CENK is Right Again: Super Committee LOWERS Corporate Tax Rate

[vroomvroom]

As predicted by Cenk in what the Super Committee of repubs/democrats would actually be doing as puppets for the super rich and corporate doners the committee announced a proposal to lower the corporate tax rate which does nothing to help resolve the deficit nor does it increase jobs...it just allows ceos to take larger bonuses (based on past history).

Cenk predicted this way back and has already laid out what the Committee will be doing next.

Ok, i know half of DU will be bashing me and letting me know how doing yet another republican dream is actually a good thing.

And you wonder why the Obama admins polls are shitty. We have a democratic party that is really just republicans.

[geckosfeet]

1. Of course. Increased bottom line for free. The CEO's and accountants love it.

No need to increase production, do research, sell more or improve any products.

Just sit on your ass and watch the dollars roll in.

[Hardrada]

2. It is one branch of the big Corporate Party so no surprise.

[Dragonfli]

16. What do you think about the Administrations jobs plan? I posted most of it below

http://www.uschamber.com/sites/default/files/110905_jobs_letter.pdf

I would like your opinion on what is in that PDF and also how much of it will be implemented by the middle right/far right alliance that is the administration and congress.

I do not expect you to know the future but I would like to know your opinion.

[Hardrada]

28. Thanks. I will look through it.

Can't promise an opinion if I get confused!!

[JuniperLea]

3. Have they actually done something...

Or is this just more arm flapping and crystal ball gazing?

[BklnDem75]

18. Not really...

but I suppose jumping the gun is being consistent.

[JuniperLea]

43. There was a time when I would have said...

There's something to be said about consistency... doesn't quite ring true these days though.

[KansDem]

4. The Super CONmittee

Ready to do the work of the plutocrats!

[ClarkUSA]

5. Link? In exchange, aren't they also getting rid of tax loopholes corporations love @ the same time?

Cenk and/or you are either not telling the whole story or you are and/or he is ignorant of the facts. President Obama made it very clear in one of his recent speeches that he'd be willing to lower the corporate tax rate in exchange for getting rid of the tax loopholes that have allowed many corporations to pay little or nothing for decades.

Furthermore, your OP title is completely misleading as well as false, given the SC is just meeting and hasn't decided a thing yet.

[indepat]

46. We can all take comfort that if corporate rates are lowered in exchange for getting rid of tax

loopholes, all corporations' effective income tax rate will be the full maximum rate and no loopholes will ever work their way back into the tax code. Never. :patriot:

[ProSense]

6. Hmmmm?

"Super Committee LOWERS Corporate Tax Rate"

The committee hasn't don't anything yet except meet.

Also the President's detailed proposal (PDF) was announced and is not a secret.

[Tarheel_Dem]

7. "Cenk is right again?" Doesn't that presuppose that he's been right before?

:rofl:

Oh, and unrec, because I despise Cenk with all the passion of any run of the mill teanutter. His GOP roots offend me. :hi:

[ProSense]

9. TYT: Cenk Loves Obama Admin Steps To Pay For Jobs Plan

TYT: Cenk Loves Obama Admin Steps To Pay For Jobs Plan

What day is it?

[Tarheel_Dem]

23. I think it depends on which underwear he's wearing on any given day.

Apparently, this was a day when they weren't pinching and/or riding up. :hi:

[Enrique]

35. ha ha ridiculing Cenk for not being a propagandist

I guess the real way to be is to pick a "side" and then only spew talking points from that "side".

You guys really have Cenk's number! :rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

[Tarheel_Dem]

39. How's that new show coming along? I hear you're on in literally tens of homes nationwide.

:hi:



:rofl:

[Enrique]

40. so you only like guys with big audiences

you must watch Bill O'Reilly religiously. :rofl:


:hi:

[Tarheel_Dem]

41. Nope. Unlike some (hint hint), I don't need my already firmly held beliefs reaffirmed by the tv.

It's why liberals will never really be competitive in talk radio or teevee. Most of us don't need to hear some dude on the teevee saying what we already know and/or believe. If you need that, then that speaks volumes. But be careful, if they move Cenk any further up the dial, you guys are gonna get even lighter in the head, and perhaps a nasty nosebleed to boot.


Bwwaahhhh! :rofl:

[Enrique]

34. Cenk's mind is free

so is mine and a lot of other people's.

Sometimes we criticize the President, sometimes we praise him. We still have our brains, we haven't turned our brains over to a politician.

[Bluenorthwest]

12. And yet the President appoints actual, current Republicans

And you support that? Amazing shit to behold, the situational ethics of the emoticon crowd. You dig Obama's Republicans. But are offended at others being former Republicans.......seriously, will you be here all week or are you taking this material to the Comedy Store?

[ClarkUSA]

8. Unrec for 100% false OP title & gratuitous bashing of the Dem Party & DUers based on that falsehood.

[vaberella]

11. Oh it's false? I knew I should take DU posts with a grain of salt. n/t

[Dragonfli]

17. You should take the post you responded to with a grain of salt as well for obvious reasons /nt

[vaberella]

19. Maybe, but people like Clark, Jenmito, Babylonsister, Prosense..

haven't steered me wrong yet.

[Dragonfli]

22. All I have ever gotten from them are talking points that justify anything and everything.

Done in the name of the administration.

All they have steered me towards are talking points and excuses.
To each his own, I like to look a little deeper than the PR Dept, but would not expect others to do the same.

[vaberella]

30. Talking points?

That would suggest a pattern of statements that followed or repeated by a group of people. Sadly they're on their owns in giving information. And they always tend to support said information with links, rather than the more critical which fails or twists the story.

[Dragonfli]

33. Then you have had a different experience than I /nt

[vaberella]

10. A lot of Liberals are on the Super Committee, I don't get it. n/t

[FrenchieCat]

26. Come on, now.....just play along!

By joining the Gotta.find.something.to.blame.Obama.for.today Club!
where it doesn't matter what the facts are, or how they apply,
What is speculation pulled out of an ass when it can be morphed into easily accepted truth
for the most gullible looking for something to do?
and After all, the Right does this all the time, pins blame without citing facts....
so why shouldn't those claiming to be on the Left not be able to do it too?
after all, my understanding is when forming an arc, the extremes meet at some point.:shrug:

We know that the Right blatantly allows itself to be misinformed and deliberately
deep sixes nuance in order to make their point...
but it does appear that the Left has finally caught up in the age of Obama.

[Supersedeas]

42. the deeply misinformed Left?

Someone is caught up in the age of Obama....you got that right.

[NorthCarolina]

38. Liberals? Really? Name them. nt

[vaberella]

47. Sure. Murray, Kerry, Clyburn, Van Hollen, Becerra; all but Baucus is a Liberal.

Didn't you know?

[NorthCarolina]

49. Don't you really mean only Murray can be considered a Liberal?

The Democrats:

Max Baucus – Weakly Liberal – Net Legislative Score 22
John Kerry – Somewhat Liberal – Net Legislative Score 44
Patty Murray – Strongly Liberal – Net Legislative Score 89
Chris Van Hollen – Somewhat Liberal – Net Legislative Score 50
Xavier Becerra Somewhat Liberal – Net Legislative Score 67
James Clyburn – Weakly Liberal – Net Legislative Score 38

Average Democrat Net Legislative Score:

51.7

The score is above 50 (and just barely at that) SOLELY due to Murray. Not great odds there for the public considering the GOP only needs to snag one Democrat to vote with them, and there are 4 Dems with the potential to do just that.

Link: http://thatsmycongress.com/index.php/2011/08/11/political-bias-of-super-committee-members/


on edit: added the link to source for political bias scoring used above.

[vaberella]

50. I think "Somewhat Liberal " Counts. Then remove Clyburn and Baucus.

Sadly there aren't that many Liberals in Congress---be them Democratic or Republican. Then maybe you shoudln't be complaining about the Super Committee---complain about the lack of liberals taking office. Something utterly lacking on this board are people really listing the Liberal candidates of their community and working to get them elected.

Honestly---I still think when compared to the Republicans---these people are super liberal.

[Cali_Democrat]

13. Corporations are sitting on record profits and aren't hiring

So they get more cash through additional tax cuts...how exactly will this create jobs?

[Dragonfli]

14. I knew an Idea was floated to lower corporate rates while "broadening" the tax base

The middle right justification as I recall for lowering corporate tax rates was that loopholes would be closed thus making the effective tax rate of corporations supposedly higher.
I do not really trust the deal making process to do both and rather expect it will be a net gain for corporations, we have little option but to wait and see what the far right and the middle right that control this country actually churn out.

I have yet to hear the middle right justifications for broadening the tax base (a nifty way of saying tax the poor more) but I believe the far right faction justifies this with some nonsense about "half of merkins pay no taxes". We shall have to wait to see what they come up with to justify this on the middle right or if the idea will be abandoned as I hope it will.

I haven't had much chance to watch Cenk lately (no cable and limited bandwidth for streaming) but has he noticed or mentioned how much of the COC agenda has been adopted by the administrations own job plan or enacted via seperate methods of implementation? So far about 80% of the COC plan http://www.uschamber.com/sites/default/files/110905_jobs_letter.pdf has been championed by the middle right Administration as well as the far right lunatics in congress. I fear they will get most of what they want in the end as "third way 'Democrats'" place a great deal of stock in what the Chamber has to say about economic issues and the far right lunatics consider them prophets ad well.

(please read the PDF I linked, it is uncanny how much of that has come out of the mouths of the Administration, I would say they are the primary authors of the Administrations approach to job creation and I am curious if you agree)

[Mr Deltoid]

15. The goal is zero taxes for the rich

This is highly predictable because of who is on this committee.

[johnaries]

20. CENK twists the facts AGAIN.

The idea is to lower the tax rate BUT to close the loopholes that allow companies like GE to get rebates instead of paying taxes. It is a much more fair system and overall increases government revenues.

[Dragonfli]

21. Why do they need the rates lowered even if SOME of the loopholes are closed?

I just don't get the need to coddle them when they are experiencing record profits the highest productivity seen in years and yet still will not invest in jobs or deign to share the profits of the productivity with those that do the actual production.

[ProSense]

24. Because

"Why do they need the rates lowered even if SOME of the loopholes are closed?"

...effectively no company is paying the actual rate. In fact, some are paying zero. Leveling the playing field and increasing revenue will get the country moving in the right direction, ensuring that corporations pay taxes. Senator Wyden proposed reducing it to 24 percent from 35 percent, but that seems awfully low.

[Inuca]

25. Among other things because

they need to COMPROMISE. Yes, I know, it's a dirty word, but you know what the rules of this committee are, right? Reach a compromise, or else measures that are painful to BOTH SIDES will supposedly take effect.

[Dragonfli]

27. Thank you for an honest answer, I prefer honesty even when the results of reality

will hurt the working people of the country.

I just wish we didn't have to compromise with terrorists and I abhor those that try to spin that need to harm us as some kind of good.

[vaberella]

31. I don't understand how you say one is honest, when it's not even based on economics?

The other is based on economics.

[Dragonfli]

32. It IS about politics, lowering the tax rate for corporations will only help the economics of CEOs it

is a reality that we now appear to find it politically expedient to support trickle down economics that do not work and in fact have a negative effect on those not in the high strata classes.

It is also in my opinion the politics of Reaganomics having entered the Democratic party via third way "Democrats" that have much more in common with Republicans of the nineties. They have taken over the party and run it like Reagan Republicans.

The reality is that because of the way they have given in to the terrorism tactics of the tea bagger lunatics so much that the only course they have left themselves is to agree to a less extreme Republican approach.

Much like the way they are adopting 80% of this http://www.uschamber.com/sites/default/files/110905_jobs_letter.pdf

The poster was just being honest about the corner the corporatists of our party have painted themselves and us into, that is a compromise with an approach that is only concerned with the top, they are not going to take an approach that works, but they may give us a less extreme version of the Right wing vision (that is the compromise) and it is no great thing.

I doubt the poster would agree with much of what I have just said, but he was honest about being in a position that we have to compromise to avoid perhaps a worse fate.

(on edit, not sure what you mean by the other is based on economics, perhaps it has to do with the post of ignored, I only have two people on ignore and I only do that to people whose posts are nothing more than regurgitation of either white house or republican talking points without ever adding any ideas of their own. That is why only two have made my list, I don't have patience trying to talk to regurgitation)

[Enrique]

36. Cenk talks about the loopholes

he's not buying it. And I'm not either. You can buy it if you want, but it's not "twisting the facts" to be skeptical towards politicians' spin.

[Cosmocat]

37. Not for nothing ...

But what exactly leads anyone to REALLY believe they will "close the loopholes" while lowering the rate?

If, given all that we have seen the last 10 years, that this is not a pretty blatent bait and switch ...

[former9thward]

48. GE got its rebate because they lost money in 2008-2009.

That is the same 'loophole' which any individual who has losses can and does use. That loophole will always remain in the tax code and will not be changed. People have been saying for decades to remove loopholes but it never really happens. As long as there are tax lawyers who didn't sleep their way through law school corporations will find ways to reduce taxes.

[golfguru]

29. Eliminating loop holes will benefit the economy

Why? Because it helps the most productive outfits instead of bailing out the least productive with tax breaks.

[leftynyc]

44. Only half the story from Cenk

(which is not unusual). Lowering the tax rate WHILE ELIMINATING LOOOPHOLES AND SUBSIDIES.

[Sienna86]

45. But that's not all...

I believe the plan would also include closing many of the loopholes.