When I was a kid, I couldn't wait for Summer to start, and the school year to end.
It meant the longest holiday of the year, Summer vacation. Only Christmas could compete with Summer vacation for popularity, as we kids anticipated a Christmas tree, and several gifts under the tree.
Like us kids, some megacorporations have their favorite holidays, too. No, it's not Summer vacation, but something better. It's called a "Repatriation Holiday," and like Christmas, it comes with millions of gifts, and not the paltry few that I found under my tree on Christmas morning.
These corporations have a tree, too, but its not called a Christmas tree. Their tree is called a "Money Tree," and instead of being decorated with shiny, colorful bulbs and lights, garland, and artificial icicles, and an angel on top, their tree comes decorated with a shiny bonanza for stockholders, colorful opportunities to buy stock back, and an angel called work-arounds so that top executives can participate, too, in the windfall holiday.
"What is the gift under the tree," you ask. Nothing greater than a 5.25 percent federal income tax on corporate profits returned to the United States.
"Some of the nation’s largest corporations have amassed vast profits outside the country and are pressing Congress and the Obama administration for a tax break to bring the money home.
"Apple has $12 billion waiting offshore, Google has $17 billion and Microsoft, $29 billion.
"Under the proposal, known as a repatriation holiday, the federal income tax owed on such profits returned to the United States would fall to 5.25 percent for one year, from 35 percent. In the short term, the measure could generate tens of billions in tax revenues as companies transfer money that would otherwise remain abroad, and it could help ease the huge budget deficit.
"Corporations and their lobbyists say the tax break could resuscitate the gasping recovery by inducing multinational corporations to inject $1 trillion or more into the economy, and they promoted the proposal as “the next stimulus” at a conference last Wednesday in Washington."
Hallelujah, a repatriation holiday for these corporations will give our nation a reason to celebrate as well. Or will it?
The last time this grand inducement was offered, the only thing taxpayers received from these corporations were lumps of coal, and a "hard-candy Christmas":
"But that’s not how it worked last time. Congress and the Bush administration offered companies a similar tax incentive, in 2005, in hopes of spurring domestic hiring and investment, and 800 took advantage.
"Though the tax break lured them into bringing $312 billion back to the United States, 92 percent of that money was returned to shareholders in the form of dividends and stock buybacks, according to a study by the nonpartisan National Bureau of Economic Research.
"This money comes from overseas operations and in some cases accounting maneuvers that shift domestic profits to low-tax countries. The study concluded that the program “did not increase domestic investment, employment or research and development.”
"Indeed, 60 percent of the benefits went to just 15 of the largest United States multinational companies — many of which laid off domestic workers, closed plants and shifted even more of their profits and resources abroad in hopes of cashing in on the next repatriation holiday."
Do I have to tell you which side of the aisle is for this repatriation holiday, and is looking to Scrooge the American people again?
I didn't think so.
"The Obama administration has been uncharacteristically harsh in its criticism of the idea. President Obama and Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner have said they will support it only if it is part of a corporate tax overhaul that results in no decline in federal revenues.
"The prospect of profitable corporations getting a break as social programs are being cut has aroused tax protesters and labor organizations like the Service Employees International Union, which say it would reward companies for moving jobs and investment overseas."
Read more here: Companies Push for Tax Break on Foreign Cash
Okay, let's see a show of hands: How many of you reading this think that this country can afford another national holiday, not for all Americans, but for a select group of multinational companies?
Come now, holidays are fun! We can fire up the barbie, settle back in the shade, drink a few piña coladas (I don't drink, so a Pepsi for me.) and roast a turkey or two over an open flame.
What's that I smell? It doesn't smell like turkey. Wait...it's a new breed of turkey, it's called the American people.
10 comments:
Now is the time for re-education of the working folk in this country.
Your post points out the obvious,most voters are not aware of what truly happens daily in Congress and the White House.
And how the interests of the majority are overlooked for the benifit of a few.
BigmacInPittsburgh said...
"Now is the time for re-education of the working folk in this country."
I couldn't agree more, but occasionally the truth has to be ferreted out.
Our news media often fail to inform. They're too busy propagandizing for those who pay the bills, and stuff their pockets with money, if they're not already owned outright by a corporation.
"[M]ost voters are not aware of what truly happens daily in Congress and the White House.
And how the interests of the majority are overlooked for the benifit of a few."
It's truly a "revolting development," one that our inattention as the true overseers of the government has allowed.
Sometimes I think we elect people to office, and then sit back, smugly thinking that our job is done, and that our elected Representatives will look out for our welfare, and our "interest."
And, as you've said, that's just not true.
Elected officials spend 80 percent of their time raising money (think, selling their votes), and 20 percent of their time supposedly doing the people's business (think, casting their votes to pay for the money they've raised).
It's a dirty, un-American, and anti-democratic thing to do, but most legislators are guilty of it.
And we wonder why lying comes so easy to them!
BD,
An excellent writeup! Did I not just read about the republicans today pulling out of the debt ceiling talks because they didn't have an accord with the administration they could live with? Something about them storming out because Obama wanted to raise taxes. It's almost a certainty that this little cut is what they're going to try to wedge in as a negotiating tactic. This is total BS. Moreover, you're exactly right--there's nothing, absolutely nothing, stimulative about this at all. There will be no hires of people, no investment in equipment and etc. This money will simply go to shareholders and the sad thing about it, these fools will try to position this as if Obama left money on the table because he didn't want to cut the rates on repatriated profits.
This is an absolute outrage and they really need to hang these fools with this sort of thing, but knowing our corporate controlled media, that's extremely unlikely.
Greg L said..."Something about them storming out because Obama wanted to raise taxes."
Yes, Eric Cantor, and his sidekick, Jon Kyle, took a powder, stating emphatically that tax increases aren't on the negotiating table, after exclaiming previously that "every thing's on the table."
Everything except tax increases, that is.
The two insisted that President Obama show leadership and offer his position on tax increases, although we've heard from the president already, but not in a venue where his every word may be captured and used against him during the upcoming presidential election.
It's a clever ruse, but I believe that the president's reelection team is well out ahead of this bit of entrapment.
"It's almost a certainty that this little cut is what they're going to try to wedge in as a negotiating tactic."
It will figure in at some point, I'm sure, but I'm hoping the president stands firm, and keeps his word on not extending Bush's taxcuts, even if the price for not extending them is a repatriation tax holiday for multinational corporations.
The holiday shouldn't be used as a bargaining chip, as it represents just another tax give away to cash rich corporations, who will not comply, or have to comply, with the details of a negotiated deal to invest in job creation, because none will be imposed.
Republicans are a wily bunch. I only wish they were on the side of the American people to the degree that they're on the side of Big Corporations.
What a difference that would make!
"[T]hese fools will try to position this as if Obama left money on the table because he didn't want to cut the rates on repatriated profits."
Republicans can always find the advantage in any negotiation, and aren't reticent to press that advantage, even if it's inimical to the economic interest of the American people.
They're good at shifting the blame and making Democrats look damn bad at the same time.
Unfortunately, for now, the electorate are buying their swill, and they're paying good money to drink it.
"This is an absolute outrage and they really need to hang these fools with this sort of thing, but knowing our corporate controlled media, that's extremely unlikely."
Our economic condition is a corporation's wet dream, especially if you're a multinational.
What they do, or don't do, have a tremendous impact on our economy, and they know it.
This is one of the reasons that they're sitting on tons of money, at home and abroad, until an already softened up executive and legislative branch, begin to see things their way--a zero tax liability, and a bare minimum of federal regulatory supervision and control.
Heads should roll for any party that treads into the repatriation holiday water, but I suspect that the American people are too gullible to act in their own economic self-interest, and will do whatever Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, and Rush Limbaugh tell them to do.
>>>This is one of the reasons that they're sitting on tons of money, at home and abroad, until an already softened up executive and legislative branch, begin to see things their way--a zero tax liability, and a bare minimum of federal regulatory supervision and control.<<<
This is absolutely the deal and to the extent they're accommodated, the bigger the Sword of Damocles they wield. This sort of thing plays out all over whether we're talking financial institutions or industrial corporations. If one looks closely, I suspect that we're talking the same owners.
>>>Heads should roll for any party that treads into the repatriation holiday water, but I suspect that the American people are too gullible to act in their own economic self-interest, and will do whatever Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, and Rush Limbaugh tell them to do.<<<<
This will be buried behind the phrase "tax increases" and the public will never know the details. One of the things that occurs too frequently is that people's eye's start to glaze over at this sort of thing, when they really need to be paying attention to this. All of the dirty work occurs in opaque tax legislation, regulation (or lack thereof), seemingly innocent laws that get attached to other legislation and etc. None of this lends itself to a quick understanding, so the media clowns reduce to down to a sound bite like "tax increases" and believe me to the extent this is resisted, they'll call it that and claim that Obama is for raising taxes.
Ignorance is very costly, particularly when one winds up following and supporting something that's against his own interests. More often than not, when given the facts, most people, even those on the right, would reject this, but then go right back to putting their focus on illegals, mosques and any other diversionary flavor of the day.
One
@Greg L: "This sort of thing plays out all over whether we're talking financial institutions or industrial corporations."
The Bush bail out gave trillions to the banks with the proviso that the money they received would be lent out. Instead these banks invested in T-bills, and speculative investments, and paid themselves huge bonuses from their profits.
It doesn't get any better than this, ('Winning!') while the American people get stuck with the bill. This was a sure-fire recipe for financial success, but the average Joe and Jane Taxpayer will never get a deal this good.
"While the Federal Reserve insists that virtually all of the money given to the banks has been repaid, this does not alter the fact that upwards of $20 trillion of public funds was doled out to rescue Wall Street from the results of its own recklessness and criminality, and these virtually free loans enabled the banks to continue their speculative ways and reap hundreds of billions more in profits. No small portion of the windfalls underwritten by the Fed and the Bush and Obama administrations went into the personal accounts of bank and hedge fund CEOs and top executives." More here.
"More often than not, when given the facts, most people, even those on the right, would reject this, but then go right back to putting their focus on illegals, mosques and any other diversionary flavor of the day."
I want to believe you, but too often the American people are getting their news through either a liberal filter or a conservative filter.
Although I believe the "liberal filter" is less bias, it's still a bias.
Let me illustrate: The Obama administration captures bin Laden, Republicans credit George Bush.
The CRA, and liberals are proclaimed to have brought this nation to the brink of a great depression (not borne out by the facts, but who cares), while Bush and company get a pass.
And we're treated to such Republican claptraps as: "Progressives view all law as flexible and subject to change depending on the day's mood."
[This statement is so sweeping and prejudicial that it renders itself inane and unsupportable.]
"It isn't always the bellicose left that makes laws flexible, it can be the right as well."
[If there's a "bellicose left," can we presume a "bellicose right," as well.]
"I do not blame minorities for the collapse. I blame the loose and careless feel good policies that caused the collapse."
[Liberals lead with their emotions (their bleeding hearts), while conservatives use logic and rationality. Where was that conservative rationality when Bush abandoned the epicenter of the war on terror, Afghanistan, and invaded Iraq?]
"The Ryan plan was interesting and at the very least, it's a start. The Democrats have willfully minimized Medicare's problems and have avoided discussing solutions."
[More of my side is right (pun?) and the other side is wrong. Here's the fact: The Right wants to cut government, cripple it, emasculate it, while the Left is insisting that any balanced approach to solving the problem can't be that one-sided, it must include a revisit of revenues, something the Right is vociferously and adamantly opposed to.]
"The problem is, a slogan is not a plan, an opinion is not intelligence, having a feeling is not experience."
[More of that liberal emotionalism being the villain, when what is needed is practical, cold, and hard as steel reality checks, something liberals aren't capable of. "Taking back the country," is not a helpful slogan, either, but we often hear it from the Right. It's certainly more "bellicose" and divisive than "hope and change."]
Two
"There has always been a strong left leaning element in the United States. The left operates on an emotional basis and tends to respond quickly to easy slogans and fairness but is not very well versed on making things work."
[In short, these emotional ninnies are long on quick fixes, but short on substantive solutions. If I remember correctly, it was a Democrat, Bill Clinton, that left office with the federal government enjoying a surplus, and rosy projections of additional revenue growth, and George Bush the one who mired us in two costly, unpaid for wars, and disastrous tax cuts that weren't paid for.
Actually, the country leans more to the Right than the Left, despite that "strong left leaning element." There's no strong Right leaning elements (such as the Tea Party) in the country, right? Well, who cares: This is the way if should be!]
"Fortunately, many of those white guys in the Tea party see this coming. I am not a Tea Party type, but I could see this coming 40 years ago."
[Prescience after the fact isn't prescience at all. It's merely a drum-beating opportunity to score where no effort was exhibited.]
"I agree in a sense, diversity is a marketing tactic. Not so much for whites, but for members of the left. This technique helps these groups get on board for a common purpose... universal love. Then the ax gets swung and next thing they know, they're living like Cubans. It's an old leftist technique, find an enemy you can hurl the masses at, sort of like baiting the bull with the red cape. The cape gets lifted and the bull rams into the brick wall of totalitarianism. As I said in a previous posting, the lefties never learn. Time after time after time they fall for it."
Did he say, "find an enemy"?
Unfortunately, the Right's right flank is under siege by multiple enemies (and the number keeps growin), most of which have been manufactured--All Muslims, a Caliphate, Illegal aliens (Georgia ran off theirs, and veggies and fruit are rotting in the fields), women and the problems they pose (abortion, and those clinics they use, Planned Parenthood), and not to forget those public unions that speak for teachers, firemen and police. Got to break them!), gays and their rights, and last, but not least, those students, older Americans, and minorities that tend to vote for liberals.]
*whew!"
And who's doing the "falling"?
As you can see, I've followed your argument with LTE over at your blog. His argument is right out of the Right's playbook, while you steadily chipped away at each of his untenable positions.
But I'm afraid that the headwind of his arguments keeps pushing him to the Right, and no level of rationality and fact are going to penetrate the armor he's surrounded himself with to resist a counterargument, even when it's presented as cogently as the one you presented.
>>>Unfortunately, the Right's right flank is under siege by multiple enemies (and the number keeps growin), most of which have been manufactured<<<
Yep, that definitely seems to be the case and even if the republicans were the only political party in existence, these people would still be surrounded by "enemies". That's the whole nature of their indoctrination. We've had 20+ years of right wing media outlets demonizing everything under the sun and prepping these people for out and out war. Amazing how he's jumping at shadows with imaginary enemies all around.
They're fighting and defending that which doesn't exist and have trashed our national discourse as a result. I can't remember the last time we could have a political difference of opinion absent the name calling, sloganeering and storming out of meetings. This all comes from the right and again, it reminds me very much of the situation in Germany. It's like every piece of ideology they promote is a "line in the sand" and breaching them is cause for another fight.
It's easy enough to dismiss this as sick and stupid, but there are a significant number of people who believe this crap, so it's like an army has been raised and the only thing needed to incite them to action is an incident--and that will likely be "created" as well.
The real question is why? Why have people been indoctrinated in this manner? I believe that it was fully known an economic maelstrom was going to hit years ago as jobs went south and the financialization of the economy took hold. Someone decided to raise an "army" to prevent one from being raised naturally against them. You're right, folks like LTE have been indoctrinated so thoroughly that they really can see anything else.
ONE
@Greg L: "They're fighting and defending that which doesn't exist and have trashed our national discourse as a result."
Could it be, Republicans have found a winning tactic (fear), and they're exploiting it for all it's worth.
In the midst of all this fear and an assembly of common enemies, an unlikely idea such as "hope and change" will resonate even louder--at least for a time.
"We've had 20+ years of right wing media outlets demonizing everything under the sun and prepping these people for out and out war."
True, but to what purpose? All of this seem to be a part of some master plan; they're all moving in concert for it to be pure chance.
"Amazing how he's jumping at shadows with imaginary enemies all around."
I continuously challenge my human assumptions. It's easy to fall into an ideological hole that is now passé, but for the hole you're in.
Our most enduring enemies are given birth from within, more than they are from without.
"I can't remember the last time we could have a political difference of opinion absent the name calling, sloganeering and storming out of meetings. This all comes from the right ... It's like every piece of ideology they promote is a "line in the sand" and breaching them is cause for another fight."
Excellent observation. Compromise (the once sacred principle of politics) is now seen as something for the weak.
When a loss, or the perception of a loss is great, people usually dig in, and become entrenched in what served them before.
After their loss of the White House and most of congress, Republicans doubled-down, and rather than retreat they reasserted their conservative values of small government, and no taxes.
Yet, despite this, I believe something else is afoot.
"It's easy enough to dismiss this as sick and stupid, but there are a significant number of people who believe this crap, so it's like an army has been raised and the only thing needed to incite them to action is an incident...."
Now, blacks are the racists; we're the ones who hate whites, and are clamoring for undeserved attention, and redress for imaginary claims.
This notion is growing on white blogs, and black ones as well.
TWO
Victimhood is no longer the private preserve of blacks, but has now become the exclusive domain of whites, as they point daily to some situation where a white person has been attacked by a black.
Glenn Beck knew his audience when he said that Barack Obama has a "deep-seated hatred of whites," and is himself a "racist."
"I believe that it was fully known an economic maelstrom was going to hit years ago...Someone decided to raise an "army" to prevent one from being raised naturally against them.
Your explanation is as good as any, as money, greed, and a lust for power, seem to be at the bottom of most of the world's conflicts.
Here's another take: A population shift is now taking place in this country, with a rise of Latinos, and a decline of whites.
The Latino demographic will, in a decade or two, wield most of the political power in this country, with whites falling precipitously to the back of the electoral bus.
What's needed to offset this shift is a new power dynamic assuring that whites will continue to assert their will over the political and social landscape.
Whites will "not go gentle into that good night...[but will] rage, rage against the dying of the light."
How do they preserve their once monopolistic power in the midst of this population shift? Simple. Transfer it to corporations. And this what we're now seeing take place, unabashedly, by the Roberts Supreme Court.
Corporations, recently raised to the importance, and stature of the individual, can now use their collective power to influence the outcome of elections and the passage of legislation.
They already have life's largest bargaining chip--jobs, the creation of the them, and the destruction of them.
Further, any regulations, or regulators that would challenge the new authority of corporations can be bought, or defeated in some other way.
In addition, because unions support labor, they, too, will have to go in this new power paradigm. A weak, disorganized, labor force won't be able to challenge the power of the corporate purse.
Further, use everything at your disposal to weaken the hand of the Federal Government and those agencies that would stand in the way of the fledgling corpocracy.
I think all of this is by design, and is not happenstance. Look for more shifts of power from the people to the corporations--shifts that will dilute our democracy, and empower corporations.
"You're right, folks like LTE have been indoctrinated so thoroughly that they really can see anything else."
That's easy to do, and easy to understand, in light of the new power paradigm: Whites know that their historical position--Alpha dog, Massa, owners of white privilege--is quickly coming to a crashing end.
What good is a democracy, "Government of the people, by the people, and for the people," if you're not the people to whom it refers.
A race war would go a long way toward assisting whites in their struggle to hold onto what's slipping away.
They would, then, have an excuse to legally suppress minority groups that are threatening to be the majority and the ramifications that shift would entail.
Post a Comment