Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Staff Contacts | Affiliates | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Casperson bill would boost state’s economy

July 3, 2013

A bill recently introduced by state Sen. Tom Casperson makes sense for Michigan and the Upper Peninsula....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(102)

Cheesehead

Jul-03-13 11:42 PM

Since, arming the public is a popular cry today, and many,

especially republicans,

want to profit from every known and unknown scam,

aka business enterprise, concocted by 'free-enterprise' wonks,

and....

since there a many groups who wish to arm themselves with ped's....

my question for tom and his republicans in michigan government is:

would the manufacture of PED's be included under our representatives auspices?

Pressure cookers come to mind as well, since they can easily be converted from domestic uses to tools of destruction, limited only by a consumers imagination....

just saying...

2 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Vauche

Jul-07-13 10:28 AM

I like just about any "scam" that has the potential to bring jobs to the area!

You know the scam they call a job. More folks that work the more folks who can spend money! How about lower tax burden, that's a great scam too! Then there's less children in poverty, more money to the schools, all benefits of the more people employed scam.

Cheeze, pressure cookers? Really? Next you'll be banning gasoline and fertilizers as they're much easier to turn into an explosive than a pressure cooker.

Funny I heard no questions about the brewery coming to Esky. Beer can kill too you know. Maybe we shouldn't have that either.

Typical liberal progressive fear mongering. Find the extreme and argue it's main stream.

2 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rednawt1

Jul-17-13 4:50 PM

I am a liberal and I am all for Casperson's bill if it brings jobs. I won't be buying any of those guns, but people will and we might just as well make them here. All I am concerned about would be the tax abatements. The companies are just looking to skirt paying taxes. Yes, more jobs means more income taxes collected. The question would be is if it is a break even for the state or a burden for the state. I hope they build a factory right next door to the new brewery.

1 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Vauche

Jul-18-13 5:30 PM

A tax abatement for a business creating jobs is never a burden on the state that I can think of.

In other words as long as the business is employing people who then pay income tax, the state coffers win. True not as much if there was no abatement but then there might not be a business or new jobs. That is a lose-lose.

1 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Whizzywhig

Jul-19-13 10:14 AM

Your view of ‘jobs’ is typically myopic and when it comes to tax abatement schemes.

Of course, the rich republicans, democrats, and their corporations are all for TAX ABATEMENT.

There has never been a tax plan they ever liked.

There has never been a tax abatement plan they ever hated.

Even narrow minded myopic visionaries must most certainly realize, there is a limited amount of revenue sources,

and when the biggest potential revenue sources lobbies for laws absolving them in the payment of taxes,

those taxes or revenues must be made up by someone else, if government is to proceed with its current policies.

Who, you two myopic wonders, is forced to make up this “shortfall” ?

You two immature boy’s should realize this ?

BUT, your writing indicates you're ignorant to this premise.

3 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Whizzywhig

Jul-19-13 10:18 AM

BTW,

personal income taxes, when compared to taxes that should be paid by the rich and their corporations, is a silly little drop in the bucket when comparing the two.

So saying, personal income taxes paid by a few jobs,

is the equivalent in terms of potential taxes the rich and their corporations should pay,

is most decidedly sophomoronic at best !

3 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Cheesehead

Jul-20-13 10:44 AM

The world according to shallow thinking:

So saith the vaunted vuche:

“A tax abatement for a business creating jobs is never a burden on the state that I can think of.”

Vuche, if that’s the limit of your thinking as quoted by words above,

you have not devoted ANY reasoning or thought nor given a millisecond to the idea of tax abatement, its ramifications and intended and un-intended consequences.

Perhaps, if you were a teacher, you’d really have to think and ‘discover’ the reality of your pronouncement ?

Just saying, and a little comment about your disingenuous, misleading thinking.

3 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Vauche

Jul-22-13 7:31 AM

I can honestly say I would rather have a company here with a tax abatement that hires people than no company at all and no new jobs.

For the less enlightened posters. Currently the state isn't getting taxes from any arms manufacturing company. Why? They aren't located in Michigan. If they move and get a 100% tax abatement what's changed? What in terms on money has the state lost? NOTHING!

Now, said company moves in and hires people. Wether it is 10 or 1000 the state still picks up extra tax revenue wether it's from income tax or sales taxes paid as these newly employed have money to spend. Further it might just be the case that some of these new hires where either on unemployment or welfare in which case the state save more.

2 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Vauche

Jul-22-13 7:54 AM

Who's a myopic thinker? You can't get past the rich, republican is to blame for everything. You live in a fantasy world and desparately want the world to work the way you think it should. I speak in terms of reality not necessarily how I would view the perfect world.

The basics are, a thriving economy pulls in revenue for local and state governments. Thriving economies equal more businesses some large some small. As an economy thrives and communities grow it becomes less necessary for tax abatements to get companies to move to your location.

And certainly a couple 100 jobs aren't going to equal taxes that a company would have paid but they do increase the tax roles and further decrease expenditures via welfare and unemployment.

You don't understand real ecomonics so can't fathom any solution other than the rich and corporations paying more taxes.

2 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Vauche

Jul-22-13 8:08 AM

Cheese, now that you and whiz have that warm fuzzy feeling and are laughing hysterically after your whimsical and clever attacks on my intelligence please explain how a tax abatement that potentially brings in jobs burdens the state.

Perhaps if I was a teacher our children wouldn't be so dang dumb when they enter the job market as to how the world of economics functions. Perhaps they wouldn't be under the false impression that everyone in this world should only have their interests in mind. Perhaps they would be ready to face the reality of this world and not some fictitious universe you and your ilk have created for them where they can do no wrong and are owed everything just for breathing.

3 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Cheesehead

Jul-22-13 9:46 AM

Tax abatement schemes are mechanisms,

the rich, (not the poor voouche) republicans and democrats and their corporations have put in place to

BLACK MAIL narrow-minded, myopic thinkers (?), politicians and government types,

into acquiescing to their demands that use “jobs” as their point of leverage in the whole scheme of economic black-mail.

If every business got a tax break,

the burden of tax revenue is merely shifted from one economic source to another.

The "pie in the sky" idea would have you believe more jobs are created by tax abatments,

when in reality, no new jobs are created….

Jobs are merely dislocated, or moved from one area to another, causing economic, social and other forms of havoc for the losing city, state, or country.

It’s that simple like a pimple / wart for those unwilling to look beyond their local environs, not at all unlike you.

Soooo much p.o.o.

from your pie-hole, and you "pie-in-the-sky" economics.

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Cheesehead

Jul-22-13 9:56 AM

Vouoche,

Think.

Think.

THINK

(if you can)!

Without blinking an eye THINK.

THINK, as though the economy is like a piece of pie,

and only holds so much pie filling,

and likewise, the economy has only so many dollars for taxation from all of its sources…

When the rich republicans and democrats, and their corporations are accorded tax breaks,

THINK, where will the money come from to operate economic, social, governmental, educational and the many infrastructures that are supported by tax dollars.

Clearly, the money won’t be coming from the rich republicans, democrats or their businesses and corporations, since they have had their way with our elected officials.

Why should anyone “focus” on these people and their corporations,

obviously, that is where the action emanates,

and these entities receive favored legislation that perpetuates widening class and economic gaps.

4 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

BravesRock

Jul-22-13 12:04 PM

Cheese Whiz, First of all, most tax abatements result in only a portion of taxes being abated, for a limited period of time. And what is abated is new revenue that the taxing entities are not receiving, so no existing revenue is lost. Finally, most if not all tax abatements require that the jobs created be new, not relocated, jobs, so that tax abatements do not simply become a tool for companies to use in moving from one community to another. Can abatements be mis-used? Yes, just like any other program, there are those who game the system (just like they do with welfare, etc.). But in general they are a tool that local governments use to aid in economic development, and the long-term gain is worth forgoing the revenue in the short term.

1 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Vauche

Jul-22-13 1:09 PM

Nice post Brave! Finally someone gets it. (even though I clicked the disagree accidentally, I can't change it, crap).

Not all business in a community will get tax abatements cheese. A lot depends on what the company can provide for the community. The more a company can provide via employment or other revenues, like those secondary business the more likely abatements may be.

It's barganing really. If I have close to 100% employment in the community I may not feel it's necessary to offer these kind of incentives to corporations. In todays economy states don't have that luxury. People want/need jobs. Are you going to be the one to tell them they can't have them because the company wants a tax incentive to move in and you said no way you schemeing republican? You think the guy/gal wanting to feed his family cares?

1 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Whizzywhig

Jul-22-13 2:59 PM

Once more you immature minded vuche and BR:

The ‘system’ is set-up and built to be ‘gamed’

by the rich republicans, democrats, and their businesses guided by guile, deceit, fraud and schemes,

all to corner the market and make a buck,

their god, first foremost, of course for ‘our investor’s’.

Google:

themoderatevoice banks-commodities-manipulation-profits

Puke….

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Whizzywhig

Jul-22-13 3:01 PM

It has been estimated by various industry executives and financial analysts

that the manipulation of the aluminum market by Goldman and other financial companies

Google:

themoderatevoice banks-commodities-manipulation-profits

has added more than $5 billion to the cost of common items for the American consumer in the last three years.

This includes 90 billion aluminum cans sold annually in the United States, automobiles, house siding, electronics, and so forth.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Whizzywhig

Jul-22-13 3:03 PM

A New York Times lead article on Sunday, July 21,

revealed how the big investment banks

have been making huge sums of money

manipulating various commodity markets and hurting the economy by raising the prices of many common items (****goo.gl/CGgfO).

The article focused on the way Goldman Sachs has stockpiled huge stores of aluminum in warehouses they own in Detroit,

moving it among their other warehouses to

“exploit pricing regulations set up by an overseas commodities exchange”

in which Goldman had an ownership interest until last year.

Google:

themoderatevoice banks-commodities-manipulation-profits

Puke….

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Whizzywhig

Jul-22-13 3:05 PM

Give us a break, kid's !

Both, you ‘boy’s’ know full well, what is ‘supposed’ to happen, and what happens actually are two different stories.

The ‘system’ is built to be ‘gamed’

by the rich republicans, democrats, and their businesses of guile, deceit, fraud and schemes,

all to make a buck, their god, first and foremost, and of course for ‘our investor’s’.

Puke….

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Whizzywhig

Jul-22-13 3:20 PM

Banks have no business being in these businesses.

It is high time that the the Federal Reserve,

the S.E.C.

and other federal regulatory agencies, step up to the plate to stop these activities and get the bankers back to boring business of banking.

If they don’t act, then Congress should further tighten regulations on the banks.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Whizzywhig

Jul-22-13 3:22 PM

Since the repeal of the Glass-Stegall Act in 1999

and

Congressional relaxations of other financial regulations that limited the risks banks could take,

these institutions have entered into different commercial activities

that are far removed from their original purpose.

In addition to buying and trading in the commodities themselves,

banks have been buying “physical commodity trading assets,”

including ports, pipelines, warehouses, and ships.

This has been approved by federal regulatory agencies such as the Federal Reserve.

However, by controlling these assets,

the banks obtain proprietary information regarding the status of the different commodities that allows them to make their trades more profitable.

Though insider trading is not considered against the rules in the commodities market,

there is an obvious conflict of interest that has not been addressed by the federal regulatory agencies.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Whizzywhig

Jul-22-13 3:23 PM

Big investment banks are making major profits

by manipulation and speculation in the commodities markets

at the peril and expense of the American consumer and the economy.

Banks have no business being in these businesses.

It is up to the Federal Reserve, the S.E.C. and other federal regulatory agencies to stop these activities

and get the bankers back to boring business of banking.

If they don’t act, then Congress should further tighten regulations on the banks.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Whizzywhig

Jul-22-13 3:28 PM

For more reasons to add fuel to the fire for your unlimited narrowmindedness and countering your nonsense:

add the following from the same article mentioned below:

Prior to Goldman purchasing one of the nation’s largest stores and storage facilities of aluminum that had the warehouses in Detroit,

the average time for stored aluminum to be delivered to the factories that used the metal WAS

SIX WEEKS.

Since Goldman took over, the wait has increased to

OVER

SIXTEEN MONTHS.

Prices for the metal rise the longer it is stored, as storage time is figured into the cost.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Vauche

Jul-22-13 3:46 PM

Well Whiz, besides the fact that the article you put up has nothing to do with the topic of this comment thread (tax incentives) it is a very good article.

Nobody here claims the current system is perfect and cheats and scoundrels don't exist. I'll argue extra layers of government aren't the answer though nor is taxing, taxing the rich or corporations.

Further you notice the article doesn't mention corporations only banks. I have very little sympathy for banks outside of actual banking activities.

1 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Cheesehead

Jul-22-13 4:40 PM

Vauche,

It’s time for you to cry ‘uncle’, because some of us continually are having to belabor the obvious,

think of the whole arena as the woods or forest or for the simple minded “a pie”.

Banks, incidentally tend to be corporations,

Of course you knew that all along, and are trying to pull wizzy's leg !

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Cheesehead

Jul-22-13 4:47 PM

Vauche,

in case you missed the underlying theme,

banks too are just another business or corporation that benefit their corporation and their owners

from thousands of pages of tax code, entitling them to tax breaks, tax incentives or

whatever the rich call their current legalized rip-off scheme !

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 102 comments Show More Comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web