Income tax is illegal in the USA?

[Dos Equis]

Except for being freaking cold Canada is good place to live.
But to be specific our tax rats are graduated. The upper bracket is 44% for both provincial and federal tax for all money earned over $107,000.
The realized tax rate would be more like 30%.

Our health care is now starting to help us bring in manufacturing jobs because the company doesn't have to pay health benefits.

Plus we don't have 30 million people without coverage.

I'd rather pay for my own health care premiums and keep more of my hard earned money. 

[Mr. Intenseone]

Perhaps you haven't yet met our good friend outsourcing.

Outsourcing is expensive for the consumer. If I outsourced for example my payroll, I would have to charge a higher rate to cover my costs!

[240 is Back]

Outsourcing is expensive for the consumer. If I outsourced for example my payroll, I would have to charge a higher rate to cover my costs!

oh - i meant that joker said that "Our health care is now starting to help us bring in manufacturing jobs because the company doesn't have to pay health benefits"

As China becomes bigger and more extended on the North American continents (or if the N. American union materializes), those Canadian manufacturing jobs will be given to chinese or mexican laborers that'll work for a tenth what a Canandian would require.

[gtbro1]

Outsourcing is expensive for the consumer. If I outsourced for example my payroll, I would have to charge a higher rate to cover my costs!

Maybe true on the small scale,such as your business,but not on the large scale.

[240 is Back]

Outsourcing means companies have higher profits and can lower their prices to maintain their profit margins (keep stockholders happy) AND grow their market share since they're selling things cheaper.

That's why outsourcing is a double edged sword.

If HP send 10,000 jobs to India, they post monster profits, and their shareholders all make more money.  The company competes better in the world.  The US economy grows.  But at the same time, those 10,000 unemployed Americans no longer have a job and are now to the detriment of society.

[gtbro1]

Outsourcing means companies have higher profits and can lower their prices to maintain their profit margins (keep stockholders happy) AND grow their market share since they're selling things cheaper.

That's why outsourcing is a double edged sword.

If HP send 10,000 jobs to India, they post monster profits, and their shareholders all make more money.  The company competes better in the world.  The US economy grows. But at the same time, those 10,000 unemployed Americans no longer have a job and are now to the detriment of society.

   Yup. Been There.

It is funny what you said about China. Our company has more business than we can handle right now. There are a few of our parts that we buy FROM CHINA..take them out of the crate...stamp MADE IN USA on them,and then ship them to the customer.   How f**ked up is that?

[headhuntersix]

Pay ur damm taxes..thats my salary.

[Hedgehog]

Outsourcing means companies have higher profits and can lower their prices to maintain their profit margins (keep stockholders happy) AND grow their market share since they're selling things cheaper.

That's why outsourcing is a double edged sword.

If HP send 10,000 jobs to India, they post monster profits, and their shareholders all make more money.  The company competes better in the world.  The US economy grows.  But at the same time, those 10,000 unemployed Americans no longer have a job and are now to the detriment of society.

Did you have any macro-economics in your degree?

Anyway, it's good for the US economy that these Americans lose their jobs.

Why?

Because USA should focus on higher education jobs only. Only a few people should work in between in unqualified jobs, but if a job can be done cheaper anywhere else in the world, then it's good for both the US economy and the foreign economy if that job is moved.

Because then that person can be put in school, and brought into a more qualified job.

Essentially it starts in school. No students should be taking "shop" or shit like that. All students should be forced through high school, and at least one foreign language, and advanced math.

That's a start, and pretty much everyone should go on to college/university as well.

Why?

Because unqualified jobs can and should be done in foreign countries.

Sure, it's an individual tragedy when someone loses their job to outsourcing, but if the society, through re-employment drives and offerings gets these unemployed upgraded, so to speak, then it's only a win-win situation for the society.

-Hedge

[a_joker10]

Hedge-

You forget, that is why no one is real serious about removing illegals in the US.
They perform all of the jobs that most Americans won't do.
Out sourcing and the use of illegals is very much the same thing.

[240 is Back]

Did you have any macro-economics in your degree?
Anyway, it's good for the US economy that these Americans lose their jobs.
Why?
Because USA should focus on higher education jobs only. Only a few people should work in between in unqualified jobs, but if a job can be done cheaper anywhere else in the world, then it's good for both the US economy and the foreign economy if that job is moved.
Because then that person can be put in school, and brought into a more qualified job.
Essentially it starts in school. No students should be taking "shop" or shit like that. All students should be forced through high school, and at least one foreign language, and advanced math.
That's a start, and pretty much everyone should go on to college/university as well.
Why?
Because unqualified jobs can and should be done in foreign countries.
Sure, it's an individual tragedy when someone loses their job to outsourcing, but if the society, through re-employment drives and offerings gets these unemployed upgraded, so to speak, then it's only a win-win situation for the society.
-Hedge

The individual tragedies are micro until you count them.

When 10,000 individuals lose their jobs, it's suddenly a macro issue, adding .00X% strain on our public support system.

So while it might be $100m good for the stockholders (and 500 people who own HP stock will benefit), it will be life changing for the 10,000 people who now live at poverty line.

Still a cumulative gain for the GDP on paper.  But a net loss to 9,500 Americans.

Horizon: shortterm win, longterm loss.  Of course these 9500 people should go back to school and get higher level service skilled positions, but there is a hit.  The use of oursourcing, IMO, should be done gradually using tariffs and financial incentives to cushion the blow and control the flow of jobs out, to manage the change.

[Hedgehog]

Hedge-

You forget, that is why no one is real serious about removing illegals in the US.
They perform all of the jobs that most Americans won't do.
Out sourcing and the use of illegals is very much the same thing.

The problem with illegals in USA, is that they bring criminality. Statistics shows that immigrants, and especially illegal, have a higher crime rate.

The gang problem is largely related to first, second and third generation immigrants into the USA.

The gangs are one of the results, symptoms, of a nonworking immigrant policy.

There are others.

Without all these illegal immigrants, tons of work would be outsourced, and a few people would be in the USA legally, controlled, paying taxes like everyone else.

It would probably lead to less crime and higher demands on students to get through college, which in turn would create demands for ways to able everyone a college/university grad.

Fact: USA as a society makes fat dollars on every baby that is born and then later decides to go all the way, all the way through university and an engineering degree.

-Hedge

[a_joker10]

The problem with illegals in USA, is that they bring criminality. Statistics shows that immigrants, and especially illegal, have a higher crime rate.

The gang problem is largely related to first, second and third generation immigrants into the USA.

The gangs are one of the results, symptoms, of a nonworking immigrant policy.

There are others.

Without all these illegal immigrants, tons of work would be outsourced, and a few people would be in the USA legally, controlled, paying taxes like everyone else.

It would probably lead to less crime and higher demands on students to get through college, which in turn would create demands for ways to able everyone a college/university grad.

Fact: USA as a society makes fat dollars on every baby that is born and then later decides to go all the way, all the way through university and an engineering degree.

-Hedge

You are right. Many countries in Europe benefit from having very highly educated citizens. While immigrant populations can back fill positions such as janitors, etc.
It is good because legals pay taxes and in many cases encourage their kids to perform well at school so that their whole family can be better off.

Outsourcing is an extension of this. Getting payed 5 dollars a day in America to make shoes is crazy and very few people would do it, but in other countries people become wealth enough to push their kids through school and in the end increase the buying power of their country.
As these countries increase their wealth it increases the overall wealth of many countries and eventually gives companies another market to sell in.
It also increases the wealth in the US for these companies and increases the amount of jobs accountants and other high end white collar. It also frees up capital for people to start their own businesses, which also helps to grow the economy.

[Hedgehog]

The individual tragedies are micro until you count them.

When 10,000 individuals lose their jobs, it's suddenly a macro issue, adding .00X% strain on our public support system.

So while it might be $100m good for the stockholders (and 500 people who own HP stock will benefit), it will be life changing for the 10,000 people who now live at poverty line.

Still a cumulative gain for the GDP on paper.  But a net loss to 9,500 Americans.

Horizon: shortterm win, longterm loss.  Of course these 9500 people should go back to school and get higher level service skilled positions, but there is a hit.  The use of oursourcing, IMO, should be done gradually using tariffs and financial incentives to cushion the blow and control the flow of jobs out, to manage the change.

Shortterm win, longterm loss?

You got it all backwards.

It's the other way.

USA as a whole wins when these jobs are outsourced. The persons that loses their jobs, they're fcuked.

But it would be unintelligent to try protecting these jobs, they are clearly not qualified enough to keep in the USA.

Upgrade the workforce, that's the message.

As far as the people losing their jobs, and how to deal with them... It's all about what kind of political belief you have, but something's needs to be done to get their level of education upgraded.

How you want to go about that, is a political choice.

Some would choose offering a special education, through the government, paid partially by the gov and partially by the new employeer.

Some would choose offering a student loan with good deals, for all Universities in the country.

Some would choose to offer some kind of tax cut as long as studying.

Et al.

There are a number of ways to go about it.

But the goal, I am sure, everyone can agree on. To get these people upgraded, so they can work with qualified jobs.

-Hedge

[240 is Back]

i agree completely about upgrading our workforce - i just think it needs to be a gradual process, controlled by govt safeguards to ensure the work force has the time and available schooling to catch up.

the short term win comes for the GDP - bottom line grows.  the long term loss comes from those 10,000 workers who are now scrambling to find an income to feed their .49 wife and 2.3 kids.

the longer term win can come if the unemployed get educated - but since their job loss is often unpredictable (and many can't take 2 years to relearn a marketable skill) most will take something below their performance capacity just to keep the lights on.

Under the current system, Microsoft, Ford, Coke, and 50 other top American companies could wake up Tuesday morning and decide to move overseas.  We could have a million American out of work instantly.  Yes, the GDP would rise, as new billions would roll in.  But those million Americans all rushing back to trade school and community college would put a crippling hurt on student loans, medium level PT jobs, and a hundred other ripplers.

So I'm all for it - but slow and regulated.

[Hedgehog]

i agree completely about upgrading our workforce - i just think it needs to be a gradual process, controlled by govt safeguards to ensure the work force has the time and available schooling to catch up.

the short term win comes for the GDP - bottom line grows.  the long term loss comes from those 10,000 workers who are now scrambling to find an income to feed their .49 wife and 2.3 kids.

the longer term win can come if the unemployed get educated - but since their job loss is often unpredictable (and many can't take 2 years to relearn a marketable skill) most will take something below their performance capacity just to keep the lights on.

Under the current system, Microsoft, Ford, Coke, and 50 other top American companies could wake up Tuesday morning and decide to move overseas.  We could have a million American out of work instantly.  Yes, the GDP would rise, as new billions would roll in.  But those million Americans all rushing back to trade school and community college would put a crippling hurt on student loans, medium level PT jobs, and a hundred other ripplers.

So I'm all for it - but slow and regulated.

If you continually upgrade the workforce, these big layoffs aren't that big of a deal.

It's if a whole nation realises that they have tens of thousands of people working the car industry, or other industries, without higher education, then is the time to wake up and smell the coffee, so to speak.

That's when a nation is bound to go through a rough translation period.

I agree with you that as few people as possible should be made to suffer.

But my reason is purely utiliary. Don't expect any humanity from me in this case. It's more effective to keep people working - less crime, less poverty, less everything of problems, except job related accidents .

The risk of getting Democrats in power, is that they tend to be protectionists, ie protect American jobs and industries, which allows ineffective American businesses to survive too long.

Perhaps the Democrats have changed their policies, Pelosi claims they have. But look for the Democrats of Detroit and the surrounding area to push for protection of American jobs.

Right now is when USA needs to get a much higher percentage of the youth into college.

Or the big tech companies, such as Microsoft and Apple, will start to outsource even the high-tech jobs. And it won't be due to lower costs, but due to a better educated population.

I believe that in ten years, the most important outsourcing will not be about lower salaries, but about finding the best place in regards to R&D and such. Companies will cluster around Universities and alike, where research is made.

Low cost outsourcing will be secondary.

-Hedge

[240 is Back]

In ten years we will likely be the north american union.  manufacturing will be done in the south (mex), resources pulled from north (oh canada) and managed in the center (USA). 

all this outsourcing talk will be for naught anyway.

Now, i'm off to spend some Ameros!

[a_joker10]

In ten years we will likely be the north american union.  manufacturing will be done in the south (mex), resources pulled from north (oh canada) and managed in the center (USA). 

all this outsourcing talk will be for naught anyway.

Now, i'm off to spend some Ameros!

We could only hope.

Unless our free market becomes stronger, we will continue to lose growth and market share to the EU.

[gtbro1]

Did you have any macro-economics in your degree?

Anyway, it's good for the US economy that these Americans lose their jobs.

Why?

Because USA should focus on higher education jobs only. Only a few people should work in between in unqualified jobs, but if a job can be done cheaper anywhere else in the world, then it's good for both the US economy and the foreign economy if that job is moved.

Because then that person can be put in school, and brought into a more qualified job.

Essentially it starts in school. No students should be taking "shop" or shit like that. All students should be forced through high school, and at least one foreign language, and advanced math.

That's a start, and pretty much everyone should go on to college/university as well.

Why?

Because unqualified jobs can and should be done in foreign countries.

Sure, it's an individual tragedy when someone loses their job to outsourcing, but if the society, through re-employment drives and offerings gets these unemployed upgraded, so to speak, then it's only a win-win situation for the society.

-Hedge

   While I agree that everyone should have an education...you show your ignorance when you insinuate that all factory jobs are "unqualified" or unskilled. There are many factory jobs that are skilled labor.You are one of those people that think a college degree makes you a "better" person than someone who works for a living. I challenge you to take your degree,and use it to weld aluminum...Or paint a car...Or build an engine/transmission. These are all things that I can do..and if you think any of them do not require skill then you are an idiot.

      Meltdown.....  saved someone the trouble.
















                   P.S. WOOO HOOO WOOO HOOO Colts are going to the SuperBowl!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[240 is Back]

i don't think he was dissing you, gt, unless of course he's a Patriots fan

I think the meaning of "skilled" means those jobs which require 4 to 8 years of schooling.  I worked painting at a bodyshop and agree - it is a position requiring a great deal of skill.  I think the emphasis is on the fact that one can become pretty proficient in some jobs in 2-3 months or on-the-job training like painting, while it'd take 8 years to be able to operate on someone's brain.

[gtbro1]

i don't think he was dissing you, gt, unless of course he's a Patriots fan

I think the meaning of "skilled" means those jobs which require 4 to 8 years of schooling.  I worked painting at a bodyshop and agree - it is a position requiring a great deal of skill.  I think the emphasis is on the fact that one can become pretty proficient in some jobs in 2-3 months or on-the-job training like painting, while it'd take 8 years to be able to operate on someone's brain.

    You guys don't trust me to work on your brain!!?

[Hedgehog]

   While I agree that everyone should have an education...you show your ignorance when you insinuate that all factory jobs are "unqualified" or unskilled. There are many factory jobs that are skilled labor.You are one of those people that think a college degree makes you a "better" person than someone who works for a living. I challenge you to take your degree,and use it to weld aluminum...Or paint a car...Or build an engine/transmission. These are all things that I can do..and if you think any of them do not require skill then you are an idiot.

      Meltdown.....  saved someone the trouble.
                   P.S. WOOO HOOO WOOO HOOO Colts are going to the SuperBowl!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Weld aluminum, painting a car...

Those are both jobs that requires little education, but rather experience.

Those jobs could just as well be done in India, China or any other low wage country.

So the sooner those jobs are automized or moved, the better.

But those who work these jobs, they need to be upgraded. They are a great resource for USA.

Those countries are not able to produce the same kind of educated workforce, so that's what USA need to focus on.


BTW, I never said all industry jobs are unqualified. Or unskilled.

Industries that requires engineers and highly educated people will always have a future in USA.

-Hedge

[gtbro1]

Weld aluminum, painting a car...

Those are both jobs that requires little education, but rather experience.

Those jobs could just as well be done in India, China or any other low wage country.

So the sooner those jobs are automized or moved, the better.

But those who work these jobs, they need to be upgraded. They are a great resource for USA.

Those countries are not able to produce the same kind of educated workforce, so that's what USA need to focus on.


BTW, I never said all industry jobs are unqualified. Or unskilled.

Industries that requires engineers and highly educated people will always have a future in USA.

-Hedge

  I have worked with mechanical engineers for 15 years...and MANY of them have the mechanical aptitude of a catfish.They are intelligent people but they lack the one thing that is required for them to be good at their job...mechanical ability.But they keep their job because they have a degree.Not all,of coarse...but many of them.
   You are correct by saying that welding and automotive painting require more skill and experience and less "education"...although paint technology changes very quickly so it is a constant learning process.It is impossible to automate everything.Things will always break and need repaired.
  The biggest problem with your argument is that it is impossible. SOMEBODY will always have to do the work.Everyone can't be executives,lawyers and Doctors...What are ya gona do if you have a fender bender? Ship your car to India for repair? What are you gona do when your car breaks down? What about when your furnace or air conditioning goes out? I could go on and on.This country is kept going by the ordinary blue collar worker.All the business smarts in the world are useless without someone to actually do the work.

[Hedgehog]

 Let me tell you I have worked with mechanical engineers for 15 years...and MANY of them have the mechanical aptitude of a catfish.They are intelligent people but they lack the one thing that is required for them to be good at their job...mechanical ability.But they keep their job because they have a degree.Not all,of coarse...but many of them.
   You are correct by saying that welding and automotive painting require more skill and experience and less "education"...although paint technology changes very quickly so it is a constant learning process.It is impossible to automate everything.Things will always break and need repaired.
  The biggest problem with your argument is that it is impossible. SOMEBODY will always have to do the work.Everyone can't be executives,lawyers and Doctors...What are ya gona do if you have a fender bender? Ship your car to India for repair? What are you gona do when your car breaks down? What about when your furnace or air conditioning goes out? I could go on and on.This country is kept going by the ordinary blue collar worker.All the business smarts in the world are useless without someone to actually do the work.

There will always be a need for jobs "in between", so to speak. Repairing and building, working hotels, the media, cleaning, shop clerks.

But those are jobs in between. Those jobs are not the foundation of USA.

The foundation of USA is the industry, the farming and other different areas where capital is produced.

My point is that those who today are working the car industry, should perhaps instead have a degree in computer programming, or in biochemistry.

You can't of course change all this in one year. But perhaps that will explain to guys like you better why Bush isn't protecting "US jobs".

To protect them, would mean that the natural evolution of the industries would be temporarily stopped, and it could cause a enormous blow to the US economy and society later on.

Better that a relatively small amount of jobs vanish on regular basis, because then society is able to "swallow" it, to find new jobs for those people, after some education.

If a huge amount of people would lose their jobs, that wouldn't be possible.

-Hedge

[D-bol]

The more prohibitive/inflexible tax system, more people will look for schemes to avoid it. Think about it, if you are earning say 50K a year, you'll pay say 16.5K tax. But a man earning 5-10mln will have to pay a hefty 1.5-3.5 million to the revenue service. Mind you one gets into a higher tax bracket with higher income and therefore pays proportionally more.

In most EU countries if you take in account all taxes, transfer taxes, capital gains, etc, etc... a higher-earning individuals end up facing up to 49% tax liability. Now when you work hard to earn a million you dont just want to give half of it away. In addition, they often match your assets to your (HISTORICAL) tax liability. In other words, you might have 5mln in assets but only 500K actual cash available, but you will be liable on the full 5mln! Where's the justice? Mind you that in many (even 1st world) countries a hefty chunk of tax revenue goes to the pockets of the MP's through legal or illegal schemas. No wonder high-income people try to find ways to minimize tax liability.

[gtbro1]

The foundation of USA is the industry, the farming and other different areas where capital is produced.



-Hedge

   That is my point.