- Posted August 7, 2014 by
This iReport is part of an assignment:
- Why Does a 14 Year Old Girl Getting Shot Not Peak the Attention of the Nation?
- Sharyl Attkinsson, Eric Holder, President Obama and Fast and Furious
- Obamacare and the Supreme Court – What Will They Decide?
- Wonder How Many Assets Michael Brown or the Other Children in Ferguson, Missouri had?
- The 9-11 Anniversary is coming soon…Is Anyone Worried?
Patriotism is defined as national loyalty. I suppose that means that we put country first and individual needs last.
Right now we are being directed to think that some American Companies are putting their interests above the interests of the entire nation. In tough economic times many of us feel victimized and powerless by big business and the system in general. Because we feel victimized, many of us are tempted to long for social justice; a way to make others pay for the problems and lack of opportunity that we are experiencing. When we are hurting, many of us want to hurt the people that we believe are causing our pain. Our president encourages us to believe that there are those in society that have not allowed us to have a fair shot in life.
Right now the president would have us believe that companies using Corporate Inversion to avoid paying US taxes are unpatriotic. The president wants to pressure companies to remain headquartered in the US instead of moving their headquarters to a country with lower corporate tax rates. (They are able to do this by buying a smaller company in a different country and then merging the two companies. Then they move their headquarters to that other country) Maybe they are unpatriotic or maybe they are just companies trying to remain competitive in a global marketplace.
When White House spokesman, Josh Earnest was asked why it is fair to accuse companies of being unpatriotic for corporate inversion, he responded
“What it means is that business that continues to be located in the United States that continues to benefit from the infrastructure of the United States, that continues to benefit from the national security of the United States, that continues to benefit from the supply of workers from the United States, well educated, highly motivated workers in the United States, they benefit from all those things without paying their fair share in taxes,” Earnest said. “The president believes that not only is not fair, it’s not good for the American economy. It erodes the tax base.”
While that sounds good and even fair, why is it okay to accuse a business of operating within the law? Why is the president targeting companies but not our legislators? Why is he vilifying American businesses to the American people and not villifying the congress that can change the law? Isn’t it unpatriotic for him to attack American companies instead of trying to work with our legislators to change a system that is not working well?
Senators Richard J. Durbin, Jack Reed and Elizabeth Warren wrote a letter to urge the president to use executive action to reduce or eliminate tax preferences for inverted companies.
Here is an excerpt from the letter:
“Although we will continue to work toward a legislative solution to the problem, we urge you to use your authority to reduce or eliminate tax breaks associated with inversions,” the senators wrote. “Inverted corporations take advantage of all the things American tax dollars provide—from tax credits for research and development, investments in transportation infrastructure, and strong patent and copyright protections, to profiting from taxpayer-supported programs like Medicare and the Veterans Health Administration. Yet, these companies claim to be foreign corporations when it’s time to pay their tax bill—denying the United States billions of dollars in tax revenue and thereby increasing the tax burden on other U.S. taxpayers.”
The letter can be read in its entirety:
How depressing is it that our senators realize how impotent they are in our current political environment? They seem to believe that no solution will be reached in congress and that the only hope to remedy this problem is to just by-pass the legislative process. Just by-pass the opinions and the desires of the people that elected our congress…the people’s representatives. Is that patriotic? Is it patriotic to give no voice at all to the people that did not vote for the president or no longer approve of his performance?
Right now our national debt stands at $17,633,157,285,764 give our take a thousand or two. If the debt were divided out among all citizens, each citizen’s responsibility would be $55,348. If the debt were divided among tax payers, each tax payer would be responsible for $151,527. I find these numbers very, very disturbing, but we are not to focus our attention here, but we are to focus our attention on American companies engaged in a legal business practice.
Back in 2008, the president campaigned that running up the national debt was irresponsible and unpatriotic; I wonder if he still feels that way today looking at the current numbers. We are about $7 trillion dollars deeper in debt than we were back in 2008 and are still deficit spending…does this show economic patriotism?