Why do Republicans hate America?
(Rick Perry makes "W" look like a genius, by the way....Molly Ivins called him "Governor Goodhair")
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/04/15/governor-says-texans-want-secede-union-probably-wont/
Perhaps, those Texans should take a lesson from farmers in India?
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/world-news/1500-farmers-commit-mass-suicide-in-india-14268995.html
His point that the Federal government serves at the pleasure of the states, not the other way around, is spot on. Unfortunately, the fed side forgets that.
Quote from: Wilbur on April 16, 2009, 07:30:13 AM
His point that the Federal government serves at the pleasure of the states, not the other way around, is spot on. Unfortunately, the fed side forgets that.
Actually, wasn't that the lesson of the Civil War? That secession is illegal and no one state -- or group of state -- is more powerful than the union?
He does not hate America. He hates what America is turning into. Seceding is a last resort and probably won't ever happen. The majority of the states are seeking 10th Amendment resolutions to give the feds notice that they must uphold the Constitution of the US. It has already passed in the State Congress in OK. Most of the politicians in Washington DC are law breakers and anyone that supports them is against the Constitution and what it stands for. They are only aloud to make laws for the states that are allowed by the Constitution. I think after 30 or more states formally declare soveriegnty the feds will repeal a lot of laws and setup tests to check bills for their Constitutionality to avoid those states from leaving the union.
Quote from: OpenYourEyesTulsa on April 16, 2009, 08:33:30 AM
He does not hate America. He hates what America is turning into. Seceding is a last resort and probably won't ever happen. The majority of the states are seeking 10th Amendment resolutions to give the feds notice that they must uphold the Constitution of the US. It has already passed in the State Congress in OK. Most of the politicians in Washington DC are law breakers and anyone that supports them is against the Constitution and what it stands for. They are only aloud to make laws for the states that are allowed by the Constitution. I think after 30 or more states formally declare soveriegnty the feds will repeal a lot of laws and setup tests to check bills for their Constitutionality to avoid those states from leaving the union.
It's political grandstanding, pure and simple. If they were so hell-bent against what this country was turning into, why weren't they doing to tea parties and screaming 'secede' in the previous administration?
Because it was a case of scratching backs, I'm guessing.
Thanks for being America's Quebec, Texas. ;D
Ummm. Weren't the last Texas secessionists jailed in the 90s?
Where were Texas Republicans then?
Political desperation breeds strange bedfellows.... I bet Kay Bailey Hutchison beats Perry out due to these shenanigans.
I need a Rick Perry vs. Rod Blagojevich celebrity death match....
No one is screaming secede, they are screaming for lower taxes for citizens and businesses, no more bailouts, securing our borders, defending the Constitution and less Federal bureaucracy.
There were lots of people that were in the "tea party" mindset during the Bush era and I was one of them. I supported 3rd party candidates for President and I was heavily against Bush on issues like the Patriot Act. The bailouts and job losses have caused many Americans to join in the "tea party" mindset. It is not against any one person or party but supports massive reform in Washington DC through unprecidented grass roots efforts.
So, let me get this straight... these "tea-party" folks got no media coverage or only token coverage when former Texas governor Bush was in power...
When everybody making under $250k per year gets a TAX CUT and the tax rate for $250k and higher goes from 35% to 39.5%, this huge so-called "grassroots movement" gets play-by-play coverage by Fox.... 39.5% is still LESS THAN THE TAX RATE FOR THE FIRST SIX YEARS OF RONALD REAGAN....
Guess it's only oppressive government when the Republicans are not in power......
The Republican activist media is at it again.
Quote from: USRufnex on April 16, 2009, 09:54:49 AM
So, let me get this straight... these "tea-party" folks got no media coverage or only token coverage when former Texas governor Bush was in power...
When everybody making under $250k per year gets a TAX CUT and the tax rate for $250k and higher goes from 35% to 39.5%, this huge so-called "grassroots movement" gets play-by-play coverage by Fox.... 39.5% is still LESS THAN THE TAX RATE FOR THE FIRST SIX YEARS OF RONALD REAGAN....
Guess it's only oppressive government when the Republicans are not in power......
The Republican activist media is at it again.
Funny. Fox didn't start this movement, only chose the cover it. Right along with ABC, NBC, CNN (who made a joke of themselves), CBS.......
Maybe Oklahoma should join Texas!
These are plain old citizens not Republicans. The mainstream media has painted it as just being Republicans. These are people that lost their jobs because their company moved to another country because they could not afford the high tax rate on businesses. These are people with kids that don't want to pass an 11 trillion dollar and growing debt to their children. These are people that don't think we should borrow from China to pay bailouts to crooked bankers.
The anti-tax "movement" has been around for years... Fox News chose to manipulate and propagandize it because it serves Rupert Murdoch's interests.... yeah, what a great big crowd in conservative Tulsa...
Fox reporter bored out of his skull at Tulsa tea bag party
http://www.dailykostv.com/w/001170/
Quote from: OpenYourEyesTulsa on April 16, 2009, 09:52:38 AM
No one is screaming secede, they are screaming for lower taxes for citizens and businesses, no more bailouts, securing our borders, defending the Constitution and less Federal bureaucracy.
Um, news flash. Tax rates dropped this year.
As for bailouts, do you want the entire financial system to collapse instead? Because that's what would happen without them. Nobody really likes bailout, but they're the best of a bad situation.
Taxes for businesses are higher here than many countries and need to be cut dramatically. Cutting taxes on individuals does not help as much when you lose your job to someone overseas. This is common sence but people still don't get it.
I think the bankers are corrupt and should be punished and not rewarded with bailouts. Let the banks in trouble file for bankruptcy like any other business. The financial system will collapse anyway because it is based on worthless debt. They need to find a better system without the federal reserve.
Quote from: OpenYourEyesTulsa on April 16, 2009, 10:53:19 AM
Taxes for businesses are higher here than many countries and need to be cut dramatically. Cutting taxes on individuals does not help as much when you lose your job to someone overseas. This is common sence but people still don't get it.
Please enumerate the countries that have lower taxes on corporate income. Or at least list a few examples.
Jobs aren't going overseas because of taxes. They're going overseas in general because of lower labor costs and less stringent environmental regulation. They largely go to China because of their artificially weak currency relative to the dollar.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/36/Income_Taxes_By_Country.svg/800px-Income_Taxes_By_Country.svg.png)
I know that cost of labor is an issue too but a lot of IT jobs are moving to Ireland for the same wage because the business pays much lower taxes.
Quote from: OpenYourEyesTulsa on April 16, 2009, 12:01:15 PM
I know that cost of labor is an issue too but a lot of IT jobs are moving to Ireland for the same wage because the business pays much lower taxes.
Yet oddly, corporate tax receipts in the US are far lower as a percentage of GDP than other OECD states. Things that make you go 'hmm...'
Quote from: OpenYourEyesTulsa on April 16, 2009, 12:01:15 PM
I know that cost of labor is an issue too but a lot of IT jobs are moving to Ireland for the same wage because the business pays much lower taxes.
This is the nominal tax rate, which is meaningless.
From the Treasury Department, page 42. Corporate taxes as a percentage of GDP, basically the effective tax rate.
According to Treasury, the United States has the second lowest effective rate in the Industrialized world, at only 2.2% of GDP.
http://www.treas.gov/press/releases/reports/07230%20r.pdf
Quote from: OpenYourEyesTulsa on April 16, 2009, 10:53:19 AM
Taxes for businesses are higher here than many countries and need to be cut dramatically. Cutting taxes on individuals does not help as much when you lose your job to someone overseas. This is common sence but people still don't get it.
I think the bankers are corrupt and should be punished and not rewarded with bailouts. Let the banks in trouble file for bankruptcy like any other business. The financial system will collapse anyway because it is based on worthless debt. They need to find a better system without the federal reserve.
Fake Teabaggers Are Anti-Spend, Anti-Government: Real Populists Want to Stop Banks from Plundering America
http://www.alternet.org/workplace/136688/fake_teabaggers_are_anti-spend,_anti-government:_real_populists_want_to_stop_banks_from_plundering_america/
"The tea parties are AstroTurf -- fake grassroots. But there is a real movement growing against corporate greed and government malfeasance."
"Last year, the Wall Street Journal exposed FreedomWorks' role in sponsoring AngryRenter.com, a site designed to imitate an amateur blog with a plutocrat's agenda: to shoot down a $300 billion bill meant to help distressed American homeowners. Freedomworks and its clients understood that if the super-wealthy Republicans who opposed the bill were fronting the campaign, it wouldn't fly with regular Americans buckling under the housing crisis, so they set up Angryrenter.com to give the impression that millions of ordinary Americans were the ones opposing it. The bill passed, but AngryRenter.com served as a warm-up exercise for the Tea Party movement."
Quote from: swake on April 16, 2009, 12:16:55 PM
This is the nominal tax rate, which is meaningless.
From the Treasury Department, page 42. Corporate taxes as a percentage of GDP, basically the effective tax rate.
According to Treasury, the United States has the second lowest effective rate in the Industrialized world, at only 2.2% of GDP.
http://www.treas.gov/press/releases/reports/07230%20r.pdf
Calling this meaningless is smallminded but you cannot be convinced. The US has the 2nd highest corporate rate which is 35% and growing vs. Ireland's 12.5%. Will you still believe the tax rates are not high when they ship your job overseas?
http://www.entrepreneur.com/tradejournals/article/177275294.html
http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/22917.html
Why tax businesses at all?
Oh because they pass it on to the consumer, who then believes that they aren't the ones paying the taxes....
I love hidden taxes, we should make them BIGGER!
Quote from: TeeDub on April 16, 2009, 01:18:29 PM
Why tax businesses at all?
Oh because they pass it on to the consumer, who then believes that they aren't the ones paying the taxes....
I love hidden taxes, we should make them BIGGER!
Good luck. My head hurts from trying to bang that one across. Some people are not equipped to get it.
No free business has ever paid a tax in the history of the world. Never!
No free business will ever pay taxes unless the government steps in and sets prices, and at that point said business is doomed to fail or worse, become a government program.
The consumers are the only people who pay taxes. Every time we levy heavy taxes on businesses, we just tax ourselves.
Quote from: Gaspar on April 16, 2009, 01:52:07 PM
Good luck. My head hurts from trying to bang that one across. Some people are not equipped to get it.
No free business has ever paid a tax in the history of the world. Never!
No free business will ever pay taxes unless the government steps in and sets prices, and at that point said business is doomed to fail or worse, become a government program.
The consumers are the only people who pay taxes. Every time we levy heavy taxes on businesses, we just tax ourselves.
Now Gaspar, quit spreading untruths! You wouldn't want people to think you were a dumbass Republican.
(http://files.dmusic.com/music/b/r/brianwar//Jesus-dumbass-Blue_Gargoyle.jpg)
But you are forgetting that corporations are evil and need to be taxed to punish them for proving jobs and making money.
Something like that . . .
Quote from: OpenYourEyesTulsa on April 16, 2009, 01:14:41 PM
Calling this meaningless is smallminded but you cannot be convinced. The US has the 2nd highest corporate rate which is 35% and growing vs. Ireland's 12.5%. Will you still believe the tax rates are not high when they ship your job overseas?
http://www.entrepreneur.com/tradejournals/article/177275294.html
http://www.taxfoundation.org/publications/show/22917.html
Nominal tax rates ARE meaningless. Your personal nominal tax rate could be 100%, but if I then allow you deduct the first billion dollars of earnings your effective rate is 0%.
Unless you are Bill Gates circa 1999.
Quote from: cannon_fodder on April 16, 2009, 02:19:04 PM
But you are forgetting that corporations are evil and need to be taxed to punish them for proving jobs and making money.
Something like that . . .
No they need to be punished because the owners have nice cars and big houses. We have to make em hurt so that the workers that really know how to run the company can take over and drive the nice cars and sit in the leather chairs.
I guess we'll see how that works.
Quote from: USRufnex on April 16, 2009, 09:54:49 AM
The Republican activist media is at it again.
Bwahahahaha
Quote from: USRufnex on April 16, 2009, 09:54:49 AM
So, let me get this straight... these "tea-party" folks got no media coverage or only token coverage when former Texas governor Bush was in power...
When everybody making under $250k per year gets a TAX CUT and the tax rate for $250k and higher goes from 35% to 39.5%, this huge so-called "grassroots movement" gets play-by-play coverage by Fox.... 39.5% is still LESS THAN THE TAX RATE FOR THE FIRST SIX YEARS OF RONALD REAGAN....
Guess it's only oppressive government when the Republicans are not in power......
The Republican activist media is at it again.
Stop, once and for all, that stupid and wholly inaccurate meme that only the "rich" are getting tax increases. Those "have nots" out there, apparently such as yourself, have no clue as to the tax increases on business and certain sectors of our economy which will most certainly be passed down to all of us (rich or not) in the form of higher prices. Again, here are some of the taxes that are coming:
1) On people making more than $250,000.
$338 billion - Bush tax cuts expire
$179 billlion - eliminate itemized deduction
$118 billion - capital gains tax hike
Total: $636 billion/10 years
2) Businesses:
$17 billion - Reinstate Superfund taxes
$24 billion - tax carried-interest as income
$5 billion - codify "economic substance doctrine"
$61 billion - repeal LIFO
$210 billion - international enforcement, reform deferral, other tax reform
$4 billion - information reporting for rental payments
$5.3 billion - excise tax on Gulf of Mexico oil and gas
$3.4 billion - repeal expensing of tangible drilling costs
$62 million - repeal deduction for tertiary injectants
$49 million - repeal passive loss exception for working interests in oil and natural gas properties
$13 billion - repeal manufacturing tax deduction for oil and natural gas companies
$1 billion - increase to 7 years geological and geophysical amortization period for independent producers
$882 million - eliminate advanced earned income tax credit
Total: $353 billion/10 years
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/02/obamas-budget-a.html
Also, I guess you just forgot about the huge tax increase on tobacco that just went into effect as well to fund s-chip, which will hit the have nots hardest since they are the ones doing most of the smoking.
These tea parties are not just about taxes. It's also about out of control spending in the form of bailouts, "stimulus", an estimated more than $1.5 TRILLION deficit this year (almost four times what Bush's deficit ran in his final year), and the omnibus budget that had thousands of earmarks (including at least one from Dear Leader who promised earmark reform). Well, at least we got that all important $1.7 million for pig odor research in Iowa, which in these hard economic times is certainly a priority and a great way to spend my money. Either read up on what is going on or turn off MSNBC if you are going to comment on tax policy or tea parties.
Quote from: guido911 on April 16, 2009, 03:22:44 PM
(almost four times what Bush's deficit ran in his final year)
Does that $458 billion deficit or whatever it is include the supplemental appropriations bills, or is it just the deficit resulting from the "real" budget?
Quote from: Gaspar on April 16, 2009, 01:52:07 PM
No free business has ever paid a tax in the history of the world. Never!
This is completely untrue. Except for companies in regulated industries. Companies (should) price their items for MAX PROFIT (current and future). It takes like $20 to make an IPOD shuffle that they sell for $89.99 if they raise the taxes on them they will probably suck up the extra cost and make a little less. For some reason everybody acts like 1) Cost has no bearing on the qty sold 2) That every company sells everything for cost or has a very low profit margin.
Quote from: OpenYourEyesTulsa on April 16, 2009, 01:14:41 PM
Calling this meaningless is smallminded but you cannot be convinced. The US has the 2nd highest corporate rate which is 35% and growing vs. Ireland's 12.5%. Will you still believe the tax rates are not high when they ship your job overseas?
Are you unable to grasp the concept of deductions? Or that different countries call different things "income?" Or that depreciation is handled differently in different countries? That's why GDP percentage is a far better way of figuring things out than just looking at the top marginal rate.
Quote from: nathanm on April 16, 2009, 03:43:30 PM
Does that $458 billion deficit or whatever it is include the supplemental appropriations bills, or is it just the deficit resulting from the "real" budget?
I thought TARP was $700 billion? Bush was +300 billion when they passed that?
Quote from: Trogdor on April 16, 2009, 03:45:58 PM
I thought TARP was $700 billion? Bush was +300 billion when they passed that?
I was using the first number I could find for the '08 deficit.
TARP went into effect October 3rd, just after the end of fiscal 08.
Quote from: guido911 on April 16, 2009, 03:22:44 PM
Those "have nots" out there, apparently such as yourself, have no clue as to the tax increases on business and certain sectors of our economy which will most certainly be passed down to all of us (rich or not) in the form of higher prices.
That's just silly right there. There's simply no proof that taxes are always and immediately passed on to consumers. There's a whole range of mitigating factors in between the levying of a tax on a business and the business pricing its goods/services.
Quote from: we vs us on April 16, 2009, 04:02:07 PM
That's just silly right there. There's simply no proof that taxes are always and immediately passed on to consumers. There's a whole range of mitigating factors in between the levying of a tax on a business and the business pricing its goods/services.
Let me think, who once said that the cap and trade/energy tax on utility companies would result in skyrocketing energy rates for consumers:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZxnT5tHVIo
Quote from: we vs us on April 16, 2009, 04:02:07 PM
That's just silly right there. There's simply no proof that taxes are always and immediately passed on to consumers. There's a whole range of mitigating factors in between the levying of a tax on a business and the business pricing its goods/services.
Businesses are beholden to the stockholder. You honestly think that I will buy a $10 stock and watch it go to $5 rather than pass through the tax burden onto the consumer? Keep dreaming.
I can see it now, Coke suddenly gets taxed a billion dollars (hypothetically) and they decide rather than raise the prices by $0.25, they will lay off workers and stop paying dividends... Riiiiight.
Quote from: TeeDub on April 16, 2009, 04:34:52 PM
Businesses are beholden to the stockholder. You honestly think that I will buy a $10 stock and watch it go to $5 rather than pass through the tax burden onto the consumer? Keep dreaming.
I can see it now, Coke suddenly gets taxed a billion dollars (hypothetically) and they decide rather than raise the prices by $0.25, they will lay off workers and stop paying dividends... Riiiiight.
I still don't get why nobody understands supply demand and the effect of cost.
Quote from: Trogdor on April 16, 2009, 04:49:54 PM
I still don't get why nobody understands supply demand and the effect of cost.
Supply and demand has nothing remotely to do with corporate taxes nor imbedded taxes paid by consumers as it relates to the discussion at hand. Compliance costs with government regs are also passed along to consumers as essentially another tax.
Quote from: TeeDub on April 16, 2009, 04:34:52 PM
Businesses are beholden to the stockholder. You honestly think that I will buy a $10 stock and watch it go to $5 rather than pass through the tax burden onto the consumer? Keep dreaming.
I can see it now, Coke suddenly gets taxed a billion dollars (hypothetically) and they decide rather than raise the prices by $0.25, they will lay off workers and stop paying dividends... Riiiiight.
Do you think we're anywhere near -- no really, anywhere NEAR -- the kind of tax structure that would either leave Coke with a billion dollar liability or to drive your stock that strongly into the dirt? Quick answer: no, we're not anywhere close to that. And before you got all slippery-slope on me, no, there's very little chance that we could see something like that in our lifetime. Let me put it another way: if we see tax rates like that, dollars to donuts our problems aren't with the tax rates.
Quote from: Conan71 on April 16, 2009, 04:55:19 PM
Supply and demand has nothing remotely to do with corporate taxes nor imbedded taxes paid by consumers as it relates to the discussion at hand. Compliance costs with government regs are also passed along to consumers as essentially another tax.
Let's move our tax code back to where it was in the early 1960's!
Bring on new tax shelters(The treasury should have figured out a way for individuals to write off over several years monies forwarded to fund the bailout).
Quote from: Conan71 on April 16, 2009, 04:55:19 PM
Supply and demand has nothing remotely to do with corporate taxes nor imbedded taxes paid by consumers as it relates to the discussion at hand. Compliance costs with government regs are also passed along to consumers as essentially another tax.
Instead of supply and demand I should have just said demand. Coke will meet the demand and vary their plants accordingly. Everybody acts like if taxes go up you just raise your price. Like they aren't charging what they believe to be their optimal pricing point in the first place.
Answering for Gov. Rick Perry-he is not anti-american-and not narrow in his view. If his script is read or videos viewed this is evident. He does not promote Texas' seceding from the USA, but rather voices what the non-partisans across the nation are saying about taxastion. There is extreme bias in feelings expressed with only a few getting press. Unfair coverage is a problem we, as a nation, face. Don't let others think for you but examine the facts. Thanks for listening.
Nadine Bell {Proud Texan}
Quote from: nadine on April 16, 2009, 05:54:51 PM
Answering for Gov. Rick Perry-he is not anti-american-and not narrow in his view. If his script is read or videos viewed this is evident. He does not promote Texas' seceding from the USA, but rather voices what the non-partisans across the nation are saying about taxastion. There is extreme bias in feelings expressed with only a few getting press. Unfair coverage is a problem we, as a nation, face. Don't let others think for you but examine the facts. Thanks for listening.
Nadine Bell {Proud Texan}
I commend those with the same sentiments the past X years in the United States. What I do question is why it requires a President of a different party in power to say anything about it. The tea bagging should have begun when Bush and his appointees announced the TARP plan.
Okay, I read all this crap filling the last three pages AND the remarks made by Governor Ludicrous Perry from Texas or (I'm not as dumb as that Alaska chick Perry).
My summary (no use re arguing all the points). Nathan, WeVus, Swake, FOTD and Trogdor make perfect sense. Especially the part about products being priced irregardless of the taxes levied. Prices for some products are so sensitive that to retain market share a producer will indeed either eat the tax to keep that price point or reduce the cost in some other way. First they'll lobby to congress to be exempt however. Perry made a stupid faux pas or at least a Freudian slip and you folks (Nadine...get a grip) let him pass with it. Can you imagine Obama having made such remarks and you guys giving him a pass? The rest of you move to Texas, secede and start your own drug cartels where taxes are indeed meaningless. Enjoy your freedom there and hope to make friends with your new southern border pals who want their state back.
Quote from: Trogdor on April 16, 2009, 03:44:19 PM
This is completely untrue. Except for companies in regulated industries. Companies (should) price their items for MAX PROFIT (current and future). It takes like $20 to make an IPOD shuffle that they sell for $89.99 if they raise the taxes on them they will probably suck up the extra cost and make a little less. For some reason everybody acts like 1) Cost has no bearing on the qty sold 2) That every company sells everything for cost or has a very low profit margin.
Taxes are built into price. When developing a proforma for a product or business, you apply your multiplier after you've added your cost for goods and services (tax included), insurance, and overhead, and after your add your payroll and disbursements (tax included). So each time one of those factors is adjusted, you simply adjust your profit multiplier to cover it and maintain your margin.
Sure some businesses with multiple distribution points and multiple product lines will shift profit models, but ultimately any increase in taxes passes to the consumer.
Quoteif they raise the taxes on them they will probably suck up the extra cost and make a little less.
No! Successful businesses will ever compromise their business model to "suck up". The additional cost is shifted somewhere, and that somewhere is always in the form of consumer cost, service, warranty, or product quality.
Thanks for playing.
Quote from: waterboy on April 16, 2009, 06:32:50 PM
Okay, I read all this crap filling the last three pages AND the remarks made by Governor Ludicrous Perry from Texas or (I'm not as dumb as that Alaska chick Perry).
My summary (no use re arguing all the points). Nathan, WeVus, Swake, FOTD and Trogdor make perfect sense. Especially the part about products being priced irregardless of the taxes levied. Prices for some products are so sensitive that to retain market share a producer will indeed either eat the tax to keep that price point or reduce the cost in some other way. First they'll lobby to congress to be exempt however. Perry made a stupid faux pas or at least a Freudian slip and you folks (Nadine...get a grip) let him pass with it. Can you imagine Obama having made such remarks and you guys giving him a pass? The rest of you move to Texas, secede and start your own drug cartels where taxes are indeed meaningless. Enjoy your freedom there and hope to make friends with your new southern border pals who want their state back.
Hardly a Freudian slip. Add our own state to the list.
http://www.ktul.com/news/stories/0409/613607.html
Quote from: Gaspar on April 17, 2009, 06:13:19 AM
Taxes are built into price. When developing a proforma for a product or business, you apply your multiplier after you've added your cost for goods and services (tax included), insurance, and overhead, and after your add your payroll and disbursements (tax included). So each time one of those factors is adjusted, you simply adjust your profit multiplier to cover it and maintain your margin.
Sure some businesses with multiple distribution points and multiple product lines will shift profit models, but ultimately any increase in taxes passes to the consumer.
No! Successful businesses will ever compromise their business model to "suck up". The additional cost is shifted somewhere, and that somewhere is always in the form of consumer cost, service, warranty, or product quality.
Thanks for playing.
Most public businesses DON'T track performance by net profit. Most track performance (and drive share prices) based on EBITDA.
EBITDA is Earnings Before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization
That is BEFORE TAXES.
Since income taxes are charged on net income long after the EBITDA equation (and only after Interest, Depreciation and Amortization) net after tax income rarely if ever is a retail price driver.
Swake,
You're actually arguing that when taxes are raised companies just go "damn, guess we won't make any money this year" and eat the loss?
I've set prices for businesses. I can tell you very directly that when setting a price you take (fixed costs) + (variable costs) + desired profit = price setting. Insurance rates (both fixed and variable since some are based on sales), labor, margin for error, fuel, maintenance and repair, and certainly taxes (ad valorum, unemployment, payroll taxes, tolls, property taxes, and corporate income tax) is all added in to the equation.
When a cost of doing business goes up we had to assess if we could pass it on to the customer. Generally, we could pass the cost on IF the cost was universal to the industry. When fuel prices went up dramatically, EVERYONE raised their fuel surcharge - so we could do so without fear of a negative market consequence. When the labor contract initiated an across the board raise, it affected most of the industry and we could raise prices. When we initiated a non-union benefits package it only effected our company, we had to eat that cost or risk alienating customers.
Taxes are an across the board increase. When everyone's expenses go up the market forces more easily allow for price increases. It would be doubtful that the company would simply eat the extra cost. Perhaps find ways to cut in other places and try to keep the price level. But in general, such a scenario is ripe for upping the price.
I'm guess the phrase "crap, the government is taking more of our money so I guess we just don't make as much" is generally not heard in board rooms.
- - -
And while you are accurate in your understanding of EBITDA, the distributions to owners come from the bottom of the line. If all the money is out the window for interest expense and taxes, there is none to distribute. And few owners really give a damn if their company looks profitable if there is no money to distribute. Money on paper < money in my pocket. The conversion rate never seems to be 1:1.
At least, that's my humble opinion.
Gas, not all businesses behave in the same way. Pricing is subject to a myriad of components but not tax rates. What is important is profitability before tax. You set your price and profit projections separate from taxes because they are subject to many different deductions, exemptions, deferrals etc. The taxes are collected and passed through but have no effect on pricing strategies.
I can charge more for a Coke in NYC than I can in OKC even if the tax rates are similar.
Quote from: waterboy on April 16, 2009, 06:32:50 PM
Okay, I read all this crap filling the last three pages AND the remarks made by Governor Ludicrous Perry from Texas or (I'm not as dumb as that Alaska chick Perry).
Are you claiming that Gov. Perry referred to Gov. Palin as a dumb Alaska chick or are you trying to be clever. If so, let's not foget that dumbass in the white house right now, you know, the guy that's visited 57 states and bowls as well as Special Olympians.
The point is that taxes are only one factor among many that affect pricing. They may or may not be passed on to the customer. The right has fetishized tax rates to the point that many people believe them to be the PRIME factor in pricing and that's simply not true.
(fixed costs) + (variable costs) + desired profit = price setting
you can set your price all you want, you still have to multiply by quantity which is where the profit really comes in. You can desire all the profit you want but if you sell 0 you make 0.
Quote from: guido911 on April 17, 2009, 08:38:43 AM
Are you claiming that Gov. Perry referred to Gov. Palin as a dumb Alaska chick or are you trying to be clever. If so, let's not foget that dumbass in the white house right now, you know, the guy that's visited 57 states and bowls as well as Special Olympians.
Looks like the Freeper's dander is up today.
If being clever, then why is the GOP distancing themselves as far away from Gov. 'I have foreign affairs experience because you can see Russia from Alaska' Palin?
The Republicans remind me of the Democrats eight, or even four years ago. In disarray with no clear-cut direction. And with Michael 'I knew what I was doing when I criticized Boss Limbaugh' Steele in charge, they may be in for two election cycles worth of this.
Look, I don't dislike the Republicans. I thought Reagan was a good president for the most part. The problem now is that the Neo-Conservatives and Right-Wing talking heads are now trying to be the voice of the party, when it's obvious that they are actually in the fringe. I guess the louder you talk, the better your message gets across. At least to them.
A moderate is going to need to step up and be the face of the party. If the Republicans continue to let people like Rush and Gov. Palin put that face on, they'll be going nowhere in the elections anytime soon.
Quote from: Trogdor on April 17, 2009, 08:58:22 AM
(fixed costs) + (variable costs) + desired profit = price setting
you can set your price all you want, you still have to multiply by quantity which is where the profit really comes in. You can desire all the profit you want but if you sell 0 you make 0.
Ummm. True. I was only talking about how you price a product. I'm not pricing a single unit price to satisfy my profit desire. Generally it is a rate setting, I need to set a 15% margin if I hope to actually turn a profit.
I guess I assumed people had in mind the inverse relationship between price and demand. Which is where my discussion on cost increases across the board in an industry come in. I really don't want to do a 3 page write up on basic market theory.
Quote from: cannon_fodder on April 17, 2009, 09:19:33 AM
Ummm. True. I was only talking about how you price a product. I'm not pricing a single unit price to satisfy my profit desire. Generally it is a rate setting, I need to set a 15% margin if I hope to actually turn a profit.
I guess I assumed people had in mind the inverse relationship between price and demand. Which is where my discussion on cost increases across the board in an industry come in. I really don't want to do a 3 page write up on basic market theory.
No nobody does, that was the point I was trying to make. If you get charged an extra $5 in taxes just raise your prices $5 you will sell exactly as many and the consumer pays the $5. That is what everybody has been saying. Go ahead and write the 3 pages up and save it for a later posting.
Quote from: cannon_fodder on April 17, 2009, 08:25:46 AM
Swake,
You're actually arguing that when taxes are raised companies just go "damn, guess we won't make any money this year" and eat the loss?
I've set prices for businesses. I can tell you very directly that when setting a price you take (fixed costs) + (variable costs) + desired profit = price setting. Insurance rates (both fixed and variable since some are based on sales), labor, margin for error, fuel, maintenance and repair, and certainly taxes (ad valorum, unemployment, payroll taxes, tolls, property taxes, and corporate income tax) is all added in to the equation.
When a cost of doing business goes up we had to assess if we could pass it on to the customer. Generally, we could pass the cost on IF the cost was universal to the industry. When fuel prices went up dramatically, EVERYONE raised their fuel surcharge - so we could do so without fear of a negative market consequence. When the labor contract initiated an across the board raise, it affected most of the industry and we could raise prices. When we initiated a non-union benefits package it only effected our company, we had to eat that cost or risk alienating customers.
Taxes are an across the board increase. When everyone's expenses go up the market forces more easily allow for price increases. It would be doubtful that the company would simply eat the extra cost. Perhaps find ways to cut in other places and try to keep the price level. But in general, such a scenario is ripe for upping the price.
I'm guess the phrase "crap, the government is taking more of our money so I guess we just don't make as much" is generally not heard in board rooms.
- - -
And while you are accurate in your understanding of EBITDA, the distributions to owners come from the bottom of the line. If all the money is out the window for interest expense and taxes, there is none to distribute. And few owners really give a damn if their company looks profitable if there is no money to distribute. Money on paper < money in my pocket. The conversion rate never seems to be 1:1.
At least, that's my humble opinion.
No,
I'm arguing that corporate income taxes are such a game that they are not a factor to companies' real bottom lines. There are so many loopholes and deductions that few large companies pay any amount of real money due to taxes on net income.
But, since those same companies want to "look" profitable to Wall Street (because they are) and still not pay much if any taxes EBITDA is the way they show profitability before they play accounting games to avoid taxes.
Earnings before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization, it's the Interest,, Depreciation and Amortization that companies use to avoid taxes so effectively. This most of the gap between Nominal tax rates and Effective rates.
The real unfairness is that small businesses often don't have the resources (and lobbyists) to be able to take advantage of the tax code and end up paying much more in taxes, especially sole proprietorships, and end up paying much closer to the nominal tax rates than large businesses do.
And for those that say businesses should not pay any taxes, fine, but if they aren't going to pay taxes, they should give up all tax credits and government assistance at the same time. I would guess that business, especially large business and farmers, pay in far less than they get out of the government.
Quote from: swake on April 17, 2009, 09:36:24 AM
No,
I'm arguing that corporate income taxes are such a game that they are not a factor to companies' real bottom lines. There are so many loopholes and deductions that few large companies pay any amount of real money due to taxes on net income.
But, since those same companies want to "look" profitable to Wall Street (because they are) and still not pay much if any taxes EBITDA is the way they show profitability before they play accounting games to avoid taxes.
Earnings before Interest, Taxes, Depreciation and Amortization, it's the Interest,, Depreciation and Amortization that companies use to avoid taxes so effectively. This most of the gap between Nominal tax rates and Effective rates.
The real unfairness is that small businesses often don't have the resources (and lobbyists) to be able to take advantage of the tax code and end up paying much more in taxes, especially sole proprietorships, and end up paying much closer to the nominal tax rates than large businesses do.
And for those that say businesses should not pay any taxes, fine, but if they aren't going to pay taxes, they should give up all tax credits and government assistance at the same time. I would guess that business, especially large business and farmers, pay in far less than they get out of the government.
If corporate taxes really don't play any role to a businesses bottom line, then why do so many move out of the country and claim lower taxes?
And, I'm good with no tax credits and government assistance. Much of the point at the Tea Parties.
Quote from: waterboy on April 17, 2009, 08:31:00 AM
Gas, not all businesses behave in the same way. Pricing is subject to a myriad of components but not tax rates. What is important is profitability before tax. You set your price and profit projections separate from taxes because they are subject to many different deductions, exemptions, deferrals etc. The taxes are collected and passed through but have no effect on pricing strategies.
I can charge more for a Coke in NYC than I can in OKC even if the tax rates are similar.
See, I told you it makes my head hurt.
Yes their are a "myriad of factors."
Yes their are many ways of manipulating price structure.
But at the end of the day, if you increase the cost of doing business, you increase the price of the product. That increase may come in the form of a higher price, less service, cheaper manufacturing, restricted availability or distribution, reduced labor force (layoffs), slower development, or increased prices on ancillary products or accessories.
Ultimately the consumer pays. Sorry, but that's the way economics works.
Does anyone else's head hurt?
I misunderstood your point Trogdor. Sorry if it seemed like I jumped on you. Here's a drawingto make it up to you:
(http://www.burrillstrong.com/wordpress/photos/trogdor.png)
Swake: I agree more when put that way. However, I still resolutely stand by the fact that taxes on corporations are a bit of a joke. No matter how you slice it the money for that tax comes from consumers and is withheld from investment in the company, hiring of new workers, acquisition of new capital, or distribution to owners. At the end of the day, people pay the tax.
I hate the entire tax system so incredibly much!
Quote from: cannon_fodder on April 17, 2009, 10:16:09 AM
Does anyone else's head hurt?
I misunderstood your point Trogdor. Sorry if it seemed like I jumped on you. Here's a drawingto make it up to you:
(http://www.burrillstrong.com/wordpress/photos/trogdor.png)
Swake: I agree more when put that way. However, I still resolutely stand by the fact that taxes on corporations are a bit of a joke. No matter how you slice it the money for that tax comes from consumers and is withheld from investment in the company, hiring of new workers, acquisition of new capital, or distribution to owners. At the end of the day, people pay the tax.
I hate the entire tax system so incredibly much!
No , I wasn't thinking you were jumping on me. This is like the third thread that everybody assumes that volume has nothing to do with profit. I am not even trying to make a statement that this will net the government money or lose the government money. It just isn't as simple as raising prices because your costs go up.
Quote from: Wilbur on April 17, 2009, 10:13:43 AM
If corporate taxes really don't play any role to a businesses bottom line, then why do so many move out of the country and claim lower taxes?
And, I'm good with no tax credits and government assistance. Much of the point at the Tea Parties.
Who has moved out of the country?
You are confused with moving jobs overseas and moving companies. Labor costs in the US are out of sight. Due in no small part to Medical Costs that government picks up in most other countries.
Quote from: swake on April 17, 2009, 10:46:40 AM
Who has moved out of the country?
You are confused with moving jobs overseas and moving companies. Labor costs in the US are out of sight. Due in no small part to Medical Costs that government picks up in most other countries.
Halliburton moving their corp. HQ to Dubai is one that comes to mind.
Quote from: swake on April 17, 2009, 10:46:40 AM
Who has moved out of the country?
You are confused with moving jobs overseas and moving companies. Labor costs in the US are out of sight. Due in no small part to Medical Costs that government picks up in most other countries.
".... medical costs that government picks up in most other countries." You talk as if government medical costs are somehow free to the taxpayer. Just who is it that pays for that medical costs?
Quote from: Wilbur on April 17, 2009, 11:17:14 AM
".... medical costs that government picks up in most other countries." You talk as if government medical costs are somehow free to the taxpayer. Just who is it that pays for that medical costs?
Where did I say healthcare was free to the taxpayer?
It's a difference in the cost of doing business from a labor cost standpoint vs other countries. no matter who you think should pay for it our current system is an employer/employee payer system and thus hits our cost of labor in a negative way.
And as for Haliburton, they are still a US company based in Houston and the CEO's moving to Dubai might just might have more to do with the lack of an extradition treaty with Dubai than anything else.
Quote from: swake on April 17, 2009, 12:14:06 PM
And as for Haliburton, they are still a US company based in Houston and the CEO's moving to Dubai might just might have more to do with the lack of an extradition treaty with Dubai than anything else.
Come on now Swake, that's a little tinfoil hattish, don't you think?
Quote from: Conan71 on April 17, 2009, 12:27:16 PM
Come on now Swake, that's a little tinfoil hattish, don't you think?
Oh, I dunno. At the very least the political climate has changed for the worse for them here in the States. Aside from losing some preferential business relationships, they got a boatload of bad PR over the last 8 years (don't ask little ole liberal me; ask the GIs returning from Iraq). I wouldn't be surprised if they're looking for a new start in another corner of the world.
Talk of Seceding is an incitement to rebellion pure and simple. It's called sedition and it creates a sense of permission to commit acts of violence against the Federal Government officials and employees. This kind of irresponsible talk leads to tragedies like Waco, Ruby Ridge and the OKC Federal Building Bombing.
Texas' governor should be arrested.
Republicans apparently didn't get the wake up call to move back towards the center. All they have left are the religious nuts and the radical fringe of what was many years ago a Grand Old Party.
Quote from: Hometown on April 17, 2009, 01:02:40 PM
Talk of Seceding is an incitement to rebellion pure and simple. It's called sedition and it creates a sense of permission to commit acts of violence against the Federal Government officials and employees. This kind of irresponsible talk leads to tragedies like Waco, Ruby Ridge and the OKC Federal Building Bombing.
Texas' governor should be arrested.
Republicans apparently didn't get the wake up call to move back towards the center. All they have left are the religious nuts and the radical fringe of what was many years ago a Grand Old Party.
You'll need to add the Oklahoma legislature to that list of arrestees.
http://www.ktul.com/news/stories/0409/613607.html
Quote from: Wilbur on April 17, 2009, 01:16:35 PM
You'll need to add the Oklahoma legislature to that list of arrestees.
http://www.ktul.com/news/stories/0409/613607.html
To be fair, that's not really talk of secession.
Quote from: Gaspar on April 17, 2009, 10:15:04 AM
See, I told you it makes my head hurt.
Yes their are a "myriad of factors."
Yes their are many ways of manipulating price structure.
But at the end of the day, if you increase the cost of doing business, you increase the price of the product. That increase may come in the form of a higher price, less service, cheaper manufacturing, restricted availability or distribution, reduced labor force (layoffs), slower development, or increased prices on ancillary products or accessories.
Ultimately the consumer pays. Sorry, but that's the way economics works.
I'm sorry that you're sorry. But you are wrong. A sales tax is passed right through. It is collected by the business and sent along to the govt. So, you can retain your dignity by claiming that an increase in taxes is merely paid by the consumer. However, when it comes to taxes that are levied anywhere else in the process, there is simply no way you can argue that consumers pay all tax increases. Otherwise just get rid of efficiency experts, marketing research, focus groups, coupons, rebates, sales etc. and just price your product where your company makes the amount of money it needs to keep its executives well paid and its labor force working.
Raise the corporate level to 75% and prices will not be much affected for large corporations. They will accumulate a MYRIAD of ways to keep from paying that tax rate. They did in the 60's and they'll do it now. They will lobby, defer, deduct and deceive in order to lower their effective tax outlay. Any one of them that instead relies on passing those costs to the consumer or resorting to your list of draconian "golden age" solutions will not last long in the market place.
Your headach is the result of inhaling your own gas fumes. ;)
Quote from: we vs us on April 17, 2009, 01:38:13 PM
To be fair, that's not really talk of secession.
No its simply an exercise in using public dollars to do political posturing rather than facing real threats to prosperity and the Union. I guess the flag desecration laws are passe' now. There are lots of other good reasons to arrest those boobs.
Quote from: waterboy on April 17, 2009, 01:48:45 PM
...and just price your product where your company makes the amount of money it needs to keep its executives well paid and its labor force working.
That is exactly what businesses do.
Cox raised it rates last month by about $7 on cable and $7 on internet? Why? Yup, to satisfy the demands of shareholders.
Banks are upping the percentage rates on your credit cards? Why? To make more money for shareholders.
Ultimately the company is beholden to the shareholder to turn a profit... Any extra expense must be offset somewhere, and once the you have cut all the fat (effeciency expert, etc) then it comes time to raise prices.
Quote from: waterboy on April 17, 2009, 01:54:41 PM
No its simply an exercise in using public dollars to do political posturing rather than facing real threats to prosperity and the Union.
That's pretty much what earmarks are as well that people are sick of...
Quote from: Conan71 on April 16, 2009, 02:15:00 PM
Now Gaspar, quit spreading untruths! You wouldn't want people to think you were a dumbass Republican.
(http://files.dmusic.com/music/b/r/brianwar//Jesus-dumbass-Blue_Gargoyle.jpg)
Quote from: cannon_fodder on April 16, 2009, 02:19:04 PM
But you are forgetting that corporations are evil and need to be taxed to punish them for proving jobs and making money.
Something like that . . .
Nope, CF. Never said that. Never will. Strangely enough, these days I think we have a consensus of dems and repubs alike who believe corporations need to be punished for NOT providing jobs and NOT making money, rather than simply being bailed out because they're "too big to fail."
Who once said, "The trouble with capitalism is capitalists. They're too greedy" ?
I'll give you a hint. It wasn't Obama or Clinton or FDR.
Here's one for ya, Conan... only a week removed from Easter.... from Senator Franken...
Al Franken's SUPPLY SIDE JESUS: An animated comic strip.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AK7gI5lMB7M
YOU DA MAN RUF!
Quote from: Conan71 on April 17, 2009, 12:27:16 PM
Come on now Swake, that's a little tinfoil hattish, don't you think?
Is it?
This is a company with going on a billion dollars in federal fines in the last few years that now has a much more hostile White House and AGs office to deal with.
Halliburton has been proven to be a very dirty company, and that was while Bush/Cheney were IN the White House. What's going to be found now? They currently have the KBR/Nigeria thing going on as detailed below, a Justice Department probe into dealings with Iran and an FBI probe into overcharging in for work in Iraq. And those are just the big ones. The former CEO of the Halliburton subsidiary KBR pled guilty to federal bribery charges just a few months ago in the Nigeria scandal. Who's to say at this point that investigation will end with him?
http://www.businessdayonline.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=3386%3Abreaking-news-uk-arrest-in-halliburton-bribe-case&Itemid=298
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/26/AR2009012602374.html
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Politics/Story?id=2943017&page=2
It doesn't take a tinfoil hat to think that any one of these investigations might end up with charges to Halliburton execs.
Quote from: TeeDub on April 17, 2009, 02:03:25 PM
That is exactly what businesses do.
Cox raised it rates last month by about $7 on cable and $7 on internet? Why? Yup, to satisfy the demands of shareholders.
Banks are upping the percentage rates on your credit cards? Why? To make more money for shareholders.
Ultimately the company is beholden to the shareholder to turn a profit... Any extra expense must be offset somewhere, and once the you have cut all the fat (effeciency expert, etc) then it comes time to raise prices.
Bad example. First there is little competition. Secondly their raises were not because of increased taxes or costs thrust upon them by government and lastly, they know just how much the public will pay before they switch to satellite. That's why they offer specials to lure old customers back. Apparently since that market place is dominated by a few players they can increase rates to satisfy greedy execs and shareholders. You actually proved my point.
Quote from: FOTD on April 17, 2009, 02:23:16 PM
YOU DA MAN RUF!
Well, I have pulled ahead of you in the bad karma department.... I think it's all part of a vast right wing conspiracy... ;D
(http://www.internetweekly.org/images/monster_theater.jpg)
Kinda ironic that later this year when the Obama administration attempts to tackle health care reform, HRC won't be there.... she'll be answering the phone at 3am, dodging sniper fire....
Looks like Texas will bring a pretty penny at auction.
Pre-secession ebay sale! No serious offers will be refused! (http://cgi.ebay.com/The-Great-State-of-Texas_W0QQitemZ170322454911QQcmdZViewItemQQptZLand?hash=item170322454911&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=72%3A1205%7C66%3A2%7C65%3A12%7C39%3A1%7C240%3A1318%7C301%3A1%7C293%3A1%7C294%3A50)
This is really good! Enjoy!
HE'S BACK!
Rachel Maddow - ballistic on Texas Gov. Perry's burning stupid & huge hypocrisy
And then there's this: Christian right aims to change history lessons in Texas schools
State's education board to consider adding Christianity's role in American history to curriculum
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jul/22/christianity-religion-texas-history-education
Christians are fascists, always have been, always will be. Keep their filth out of our governments!!
The sooner Texas secedes, the better.
I love what one of the Texas guys said on Maddow last night. "Texas is like Mississippi with better roads".
We become a border state if they secede and get money to secure that border. Let 'em go. Mexico will take care of them.
Quote from: waterboy on July 25, 2009, 04:18:06 PM
I love what one of the Texas guys said on Maddow last night. "Texas is like Mississippi with better roads".
We become a border state if they secede and get money to secure that border. Let 'em go. Mexico will take care of them.
LIving there for three years (Houston), I concur...
I'll betcha, Texas won't be the only one to refuse Obama Care. In fact, Oklahoma will probably be second.
AMEN!
When not one Senator or Representative will put language in the bill to mandate they and everyone in the White House use the same system they are trying to force on the rest of us, should SCREAM volumes.
So, you think we should bolt the Union because of a health plan? You think the current plan is worth fighting for? Worth seceding for? I sure don't.
Do you think this is JUST about the health care plan? Everything this admin. is trying to do is a corruption of our constitution. Obama admits it. The constitution gets in the way of his massive, communistic, redistribution of wealth agenda. Besides, rejecting Obama care isn't seceding. I really don't think Texas will go that far, but I hope Oklahoma and many other states will join Texas in rejecting this and all the rest of his attacks on America. We missed the boat on that stupid, over bloated, stimulus package. No more over spending. I thought Bush was bad. This nut takes the cake.
http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=79225 (http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=79225)
Quote from: Crash Daily on July 26, 2009, 11:01:38 PM
Do you think this is JUST about the health care plan? Everything this admin. is trying to do is a corruption of our constitution. Obama admits it. The constitution gets in the way of his massive, communistic, redistribution of wealth agenda. Besides, rejecting Obama care isn't seceding. I really don't think Texas will go that far, but I hope Oklahoma and many other states will join Texas in rejecting this and all the rest of his attacks on America. We missed the boat on that stupid, over bloated, stimulus package. No more over spending. I thought Bush was bad. This nut takes the cake.
http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=79225 (http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=79225)
Worldnet? Really?
(http://static.flickr.com/10/14726345_7ef421c568_m.jpg)
Quote from: waterboy on July 25, 2009, 05:41:59 PM
So, you think we should bolt the Union because of a health plan? You think the current plan is worth fighting for? Worth seceding for? I sure don't.
Seceding is a little extreme. I haven't heard that term being used. It's talk of simply rejecting Obama Care, just as Texas rejected TARP money.
Quote from: Wilbur on July 27, 2009, 06:02:58 AM
...just as Texas rejected TARP ARRA money.
And then, turned around and asked the federal government for more than the amount Gov. Perry initially rejected. So, are we expecting that Texas will soon embrace it?
Wilbur, just what would that accomplish? Other than to reinforce stereotypes of the two states that already exist. It doesn't serve the public. It would put us at a disadvantage versus surrounding states. The existing health system, (a stupid, overbloated, nutty, corrupt, massive, elitist, concentrated wealth producing system...thanks for the adjectives Crash) would continue to creak and groan in our two states while the rest of the country has their health system move up to match the rest of the world.