3 ms·

Profit maximization is a basic tenet of capitalism. Verizon serves their shareholders not a country. The alternative is to turn Verizon into a state owned compa

Profit maximization is a basic tenet of capitalism. Verizon serves their shareholders not a country. The alternative is to turn Verizon into a state owned company like Huawei.

house9-2 8y ago
> Verizon serves their shareholders not a country. What about their customers? > Profit maximization is a basic tenet of capitalism. Sure, then lets eliminate tax cuts for 'Profit maximization' based corporations and increase their taxes to help the people of this country. I like the fact I live in a Democratic country, the fact that it runs on capitalism, not so much.
el_benhameen 8y ago
Verizon and others of its ilk have worked hard to convince people that cutting its taxes would help its employees and the country as a whole, not just (or not even!) its shareholders. This was obviously (and now more obviously) bullshit in pursuit of that same profit maximization, but given how they lobbied for it, I think it's entirely fair to criticize them on this basis.
- Tsubasachan 8y ago
  Look the American people have voted for a Republican party who approves of lobbying. Don't get angry when companies actually do it and do it well. And the tax cuts were bullshit and many economists said so but the American people voted for it overwhelmingly. Because Americans always vote for tax cuts. Verizon plays the game by the rules and they won.
  - el_benhameen 8y ago
    Look the American people have voted for a Republican party who approves of lobbying. Don't get angry when companies actually do it and do it well. "The American people" is not a singular voting bloc. Those of us who don't vote for such things are well within our rights to get angry, as are those who did vote for the party but feel betrayed by it. the American people voted for it overwhelmingly. Because Americans always vote for tax cuts. The American people largely disapproved of the tax cut, and that has held steady in the year since its passage [1]. California soundly rejected the repeal of its gas tax. Americans don't always vote for tax cuts. Verizon plays the game by the rules and they won. Then let's change the rules? Defeatism can feel good, but it's unhelpful. [1] https://news.gallup.com/poll/243611/disapprove-approve-2017-tax-cuts.aspx https://news.gallup.com/poll/243611/disapprove-approve-2017-...
    - coolso 8y ago
      >The American people largely disapproved of the tax cut The media spoke negatively - almost to smear campaign levels - about the tax cut from the very beginning. Is it any wonder? >and that has held steady in the year since its passage [1] According to your source, support has increased. It’s still not popular among a majority, but post media smear campaign (mostly) support has gone up from 29% to 39%, and disapproval down from 56% to 46%. That’s pretty big.
      - el_benhameen 8y ago
        Can you clarify what you mean by “smear campaign”? The negative stories I read mostly focused on how the tax cut would increase the defecit and debt (which it did [1]), how companies were likely to use it for stock buybacks versus investment or hiring (which they did [2]), and how the tax cut would disproportionately benefit higher earners (which it did [3]). [1] https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/16/trumps-tax-cut-didnt-reduce-the-deficit--despite-his-many-promises.html https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/16/trumps-tax-cut-didnt-reduce-... [2] https://money.cnn.com/2018/07/10/investing/stock-buybacks-record-tax-cuts/index.html https://money.cnn.com/2018/07/10/investing/stock-buybacks-re... [3] https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publications/effect-tcja-individual-income-tax-provisions-across-income-groups-and-across-states/full https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publications/effect-tcja-ind...
        coolso 8y ago
        > Can you clarify what you mean by “smear campaign”? Yes, nearly every single media outlet spoke negatively about the tax cut while spending very little time speaking positively about it. Take this example, one of many: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/03/30/the-richest-americans-get-a-33000-tax-break-under-the-gop-tax-law-the-poorest-get-40 https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/03/30/the-r... Entitled “The richest Americans get a $33,000 tax break under the GOP tax law. The poorest get $40.” What it fails to mention is the fact that the richest Americans are already paying the brunt of taxes, while the poorest are already barely paying any - as it should be. However, the headline paints a very biased picture. See also the Wiki article on the Tax Act, which speaks to the media “assailing” the Tax Act, and provides examples. See this article http://www.crfb.org/press-releases/house-passes-historic-debt-increase http://www.crfb.org/press-releases/house-passes-historic-deb... Entitled “House Passes Historic Debt Increase”, while it may technically be correct, it’s also misleading and very biased. No mention of the near-$500-$1k a year tax break the average middle class American receives under the Act? Or the increased employment numbers? Regarding complaints of adding to the deficit, note that aside from Fox, most media outlets - that had previously reamed W for his, rightfully so - payed little attention to the fact that Obama increased the deficit almost twice what Obama did. It’s the picking and choosing that bothers me. Border walls and stricter immigration policy was endorsed by Dems until somewhat recently... until Trump endorsed them, now they’re the worst ideas ever. Budget deficits are fine when they’re the result of policies the Dems like... but now they’re horrendous. I agree that the Tax Cut should have included bigger breaks for the lower income brackets, but they absolutely are still getting a break, and unemployment numbers are at record highs.

Profit maximization is a basic tenet of capitalism. Verizon serves their shareholders not a country. The alternative is to turn Verizon into a state owned company like Huawei.

house9-2 8y ago

> Verizon serves their shareholders not a country. What about their customers? > Profit maximization is a basic tenet of capitalism. Sure, then lets eliminate tax cuts for 'Profit maximization' based corporations and increase their taxes to help the people of this country. I like the fact I live in a Democratic country, the fact that it runs on capitalism, not so much.

el_benhameen 8y ago

Verizon and others of its ilk have worked hard to convince people that cutting its taxes would help its employees and the country as a whole, not just (or not even!) its shareholders. This was obviously (and now more obviously) bullshit in pursuit of that same profit maximization, but given how they lobbied for it, I think it's entirely fair to criticize them on this basis.

Tsubasachan 8y ago
Look the American people have voted for a Republican party who approves of lobbying. Don't get angry when companies actually do it and do it well. And the tax cuts were bullshit and many economists said so but the American people voted for it overwhelmingly. Because Americans always vote for tax cuts. Verizon plays the game by the rules and they won.
- el_benhameen 8y ago
  Look the American people have voted for a Republican party who approves of lobbying. Don't get angry when companies actually do it and do it well. "The American people" is not a singular voting bloc. Those of us who don't vote for such things are well within our rights to get angry, as are those who did vote for the party but feel betrayed by it. the American people voted for it overwhelmingly. Because Americans always vote for tax cuts. The American people largely disapproved of the tax cut, and that has held steady in the year since its passage [1]. California soundly rejected the repeal of its gas tax. Americans don't always vote for tax cuts. Verizon plays the game by the rules and they won. Then let's change the rules? Defeatism can feel good, but it's unhelpful. [1] https://news.gallup.com/poll/243611/disapprove-approve-2017-tax-cuts.aspx https://news.gallup.com/poll/243611/disapprove-approve-2017-...
  - coolso 8y ago
    >The American people largely disapproved of the tax cut The media spoke negatively - almost to smear campaign levels - about the tax cut from the very beginning. Is it any wonder? >and that has held steady in the year since its passage [1] According to your source, support has increased. It’s still not popular among a majority, but post media smear campaign (mostly) support has gone up from 29% to 39%, and disapproval down from 56% to 46%. That’s pretty big.
    - el_benhameen 8y ago
      Can you clarify what you mean by “smear campaign”? The negative stories I read mostly focused on how the tax cut would increase the defecit and debt (which it did [1]), how companies were likely to use it for stock buybacks versus investment or hiring (which they did [2]), and how the tax cut would disproportionately benefit higher earners (which it did [3]). [1] https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/16/trumps-tax-cut-didnt-reduce-the-deficit--despite-his-many-promises.html https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/16/trumps-tax-cut-didnt-reduce-... [2] https://money.cnn.com/2018/07/10/investing/stock-buybacks-record-tax-cuts/index.html https://money.cnn.com/2018/07/10/investing/stock-buybacks-re... [3] https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publications/effect-tcja-individual-income-tax-provisions-across-income-groups-and-across-states/full https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/publications/effect-tcja-ind...
      - coolso 8y ago
        > Can you clarify what you mean by “smear campaign”? Yes, nearly every single media outlet spoke negatively about the tax cut while spending very little time speaking positively about it. Take this example, one of many: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/03/30/the-richest-americans-get-a-33000-tax-break-under-the-gop-tax-law-the-poorest-get-40 https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/03/30/the-r... Entitled “The richest Americans get a $33,000 tax break under the GOP tax law. The poorest get $40.” What it fails to mention is the fact that the richest Americans are already paying the brunt of taxes, while the poorest are already barely paying any - as it should be. However, the headline paints a very biased picture. See also the Wiki article on the Tax Act, which speaks to the media “assailing” the Tax Act, and provides examples. See this article http://www.crfb.org/press-releases/house-passes-historic-debt-increase http://www.crfb.org/press-releases/house-passes-historic-deb... Entitled “House Passes Historic Debt Increase”, while it may technically be correct, it’s also misleading and very biased. No mention of the near-$500-$1k a year tax break the average middle class American receives under the Act? Or the increased employment numbers? Regarding complaints of adding to the deficit, note that aside from Fox, most media outlets - that had previously reamed W for his, rightfully so - payed little attention to the fact that Obama increased the deficit almost twice what Obama did. It’s the picking and choosing that bothers me. Border walls and stricter immigration policy was endorsed by Dems until somewhat recently... until Trump endorsed them, now they’re the worst ideas ever. Budget deficits are fine when they’re the result of policies the Dems like... but now they’re horrendous. I agree that the Tax Cut should have included bigger breaks for the lower income brackets, but they absolutely are still getting a break, and unemployment numbers are at record highs.