Tomguy53 wrote:
Are you intentionaly misrepresenting the information?

A 'tax holiday' to repatriot corporate profits is lowering their tax obligations.
I am not intentionally or unintentionally misrepresenting anything.

I copied Mr. Krugman's words verbatim.  This is a meme that Democrats love to use. If we lower taxes we are 'giving' that money to those who will pay those lower taxes. In truth, we are merely allowing these folks to keep what is already theirs.

I think Mr. Krugman is also wrong when he says this money earned overseas would have been repatriated eventually. He offers no reasoning behind this idea other than because he says so. Mr. Krugman does this quite often.

Finally, he claims:

But they used that money to pay dividends, pay down debt, buy up other companies, buy back their own stock — pretty much everything except increasing investment and creating jobs. Indeed, there’s no evidence that the 2004 tax holiday did anything at all to stimulate the economy.
If they pay dividends, this puts money back into the economies and helps all those public retirement funds which are so inadequately funded become a bit more fiscally viable. Not a bad thing to happen in our economies.

If the pay down debt, this also puts money back into the economies as the folks this debt was owed to now have a liquid asset they can turn around and reinvest somewhere else. Maybe no other businesses want to borrow that money right now, but that just means they will end up loaning it to government at some level which helps keep our debt here at home rather than in China. Again, not a bad thing to have happen.


The only reason some people get lost in thought is because it's unfamiliar territory. - Paul Fix