Actually, this is one of the few things Trump has done that I support. Why shouldnât the Ukrainians pay back the billions of dollars in aid theyâve received from American taxpayers if they are able?
And while weâre at it. Why are American taxpayers being required to fund Israelâs War in Gaza. Israel is a wealthy country today. Let them fund their own genocidal campaigns in Gaza, and leave the American taxpayer out of it.
I think Trump is on to something with his idea of an 8% per year cut in military spending over four years. I hope itâs 8% with annual compounding. That would have a very beneficial, macroeconomic affect on the deficit and National Debt.
intercst
Because the practice you are supporting is corrupt.
Ukraine and Israel donât get money from us. Our military contractors get the money.
You are for double dipping under duress.
Then apply the same rationale to the wealthy who want federal funds for any reason. If they refuse to DIY, then the govt (and thus the public) gets a piece of the action.
Alternatively, what would the SMiC do when Russia is all around because âdoing nothingâ is what the SMiC does all the time.
I have often thought that those who profit from public dollars should in some way recompense the public treasury for their good fortune.
Google, for instance, came partly from grants from the CIA and NSA in coding and beyond. Tesla has profited mightily from corporate subsidies. The entire pharma industry takes government money, relies on government testing protocols, and makes zillions from selling pills which enables them to give lavish bonuses to executives.
There are thousands more examples, everything from jet engines developed on the public dime to farm subsidies (including ethanol) and more. Imagine if the public purse got a fraction of the value-added that the public purse engendered. Heck, the âinternetâ alone would put billions, perhaps trillions back into the public coffers.
I do not know how this would be accomplished, as it is such an airy thought Iâm sure it will never happen. I do have an example or two: in the early days of cassette recorders the music industry got all up in arms that people would be âtapingâ their music off the radio, or off friendsâ record collections, and convinced Congress to put a tax on blank cassette tapes, the proceeds of which would go to musicians to recompense for the âtheftâ of their work. You still pay that today, even if you buy a cassette tape to record a university lecture or to dictate your own thoughts at night in your den. That tax still goes to the music industry, even though it may not have anything to do with music. Thatâs âgrossâ, but a reasonable way for an interruptive technology to pay for the sins of its users, even with the obvious contradiction of paying when no music is involved.
There are similar use taxes: think the gas tax which helps pay for road maintenance and construction. Everybody pays the same, even the heavy SUV and the tiny SmartCar, one of which does vastly more damage than the other. It never perfectly balances out, as the SmartCar uses less gas and pays less, but itâs not âperfectâ either.
How to make industries âpayâ for the many gifts of public monies? I donât know. Iâd be willing to entertain suggestions, though.
Itâs called âThe Corporate Income Taxâ. If a company benefits* $1M worth, they pay XX% of $1M. If a company benefits* $1B worth, they pay XX% of $1B, or 1000 times as much as the first company above.
* The definition of âBenefitâ here is âthe sum total of benefit derived from a stable country, a growing country, a country that does sufficient basic research, a country that properly uses its tax money for the general benefit, etcâ
Now, every penny that every company has coming in each year comes from its customers, one could argue that any corporate income tax is essentially being paid by those customers. And that is true, but may not have much meaning in this particular discussion because those customers ARE THE ONES benefiting from the above (stable country, proper allocation of tax money, etc).
In true USian fashion, the âJCsâ tell the governments that shower goodies on them âtax the Prolesâ, hence the âjob creatorâ narrative, that makes the tax burden shift from corporations to Proles politically acceptable.
Steve
Make it a loan, but to require a cut of their minerals for life? That is crazy.
Again make it a loan but to take part of a country? That is crazy.
The Ukraine war is a proxy war. If it were not the Ukrainians dying it would be US and NATO soldiers dying. Either now or in the foreseeable future. It may still come to that. Appeasement of Russia will only encourage future aggression. A modest trade agreement with Ukraine might be appropriate, but taking/demanding a huge amount for throwing a life preserver to a drowning man is immoral.
Theyâre both getting a benefit on the backs of US taxpayers. Of course, thereâs a requirement that they buy US weapons. Would you prefer they use the US cash to buy from Russia or North Korea?
intercsr
USian âJCsâ in action. The entire US drug industry operates on the principle of âyour money or your lifeâ. Remember the âpharma broâ?
Steve
{{ Zelenskyy offers to resign in exchange for peace, NATO membership, and better terms on Trump minerals deal. }}
See, weâre now negotiating â The Art of the Deal. {{ LOL }}
intercst
I saw that, and read it as âIâll be happy to leave my seat if we get NATO membership and protection. He knows that otherwise Russia will eliminate Ukraine. The whole world knows that, but Trump says itâll bring peace.
But that has nothing to do with whether or not their funding originated with government. You are taxing the same whether you took it from your own pocket or got grants from the NSA to perfect your work before running jit for private gain.
And not that it matters, but it appears the corporate income tax is a pretty feckless instrument these days anyway:
Yes, please ask me to resign. He looks so tired. Understandably. Script has gone all wrong on this show.
IP
It doesnât matter is a pretty good argument in this case. Thatâs because even if company A specifically benefited from government funds, if it thrives because of it, it buys lots of stuff from company B, C, and D, and then those companies have higher profits. So the profits from A, B, C, and D are taxed ⌠all due to the fact that government made a good choice up front by helping A thrive. The idea of good government is to help the country as a whole thrive, and when growth happens, and profits happen, thatâs the result.
Tesla paid zero federal income tax in 2024, and its federal tax rate over the past three years has been 0.4%.In 2022, Tesla paid zero federal income tax. In 2023, Tesla paid $48 million in taxes on $3.1 billion in income.
When you invest $20-25B over 15 years and not earn anything net, once you do start earning, the investment gets slowly written off until an actual profit is declared ⌠and taxed. Thatâs how our system works. If it didnât work that way, it would be quite hard to find anyone willing to invest if gross profit were taxed from dollar one! Also, there are years with higher expenses and years with lower expenses, resulting in varying amounts of profit.
When the US funds foreign military spending our production costs get spread out and come down per unit of production. There are economies of scale.
Incompetence is destroying that. Putin loves it.
The foreign militaries buy from us in return and our costs still go lower per unit. Were was had beenâŚbut incompetence is the rule of the day.