$5 a Gallon?!

Ryan Williams wrote: Ding Ding Ding! The wealthiest of the wealthy don't even understand what it's like to live in the real world. I don't know the statistics, but London has to be one of the most imbalanced cities in the world in regards to the distribution of wealth. The family that my wife works for quite literally can't get along normally in the world w/o a live in nanny, a cleaner, a cook and a Personal Assistant (my wife). When my wife is on vacation she gets calls from her boss asking about the simplest things. I don't think that everyone should earn the same amount of money (and I'm quite happy with the existance of rich people), but when you see someone lose a watch that costs more than you and your wife's combined salaries and the go and buy another one the next day, you begin to wonder if this is the best possible system for all people.

+1

I agree with some of what's been said.

I'm absolutely coming from a smaller government, and bigger "free market" position. Government is needed in many ways. . . but it also needs to be kept in check.
I don't support all of these bail outs. I don't support growing the Gov simply for greater oversight and financial control of the public (in all sectors). I don't believe in increasing taxes on big business, and pushing business out of America because of the governemnt/tax structure, and their ridiculous appetite.

The US just surpassed Japan (who was #1, and is now going in the other direction) in regards to corporate/business tax. Through experience, they've decided that higher taxes push business (and jobs/money) out; and in the long run, more "imports" become destructive to the economy/society.

Instead of raising taxes (on everyone), the Gov should be reducing its own footprint. . . and should start with the military (arguably our largst financial burden).
The amount of wasteful spending is absurd - I saw it in the active Army, afterwards as a contractor, and I read/hear about it now.
economist.com/blogs/dailych…

Instead, we increase the debt ceilings (via foreign involvement) and build the Gov to support new acts: Budget Control Act of 2011.

This system we are supporting now is killing us, and quickly; fully unsustainable. Throwing more money at it, and taxing it more, has proven to be ineffective (not just in the US, obviously).

Umph! wrote: I don't believe in increasing taxes on big business, and pushing business out of America because of the governemnt/tax structure, and their ridiculous appetite. .

I think the threat of business leaving the US to avoid higher taxes is a red herring to divert attention away from sloppy business practices and absurd executive compensation. The other red herring is job creation. Bring more outsourced jobs home, bring executive compensation back to 20 to 1 ratio (a la Galbraith), and then we talk about lowering your taxes.
I totally agree about the gov't using corporate greed as a justification to expand its own power, but there has to be a middle path, and corporations are raging out of control. The accepted business paradigm right now is corporations exist to make profit uber alles. I believe there needs to be a policy shift to bring the focus of corporations back to providing a product that is necessary and beneficial to society first, profits (a very close) second.

matt davies wrote: I think the threat of business leaving the US to avoid higher taxes is a red herring to divert attention away from sloppy business practices and absurd executive compensation.

Businesses may not leave, instead they hold billions in taxable assets off shore. Would you rather have $5 billion taxable at a lower rate or $0?

JoeP wrote: Businesses may not leave, instead they hold billions in taxable assets off shore. Would you rather have $5 billion taxable at a lower rate or $0?

That's a false choice. Pass legislation mandating American corporations keep their holdings onshore.
Edit: There is this perception in the business world that the US is blessed and should count itself lucky that all these wonderful corporations choose to operate here. It's time to flip the script.

matt davies wrote: I think the threat of business leaving the US to avoid higher taxes is a red herring to divert attention away from sloppy business practices and absurd executive compensation. The other red herring is job creation. Bring more outsourced jobs home, bring executive compensation back to 20 to 1 ratio (a la Galbraith), and then we talk about lowering your taxes. .

Japan is changing their tactics, because it's a reality and not misleading rhetoric. They're (businesses) like you, a consumer - find the best deal to save money.

I like your idea, but I don't see that it will cut it in today's world economy where businesses can choose a location that fits them best. You can dangle the carrot in front of their noses, but they'll likely just step to the side and pick their own from the garden.

Umph! wrote: Japan is changing their tactics, because it's a reality and not misleading rhetoric. They're (businesses) like you, a consumer - find the best deal to save money. I like your idea, but I don't see that it will cut it in today's world economy where businesses can choose a location that fits them best. You can dangle the carrot in front of their noses, but they'll likely just step to the side and pick their own from the garden.

I see your point about business relocating to save money, but what I'm advocating is making relocating a losing proposition by excluding relocated businesses from participating in our market, which is still the largest in the world (although that may change soon). Fence the garden.
Edit: It may be that I'm overestimating the importance of the American market, or underestimating the will of the rest of the world to change corporate "ethics". Meaningful and lasting change would have to involve a global paradigm shift concerning business. The US should lead the way!