12 U.S. MULTINATIONAL CORPORATIONS PAY NO TAXES, GET BILLIONS IN REFUNDS.

[J.R.]

All of the American taxpayers who just dutifully paid all their taxes might be just a little offended by the fact that 12 U.S. registered corporations that have off-shored some or all of their operations to other countries are not only not paying taxes into the U.S. Treasury, they are also getting tax refunds---courtesy of actual U.S. taxpayers---from the U.S. government. So, what geniuses in the "service" of our spendthrift government hatched up this free ride and, what would seem to be in conflict with the U.S. Tax Code, subsidizing of corporations who shipped their operations overseas, while leaving American workers out in the cold?

Whoever they were, they should be tarred and feathered and run out of the country on a slow boat to China..., which is where General Electric just off-shored all of their operations, and are now creating employment for Chinese workers. Frankly, folks, this is the ultimate example of "spreading the wealth." Whose wealth are they spreading? Yours, mine, and American workers' who lost their jobs to the ultimate in greed and protectionism for the favored wealthy elites who finance campaigns of candidates who will keep the gravy trail open and unimpeded for them.

If you think I'm being cynical, read the below article and see if it doesn't make you feel shocked, cheated and angry. Apparently, this is what our country's deficit spending is financing, in order to grease the wheels for maintenance of just the right power and control structure in this country... for the elites who aspire to becoming this country's new nobility.

It gives you that "we've all been duped" feeling, now that we learn that all the bread and circuses over the budget, was just that... bread and circuses. Nothing was cut. And the deficit spending continues unrestrained.

I've included the entire article below, with a link to its source, where you can read more about how "taxes are not designed to raise money for the government," to which there was a link in the article.

"Incredible Shrinking Government Cuts

April 18, 2011

The devil is in the details, and as the much ballyhooed budget deal reached by House Weeper John Boehner and President Barack Obama is dissected, an evil, despicable lie is revealed: Those “amazing” promised cuts are non-existent.

A report from the Congressional Budget Office indicates the $38 billion Congress supposedly cut from the budget in a deal reached April 8 after days of brinkmanship isn’t really $38 billion. It’s actually less than one-tenth of that: $352 million.

Not that $38 billion was a cut in the first place. It paled in comparison to the paltry $100 billion promised by Republicans trolling for votes last November, which paled next to a $1.5 trillion budget and a so-called $15 trillion debt.

Weeper Boehner and Congressional Republicans (outside of those with the surname Paul) have no intention of cutting government in any significant way. They can’t even cut it back to the previously unbelievable Bush-era numbers. They only favor cutting when shilling for your vote.

The elected elites work for government and, left to their own devices and unburdened from fear of being kicked out of office, they have no intention of cutting. What they do want to do, however, is to raise taxes.

Obama wants to raise taxes on the “rich.” To Obama, the rich is anyone drawing a paycheck. And some in Congress are talking about a Federal tax on Internet transactions.

In other words, the American middle class is the turnip and government is ready to give them another squeeze.

But we don’t have a revenue problem in America. We have a spending problem. And we have only two members of Congress who really understand that. Ron Paul and Rand Paul.

Oh, there are some Congressional Republicans—those elected under the Tea Party banner—who voted against the deal. But I doubt they really understand the depth of the spending problem.

After all, none of them are advocating cutting military spending, which consumed almost $1 trillion in 2009, according to economist Robert Higgs as quoted in Thomas E. Wood Jr.’s book, Rollback.

We also have a tax problem, but not the one that some of the elites would have you believe. Those that are advocating a tax increase on individuals want you to think the problem is that the rich aren’t taxed enough and if we just took some of their earnings, everything would be fine.

But if all the taxable income of everyone earning more than $100,000 was taxed at 100 percent, the earnings would not cover the spending in Obama’s budget plan.

The top 12 multinational corporations? Now that’s another story. But no one is talking about taxing them, despite the fact that they don’t pay taxes and, in some cases, get tax refunds in the billions.

According to a report on Alternet.org, General Electric has paid no taxes since 2006 despite earning $26 billion since then. In fact, in 2006 GE received a tax refund of $4.1 billion. Last year, Bank of America made $4.4 billion and received a refund of $1.9 billion. Other tax avoiders include Verizon, ExxonMobil, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Valero, Boeing, FedEx, Carnival Cruise Lines, Citi and Goldman Sachs.

These companies used a tax haven given to corporations that do business overseas—but not available to companies doing business solely in the United States—to reduce their tax liability. How did this happen? They spent billions of dollars lobbying the elected elites to gouge out loopholes in the tax laws.

In fact, according to the Alternet.org report, 83 of the 100 largest publicly traded U.S. corporations use these tax havens to reduce their tax liability. So not only is Congress encouraging corporations to move their jobs overseas, it is penalizing companies that choose to remain in the U.S. to do business. And penalizing American workers.

And we wonder why our jobs are going overseas?

But I’ve told you before that taxes are not designed to raise revenue for the government. Income taxes have three purposes: To control and redistribute the volume of money, to direct the behavior of people and corporations and to keep a dossier on all citizens.

“But what about the debt?” you might ask. To which I would reply, “What debt?”

There is none. If the Federal government can print money to infinity, how can there be debt? That word is doublespeak designed to keep you enslaved to the elites and moneychangers.

Think about it. If you had a machine that could crank out legal tender in whatever amount needed to pay off your debts, would you have any debt? Of course not.

And neither does the U.S. government. It is the biggest Ponzi scheme in the history of the world. Yet it’s Bernie Madoff who sits in jail.

So if you’ve put off filing you income tax until today, as you seal that envelope and put it into the mailbox, remember this: The devil is in the details.

And of course, Satan is the father of lies."

http://www.personalliberty.com/conservative-politics/incredible-shr...

[J.R.]

WSJ: US to Sell GM Stake at $11 Billion Loss

"The government plans to sell most of its remaining stake in General Motors in the coming months and lose $11 billion in the process, The Wall Street Journal reports.

With taxpayer money, the government rescued General Motors for $50 billion in 2009

To get that money back, the U.S. Treasury will need to sell its remaining stake of around 500 million shares at $53 apiece.

GM is currently trading around $30, even dipping below that figure, on the New York Stock Exchange, below its $33-a-share November initial public offering..."

Read more:

http://www.moneynews.com/StreetTalk/WSJUStoSellGMStakeat11BillionLoss/2011/04/21/id/393608?s=al&promo_code=C200-1

[J.R.]

We're halfway through the fourth month of 2011, and we are just now seeing 2009 statistics for the export of American jobs to foreign countries, which, by the way, results in the export of money from the U.S. economy and into the economies of those foreign countries. In other words, it's another redistribution of wealth, with redistribution of jobs at the same time.

In addition to that, the lagging statistics we've only now been given are only for the first year of the Obama administration.  The off-shoring of American corporations and jobs continued throughout 2010 and into 2011, including the off-shoring of General Electric's operations to China in 2011, leaving a large trail of unemployed American workers behind. 

Yet, these multi-national corporations that have off-shored all or part of their operations, pay little or no taxes into the U.S. Treasury, and twelve of them pay no taxes and get billions in refunds from the U.S. Treasury.  Exactly how does THAT work??  How can a corporation get a "refund" when they paid nothing into the Treasury in the first place??

Surely, almost two thirds of the way through 2011, we should already have received statistics for 2010, so we can see how those losses of American jobs figure into the accumulated total of unemployment figures.  Of course, we know monthly unemployment figures are an exercise in deliberate deception, since they count jobs "saved" (how they figure these, we don't know) and don't count those who are still unemployed and have run out of unemployment benefits payments, the total of which are limited by law to a defined period of time, extensions of time notwithstanding due to the fact they are also temporary.

Meanwhile, our President is---without any bill having passed both the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate and being signed into law by him to do so---giving ca. 2 1/2 BILLION DOLLARS to the foreign country of Colombia in South America to build an oil refinery.  Obama has no constitutional authority to dole out American taxpayers' money without a money bill authorizing it being introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives, approved by the U.S. Senate, and signed into law by him.  He doesn't get to skip over that process and use the U.S. Treasury as his political piggy bank to dole out money to foreign dictatorships.  One can't help but wonder how much of the taxpayers' money he spreads of his own volition finds its way back to him, the Democrat Party, or organizations and businesses that support him and his unconstitutional overreach that is bankrupting this country and tearing up our Constitution piece by piece.

Here are some excerpts from the article and a link to the entire source article:  

"U.S. Multinationals Increase Overseas Hiring"

"U.S. multinational corporations, the big brand-name companies that employ a fifth of all American workers, have been hiring abroad while cutting back at home, sharpening the debate over globalization's effect on the U.S. economy, reports the Wall Street Journal.

The companies cut their work forces in the United States by 2.9 million during the 2000s while increasing employment overseas by 2.4 million, new data from the U.S. Commerce Department show.

That's a big switch from the 1990s, when they added jobs everywhere: 4.4 million in the U.S. and 2.7 million abroad.

 
In all, U.S. multinationals employed 21.1 million people at home in 2009 and 10.3 million elsewhere, including increasing numbers of higher-skilled foreign workers.

 
The trend highlights the growing importance of other economies, particularly in rapidly growing Asia, to big U.S. businesses such as General Electric Co., Caterpillar Inc., Microsoft Corp. and Wal-Mart Stores Inc.

The data also underscore the vulnerability of the U.S. economy, particularly at a time when unemployment is high and wages aren't rising. Jobs at multinationals tend to pay above-average wages and, for decades, sustained the American middle class..."

http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=20562&utm_sour...

[tamara stephenson]

Amen J.R.!

[J.R.]

Steve, ProPublica is an awesome website. I only had time to scan some of it, but there are a lot of serious investigations going on that appear to paint a lot of these financial institutions as corrupt, with some undergoing criminal investigations. If criminal behaviors are proven, Bernie Madoff could have some company soon. Many are the banks/financial institutions that benefitted from the bailouts, while posing as victims---when they were really the villains. No wonder our country has gone to economic hell in a handbasket, when you can't even trust banks and financial institutions that have been entrusted with our money to act in good faith. Instead, they were manipulating, conspiring, and cheating us themselves. Surely, under these circumstances, their guarantees and liability policies won't be valid to cover all the financial losses to their depositors and investors. All of their assets should be frozen or seized until all investigations and litigations are final. Goldman Sachs has been one of the worst and their cunning officials should be the ones to be frog-walked out the door in handcuffs first.

[J.R.]

Tamara, I also prefer the elected officials who have the courage to step up and make the tough decisions.  Unfortunately, there are too few of them, as Speaker John Boehner and his approved deal proved to us last week.  And, of course the administration had inside advance notice of Standard & Poor's planned down-grade and Geithner was doing his assigned job of getting out there fast and putting out fires before the flames started getting fanned beyond the reach of their politican machine's control.

The good old boy establishment politicians and gameplayers have done their share in contributing to the current financial fiasco, too, right along with the administration.  They could have made a choice to do some actual cutting in the budget, but they are so steeped in their one best way mentality of doing things and caught up in political games, they neglect to do the serious job and make the hard decisions we the people expect and are entitled to have them make for us. They work for us, after all, and are supposed to represent our voice in our government. Those establishment politicians are the ones we need to find and back serious, well-qualified candidates to run against and defeat on Nov. 6, 2012.

[tamara stephenson]

I love that "Tyler Durden" listens in on the S&P conference call and liveblogs it to everyone.  According to him, Geitner made the rounds on Sunday b/c the WH knew the S&P was going to downgrade us today.  I fear that while the electorate (sans the wealthiest 2%) are willing to sacrifice in every way, including spending cuts to entitlements and paying his/her fair share, the politicians are too scared to vote for it for fear of losing his/her job.  Whoever is willing to tell the truth and make the tough calls gets my vote.

[J.R.]

Floor Speech - Debts and Deficits

by Senator Mark Kirk

"The Federal Debt and Deficit Problem"

Friday, Mar 18

Video

http://www.kirk.senate.gov/?p=blog&id=100

:

[J.R.]

Below is an e-mail I received today from U.S. Senator Mark Kirk.  There are graphs available at www.kirk.senate.gov showing the 10 Year Bond Yield in each of the three countries described below:  Ireland, Canada, and the United States

 

"We Have Been Warned"

S&P Today: “if an agreement is not reached and meaningful implementation is not begun by then (2013), this would in our view render the U.S. fiscal profile meaningfully weaker than that of peer ‘AAA’ sovereigns.”

 

"Dear Friend:

S&P just announced a negative outlook for the future of U.S. debt – a warning that if we do not stop spending, a crisis could come.

The rate of U.S. spending and debt is unsustainable -- our economy is on a dangerous course. We are borrowing $4 billion a day and will pay our creditors over $200 billion just in interest payments this year.

In times of crisis, we face a choice: 1) raise taxes and provide government bailouts, or 2) cut spending and enact pro-growth policies. I strongly support cutting spending.

 

The Case of Ireland

If we do not change course, we face the fate of many European debtors. Take the case of Ireland. During the economic downturn, Ireland guaranteed the debts of its banks – essentially a bailout. Ireland increased spending and borrowing while its tax revenues shrunk. In response, Moody’s cut Ireland’s debt rating.

The price of Ireland’s bad government was paid by the people of Ireland

Lenders charged the Irish taxpayer more and more for the privilege of spending other people’s money.

The Case of Canada

Compare this to Canada. When faced with the same dilemma, Canada cut spending during its 1990s economic crisis. After Moody’s downgraded Canada’s foreign debt rating in 1994, the Canadian government cut 20% of federal spending. Because Canadian leaders waited until after their debt situation reached a crisis, they had to eliminate 40,000 public sector jobs.

Canada’s tough choices lowered borrowing costs and strengthened the country as the government sought pro-growth solutions. In fact, Canada came out of the recent financial crisis healthier than most other countries – lenders charged less and less, with new confidence that Canada had its act together.

The Case of the United States

We now face similar choices. To protect you and your income, I think we should follow Canada’s fiscally responsible path and avoid the drop in incomes suffered by the Irish people. If the government makes hard choices now, you will be protected from hard choices later.

In Ireland, the government said ‘yes’ to everyone and ‘no’ to its economic future. In Canada, the government learned that restraint and responsibility led to a very bright future.

With today’s report from S&P, we Americans have been warned.

Thank you for your continued interest in these important issues. As always, please feel free to contact me at [phone] or online at www.kirk.senate.gov if you have any questions or comments, or should issues of concern to you come before the Congress.

It is an honor to serve you in the U.S. Senate.

Very truly yours,

Mark Kirk

U.S. Senate

[J.R.]

Here are two articles in today's financial news. You can read the complete articles by using the links provided below:

DeMint Threatens Filibuster on Raising Debt Ceiling

"Republican Sen. Jim DeMint is threatening to block a vote in Congress on raising the U.S. debt ceiling unless he wins a balanced-budget amendment to the Constitution, according to Fox News. The filibuster threat comes a day after news that GOP leaders had offered private assurances to the White House that they ultimately would vote to raise the $14.3 trillion ceiling, regardless of whether a deal is reached on long-term spending cuts.

"I will oppose any attempt to vote to raise the limit on our $14 trillion debt until Congress passes the balanced-budget amendment," the South Carolina conservative said. He first made the remarks to McClatchy, which his office confirmed to Fox News.

All GOP senators already have signed onto a balanced-budget amendment proposal, reviving a push from the mid-'90s -- when the House approved such an amendment, and the Senate fell one vote short of doing the same..."
http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/jim-demint-gop-filibuster/2011/0...________________________________________________________________________

DeMint Threatens Filibuster on Debt Ceiling Vote 

Throwing down the gauntlet, Republican Sen. Jim DeMint threatened Monday to block a vote in Congress on raising the U.S. debt ceiling unless he wins a balanced-budget amendment to the Constitution.

The filibuster threat comes a day after Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner suggested Republican leaders had offered private assurances to the White House that they ultimately would vote to raise the $14.3 trillion ceiling, regardless of whether a deal is reached on long-term spending cuts.

Publicly, Republicans say they will demand spending cuts as a condition for supporting a hike in the debt ceiling. They stood by that claim following Geithner's comments, and DeMint took their demands a step further.

"I will oppose any attempt to vote to raise the limit on our $14 trillion debt until Congress passes the balanced-budget amendment," the South Carolina conservative said. He first made the remarks to McClatchy, which his office confirmed to Fox News..."

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/04/18/sen-demint-threatens-fil...

[J.R.]

Steve, if you're referring to Zero Hedge's report that Goldman Sachs' use of flash trading, through their access to flash order information to gain unfair profits was corrupt and that they were attempting to bring about a purifying market crash to eliminate big banks and free market capitalism, why don't you explain this concept and let us know whether Goldman Sachs' actions succeeded in helping or hurting the economy. Is this what we need to know, but don't want to know?  Just asking...