Bipartisan Bill Would Give Small Businesses a Tax Credit for Employee Training

October 24, 2017

  • October 24, 2017 at 2:49 pm
    Jeff says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 5
    Thumb down 1

    Wow… giving businesses an incentive to better train their employees. That right there is crazy talk. Shouldn’t we be busy taxing them at 110%?

    • October 24, 2017 at 2:53 pm
      Agent says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 7
      Thumb down 6

      According to Progressives, the only way to grow an economy is by taxing employers more.

      • October 24, 2017 at 4:54 pm
        ProgressiveYogi says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 4
        Thumb down 4

        Name TWO Progressives who have ever said that. Ready…steady…GO!!

        • October 25, 2017 at 6:02 pm
          Agent says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 4
          Thumb down 5

          The list would be too long to post on this forum. Just pay attention to any Progressive politician.

          • October 26, 2017 at 8:04 am
            ProgressiveYogi says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 2
            Thumb down 4

            I asked you for TWO names, not all of them.

          • October 26, 2017 at 2:14 pm
            bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 4

            And in fact, there was a campaign started with a left leaning political activist group with the same basic concept.

            https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2017/08/03/liberals-launch-not-one-penny-campaign-in-effort-to-stop-trump-tax-cuts/?utm_term=.fc6a98248618

            You’re pretending like no liberals do this and agent is insane for thinking democrats always try to tax businesses, when in fact they do. They have stopped every major push to lower the corporate tax rate.

            We can move to Sanders as well, who publicly said he would force GE to pay their fair share. Do you know why GE paid practically no taxes? On certain years their profit margin was literally .01%.

            If Sanders got a 35% rate on their revenues, which is the only thing he could have meant, he would have bankrupted them in the billions.

            This has been a fight democrats made every time since FDR when they started this hogwash, when our nations worst president FDR came into play, and yes, you were probably brainwashed to think he was great, he wasn’t.

            Agent is the one spouting indoctrinated nonsense. You are.

          • October 26, 2017 at 4:43 pm
            ProgressiveYogi says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 3
            Thumb down 2

            your link talks about opposing the current republican tax plan and doesn’t even come close to naming someone who actually said something like ‘the only way to grow an economy is by taxing employers more.’

            if you were trying to answer my question to agent, please post a link that has to do with his comment and my question.

            thanks.

          • October 26, 2017 at 5:30 pm
            bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 4

            A: He was clearly mocking the fact that they refused tax cuts for businesses.

            B: My link clearly shows that this organization was against any corporate tax rate reductions or business tax reductions, as it would benefit the wealthy.

            C: Therefore, progressives are clearly against cutting tax rates for corporations, the clear reason they are against the tax reductions in the Republican plan.

            Agent is right. You’re wrong.

          • October 26, 2017 at 5:34 pm
            bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 3

            I will also reiterate that democrats and liberals, and media outlets all pour out the Clinton years as an example that higher tax rates on businesses result in higher growth.

            I will connect the dots here, in that the democrats are also attacking the Kansas tax plan saying it is the same thing, that tax cuts for businesses do not encourage growth.

            Obama numerous times broke his promises in regards to tax increases on business.

            Agent is right. Democrats are clearly for taxing business first people second. Republicans believe in taxing business less, and recouping the amount of gains in additional jobs and payroll.

            You are basically trying to do an aha moment rather than any real thought on the issue, it’s childish, it’s been done to the high heavens since I was 18, and you remain incorrect, whereas Agent is completely within reason in his comment. You are delusional, not him, and I can guess your age due to this.

            I doubt that the generation younger than me was trained as well. So you’re not 20. You’re close to my generation but a little younger, unless you’re very immature for a millennial in the older age range, you’re 25-29.

            How close am I?

          • October 27, 2017 at 8:03 am
            PolarBeaRepeal says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 3

            @Regressive, Oppressive, un-impressive Yogi:

            Just because someone can’t find an exact quote you seek, word for word, from a liberal politician who wants to tax the rich, doesn’t invalidate the claim that their intention is to do so.

            You’re at the end of your debate involvement if you think word parsing is meaningful manner of rebuttal.

            If your main intent is to mock me for pointing out that Libitterals take my statements and then, unable to rebut my points, make Straw Man arguments by TWISTING my words, or make claims I wrote something that I didn’t write, you’ve also failed at that goal.

          • November 13, 2017 at 12:52 pm
            Agent says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 0

            Think you are clever moniker thief? How about Chucky Smucky Schumer, Nancy Pelosi Galore, Maxine Crazy Waters, Dirty Harry Reid? Need more? The list is long indeed. They will do their worst to torpedo meaningful tax reform.

        • October 26, 2017 at 9:29 am
          PolarBeaRepeal says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 1
          Thumb down 5

          Bernie Sanders. John Kerry. Al Gore says it EVERY day. Obama. ANY Democrat Governor. The list goes on and on and on… but isn’t unlimited because so few Progressives now hold elected office after information got out to voters about the Progressives track record in RUINING cities, states, and running up the fed deficit; e.g. $10T deficit under Obama.

          You need to change your screen name to RegressiveYogi.

        • October 26, 2017 at 2:08 pm
          bob says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 1
          Thumb down 4

          When republicans wanted to cut business tax rates and corporate tax rates, the democrats nearly ALL signed a bill saying not one dime to the rich, as they worded it, and said any of those tax cuts would favor the rich.

          Thus, whenever republicans try to cut either of those taxes, they refuse, and tax the businesses more.

          It’s not rocket science, it’s not unreasonable to see this. Just because you live in your own fantasy land, doesn’t mean Agent doesn’t know what he’s talking about.

          • October 30, 2017 at 10:31 am
            PolarBeaRepeal says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 3

            Your post will end the liberals’ debate on that point, for now. I assume that they never knew what you pointed out due to the bias in websites, teachers, and other people from which they get their info.

  • October 25, 2017 at 1:01 pm
    Jim O'Brien says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 5
    Thumb down 0

    My first employer in the Commercial / Industrial Property Insurance Industry put me through a 1 year long, strictly monitored, Engineering & Inspection training program that significantly bettered my income, personal outlook on life, happiness in my job, etc., etc., etc. As a result, I paid higher taxes to the State & Federal Govt., purchased houses / cars, etc. and paid property tax to the towns we lived in.

    That was back in 1966 when medical coverage (100%) was a standard employee benefit at most companies as well. I’m quite certain that, even in 1966 dollars, $1,250 would only have been a “drop in the bucket” to help offset that kind of expense my company incurred to train me as a qualified fire inspector for the company. As the years passed, I was moved up in the company to Assistant Engineer, District Supervising Engineer, Account Engineer and other responsible positions, all without having obtained a college degree. However, I was a veteran (enlisted) who served during the Vietnam conflict (not in Vietnam, however) and the gentleman who first hired me had a high regard for his fellow Irishmen and their mechanical intuition (lol).

    So, I feel that, if companies can’t find “qualified” people to fill their job needs, they should “bite the bullet” so to speak and commit to full scale competency training programs and employee benefit programs that are designed to retain their (expensively) trained employees. The Federal Government shouldn’t have to support these efforts with tax incentives (give away programs to corporations). The costs associated with these activities can be quantified and are already qualified as a tax deduction under current tax law.

    We have other places where our tax dollars need to be spent (i.e. Texas, Florida, Puerto Rico & US Virgin Islands, Wildfire abatement, etc.

    • October 25, 2017 at 6:05 pm
      Agent says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 3
      Thumb down 4

      Tax dollars will actually increase if Tax reform is passed. More jobs, higher paying jobs will increase revenue. Progressives cannot tax their way to prosperity. Hasn’t worked, will not ever work.

      • October 26, 2017 at 10:37 am
        Ron says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 3
        Thumb down 2

        That is what we were told in 2013. What exactly happened to the debt?

        How about this. If the goal of lowering taxes is to stimulate growth, jobs and wages, just give credits to employers who actually grow, hire and increase wages?

        Then reduce taxes for the bottom 80% only. You know, those who live paycheck-to-paycheck and will actually put the additional money back into the economy, not save and invest which will just increase profits of banks and Wall St.

        • October 26, 2017 at 2:07 pm
          bob says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 2
          Thumb down 3

          Bull. You are listening to liberals on this, and I have read the articles you very likely are getting your last idea from.

          “Then reduce taxes for the bottom 80% only. You know, those who live paycheck-to-paycheck and will actually put the additional money back into the economy, not save and invest which will just increase profits of banks and Wall St.”

          Yes, we did a repatriation in the 2000’s that was reinvested in profits. That was a one time event, not a long term cut in the corporate tax, which did not occur along side it, so of course they weren’t going to relocate here for one year’s tax savings, that is insanity to believe it would occur. In order to keep them we needed a corporate tax reduction, in tandem. The democrats have used that one time repatriation to claim that corporations would never come back here with a lower rate and we would never have benefits from lower corporate taxes, which simply must be what you’re referring to here in part.

          But then wait, why do none of them compare Canada, who took many of our corporations since they lowered their rate? They did the opposite of us.

          https://taxfoundation.org/canadas-lower-corporate-tax-rate-raises-more-tax-revenue/

          What do you notice Ron? As a percent of GDP revenues went up. Businesses must have more money in the economy if they are keeping it, and there must thus be an economic advantage here.

          Lower corporate tax rates work. Not all lower rates work, not all lower taxes work, it must be done properly.

          This means if you intend on giving the corporation a tax cut, you probably shouldn’t slash the top marginal rate. I will be one of the first republicans who says this. The only point in slashing the marginal rate is in that businesses often do pass through and are taxed on it. If you make a lower business rate for that, and a corporate tax rate which should be at least 15%, not 20%, and then say keep the marginal rate similar to what it is now, you should have an affect that doesn’t harm business in America.

          Also, another big one that needs to go which you keep complaining about because you always say we need revenues from somewhere: The estate tax. That is a huge waste of capital, potential family business destroyer, etc. If it can be gained elsewhere, the revenue should never be taken in that manner.

          I will even agree to give you a higher marginal rate, if you agree these things must go that I have discussed.

          They have to. They affect business, while you refuse to say that they do. If you want to go after the wealthy, go after the marginal rate! Not anything other than that.

        • October 26, 2017 at 2:28 pm
          bob says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 0
          Thumb down 2

          “How about this. If the goal of lowering taxes is to stimulate growth, jobs and wages, just give credits to employers who actually grow, hire and increase wages?”

          In reply to this:

          Because you have created a catch 22. They cannot grow until they have more capital, and you won’t give them capital until they grow with your scenario.

          As they do more investments they will need more employees, they don’t need more employees first then investments. Your idea is patently absurd.

        • October 27, 2017 at 8:07 am
          PolarBeaRepeal says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 0
          Thumb down 3

          Profits of banks and Wall St fund pension benefits to widows and other retirees.

          Do you want to TAX widows (indirectly)…? Shame on you if you do.

          { Do you know how Dems try to influence voters by appealing to emotions of voters rather than use facts and logic? If not, re-read the above two sentences. }

          • October 27, 2017 at 9:08 am
            Ron says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 0

            “Profits of banks and Wall St fund pension benefits to widows and other retirees. Do you want to TAX widows (indirectly)…? Shame on you if you do.”

            I did not say increase their taxes, just do not decrease their taxes. We need to have smarter tax policy that actually does stimulate growth and increase jobs and wages. Just giving money to people who will not put it back into the economy does not work. It has been tried and has failed miserably.

            “Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”
            -George Santayana

          • October 27, 2017 at 2:05 pm
            bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 2

            “I did not say increase their taxes, just do not decrease their taxes.”

            Not good enough. This means you have not pondered what rate is best.

            “We need to have smarter tax policy that actually does stimulate growth and increase jobs and wages. Just giving money to people who will not put it back into the economy does not work.”

            The last line is not proven.

            “It has been tried and has failed miserably.”

            Except for in Canada when they decreased their rate from 40% down to 15% and their corporate revenues as a share of GDP went up. You have only read sources you agree with.

            “Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”
            -George Santayana”

            Cliché lines. Typical millennial.

          • October 30, 2017 at 10:34 am
            PolarBeaRepeal says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 2

            @Ron; do you claim that WIDOWS, and other pensioners are receiving a fair income AFTER CURRENT TAXES.

            Answer my specific question. The debate hinges on it, as do the substantiation of the tax DECREASES proposed.

            Be sure to make coherent arguments as to the ‘proper tax rate’ for each strata of society, and WHO determines such.
            Again, I emphasize; be sure to name WHO makes the determination.

          • October 30, 2017 at 11:22 am
            Ron says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 2
            Thumb down 0

            The problem with your question is that you did not define “fair”. That is a very subjective term and means different things to different people.

          • October 30, 2017 at 4:16 pm
            bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 2

            “The problem with your question is that you did not define “fair”. That is a very subjective term and means different things to different people.”

            He responded to your comment. He doesn’t have to define what the fair amount of taxes are. You do. I’ve noticed you seem to believe the current tax rate is “fair” and shouldn’t change. Why do you believe this? You didn’t make that case, you just tried to dislodge his. It’s ironic you believe republicans do this all the time, yet it’s you doing it now, and your side that typically does. What you’re doing right now is debate style tactics taught in classes.

            You also just philosophized mid debate. Also, he never used the word “fair” you did. He asked you a very specific question. You dodged it.

      • October 27, 2017 at 11:33 am
        Doug Fisher says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 2
        Thumb down 1

        Trickle-down economics do not work, sorry.

        Even Reagan’s budget director behind the policy, and his former VP referred to it as a policy that frankly does not work.

        Myriad studies have shown the idea to be absolute bunkum. It is a great thought experiment, but never works out in actual practice.

        You want to stimulate the economy? Let people who spend most of their hard-earned money every paycheck keep it and tax those who off-shore it at a higher rate.

        • October 27, 2017 at 2:03 pm
          bob says:
          Like or Dislike:
          Thumb up 0
          Thumb down 2

          “Trickle-down economics do not work, sorry.”

          Saying something doesn’t make it true.

          “Even Reagan’s budget director behind the policy, and his former VP referred to it as a policy that frankly does not work”

          Citation needed.

          “Myriad studies have shown the idea to be absolute bunkum. It is a great thought experiment, but never works out in actual practice”

          Except for the slash in rate from 40% down to 15% in Canada, in which revenues as a percent of GDP for corporations went up.

          “You want to stimulate the economy? Let people who spend most of their hard-earned money every paycheck keep it and tax those who off-shore it at a higher rate.”

          They already do. The poorest in society pay little to nothing in taxes. If you make $40,000 and have 3 kids you get a tax refund in excess of your income tax, enough to give you a refund which nearly pays for your social security and medicare taxes.

          If you want to get the economy going, I will agree with you in one area which is similar: Expand the child tax credit to higher incomes, and stop calling that a benefit that only helps people better off. Possibly make a daycare for all program, utilizing current school systems, so anyone can get back to work. Right now the LPR for women is obscenely low in working age, and the part time work by mothers is 66% of part time workers. That also goes a long way to explaining the pay gap.

          Regarding corporate taxes: They do need to be lowered and would have a positive affect.

          Regarding business taxes, they should be lowered minimally as well.

          I’ve already shown how if you got the LPR rate up for women you could bring in massive government revenues and cut spending. Basically this would be a scenario of instead of providing other forms of assistance, you would pay for day care and then women would go back to work and pay for the other assistance you used to, food, etc.

          Tax cuts work when targeted. You’re simply wrong on this.

          • October 29, 2017 at 10:36 am
            Doug Fisher says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 1
            Thumb down 0

            All of what I said is well-known and documented.

            Google David Stockman’s thoughts on Reaganomics.

            Google George Bush talking about Voodoo Economics.

            Trickle Down economics are a joke as a means to stimulate the economy. The amount of growth will never make up the billions or trillions lost on needless tax cuts for those at the top.

          • October 30, 2017 at 10:35 am
            PolarBeaRepeal says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 3

            What was said about ‘Kennomics’ practiced during 1961-63?

          • October 30, 2017 at 1:14 pm
            bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 2

            “All of what I said is well-known and documented.”

            And all of what I said is just as well documented. You still have to show your work. This is lazy behavior.

            “Google David Stockman’s thoughts on Reaganomics.”

            Google other economists thoughts. There is plenty of support for it. Regardless of such I don’t believe something because of a credible source so to speak. I believe it when it makes sense, and I have explained why certain tax positions would damage the economy. The truth is, it is clearly proven Reaganomics works. WWII, vs the 90’s, in the tax rate and portion paid by both the middle class and the rich. You would have to be insane to not realize the degree taxes were lower in the 90’s and we did better. Reaganomics were still mostly in affect with lower taxes.

            Also, Reganomics is not just taxes, it is costly regulations. I have been line itemizing these and why. You have not, because you don’t debate with your own head, you debate with regards to who says what.

            “Google George Bush talking about Voodoo Economics.”

            Ergo this.

            “Trickle Down economics are a joke as a means to stimulate the economy.”

            You’re wrong.

            “The amount of growth will never make up the billions or trillions lost on needless tax cuts for those at the top.”

            Yes it will, if done correctly, and primarily due to what I mentioned before for getting women back to work. Reaganomics was not just taxing the rich less. Why do you suppose the corporate tax rate max back then was higher than it is now? Or did you even know that? Business taxes were also higher.

            Did you even know that?

            You do not know what you’re talking about. It’s very clear you argue by what you hear from someone else, not your own thinking.

          • October 30, 2017 at 3:56 pm
            bob says:
            Like or Dislike:
            Thumb up 0
            Thumb down 1

            How do you explain the corporate tax rate in Canada Doug?

            If Trickle down is proven not to work, how did they lower the corporate tax rate from about 40% down to under 15% at points and have equal and greater revenues as a percent of GDP?

            There is plenty of debate here and you argue the starting point of established fact. It’s also why you lose arguments.

            You can’t debate. It’s that simple, while you accuse me of being unable to do so, as with Ron and others here, you all are basically a group of leftists who band together to go after easy targets and make statements of fact that don’t hold up, and whenever someone debates you, you either:

            Say statements of fact without even trying to prove them.
            Call out the character of others here
            Decry hypocrisy
            Say that Trump is not presidential
            Bring up a social justice issue.

            Or any multitude of aspects that do not address the issue at hand. Many times you don’t even reply and just down like posts.

            I believe it’s because you can’t. The post you already made is as far as you’ve taken the research. You cannot BS knowledge on politics or regulations with someone like me, and, unlike you, I have no allegiances.

            Just the other day I was talking about how day care should be a universal program in the States. While Nixon also argued this, not many republicans do.

            You have never said anything remotely conservative.

            I have also gone over HPV vaccinations, why I approved of the opt out 401k program from Obama, how I liked the EIC expansion and child tax credit from democrats.

            I have explained how it should go further, and could get the LPR rate up for women.

            I thought up that last one all my own, I didn’t just read someone’s opinion on a tax plan slamming it, like you likely did for Trump’s, and then look at tax policy people who agree.

            I line itemize what I like and don’t. A couple weeks back I said I was not sure what to think of Trump’s tax plan and if it would do what I said needed to be done. This is still subject to debate, as Marco Rubio was debating even a $2,500 child tax credit refundable against taxes, and barring a daycare for all program, this is the next best thing. I am hoping this gets pushed in, as day care for all probably won’t, but this is enough to cover that largely for the people I said need to get back into the workforce.

  • October 26, 2017 at 9:03 am
    Captain Planet says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 3
    Thumb down 0

    I applaud this bill. The State of Iowa gave our company a grant to be used on employee education for two years and it was amazing what we were able to accomplish. We built a conference training room with some amazing technology, attended conferences and seminars to further our knowledge, and truly grew as a result. This is an excellent bill!

    • October 26, 2017 at 3:29 pm
      Jax Agent says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 1
      Thumb down 1

      OMG…..we agree on something….other than marijuana.

      Good for your company for taking advantage of grant and opportunity.

      • October 26, 2017 at 4:28 pm
        Captain Planet says:
        Like or Dislike:
        Thumb up 2
        Thumb down 0

        Cheers, Jax. Enjoy your view of the blue moon tonight, I’m also looking forward to it.

  • October 30, 2017 at 12:10 pm
    Doug Fisher says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 2
    Thumb down 0

    Will there be a tax credit to retrain federal government employees to make license plates in a safe way?

    I wouldn’t want any of those delicate-skinned men to get any cuts on their hands.

    • October 30, 2017 at 1:04 pm
      Captain Planet says:
      Like or Dislike:
      Thumb up 3
      Thumb down 0

      So much winning going on, huh Doug? I think they’ll supply these Trump administration criminals with the proper PPE. They’ll be relatively okay behind bars…which, is where they belong.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*