macmarcus

chasm said:

I think the point Elian was trying to make is that this tax cut — which the rest of you are correct in saying will be good for corporations and possibly good in the short term for the US in terms of some investment like what Apple is making — is almost entirely paid for on credit (ie funded by increasing the deficit, ie your kids are paying for it). The bill added/will add at least $1.5 trillion to the already-massive deficit. That is not a political viewpoint; it is a statement of fact. I haven’t finished doing the math yet, but my premiliminary figures suggest that Apple would actually save a few billion long-term if they just carried on they way they have for the past few years; borrowing to pay US costs and investing its foreign profits in overseas ventures/selling. I’m delighted that they are “repatriating” some of their massive foreign profits in the US, but it is actually costing them considerably more than if they didn’t; I guess they want to invest more heavily in the US (they’ve said this for years) and figured this was the best break they were ever going to get in the foreseeable, so the good publicity and higher stock price would make the loss (compared to not repatriating) worth it. Let’s also not kid ourselves about how MOST companies not named Apple will handle the windfalls they might get from this tax bill: MOST of it will go to executive bonuses and stock buybacks, just like it has every previous time the US corporate tax rate was lowered, or there was a temporary “tax holiday” for repatriation of foreign profits. Again, not a political statement; a statement of fact based on abundant historical record.