reduction" bill. 

 

 

[Sean Mooney 1,970]

4 hours ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Gutterboy and Mooney don’t understand what profit is. 

Put the bottle down. 

[Sean Mooney 1,970]

5 hours ago, Horseman said:

Not sure I believe you teach, here is why:

You want corporations to eat the tax increases instead of passing them down to consumers.  In other words, the part you fail to understand is that you want the cost divided and absorbed by thousands of shareholders instead of millions of consumers.  If you really are a shareholder, that's financially irresponsible.  Multiply that line of thinking across all of your holdings and you are effectively saying that you are willing to push off your own retirement and the happiness of your family by years, instead of everyone else who buys a phone having to pay a few dollars more.

You're either not a shareholder and would like your phone a few bucks cheaper, or you aren't very bright.  It's one or the other.

Or, I can own stock but still see how it is a system that is either rigged for, or gamed by, corporations and needs to be fixed. 

You act like a place like Walmart saying "You know what- we will keep Bread at 1.07 a loaf instead of raising it to 1.14," is going to cause anarchy in the system.

[Horseman 2,438]

4 hours ago, vomit said:

We're talking about the average person, and does it make sense.  Is Average Joe gonna hire a team of accounts for $20K to save him $100 in taxes?

Also If you're a US citizen, you pay US taxes, regardless if you own a home elsewhere.

Nobody is going to hire 20K worth of accountants to save $100.

[craftsman 1,045]

10 minutes ago, Horseman said:

Nobody is going to hire 20K worth of accountants to save $100.

Biden does. Only we have to pay for it.

[Horseman 2,438]

7 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

Or, I can own stock but still see how it is a system that is either rigged for, or gamed by, corporations and needs to be fixed. 

The rules favor corporations over who?

Whether or not corporations should maximize profits and whether you think the rules are fair are two different things.   You always try and change the discussion like that because you can't argue the original premise.   As a stockholder you want the stock to eat the 15% tax instead of passing it down as a tiny fraction of the cost to the consumer is nonsensical.  You can't argue it on it's merits.

 

[Horseman 2,438]

14 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

Or, I can own stock but still see how it is a system that is either rigged for, or gamed by, corporations and needs to be fixed. 

You act like a place like Walmart saying "You know what- we will keep Bread at 1.07 a loaf instead of raising it to 1.14," is going to cause anarchy in the system.

Not very bright it is!

[Sean Mooney 1,970]

38 minutes ago, Horseman said:

The rules favor corporations over who?

Whether or not corporations should maximize profits and whether you think the rules are fair are two different things.   You always try and change the discussion like that because you can't argue the original premise.   As a stockholder you want the stock to eat the 15% tax instead of passing it down as a tiny fraction of the cost to the consumer is nonsensical.  You can't argue it on it's merits.

 

 

36 minutes ago, Horseman said:

Not very bright it is!

This is why nothing gets fixed because people get themselves brainwashed into stumping for corporations.  Cool.

I'm sure a place like Apple is going to have to close up shop eating the money. 

Also, I'm not trying to change the discussion. I'm laying out more of what I believe. There is a difference. 

[Horseman 2,438]

21 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

 

This is why nothing gets fixed because people get themselves brainwashed into stumping for corporations.  Cool.

I'm sure a place like Apple is going to have to close up shop eating the money. 

Also, I'm not trying to change the discussion. I'm laying out more of what I believe. There is a difference. 

First sentence:  99.99% of all share holders understand that it's in everyone's best interest to maximize profits.  Before today I thought it was 100%.

Second sentence:  You still miss understand, all corporations pass incremental tax gains to the consumer, they owe that to their shareholders.

Third sentence: Your beliefs are fundamentally wrong.  You interjected fairness of rules which has nothing to do with how tax gets reflected in the cost of goods. That's purely in your head.

[Horseman 2,438]

Favor corporation over who?

And why do you give your money to these corporations who you hate, so they can do what they want with it?

[Sean Mooney 1,970]

5 minutes ago, Horseman said:

First sentence:  99.99% of all share holders understand that it's in everyone's best interest to maximize profits.  Before today I thought it was 100%.

Second sentence:  You still miss understand, all corporations pass incremental tax gains to the consumer, they owe that to their shareholders.

Third sentence: Your beliefs are fundamentally wrong.  You interjected fairness of rules which has nothing to do with how tax gets reflected in the cost of goods. That's purely in your head.

I'm glad you feel better. Again- people can hold stock yet recognize that the rules and how those rules are passed on are unfair.

I can understand how it is hard for you to comprehend how two ideas can run with each other like that. 

[Horseman 2,438]

14 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

I'm glad you feel better. Again- people can hold stock yet recognize that the rules and how those rules are passed on are unfair.

I can understand how it is hard for you to comprehend how two ideas can run with each other like that. 

List one rule you’re talking about and explain how it has anything to do with what the rest of us have been talking about today. 

[Horseman 2,438]

9 hours ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Gutterboy and Mooney don’t understand what profit is. 

Is there any other conclusion when someone buys stock, votes for corporate tax increases and then gets upset when the tax increases get passed down to consumers?  Its literally one step forward and two steps backwards.  LOLZ

[Sean Mooney 1,970]

3 hours ago, Horseman said:

List one rule you’re talking about and explain how it has anything to do with what the rest of us have been talking about today. 

 

29 minutes ago, Horseman said:

Is there any other conclusion when someone buys stock, votes for corporate tax increases and then gets upset when the tax increases get passed down to consumers?  Its literally one step forward and two steps backwards.  LOLZ

I'm done playing your games. You keep trying to make what I'm saying into what you want to argue against rather than actually reading what I'm saying.

As to the second quote- well see the previous sentence. 

Enjoy your day. Hope you feel better. 

[Horseman 2,438]

20 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

 

I'm done playing your games. You keep trying to make what I'm saying into what you want to argue against rather than actually reading what I'm saying.

As to the second quote- well see the previous sentence. 

Enjoy your day. Hope you feel better. 

Yep.  Cant prove your point so there is nothing left to do but run. So predictable, so childish.  Let me explain it for you:

The only thing being discussed was companies passing tax increases down to the consumer by raising prices. The only "rule" you could possibly be crying about is something imaginary that would keep companies from doing that.  You want a rule that would keep companies from reflecting the price of doing business into the cost of their products.  lololol

 

[Sean Mooney 1,970]

Just now, Horseman said:

Yep.  Cant prove your point so there is nothing to do but run. So predictable. Let me explain it for you:

The only thing being discussed was companies passing tax increases down to the consumer by raising prices. The only "rule" you could possibly be crying about is something imaginary that would keep companies from doing that.  You want a rule that would keep companies from reflecting the price of doing business into the cost of their products.  lololol

 

Not running. Just not wasting my time, nor yours really. You are choosing to willfully not understand what I'm saying so you can name call and try to argue around the same point over and over. 

 

Hope you feel better. 

[Horseman 2,438]

1 minute ago, Sean Mooney said:

Not running. Just not wasting my time, nor yours really. You are choosing to willfully not understand what I'm saying so you can name call and try to argue around the same point over and over. 

 

Hope you feel better. 

Yet here you are. And all you have to do is tell us any of the rules you were crying about. You cant. 

And I've always felt great. I dont get sick. I havent been sick in decades.  

[Horseman 2,438]

No games, you simply dont know what the fok you're talking about. Your liberal ideals are in conflict with corporations, profit and growing wealth.  You cant reconcile that and that's why you wont even try. 

[Sean Mooney 1,970]

7 minutes ago, Horseman said:

No games, you simply dont know what the fok you're talking about. Your liberal ideals are in conflict with corporations, profit and growing wealth.  You cant reconcile that and that's why you wont even try. 

So dumb- every single thing you say. And again- it's all name calling and insulting from a guy who cried on here about how terrible it was when people attack other posters with "red herring ad hominem" attacks.

Look in the mirror and take some stock. No need to ask me to play your dumb games anymore because I refuse. You keep trying  to paint what I'm saying into what you want it to be as opposed to what it actually is.  You've done it here, and you've done it in every interaction I've had the misfortune to have with you. 

[Horseman 2,438]

7 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

So dumb- every single thing you say. And again- it's all name calling and insulting from a guy who cried on here about how terrible it was when people attack other posters with "red herring ad hominem" attacks.

Look in the mirror and take some stock. No need to ask me to play your dumb games anymore because I refuse. You keep trying  to paint what I'm saying into what you want it to be as opposed to what it actually is.  You've done it here, and you've done it in every interaction I've had the misfortune to have with you. 

You cant help yourself.  Lolz

Quits, comes back, quits, comes back. 

List one rule you think is unfair that has anything to do with the discussion. Just one. You cried about it, what is it?  

 

[Horseman 2,438]

It's too easy to prove Mooney wrong. Then he takes his ball and goes home. 

[Sean Mooney 1,970]

7 hours ago, Horseman said:

It's too easy to prove Mooney wrong. Then he takes his ball and goes home. 

Whatever you have to tell yourself to get through the day. 

[Hardcore troubadour 15,257]

Shonuff always had to get the last word in too.  

[Sean Mooney 1,970]

14 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Shonuff always had to get the last word in too.  

"Mooney is shonuff"...yet another thing HT is wrong about here.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,257]

21 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

"Mooney is shonuff"...yet another thing HT is wrong about here.

I never said that,  I merely pointed out the similarities.  I don’t think you are, but  I enjoy comparing you to one of the biggest morons on the internet. Congrats. 

[Reality 3,121]

47 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Shonuff always had to get the last word in too.  

Yup. Always.

Also, stay at home Dad. Could post any time of the day because he didn't work.

[Horseman 2,438]

31 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

I never said that,  I merely pointed out the similarities.  I don’t think you are, but  I enjoy comparing you to one of the biggest morons on the internet. Congrats. 

Dumb as a box of rocka is one those similarities. 

[Horseman 2,438]

2 hours ago, Sean Mooney said:

Whatever you have to tell yourself to get through the day. 

You cant help it. 

I'm done waisting my time! Keeps coming back over and over. 

That kinda proves it's not really about time, doesn't it . It's that you cant argue your point anymore. You lost. You're a loser.