1130
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] coffee_with_cream@sh.itjust.works 10 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Title

Unless there is a global minimum tax this will just move headquarters to Ireland or whoever is cheapest. This type of stuff is just to get votes. Sorry to be a negative Nancy 😕

If you disagree pls explain why. Genuinely interested in learning. I promise to discuss in good faith. I am also not an expert on most things. Just a person who has had some experience in broken promises 😉

[-] todd_bonzalez@lemm.ee 25 points 2 months ago

"Unless this arbitrary impossible thing happens, the problem won't be fixed. That's why we have to do nothing."

No.

Let's just tax companies that operate in the USA based on their respective revenues related to that business, regardless of where they are headquartered.

[-] coffee_with_cream@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Thank you! I like this.

To be clear: I do not think we should do nothing. That was not what I was trying to suggest. I've just been around a while and seen this type of promise before. I am worried that some people are maybe over optimistic about these types of promises and how it might play out.

Re: your last paragraph: would you be willing to pay more for goods or have US based companies perform worse in your 401k? (I do not have any money in my 401k to be clear I'm pretty poor, but I know that people care about that 😂) I will continue being negative and assume they'd pass that cost onto us

[-] baronvonj@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago

A global minimum corporate tax rate, you say? Agreed to by 137 countries during the Biden administration even? Neat!

[-] coffee_with_cream@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago

One thing I will mention. GMT above focuses on 15% of profits. It is trivial to manipulate that number. Which is why I am also for...

Openly transparent auditable money

[-] baronvonj@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

Yeah, but gotta start somewhere right?

[-] coffee_with_cream@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago

Well. Amazon didn't make a profit for a long while. Maybe still not? EBITDA? Idk their current numbers, but I'm assuming there's a lot of Hollywood Accounting happening.

I think closing those types of loopholes is the place we should start. Circling around: these campaign promises are easy to make, hard to keep.

It requires knowledge of accounting, economics, law, tech, politics...few people, if any, have that breadth of knowledge and connections.

I would be impressed with a politician if they had a solid how on these items. Otherwise: talk is cheap.

[-] baronvonj@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

Congress has access to the brightest economic consultants to navigate everything, that's not a problem. Closing loopholes is a logical next step. Just need to overcome the narrow margins and procedural fuck you manuevers to actually get things done.

[-] coffee_with_cream@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago

I agree, with the caveat that your last sentence is a little hand-wavey. The word "Just" makes it seem easier than it is. People are easily swayed & bought. It's wrong, but it is a thing.

[-] coffee_with_cream@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago

Exactly! Good link

[-] FrowingFostek@lemmy.world 6 points 2 months ago

I saw a video about this. I think the next step would be heavier taxes on the corporations that do this kind of stuff.

Then a nationalization of the physical means of that corporation that the entity leaves behind.

"If they leave we just make it work without them, we are American, we can do anything." -some dude on the internet

[-] Kecessa@sh.itjust.works 8 points 2 months ago

Force companies that want to operate in your country to report sales made in your country so they're taxed on the revenues, kick em out if they don't report them.

[-] FrowingFostek@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

Sounds good to me. I like the idea of making corporations do what we want. I have very little concern for the freedoms of businesses.

[-] coffee_with_cream@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago

Thank you for the reply! What would this look like realistically? I.e.: Google doesn't comply. Do we build our own Chinese internet where you can't use Google products?

[-] baronvonj@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

Uh .. doesn't China actually do that already?

[-] coffee_with_cream@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago

Yep! And people in China VPN around it

[-] coffee_with_cream@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Thanks for the reply! Would this work for tech companies? Biggest part of our Sp500. They're mostly "in the cloud" right? So it's pretty easy to move. And physical resources they leave behind would just be some data centers or whatever

Would love to see the video you mentioned if you can find it

[-] FrowingFostek@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

I imagine it would work much the same way taxing any service industry would.

I wont pretend to understand how the sp500 calculates its value. I personally think the stock market is all smoke, mirrors & vibes. Tech still needs patents and copyrights, a likely vector of attack for a willing government I imagine.

Unfortunately, I have a vague memory of the video maybe its this one?

[-] coffee_with_cream@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago

Thank you for sharing the video! I will take a look 🤠

[-] FrowingFostek@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

Absolutely, it was a delight speaking with you. Enjoy the rest of your day friend.

[-] StupidBrotherInLaw@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

I think you're being a Realistic Rhonda.

[-] casmael@lemm.ee 3 points 2 months ago
[-] coffee_with_cream@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago

This thread has been tough for me tbh. A lot of the things I'm reading here were like what I would say when I was back in college.

I guess I'm the old man now haha

[-] StupidBrotherInLaw@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

It's rough. It's a great solution on its face, but people don't like to discuss its weaknesses. It's an issue that seems particularly bad in the United States since they only have two functional political parties. It's constantly "us vs them" for them, so anything that is seen as threatening their team results in backlash, even if it's constructive criticism. They're very much a "if you're not with us, you're against us" people. It's pretty sad.

this post was submitted on 19 Aug 2024
1130 points (100.0% liked)

politics

19097 readers
3721 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS