Cyprus-Forum.com

[Kikapu]

I thought we were still on the subject of tax cuts when I made my comments regarding “Robin Hood”.

Yes, the rich and the cooperations got the lions share of the benefits from the tax cuts.

Even now, look at where the stock market is despite all the negative impacts on the economy from the coronavirus effect. The stock market was down as much as 35% just 2-3 months ago. Now, it is only 2-3% of being where it was back then despite record unemployment.

[Paphitis]

I thought we were still on the subject of tax cuts when I made my comments regarding “Robin Hood”.

Yes, the rich and the cooperations got the lions share of the benefits from the tax cuts.

Even now, look at where the stock market is despite all the negative impacts on the economy from the coronavirus effect. The stock market was down as much as 35% just 2-3 months ago. Now, it is only 2-3% of being where it was back then.

So you are talking business tax cuts.

Well, the US and Trump are not the only countries to reduce tax for business.

Australia, having one of the highest tax regimes in the world is reducing the company tax rate from 28% down to 21%

Why? Well the answer to that should be very obvious. High tax for business is a disincentive for these businesses to remain based in Australia when we are competing with other countries that only levy 10% in tax to business.

It isn't a case of aiding the rich, but more of an attempt to remain competitive internationally.

Charging 30% in tax on business isn't exactly helping the poor when it is the poor worker who will end up on the unemployment benefits.

By reducing the company tax rate, the State gains revenue elsewhere when there are more jobs, therefore more income tax into the system, more payroll tax, more money in circulation helping traders and small business thus also increasing the taxable pool.

You can all live with your head in the sand all you like, but taxing business at a high rate isn't going to help the economy, keep jobs and create more jobs. Likewise, taxing the worker highly doesn't help the economy either or business because people have less disposable income. Tax is like the biggest handbrake. The US was headed towards being a rust belt if it wasn't for Trump.

[Kikapu]

I thought we were still on the subject of tax cuts when I made my comments regarding “Robin Hood”.

Yes, the rich and the cooperations got the lions share of the benefits from the tax cuts.

Even now, look at where the stock market is despite all the negative impacts on the economy from the coronavirus effect. The stock market was down as much as 35% just 2-3 months ago. Now, it is only 2-3% of being where it was back then.

So you are talking business tax cuts.

Well, the US and Trump are not the only countries to reduce tax for business.

Australia, having one of the highest tax regimes in the world is reducing the company tax rate from 28% down to 21%

Why? Well the answer to that should be very obvious. High tax for business is a disincentive for these businesses to remain based in Australia when we are competing with other countries that only levy 10% in tax to business.

It isn't a case of aiding the rich, but more of an attempt to remain competitive internationally.

Charging 30% in tax on business isn't exactly helping the poor when it is the poor worker who will end up on the unemployment benefits.

So you don’t think it was self serving for Trump’s business empire with the corporate tax cuts as soon as he became the president? The average worker got very little in cuts, if anything.

[Tim Drayton]

Speaking at a recent Chatham House top secret, closed door meeting attended by experts only, editor of the Lancet Dr. Richard Horton, bemoaning the current state of science, was reported to have said:

If this continues, we are not going to be able to publish any more clinical research data because pharmaceutical companies are so financially powerful; they are able to pressure us to accept papers that are apparently methodologically perfect, but their conclusion is what pharmaceutical companies want.

https://ahrp.org/lancet-editor-spills-t ... 6Qgrwd5xGo

[Paphitis]

I thought we were still on the subject of tax cuts when I made my comments regarding “Robin Hood”.

Yes, the rich and the cooperations got the lions share of the benefits from the tax cuts.

Even now, look at where the stock market is despite all the negative impacts on the economy from the coronavirus effect. The stock market was down as much as 35% just 2-3 months ago. Now, it is only 2-3% of being where it was back then.

So you are talking business tax cuts.

Well, the US and Trump are not the only countries to reduce tax for business.

Australia, having one of the highest tax regimes in the world is reducing the company tax rate from 28% down to 21%

Why? Well the answer to that should be very obvious. High tax for business is a disincentive for these businesses to remain based in Australia when we are competing with other countries that only levy 10% in tax to business.

It isn't a case of aiding the rich, but more of an attempt to remain competitive internationally.

Charging 30% in tax on business isn't exactly helping the poor when it is the poor worker who will end up on the unemployment benefits.

So you don’t think it was self serving for Trump’s business empire with the corporate tax cuts as soon as he became the president? The average worker got very little in cuts, if anything.

No! I think cutting company tax rates is one of the wisest things any economy can do. Australia and US need to do this and close the gap between them and low tax regimes who have a 10% tax rate.

It's not self serving because most EU countries, Australia, NZ, and others are doing the same and the reasons are obvious. Our Governments have a responsibility to introduce policies which stimulate the economy and keep people employed and make more jobs. if it does that, it's tax revenues actually increase to provide other services. If Trump was self serving, he would take his well earned salary.

I also think cutting income tax is another wise thing to do to stimulate the economy.

Bottom line is, low tax is good. For both business and workers.

[Kikapu]

I am all for low tax. Even for no tax, but mainly for the working families who will spend the money that will be put back into the economy. The rich can only buy so many houses and cars as their money mostly remain in investments and not circulate to boost the economy.

[Tim Drayton]

John Kirby interviews Erin Marie Olszewski, a Nurse-turned-investigative journalist, who has spent the last few months on the frontlines of the coronavirus pandemic, on the inside in two radically different settings. Two hospitals. One private, the other public. One in Florida, the other in New York.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIDsKde ... e=youtu.be

[Paphitis]

I am all for low tax. Even for no tax, but mainly for the working families who will spend the money that will be put back into the economy. The rich can only buy so many houses and cars as their money mostly remain in investments and not circulate to boost the economy.

but this economic premise is false.

Without big business, there are hundreds of thousands of working families now reliant on the unemployment benefits as well.

Let's say for instance, you wanted to be Robin Hood - take from the rich and give to the poor. Well, there would be lots of poor and lots of poor to give to which can only increase the tax burden on those lucky enough to be employed. Let's say, you increases the corporate tax rate to 50%.

Well for starters you are telling those businesses to pick up stumps and go to the Cayman islands. those which stay, will not be able to create as many jobs - therefore this impacts on working families. As a result, unemployment rates can only increase. Tax revenues will slump too.

So yeh, it's a fine juggling act. can't exactly over tax the worker and can't over tax business either unless you want to kill the economy.

At the same time, we have to remain competitive. A country that taxes business at 30% isn't as competitive as a country which taxes business at 10%. Impact isn't only on business, but also on working families.

[Robin Hood]

I thought we were still on the subject of tax cuts when I made my comments regarding “Robin Hood”.

Yes, the rich and the cooperations got the lions share of the benefits from the tax cuts.

Even now, look at where the stock market is despite all the negative impacts on the economy from the coronavirus effect. The stock market was down as much as 35% just 2-3 months ago. Now, it is only 2-3% of being where it was back then despite record unemployment.

Just goes to show you that there is no relationship between the financial markets and the REAL economy! I believe the US/UK/EU have poured trillions into propping up the banks over the last few months? Banks that contribute very little to the real economy...... same old story ........ the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

[repulsewarrior]

John Kirby interviews Erin Marie Olszewski, a Nurse-turned-investigative journalist, who has spent the last few months on the frontlines of the coronavirus pandemic, on the inside in two radically different settings. Two hospitals. One private, the other public. One in Florida, the other in New York.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIDsKde ... e=youtu.be

...thanks Tim.