Democrat Takedown of Bernie

Viewing 9 posts - 31 through 39 (of 39 total)
  • Author
  • #44440

    Apple has a little over 200 billion dollars cash on hand right now.

    Deane Johnson

    So, would that not be the property of the stockholders, as would everything that constitutes “Apple”. Stockholders who have their stock as part of their 401K, as a for instance.

    Wouldn’t taking the money away from Apple actually be taking it away from hardworking people who have tried to invest wisely and Apple was one of their choices? If the government takes the money from Apple, and the stock price goes down correspondingly, isn’t that taking it from ordinary citizens?

    As you can tell, I have a rather simple mind. My simple mind doesn’t understand how taking money away from people like this example is the right thing to do.


    I don’t think anyone is saying they are going to empty Apple’s cash reserves. But maybe Apple could pay a little more in taxes and be just fine? Yes.


    Think of it this way:

    If we do not require corporations to actually pay for their impact on the society they profit from, isn’t that a lot like over planting good ground, until it becomes parched, unproductive ground?

    When that kind of thing happens, the answer is to replenish the ground, with investment crops say, until it’s once again bountiful.

    Everyone depending on that ground benefits from the bounty.

    An overworked, unhealthy, cash lean society is like parched ground. Sure, money can be made, but at what cost?

    my mind is simple too


    And it’s not like anyone is keeping that money.

    Remember, cyclic.

    An Apple selling into a more fertile society will sell more, can charge more, etc… They will get it back, and could even accumulate similar amounts of cash on hand too. There isn’t anything about any of this that prevents doing that.

    There is a short term impact, but a longer term gain that works out very well for everyone, but that first ripping of the bandaid does hurt some.

    Deane Johnson

    I don’t have any knowledge of what Apple or Amazon pay in percentages vs. middle class individuals. Corporations live in a different tax world. Somewhere on the chart, there is an appropriate level of taxes to be collected, and we’re probably not there at this time.

    But, to think that getting more money from the rich to solve our healthcare and college costs, and the like, as a realistic solution is likely a winner in the fairy tale of the week contest.

    Cut next to Warren and Bernie on the campaign trail. Loaded with misleading statements and assumptions for the gullible at the low end of the thinking scale. Fortunately in November it will all get sorted out at the polls and the thinking of people like these two will be relegated to the scrap pile of history.

    Deane Johnson

    Missing – “can charge more”

    Don’t give them any ideas. They may not have thought of this.


    Lol, you can bet they have. I am sure Jobs passed that bit along to Cook, Item 1.

    And that is fine. Apple actually does ask a price for all the value added. I applaud them for that and kind of chuckle when I hear, “wish I could get a machine like the Mac for the cost of a Dell…”

    Other products may appear the same on paper, but the usability work has clear value. A bit less these days as Apple has floundered some, but still valid.

    Edit: I point to Apple all the time as an excellent example of selling for value, not volume. They have the most profitable ecosystem and get some 90 percent of mobile and app profits, despite having a much smaller share than say Dell, HP, or Samsung.

    I am cheap ass, and run Android on Samsung. I know what I am doing and do not want or need the added value Apple charges for. My wife? Totally does, buys Apple. Easy peasy.

    Deane, nobody said taxing the wealthy solves all the problems.

    Vitalogy is bang on too. They need to pay more. Amazon, GE, others have paid zero. Sometimes are owed money. Not OK.

    EVERYONE will see a tax increase for health care. The savings are substantial for the vast majority. Savings for the nation overall are just as significant.

    Honestly, the big gains are to be had with the long overdue public works. Major league, long enduring returns are what will pay down the debt. Investments at Federal scale can have serious impact, but we have to do them.

    Trying to cost cut our way out of it at this point is foolish. Painful, even deadly.

    In this point, progressives and neoliberals disagree profoundly. The only tools in the neoliberal tool box are austerity and private investment. Not workable.

    Andy Brown

    Deane: “Wouldn’t taking the money away from Apple actually be taking it away from hardworking people who have tried to invest wisely and Apple was one of their choices?”

    Great question!

    It in part is. However, Vitalogy’s explanation is succinct. It’s not Apple’s cash reserves that are the target, just its profits. Clearly, Apple is only one example. The oil industry is a clearer target because if you look at the loopholes and subsidies, the oil corporations are the ones getting far more breaks than Apple. It’s not about a “tax” policy run amuck, rather it is about the long and storied history of tax breaks, incentives, subsidies and loopholes that Congress has put in place that has resulted in a lot of corporations ending up with paying no taxes. If you remove all that icing, you could probably lower tax rates on big corporations. Apple pays a lot in income tax. Amazon pays nothing. Amazon isn’t in the oil business. So there are other loopholes, subsidies, etc. that also have to be eliminated. Once all the exceptions are stricken from the code(s), then and only then can you figure out a proper tax rate. Otherwise, with high corporate rates, Congress will continue to write the exceptions and create the loopholes.

Viewing 9 posts - 31 through 39 (of 39 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.