dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
145
share rss forum feed


Kommie
Premium
join:2003-05-13
united state
kudos:3

5 recommendations

By the People for the People

People are not corporations. The Government should throw everything it has into stopping this takeover.

Comcast would be the Monopoly in the Media world. The merger with NBC was too big.


tshirt
Premium
join:2004-07-11
Snohomish, WA
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Comcast
There are lots of other players in the content side and quite a few on the delivery side Comcast is just aiming to be the largest with skin in both the delivery and content side, which might be a lot more stable then lots of smaller companies playing the "blackout wars" game.
Vertical integration can have benefits to the consumer as well as the provider.

AVonGauss
Premium
join:2007-11-01
Boynton Beach, FL
reply to Kommie
said by Kommie:

People are not corporations.

Corporations are a group of people.


Eddy120876

join:2009-02-16
Bronx, NY
Correct but they shouldn't dictate how government should work. or heck even get tax break like people.

openbox9
Premium
join:2004-01-26
Germany
kudos:2
They don't dictate how government works; your elected officials do. And corporations shouldn't be paying income taxes in the first place.

jpatton1979

join:2011-08-10
Lexington, KY

3 recommendations

said by openbox9:

They don't dictate how government works; your elected officials do.

Don't be so naive.

They indirectly dictate how government works. How do you think those officials got elected? These corporations "donated" (for lack of a more appropriate word) money to their campaigns and/or PACs (and sometimes Super PACs) to help them get elected. More often than not those elected officials care more about the interests of their benefactors than they do about the interests of their constituents.


your name

@comcast.net

1 recommendation

said by jpatton1979:

said by openbox9:

They don't dictate how government works; your elected officials do.

Don't be so naive.

They indirectly dictate how government works. How do you think those officials got elected? These corporations "donated" (for lack of a more appropriate word) money to their campaigns and/or PACs (and sometimes Super PACs) to help them get elected. More often than not those elected officials care more about the interests of their benefactors than they do about the interests of their constituents.

Ultimately, who steps in to the voting booth? Corporations? Special Interests? No the people do. And the people get what they voted for and get what they deserve.

Kearnstd
Space Elf
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
kudos:1

1 recommendation

reply to openbox9
said by openbox9:

And corporations shouldn't be paying income taxes in the first place.

Why not? They use resources they should pay taxes.

And thanks to Peoples United corporations got the ability to be called people, And people pay income tax.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports


Inefficient

@comcast.net
said by Kearnstd:

said by openbox9:

And corporations shouldn't be paying income taxes in the first place.

Why not? They use resources they should pay taxes.

And thanks to Peoples United corporations got the ability to be called people, And people pay income tax.

Corporations return profits to their stockholders and they pay the taxes. Taxing at 2 different places(the corporation and the individuals who own the corporations) is inefficient. It just creates more jobs in the public sector sucking down taxpayer money. There is no need to tax corporations.

waycoolphil

join:2000-09-22
Cathedral City, CA

1 recommendation

But stockholders only pay capital gains taxes and they are too low so corporate taxes make up for that. I would agree with you if stockholders had to declare stock and bond profits as regular income and pay taxes at that rate.

openbox9
Premium
join:2004-01-26
Germany
kudos:2
reply to Kearnstd
Consumption and use taxes are fine. Income should be taxed where it goes, not the funnel that gets it there.

openbox9
Premium
join:2004-01-26
Germany
kudos:2
reply to waycoolphil
said by waycoolphil:

But stockholders only pay capital gains taxes

Capital gains are irrelevant. Taxing earnings (typically dividends) is what you need to look at. Why should money be taxed going in and out of corporations and then again at the individual level? That's a lot of layers of taxation. Of course, fixing that problem would require gutting the tax code and history has proven that won't happen.
said by waycoolphil:

I would agree with you if stockholders had to declare stock and bond profits as regular income and pay taxes at that rate.

Dividends are taxed more inline with regular income and interest is taxed as ordinary income. I don't mind removing some of the individual tax breaks for dividends in exchange for lowering/eliminating corporate income tax rates.


PlusOne

@google.com
reply to openbox9
said by openbox9:

Consumption and use taxes are fine. Income should be taxed where it goes, not the funnel that gets it there.

So many people can't seem to comprehend that simple fact. Our education system is doing a horrible job educating our children in basic economic concepts. But they do a wonderful job in getting them ready to be cared for their whole lives by the all-powerful, all-giving welfare state.

existenz

join:2014-02-12
kudos:2

1 recommendation

reply to your name
Naivety supreme.

waycoolphil

join:2000-09-22
Cathedral City, CA

1 recommendation

reply to openbox9
Most corporations pay no or little dividends. Investors make a lot more money from capital gains and it's taxed at a much lower rate. Stockholders do not become stockholders to reap the dividends. It's all about the price of the stock isn't it.

openbox9
Premium
join:2004-01-26
Germany
kudos:2
reply to existenz
Ignorance is bliss.

Donut

join:2005-06-27
Romulus, MI
Reviews:
·Sprint Mobile Br..

1 recommendation

reply to Kommie
Sorry to tell you this. But in the business class I took at the local college in legal terms a corporation is an "artificial person". So yeah, technically speaking a corporation is a person in the eyes of the law.
--
Mr. Donut

openbox9
Premium
join:2004-01-26
Germany
kudos:2
reply to waycoolphil
said by waycoolphil:

Most corporations pay no or little dividends.

Then there are no earnings. In that case taxing corporate income only decreases money reinvested into the business. That's even worse than double/triple taxing income with companies that distribute income to owners.
said by waycoolphil:

Investors make a lot more money from capital gains and it's taxed at a much lower rate.

You're confusing capital gains with how much money corporations make.
said by waycoolphil:

Stockholders do not become stockholders to reap the dividends. It's all about the price of the stock isn't it.

Some of my positions are to earn income, some are for growth. So, it depends.


Simba7
I Void Warranties

join:2003-03-24
Billings, MT

1 edit

2 recommendations

reply to your name
Have you been in a cave for the past few decades?

It's the House and the Senate with the most power. Most of them, in turn, take orders from Lobbyists from large corporations. The President is usually just a figurehead.


al_non_

@107.39.30.x
reply to Kommie
THE GOV'T and THIS ADMINISTRATION is FOR this merger.


your name

@google.com
reply to Simba7
said by Simba7:

Have you been in a cave for the past few decades?

It's the House and the Senate with the most power. Most of them, in turn, take orders from Lobbyists from large corporations. The President is usually just a figurehead.

Someone needs to tell the current president who has been ruling by fiat for the last 4 yrs. Illegally, but ruling nevertheless.

waycoolphil

join:2000-09-22
Cathedral City, CA
reply to openbox9
Right. And honestly, what's the ratio?


Simba7
I Void Warranties

join:2003-03-24
Billings, MT
reply to your name
You know, as well as everyone else, that Corporations design and implement the laws. It's sad, but true in every way.

waycoolphil

join:2000-09-22
Cathedral City, CA

1 recommendation

reply to openbox9
Many companies don't pay dividends because they know they can get away with not doing so as long as the stock price is rising. They create cash hordes.

openbox9
Premium
join:2004-01-26
Germany
kudos:2
reply to Simba7
said by Simba7:

implement the laws.

No!


delusion ftl

@comcast.net

4 recommendations

reply to Kommie
I disagree, the root of the issue is that the government didn't pave nor controls the roadways. And by roadways I mean network connectivity. My friends on the right hate me for this but the government should be in charge of running fiber to every home. But I'm not talking the federal government here per say, the feds didn't pave the road going down the windy lane of suburbia, Municipalities, counties, whatever, the same group that hooks up your water service, should run fiber to every home. Then allow private ISP's (comcast can be included if they want), to offer various services, speeds, options at whatever rates they find competitive. The municipality maintains the infrastructure, but UPS, England trucking, taxi services, carpools and such run on top of the infrastructure providing whatever services they can in an equal competitive environment.

As it is now, various companies own the roadways and charge various rates for their customers to drive their cars on it. If a customer wants to use the freeway, that will cost them more. Some companies don't want to widen the roads or keep them in as much repair, so they set limits on how much driving someone can do, I mean we cant let road hogs use up all the space on the roads right? They charge top dollar for average roads and don't really worry because no one else has roads in their area. If it's really bad and the roads are garbage and narrow, and not safe and a municipality wants to run their own roads, they go above them and block it at the government level.

Unlike some of my friends on the right, I do think there is a place for government, and network infrastructure is one of the places that I think government should be, albeit this is probably mostly left for local government to do. If you have the feds do it, it will be a disaster.

openbox9
Premium
join:2004-01-26
Germany
kudos:2
reply to waycoolphil
Ratio of earnings vs. growth for my holdings? Presently I'm sitting at about 80/20, growth vs. earnings.

openbox9
Premium
join:2004-01-26
Germany
kudos:2
reply to waycoolphil
They reinvest the capital to grow the business. "Cash hordes" have been a horrible capital allocation strategy for the last few years. That's why investors pressure those companies to deploy the capital or return it to the shareholders.


firephoto
We the people
Premium
join:2003-03-18
Brewster, WA

1 recommendation

reply to PlusOne
said by PlusOne :

said by openbox9:

Consumption and use taxes are fine. Income should be taxed where it goes, not the funnel that gets it there.

So many people can't seem to comprehend that simple fact. Our education system is doing a horrible job educating our children in basic economic concepts. But they do a wonderful job in getting them ready to be cared for their whole lives by the all-powerful, all-giving welfare state.

That's full bs, you tout economic concepts that are full of bias towards the current system that hordes wealth at the top. All that is taught is artificial markets that allow people with no direct connection to said markets to make money from those markets or manipulate those markets or kill those markets regardless of demand for the product of the market itself. A system originally designed with the goal of stability has been morphed into something with intentional instability for the purpose of creating fake wealth.

If you're teaching children things that are false, or fake, or absolute lies, it's not benefiting those children. Reality is the best thing for everyone but it's also probably the worst thing for those at the top of and who benefit directly from financial markets.
--
Say no to those that ‘inadvertently make false representations’.


firephoto
We the people
Premium
join:2003-03-18
Brewster, WA

1 recommendation

reply to Donut
said by Donut:

Sorry to tell you this. But in the business class I took at the local college in legal terms a corporation is an "artificial person". So yeah, technically speaking a corporation is a person in the eyes of the law.

So if I took a class that said the exact opposite it would obviously be wrong? Business school teaches what is best for business, not what is true or best for a majority of a population.
--
Say no to those that ‘inadvertently make false representations’.