Alphabet Q1 2018 Earnings [pdf] • Hacker News Board

Re: Alphabet Q1 2018 Earnings [pdf]

#161

Post by okreallywtf » Tue, Apr 24, 2018, 6:34 PM UTC

refurb wrote: post #144

okreallywtf wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OP might be exaggerating, but they are not talking about who lobbies, they are talking about the politicians who pass the bills and implement the tax cuts. In that they are right. In the house, 191 democrats voted against the tax overhaul, 0 voted for it. 227 republicans voted for it, 12 against it [0]. The senate was much the same [1]. You can say what you want, but this is a republican tax bill no matter who it ben…

Benefits the rich? You mean it benefits everyone. I'm not rich and my taxes went down.

I should have said benefits the rich disproportionately. They are throwing most of us a bone (sometimes even a half-decent bone) while treating themselves to a 11 course meal. I don't think that this is a controversial statement, its just how it is going to be. They know that a few thousand dollars in the pockets of average Americans is a huge deal, even if it results in millions in the pockets of others.

The question is, in the long run, does that couple grand benefit us more than it costs us in terms of long term deficits, reductions in government services, etc?

The "hell yeah I'll take more money anyday!" mentality is what they depend on to sell the bill and it works.

Re: Alphabet Q1 2018 Earnings [pdf]

#162

Post by okreallywtf » Tue, Apr 24, 2018, 6:34 PM UTC

stochastic_monk wrote: post #120

mcintyre1994 wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm sure if it was possible to isolate by party they would have done so It actually does seem to do that fairly effectively from my understanding, by restricting the deductions those in high tax states (ie Democrat) can claim.

Correct, the bill benefited lower-tax (that is, Republican-controlled) states very disproportionately.

Good points, I forgot about that.

Re: Alphabet Q1 2018 Earnings [pdf]

#163

Post by okreallywtf » Tue, Apr 24, 2018, 6:41 PM UTC

skrowl wrote: post #155

refurb wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Benefits the rich? You mean it benefits everyone. I'm not rich and my taxes went down.

The liberal media narrative for every tax cut ever is that it only benefits the rich. Forget that your paycheck and mine saw taxes go down, it was only for the rich according to the media.

Got any sources on that? I expect you'll see a lot of them say it benefits the rich more, but saying it only benefits the rich? Not that I've seen, not legitimate sources (I know its hard to tell the difference between a left-wing blog and a multi-Pulitzer winning newspaper over 100 years old).

I should have said it disproportionately benefits the rich and in the long run I think it probably does only benefit the rich because the middle class and the poor will be hurt by the cuts necessary to pay for the thing and the resulting deficits.

Here are examples of the "liberal media" saying its disproportionate, not that it only benefits the rich. I hate to break it to you, but most of the "liberal media" is pretty nuanced, it may not say what you want but you don't see nearly as much "always/never" as you would expect.

[1] https://www.npr.org/2017/11/14/562884070/charts-heres-how-go...

[2] https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/how-the-senate-tax-bil...

Re: Alphabet Q1 2018 Earnings [pdf]

#164

Post by refurb » Tue, Apr 24, 2018, 9:14 PM UTC

okreallywtf wrote: post #161

refurb wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Benefits the rich? You mean it benefits everyone. I'm not rich and my taxes went down.

I should have said benefits the rich disproportionately. They are throwing most of us a bone (sometimes even a half-decent bone) while treating themselves to a 11 course meal. I don't think that this is a controversial statement, its just how it is going to be. They know that a few thousand dollars in the pockets of average Americans is a huge deal, even if it results in millions in the pockets of others. The questio…

The rich pay the most tax, so any cut would benefit them more no?

Re: Alphabet Q1 2018 Earnings [pdf]

#165

Post by okreallywtf » Tue, Apr 24, 2018, 9:45 PM UTC

refurb wrote: post #164

okreallywtf wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I should have said benefits the rich disproportionately. They are throwing most of us a bone (sometimes even a half-decent bone) while treating themselves to a 11 course meal. I don't think that this is a controversial statement, its just how it is going to be. They know that a few thousand dollars in the pockets of average Americans is a huge deal, even if it results in millions in the pockets of others. The questio…

The rich pay the most tax, so any cut would benefit them more no?

It is more complicated than that, but even on a basic level it is not proportional [0]. If you consider the purpose of a progressive tax system it gets even murkier.

[0] https://www.npr.org/2017/11/14/562884070/charts-heres-how-go...

Re: Alphabet Q1 2018 Earnings [pdf]

#166

Post by chrischen » Wed, Apr 25, 2018, 11:05 PM UTC

spbaar wrote: post #113

chrischen wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t get the whole issue with low coporate taxes. I get why people should be taxed so as to reduce consumption and increase production, but a coporation is not a person, so why hinder their ability to further productivity and economic output? It’s redirecting money earned that could be used to further economic activity and redirecting it to the hands of some highly corruptable bureaucrat in public office given the…

Your concerns make sense for considering things like payroll taxes and taxing other operating expenses. But if we consider taxing corporate profits that go to shareholders, taxing here is a very relatively painless place to tax, as opposed to, say sales tax. This is doubly so when corporations are already sitting in hoards of cash and not investing, due to lack of opportunity or demand, interest rates are low, produc…

> But if we consider taxing corporate profits that go to shareholders, taxing here is a very relatively painless place to tax, as opposed to, say sales tax.

Aren't stock dividends taxed when it hits the individual?

I can understand profit taxing to incentivize spending.

Re: Alphabet Q1 2018 Earnings [pdf]

#167

Post by chrischen » Wed, Apr 25, 2018, 11:07 PM UTC

Diederich wrote: post #77

chrischen wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t get the whole issue with low coporate taxes. I get why people should be taxed so as to reduce consumption and increase production, but a coporation is not a person, so why hinder their ability to further productivity and economic output? It’s redirecting money earned that could be used to further economic activity and redirecting it to the hands of some highly corruptable bureaucrat in public office given the…

I get your argument, but consider this. Corporations generate activity that taxes support, such as the use of roads. That's really what it comes down to I think. > or else government would be even more beholden to coporations instead of citizens This is a real problem...perhaps one of the biggest problems we face, and I really don't have any reasonable ideas on how to fix it.

> Corporations generate activity that taxes support, such as the use of roads. That's really what it comes down to I think.

For roads specifically, if a corporation causes increased usage of roads from say, more employees, the employees already pay for it through their personal income taxes (off of salary). If it's a trucking company, then there are weigh stations that weigh these commercial users and charge them extra for road maintenance.

Re: Alphabet Q1 2018 Earnings [pdf]

#168

Post by chrischen » Wed, Apr 25, 2018, 11:08 PM UTC

s2g wrote: post #126

chrischen wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t get the whole issue with low coporate taxes. I get why people should be taxed so as to reduce consumption and increase production, but a coporation is not a person, so why hinder their ability to further productivity and economic output? It’s redirecting money earned that could be used to further economic activity and redirecting it to the hands of some highly corruptable bureaucrat in public office given the…

Well for one thing, they aren't the primary source. For another, reinvesting into the business lowers your tax burden.

Yes I agree the tax has a positive benefit of incentivizing re-investment (payroll, or other spending) to avoid paying taxes, BUT it seems like this has a high risk of causing companies to focus on short term re-investments.

Famously, companies with thin profit margins from constant reinvestment become less resilient to economic downturns and shifting industry trends, like defunct retailers like Circuit City. Having no saved up capital means companies like that are completely unable to properly reinvent themselves if market shifts happen relatively fast and they have no reserve capital.