U.S. Companies Are Stashing $2.1 Trillion Overseas To Avoid Taxes

[redrage]

Over-taxation? LOL. The actual real tax-rate (not the imaginary one politicians parrot) paid by corporations in the USA is ridiculously low.

Cry me a river. If have to pay 20% or more to the feds, then guess what? So should fucking Exxon. And I have investments, I can defer taxes and I have overseas investments. And I still pay a higher rate than (favorite punching bag) Exxon who pays negative taxes. IE: they get handouts from the feds (that would be from me and the rest of you) in addition to the taxes they don't pay.

I have zero sympathy for the whining about corporate taxes. I carry my weight to prop up our military war orgy and wall-street fetish complex. So should the American corporations cowering behind the might of our military (that I help pay for) and making money off it.

So fucking sick and tired of the whining about this. "OMG if company FOO pays 20% it will destroy America!"

Bullshit. During the height of American middle class and corporate growth taxes were way higher at the top.

But hey. Y'all win the lottery some day right? So we gotta keep the taxes low just in case!

I'm by far an expert but sounds like you got a bad accountant, How much tax do you pay to foreign countries?

I could be wrong.... If Exxon makes money in another country they pay taxes on that money in that country. The US takes account those taxes and gives them a credit. If/When that money makes it back to the US it gets taxed at what ever the current rate is.

So if their taxable amount is 100 billion but they paid 3 billion in taxes to south Africa on 20 billion in profit they're taxable income is now 97 billion.. when they bring that 50 billion back to the US they get taxed on that as well. Granted they may never bring it back. If you add it all up, they still pay quite a bit percentage wise in income taxes.

What pisses me off about the tax system is that Bob down the street with his wife and 4 kids paying 10 grand in taxes per year get 20 grand back in refund. WTF? How can you be refunded more than you paid?

The Tax system needs thrown out and rewritten. Could be done in one page. Everyone pays 10% No deductions, no subsidies, etc.. just you work you pay 10%... you make money somewhere.. ok.. 10% you are a cooperation and made 100 bazzilion dollars? you owe 10 bazzillion in taxes (10%). You live/based in the US you make money in Brazil. 10% minus Brazil's taxes. Oh their taxes are more.. sorry no refunds.

 

[redrage]

Corporations/companies are not job creators. That's a misnomer created in the last few election cycles. A businesses sole purpose is to turn a profit. It does this by employing as few people as possible. The real job creators are the consumers, without them, businesses would either cease to exist or employ no-one.

However, with the widening gap and shrinking middle class, there's less consumers in the marketplace to create jobs.

Chicken and the Egg.

Consumers AND Corporations/companies/Businesses... are job creators.

The Corporations job is to make money by selling a product to a consumer efficiently. the corporation sells enough of that product and they may need to add jobs and/or become more efficient by adding new tech which also creates new jobs... Assuming it was being run properly any who.

 

[spintroniX]

the problem, as I see it, is not that corporations do it. The problem is that I can't do it.

 

[TrevorR]

Over-taxation? LOL. The actual real tax-rate (not the imaginary one politicians parrot) paid by corporations in the USA is ridiculously low.

Cry me a river. If have to pay 20% or more to the feds, then guess what? So should fucking Exxon. And I have investments, I can defer taxes and I have overseas investments. And I still pay a higher rate than (favorite punching bag) Exxon who pays negative taxes. IE: they get handouts from the feds (that would be from me and the rest of you) in addition to the taxes they don't pay.

I have zero sympathy for the whining about corporate taxes. I carry my weight to prop up our military war orgy and wall-street fetish complex. So should the American corporations cowering behind the might of our military (that I help pay for) and making money off it.

So fucking sick and tired of the whining about this. "OMG if company FOO pays 20% it will destroy America!"

Bullshit. During the height of American middle class and corporate growth taxes were way higher at the top.

But hey. Y'all win the lottery some day right? So we gotta keep the taxes low just in case!

You clearly don't understand how businesses work. To make it easier for you to understand, lets say you have a job that requires you to do some overseas work, lets say you go over the Britain and you come back. Imagine if you have to pay the normal rate of federal income tax but then you are subject to paying Britains income tax as well. Does that seem fair? Do a reversal in this situation.

Are you a liberal? Do you deserve everything?

 

[Draxanoth]

You clearly don't understand how businesses work. To make it easier for you to understand, lets say you have a job that requires you to do some overseas work, lets say you go over the Britain and you come back. Imagine if you have to pay the normal rate of federal income tax but then you are subject to paying Britains income tax as well. Does that seem fair? Do a reversal in this situation.

Are you a liberal? Do you deserve everything?

I've always been perplexed as to how people construe paying taxes in the country you're operating in as hiding your money from the United States.

 

[rudy]

The problem here is that the tax law is broken.

People tend to take one of 2 sides, either they should pay taxes, or they shouldn't but its not nearly that simple. A big company isn't sitting money off shore because they are afraid to get taxed they are actually purposely moving money off shore to avoid taxes. Lets take a simple example with a normal person as the example likes to be done. Say you work in England and your wife works in the USA and for some reason you are taxed much lower in England. So what you do is you tell your wife to keep the kids in the USA to take the CTC and EITC as well as whatever else. Then you tell your wife to spend anything she can that is tax deductible. Maybe you go to church and your wife pays all your tithe. Now normally you should be paying tithe to the church of England and the queen lol but instead you have your wife pay all the tithe in the USA for both of you because it is tax deductible. By the time it is all done your wife actually gets a credit back from the government every year when she files and you pay a lower rate in England which you couldn't avoid anyway due to their tax laws.

Now does that seem fair? No it doesn't you are exploiting the system and the Americans whom do pay taxes are clearly going to be unhappy when they find out you and all your pals are doing this getting free money from the government and you are happily living way beyond what your wifes income suggests as you only send money back to here to buy things that are not heavily taxed when she needs it. This is the kind of stuff that is happening. Companies carefully work their accounting and billing so that their profits look really low in places they can be taxed heavily they might be working 5 country angles and doing massive suspect book keeping. Remember most of these companies at some point or another had to pump billions of dollars out of the USA into some foreign country to get their operations going over there, now they have the profits and instead of returning them as one would expect from an ROI they just sit on them. And this is EXTREMELY dangerous. First of all because it creates a massive deficit in finance with other coutnries. Money goes out and never comes back. Also because 9 tenths of the law is possession. If you consider that and the fact that 2.1 trillion dollars is just sitting outside the country what if something happens. a major economic collapse, war etc.....? Those other countries might freeze that money, they might confiscate it, a lot of things could go wrong. Its the same reason a lot of countries are pissed when they find out their own country has a stock pile of gold in the USA. If something goes wrong we all the gold in the federal reserve even if its german.

Now you might have mistaken me for someone who thinks that we should go change the laws to tax them. Honestly I don't believe in that in fact I think that all corporate taxes in the USA should be abolished. The reality is there is simply NO way the current US government or anyone in my life time has the balls to do what it needs to do to put pressure on other countries that create these loop holes. Tax law and businesses that do it NEVER stop lobbying the members of EVERY country to carefully craft the loopholes they need. The solutions isn't to go after the companies it is to first create profit and taxation standards in all important countries so companies have no incentive to hide money offshore. But even if you could pull that off it probably wouldn't stay that way long. So IMO the only real solution is for the USA to switch nearly entirely over to taxes on individuals. After all it is mostly individuals who gain from US taxes and therefore they should pay for it. The USA should become the country that everyone else hates because we ARE the tax haven for businesses.

 

[kbrickley]

The problem here is that the tax law is broken.

People tend to take one of 2 sides, either they should pay taxes, or they shouldn't but its not nearly that simple. A big company isn't sitting money off shore because they are afraid to get taxed they are actually purposely moving money off shore to avoid taxes. Lets take a simple example with a normal person as the example likes to be done. Say you work in England and your wife works in the USA and for some reason you are taxed much lower in England. So what you do is you tell your wife to keep the kids in the USA to take the CTC and EITC as well as whatever else. Then you tell your wife to spend anything she can that is tax deductible. Maybe you go to church and your wife pays all your tithe. Now normally you should be paying tithe to the church of England and the queen lol but instead you have your wife pay all the tithe in the USA for both of you because it is tax deductible. By the time it is all done your wife actually gets a credit back from the government every year when she files and you pay a lower rate in England which you couldn't avoid anyway due to their tax laws.

Now does that seem fair? No it doesn't you are exploiting the system and the Americans whom do pay taxes are clearly going to be unhappy when they find out you and all your pals are doing this getting free money from the government and you are happily living way beyond what your wifes income suggests as you only send money back to here to buy things that are not heavily taxed when she needs it. This is the kind of stuff that is happening. Companies carefully work their accounting and billing so that their profits look really low in places they can be taxed heavily they might be working 5 country angles and doing massive suspect book keeping. Remember most of these companies at some point or another had to pump billions of dollars out of the USA into some foreign country to get their operations going over there, now they have the profits and instead of returning them as one would expect from an ROI they just sit on them. And this is EXTREMELY dangerous. First of all because it creates a massive deficit in finance with other coutnries. Money goes out and never comes back. Also because 9 tenths of the law is possession. If you consider that and the fact that 2.1 trillion dollars is just sitting outside the country what if something happens. a major economic collapse, war etc.....? Those other countries might freeze that money, they might confiscate it, a lot of things could go wrong. Its the same reason a lot of countries are pissed when they find out their own country has a stock pile of gold in the USA. If something goes wrong we all the gold in the federal reserve even if its german.

Now you might have mistaken me for someone who thinks that we should go change the laws to tax them. Honestly I don't believe in that in fact I think that all corporate taxes in the USA should be abolished. The reality is there is simply NO way the current US government or anyone in my life time has the balls to do what it needs to do to put pressure on other countries that create these loop holes. Tax law and businesses that do it NEVER stop lobbying the members of EVERY country to carefully craft the loopholes they need. The solutions isn't to go after the companies it is to first create profit and taxation standards in all important countries so companies have no incentive to hide money offshore. But even if you could pull that off it probably wouldn't stay that way long. So IMO the only real solution is for the USA to switch nearly entirely over to taxes on individuals. After all it is mostly individuals who gain from US taxes and therefore they should pay for it. The USA should become the country that everyone else hates because we ARE the tax haven for businesses.

Yes, and there are plenty of taxes the companies pay on their USA employees that they can't dodge (unemployment tax, Social Security tax, Disability tax, etc) ... also, if they own property they pay property tax ... if they rent then their landlord is paying taxes on the revenues from rent and the property tax ... things like telecommunications, power, water, gas and other utilities tend to be taxed ... and now that the internet is classified as a Title II service the government does have the option to put taxes on it similar to phones (if they desire) ... just because the companies can avoid some of our corporate taxes doesn't mean they contribute nothing to the economy

 

[rudy]

Yes, and there are plenty of taxes the companies pay on their USA employees that they can't dodge (unemployment tax, Social Security tax, Disability tax, etc) ... also, if they own property they pay property tax ... if they rent then their landlord is paying taxes on the revenues from rent and the property tax ... things like telecommunications, power, water, gas and other utilities tend to be taxed ... and now that the internet is classified as a Title II service the government does have the option to put taxes on it similar to phones (if they desire) ... just because the companies can avoid some of our corporate taxes doesn't mean they contribute nothing to the economy

This correct which is why I pointed out that people seem to take one of 2 sides and not recognize the middle. However most of the taxes you listed simply do nothing for the general tax budget. They are very specific taxes levied for specific tasks. This doesn't provide any significant source of revenue for the Military, government operations, and so on. So all of those taxes would have to increase heavily if that is where we expect they will contribute.

 

[kbrickley]

This correct which is why I pointed out that people seem to take one of 2 sides and not recognize the middle. However most of the taxes you listed simply do nothing for the general tax budget. They are very specific taxes levied for specific tasks. This doesn't provide any significant source of revenue for the Military, government operations, and so on. So all of those taxes would have to increase heavily if that is where we expect they will contribute.

Property taxes can definitely cover a wide range of local activities since Texas uses property tax instead of income tax ... most companies would be willing to pay a reasonable tax rate (something in the 5% range perhaps) ... if combined with special free trade zones or other business friendly things I think we could reach a compromise that would meet the needs of the country (who wants money), the companies (who want profit), the consumers (who want value), and the workers (who want jobs and paychecks) ... the USA remains the world's largest and strongest economy but if we don't grow and make changes then we will fall behind China much sooner than we should

 

[Mohonri]

Property taxes can definitely cover a wide range of local activities since Texas uses property tax instead of income tax ...

That's not entirely true. I moved from Texas to Illinois about 4 years ago. While it is true that Texas has no income tax and Illinois currently charges 5%, the effective property tax rate is the same in both states, and the sales tax rate is the same. And property values are (in my admittedly limited experience) higher in IL than in TX. So are vehicle registration fees, business taxes, and pretty much everything else government-related.

 

[redrage]

*snipped other stuff*
Further, corporate taxes as a percent of government revenue is only 13%. So while corporate profits are at an all time high and individual income has stagnated since the 1970s, they contribute only 13% of what is needed to run the country.

https://static.nationalpriorities.org/images/fb101/2014/ind-corporate-income-tax.png

That is income tax only. they may 'only' contribute 13% of total revenue in the form of income tax. They pay other taxes as well. ( other wise exxon would make more than 10 cents a gallon of gas we pay $3.50 for ). What is more shocking to me in the chart is that income tax amounts to less than 60% or total revenue.

 

[Jarod888]

Good. The job of anyone, be it an individual, a small business or a corporation is to do as much as legally possible to avoid paying taxes. The corporations are just using the law and the complexity of the tax code to their best advantage. If I could, I would.

 

[lcpiper]

Hey, maybe all of us can try doing this and see what happens! What do you mean we'll all go to jail? That doesn't seem fair.

Um Steve, did you know;

If you move overseas, get a job with a foreign business, live as an expat, then your Income won't be taxed by the US either, unless you bring it into the US.

If you accept a job for a US Company and work overseas, say as a contractor, the first almost $90K you earn is not taxable either. That's a hell of a tax break. Anything over that amount is taxed on the tax table that reflects your total income, so if you make $130K a year, you are taxed on about $40K at the same rate as if you earned the $130K.

All sounds fair to me, I sure didn't complain about it that year I worked in Iraq

 

[lcpiper]

I also completely disagree that income has stagnated since the 70's. I know cost of living increases, inflation, eat up perceived income increases. But man, I got out of the Army in '98 and went to work for a company at $41K a year, my income jumped to better then $70K a year in less then 10 years time. That's like 80% and I know cost of living didn't increase 80% from '98 to '08.

 

[lcpiper]

I'm pretty sure football stars have gotten a little bump since the '70s as well

Corporate CEOs, anyone think their income has been flatlined?

 

[/usr/sbin]

I've always been perplexed as to how people construe paying taxes in the country you're operating in as hiding your money from the United States.

Let me give you an example of how its wrong

• You found Draxanoth USA as an american living in america.
• Draxanoth USA becomes a successful business making hundreds of million in profit annually.
• You move your "headquarters" to the cayman islands.
• Daxanoth USA only employs 5 low ranking people at the "headquarters" while employing 1000s in the Us/Canada
• A huge majority of your customers are in the USA. Ie. All of your profit comes from the american market.
• When it comes to tax time you say you aren't an american company as your "headquarters" is elsewhere.

See the problem?

 

[redrage]

Let me give you an example of how its wrong

• You found Draxanoth USA as an american living in america.
• Draxanoth USA becomes a successful business making hundreds of million in profit annually.
• You move your "headquarters" to the cayman islands.
• Daxanoth USA only employs 5 low ranking people at the "headquarters" while employing 1000s in the Us/Canada
• A huge majority of your customers are in the USA. Ie. All of your profit comes from the american market.
• When it comes to tax time you say you aren't an american company as your "headquarters" is elsewhere.

See the problem?

see Tax Inversion

 

[lcpiper]

By Rudy;
...Say you work in England and your wife works in the USA and for some reason you are taxed much lower in England.

For some reason? there is no reason to play hypothetical here Rudy, state the reason. If a US citizen is working in England then he is doing so either as an Expat and works for a foreign business in a foreign country and therefor will not be taxed by the US at all unless he moves the money to the US. Or he is working for a US Company and roughly the first $90K of what he makes is not taxed as income but anything he makes over that $90K is taxed at the total income tax rate.

So without being hypothetical the guy is just like I was, working in Iraq and I made about $210K for that year, my wife made her usual 60K so we made $270K, everyone get's at least the standard deduction so let's just peal off $10K and that $90K I spoke of right now and so I had to pay taxes on the remaining $170K that year. Now I am paying taxes on the $170K at the rate for the table that $270K is on. No need to guess,click the link below and follow along;
On Page 87, Fine Schedule Y-1 Titled "...Married filing jointly or Qualifying widow(er)"
Find the line for "If your taxable income is more then 128,500 but less then 195,850.
I paid 24,972.50 + 28% of the amount over— 128,500.

Subtract 128,500 from 170,000 and we get 41,500 + the 24,972.50 = $66,472.50 for my taxes that year. Now on the surface this look like a real windfall, I mean I always figure Uncle Sam takes a third every year just to ball park it. A third of $270K is $90K and I only had to pay out about $66.5K. But keep something else in mind, I was not in the US that year, I was in a third world country in a war zone so what I am saying is I wasn't driving on US roads, using US resources, or doing many of the things that justify the collection of taxes. Therefor my taxes are supposed to be lower, I'm using less.

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-prior/i1040tt--2007.pdf

 

[lcpiper]

Let me give you an example of how its wrong

• You found Draxanoth USA as an american living in america.
• Draxanoth USA becomes a successful business making hundreds of million in profit annually.
• You move your "headquarters" to the cayman islands.
• Daxanoth USA only employs 5 low ranking people at the "headquarters" while employing 1000s in the Us/Canada
• A huge majority of your customers are in the USA. Ie. All of your profit comes from the american market.
• When it comes to tax time you say you aren't an american company as your "headquarters" is elsewhere.

See the problem?

Canna, this is only a small part of the problem and it really isn't the problem this article is addressing. This article is talking about companies like Coke Cola who open a plant in India, hire Indian People to work in it, pay utilities and other costs to the native country, and when it comes time to deal with their profits they don't want to move the money they have made to the US because the US will tax them for it on top of the taxes paid to the host country. Now I know there are extremes vice norms but this adds up to a lot of money. The question is, how much of this money is the US really entitled to from a company who is overseas in all but name. Even if Coke want's to start selling Sprite as well as Coke Cola, they have to pay the government for the overseas transfer of intellectual Property, (The Formula for Sprite). The Government digs too deep and looks for too many angles. Our country deserves what it get's in this regards.

 

[Retronym]

I also completely disagree that income has stagnated since the 70's. I know cost of living increases, inflation, eat up perceived income increases. But man, I got out of the Army in '98 and went to work for a company at $41K a year, my income jumped to better then $70K a year in less then 10 years time. That's like 80% and I know cost of living didn't increase 80% from '98 to '08.

College: minimum wage shit jobs

Post college: $40k start
Two years later: more responsibility, more constant overtime = six figures

~$70k 6 years later, + OT, so six figures, sustained.

Minimum wage to six figures in three years.

It's called WORKING.
All those hours these bitchy whiners spent on the XBOX I was WORKING.

Fuck the whiners. We don't owe them shit.
There are no guarantees, you have to be hungry.

 

[Draxanoth]

Let me give you an example of how its wrong

• You found Draxanoth USA as an american living in america.
• Draxanoth USA becomes a successful business making hundreds of million in profit annually.
• You move your "headquarters" to the cayman islands.
• Daxanoth USA only employs 5 low ranking people at the "headquarters" while employing 1000s in the Us/Canada
• A huge majority of your customers are in the USA. Ie. All of your profit comes from the american market.
• When it comes to tax time you say you aren't an american company as your "headquarters" is elsewhere.

See the problem?

Most of them aren't doing this though, kind of apples and oranges considering the topic at hand.

 

[lilbabycat]

It's called WORKING.
All those hours these bitchy whiners spent on the XBOX I was WORKING.

Fuck the whiners. We don't owe them shit.
There are no guarantees, you have to be hungry.

Yeah I did all that too except I didn't magically hit six figures, didn't magically get a raise, and still don't like corporations fucking over the (ever shrinking) middle class. As well, 25% overtime (which I averaged year round) is no way to live.

 

[tetris42]

I also completely disagree that income has stagnated since the 70's. I know cost of living increases, inflation, eat up perceived income increases. But man, I got out of the Army in '98 and went to work for a company at $41K a year, my income jumped to better then $70K a year in less then 10 years time. That's like 80% and I know cost of living didn't increase 80% from '98 to '08.

I think the U.S. Census Bureau with their sample of hundress of millions of people might be a slightly more accurate assessment of the situation than your sample of one person, yourself:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/17/upshot/you-cant-feed-a-family-with-gdp.html?_r=0&abt=0002&abg=0
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Household_income_in_the_United_States

 

[Retronym]

Yeah I did all that too except I didn't magically hit six figures, didn't magically get a raise, and still don't like corporations fucking over the (ever shrinking) middle class. As well, 25% overtime (which I averaged year round) is no way to live.

FOR YOU.

See how that works?

 

[kbrickley]

I think the U.S. Census Bureau with their sample of hundress of millions of people might be a slightly more accurate assessment of the situation than your sample of one person, yourself:

Except that is median income ... median income could be skewed not because of a lack of high paying jobs but it could also be affected by an increase in lower paid workers ... skilled worker and professional worker wages have definitely continued to increase (perhaps not at the pace some people want and not at the pace of a CxO but still upwardly moving) ... however, a larger and larger percentage of workers are moving into the unskilled labor pool (retail, leisure services, food, etc) ... some people are trying to alleviate that by requiring an increase in the wages (increasing the minimum wage) but not by increasing the required skill level of the workers

Engineers and professionals, for the most part, are doing very well ... there are few of us and because of that we are paid well ... burger flippers and Walmart greeters are not doing so well but that isn't strictly the fault of the corporations that employ them (realistically, how much is a Walmart cashier worth ... $20K, $30, more, less) ... one can have a valid argument on the value of CxOs compared to their pay and lack of accountability but we can't just arbitrarily say that all workers are underpaid or overpaid

 

[tetris42]

Except that is median income ... median income could be skewed not because of a lack of high paying jobs but it could also be affected by an increase in lower paid workers ... skilled worker and professional worker wages have definitely continued to increase (perhaps not at the pace some people want and not at the pace of a CxO but still upwardly moving) ... however, a larger and larger percentage of workers are moving into the unskilled labor pool (retail, leisure services, food, etc) ... some people are trying to alleviate that by requiring an increase in the wages (increasing the minimum wage) but not by increasing the required skill level of the workers

Engineers and professionals, for the most part, are doing very well ... there are few of us and because of that we are paid well ... burger flippers and Walmart greeters are not doing so well but that isn't strictly the fault of the corporations that employ them (realistically, how much is a Walmart cashier worth ... $20K, $30, more, less) ... one can have a valid argument on the value of CxOs compared to their pay and lack of accountability but we can't just arbitrarily say that all workers are underpaid or overpaid

Well I picked median income because that's a good indicator how the average person is doing. Average income tends to get skewed quite a bit by the 0.01%. For example, the median income for an individual in the US is around 24k a year, but the average income is around 42k. That's a world of difference. I mean you can claim it's getting skewed, but if the MEDIAN is getting skewed, that means it's worse for the majority of people.

As for laying blame, I don't think it's any one thing, though I think outsourcing jobs overseas where workers can be paid below our minimum wage here is a big part of it. I mean if it wasn't the fault of corporations, then GDP would be keeping pace with the median income, but instead it's soaring far and away from average and median.

I do agree though that increasing minimum wage isn't really an answer. All that does is increase inflation then we're back where we started after a few years.

 

[kbrickley]

Well I picked median income because that's a good indicator how the average person is doing. Average income tends to get skewed quite a bit by the 0.01%. For example, the median income for an individual in the US is around 24k a year, but the average income is around 42k. That's a world of difference. I mean you can claim it's getting skewed, but if the MEDIAN is getting skewed, that means it's worse for the majority of people.

As for laying blame, I don't think it's any one thing, though I think outsourcing jobs overseas where workers can be paid below our minimum wage here is a big part of it. I mean if it wasn't the fault of corporations, then GDP would be keeping pace with the median income, but instead it's soaring far and away from average and median.

I do agree though that increasing minimum wage isn't really an answer. All that does is increase inflation then we're back where we started after a few years.

Wages are not the primary driver for outsourcing (at least not direct wages) ... the primary drivers for outsourcing are material costs (material suppliers are often right next to the factories in China, reducing the transportation, inventory, and other costs), environmental costs (the costs to meet environmental regulations in the USA can be very high in some industries), and availability of labor (although we sing the praises of manufacturing, not everyone wants to work on a production line in the USA) ... our GDP has been skewed by outsourcing slightly as our distribution in services (government, financial, etc) has overtaken the percentage that used to be produced by industry and manufacturing ... if we could figure out a way to create more knowledge based jobs and fewer unskilled jobs we could increase both GDP and wages ... unfortunately our consumption based economy is always going to favor certain lower paying jobs (retail employees)

 

[lcpiper]

Except that is median income ... median income could be skewed not because of a lack of high paying jobs but it could also be affected by an increase in lower paid workers ... skilled worker and professional worker wages have definitely continued to increase (perhaps not at the pace some people want and not at the pace of a CxO but still upwardly moving) ... however, a larger and larger percentage of workers are moving into the unskilled labor pool (retail, leisure services, food, etc) ... some people are trying to alleviate that by requiring an increase in the wages (increasing the minimum wage) but not by increasing the required skill level of the workers

Engineers and professionals, for the most part, are doing very well ... there are few of us and because of that we are paid well ... burger flippers and Walmart greeters are not doing so well but that isn't strictly the fault of the corporations that employ them (realistically, how much is a Walmart cashier worth ... $20K, $30, more, less) ... one can have a valid argument on the value of CxOs compared to their pay and lack of accountability but we can't just arbitrarily say that all workers are underpaid or overpaid

Agreed. BTW, my company just had a SAN Engineer retire, anyone looking?

Were talking Military Contract at NETCOM with NCI Inc.
Sierra Vista, AZ. Which is work on Fort Huachuca.

 

[lcpiper]

Well I picked median income because that's a good indicator how the average person is doing. Average income tends to get skewed quite a bit by the 0.01%. For example, the median income for an individual in the US is around 24k a year, but the average income is around 42k. That's a world of difference. I mean you can claim it's getting skewed, but if the MEDIAN is getting skewed, that means it's worse for the majority of people.

As for laying blame, I don't think it's any one thing, though I think outsourcing jobs overseas where workers can be paid below our minimum wage here is a big part of it. I mean if it wasn't the fault of corporations, then GDP would be keeping pace with the median income, but instead it's soaring far and away from average and median.

I do agree though that increasing minimum wage isn't really an answer. All that does is increase inflation then we're back where we started after a few years.

How did 25+% unemployment effect that median income BTW? Just asking.

 

[tetris42]

our GDP has been skewed by outsourcing slightly as our distribution in services (government, financial, etc) has overtaken the percentage that used to be produced by industry and manufacturing ... if we could figure out a way to create more knowledge based jobs and fewer unskilled jobs we could increase both GDP and wages ... unfortunately our consumption based economy is always going to favor certain lower paying jobs (retail employees)

I think where we may disagree is you say our GDP v. average or median income has been skewed by outsourcing slightly. While I'm willing to accept there could be an alternate explanation, I would say it's been skewed "a whole shitload" starting since the late 70s, not slightly.

How did 25+% unemployment effect that median income BTW? Just asking.

I'm not sure, I don't have that data. It does look like the average income spiked during the start of the recessions and has more or less stayed there:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped..._Real_or_Adjusted_for_Inflation_1964-2014.png

 

[kbrickley]

I think where we may disagree is you say our GDP v. average or median income has been skewed by outsourcing slightly. While I'm willing to accept there could be an alternate explanation, I would say it's been skewed "a whole shitload" starting since the late 70s, not slightly.

Except what is the alternative to outsourcing ... We return to the days when computers cost thousands of dollars and TVs were a luxury ... Outsourcing has allowed american consumers to have everything at a fraction of what they used to cost ... We need to maintain some critical industries like defense but our gap is doing a poor job creating the jobs of the future ... Not trying to hang onto the jobs of the past

 

[tetris42]

Except what is the alternative to outsourcing ... We return to the days when computers cost thousands of dollars and TVs were a luxury ... Outsourcing has allowed american consumers to have everything at a fraction of what they used to cost ... We need to maintain some critical industries like defense but our gap is doing a poor job creating the jobs of the future ... Not trying to hang onto the jobs of the past

We also had dependable retirement, affordable higher education, worker bargaining power, living wages, and a stronger middle class, it was hell.

Right now we're looking at robotics replacing an enormous portion of the workforce in the future. Considering how many issues we have now, I'm really curious what you think these new jobs are going to be.

 

[rudy]

For some reason? there is no reason to play hypothetical here Rudy, state the reason. If a US citizen is working in England then he is doing so either as an Expat and works for a foreign business in a foreign country and therefor will not be taxed by the US at all unless he moves the money to the US. Or he is working for a US Company and roughly the first $90K of what he makes is not taxed as income but anything he makes over that $90K is taxed at the total income tax rate.

So without being hypothetical the guy is just like I was, working in Iraq and I made about $210K for that year, my wife made her usual 60K so we made $270K, everyone get's at least the standard deduction so let's just peal off $10K and that $90K I spoke of right now and so I had to pay taxes on the remaining $170K that year. Now I am paying taxes on the $170K at the rate for the table that $270K is on. No need to guess,click the link below and follow along;
On Page 87, Fine Schedule Y-1 Titled "...Married filing jointly or Qualifying widow(er)"
Find the line for "If your taxable income is more then 128,500 but less then 195,850.
I paid 24,972.50 + 28% of the amount over— 128,500.

Subtract 128,500 from 170,000 and we get 41,500 + the 24,972.50 = $66,472.50 for my taxes that year. Now on the surface this look like a real windfall, I mean I always figure Uncle Sam takes a third every year just to ball park it. A third of $270K is $90K and I only had to pay out about $66.5K. But keep something else in mind, I was not in the US that year, I was in a third world country in a war zone so what I am saying is I wasn't driving on US roads, using US resources, or doing many of the things that justify the collection of taxes. Therefor my taxes are supposed to be lower, I'm using less.

http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-prior/i1040tt--2007.pdf

I don't care to get into the specifics because the specifics will change with every country and situation. You are supposed to focus on the bigger picture. How do we create a tax that properly represents and covers the government costs and citizen benefits and does so without easily being loop holed around. And part of the reason you actually wouldn't want me to use specific examples is that you probably actually were driving on US roads because we pour billions into those countries to prop up their insolvent governments that are so corrupt they don't actually build much of anything unless someone else pays for it. Where as with England you might actually be driving on an road paid for by their own taxes. And that doesn't even get into the trillion dollars we have poured into those wars.

The bigger picture is what is always missing from these arguments. For decades the USA and its major businesses have been pouring hundreds of billions if not trillions in costs into developing off shore jobs, factories, economies and customer bases. At some point we are suppose to get the ROI, now many of great companies that were built in this country and helped create the great companies in other countries are raking in the reward for their astronomical investment, and investment mind you that was in effect made by the American people who set the foundation for which these companies were built. And have laid our untold billions or trillions in military expenditures to keep the shit hole world stable. It is not unreasonable for these same American people, when faced with hard times to wonder when that ROI is going to come back to those companies and result in some tax revenue for our crumbling infrastructure, reinvestment in a little of our own job creation, etc.... It seems like just when the worlds major developing economies were starting to come online and actually have a smidgen of interest in buying high quality American made products suddenly they had all the loop holes they needed to not bother paying any taxes.

 

[Retronym]

We also had dependable retirement, affordable higher education, worker bargaining power, living wages, and a stronger middle class, it was hell.

Right now we're looking at robotics replacing an enormous portion of the workforce in the future. Considering how many issues we have now, I'm really curious what you think these new jobs are going to be.

This is a common concern. The robots are taking our jobs.

We don't know what the jobs are going to be, because we don't know what the market demand will be. What we do know is that even with robots, even with more efficiency, there will always be demand for something. It's the something that changes.

 

[redrage]

College: minimum wage shit jobs

Post college: $40k start
Two years later: more responsibility, more constant overtime = six figures

~$70k 6 years later, + OT, so six figures, sustained.

Minimum wage to six figures in three years.

It's called WORKING.
All those hours these bitchy whiners spent on the XBOX I was WORKING.

Fuck the whiners. We don't owe them shit.
There are no guarantees, you have to be hungry.

Agreed although maybe in not such a forceful way.

 

[Retronym]

i was forceful to make a point.

it's that attitude, specifically, that enabled me to get the monies.
I didn't hide behind a government skirt to enact change that trickled down to me.

I took it.

 

[kbrickley]

We also had dependable retirement, affordable higher education, worker bargaining power, living wages, and a stronger middle class, it was hell.

Right now we're looking at robotics replacing an enormous portion of the workforce in the future. Considering how many issues we have now, I'm really curious what you think these new jobs are going to be.

Although it is tough to make a living doing it yet, technology has given people many money making opportunities that never existed before ... you could write your novel and see it published on the Kindle ... you could write apps for the smartphone of your choice ... you could participate in the service side helping to care for animals or people ... you could see your great invention launched on Kickstarter, or your play, or your movie ... the path for the entrepreneur still exists for people that have drive and a dream ... for folks that want to work for the man we still have many "dirty jobs" that go unfilled because they aren't sexy enough https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0NwEFVUb-u0

From a government standpoint (or adventurous private companies) we have the oceans ... we could create undersea cities, mines, farms, resorts ... we have space ... the moon is ripe for exploitation, or we could build real space stations, or we could start exploring Mars or the Asteroid Belt ... our problem is we have become complacent ... we want to spend 50 years working at the same desk for the same company doing the same job and that time unfortunately has passed ... as the astronaut Borman once stated we are suffering from a failure of imagination ... holding onto the past is not a solution so we much force our government to embrace the future in ways that strengthen us and not look backwards to a past that will never return

 

[rudy]

Fear of robots is always over blown, automation swept the auto industry decades ago, automation creates efficiency gains and every time there is an efficiency gain people say OMG jobs lost but what happens is that actually frees people up to do different jobs, many times these new jobs are less physically demanding. The real threat from robots in the near future is not that they steal jobs directly but more that if they are good enough and modular enough what stops people from moving the robots anywhere on earth yet again to escape taxes? Robots don't care what language the manager speaks, they have no allegiance, nothing that would bind a typical workforce to where it started exists for robots.

 

[redrage]

i was forceful to make a point.

it's that attitude, specifically, that enabled me to get the monies.
I didn't hide behind a government skirt to enact change that trickled down to me.

I took it.

yup i've been on both ends. I have to say it is far more rewarding working for what you have.