SpokenTruth said:
Snoopy said:

1. No one paid 90% tax rate back then. There was a lot of loopholes and more than you think back then. Second, a strong defense in military spending is necessary for not only protection, but it pushes technology further for us and generated us a lot of money.

2. We spend over a hundred billion dollars on illegal immigrants a year as it is. If the wall can stop them from coming in (or at least make it harder) it can benefit us greatly. 50 billion for one year an estimated 150 million a year to maintain can benefit us in the long run.

 3. Other countries don't tax as much on their companies like we do that's why we see a lot of companies building their HQ in other countries to avoid higher taxes. Which means we get nothing at all. 

There is also something called the Laffer curve.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FqLjyA0hL1s

1. Our military is already strong enough for protection.  Way more so than needed.  And how does it generate money?  Taxes spent is not new money nor is the military a revenue generating entity.  Further, a lot of our military spending goes to foreign nations.

2.  Illegal immigrants generate a net positive on the economy.  The Center for Immigration Studies suggests the wall could reduce tax burden by $12 - $15 billion but we would lose the economic benefit and other taxes they generate thereby creating a net loss.  They pay $12 billion per year according to the Social Security Administration and a further $11.6 billion in sales tax, property tax, etc...   Oh, any get ready for prices to increase because illigeal immigrants make up 40% of all Brickmasons, blockmasons, and stonemasons, 37% of all Drywall installers, ceiling tile installers and tapers, 31% of all roofers, 30% of agricultural workers, 27% of construction laborers....and more according to the Pew Research Center.

3. Given we just agreed that corporations do not pay the actual 35% rate, it's irreelvant where they move their HQ to.  Further moving money offshore to a tax haven like the Cayman Islands with a 0% rate is just as damaging to us as moving their HQ to elsewhere.  Canada has a 31% rate, Belgium has a 34% tax rate, Ireland is 12.5%, Switzerland is 18%, Panama is 25%, UK is 19%.  I mention them because they are the most common places they move to.  Canada and Belgium probably cost more to move to than the tax they save but the real issue is that we seem to care far more about competive rax rates than fixing loop holes. 

And yes, I'm familiar with the Laffer Curve...are you familiar with it being discredited?  Presuming taxes and revenue curve equally only looks good in graphics.

1. We have ourselves and our allies to protect. With countries like Russia and China we need to keep investing in our military and make sure we have the best technology available. Having the best military and teaming up with NATO makes it where no country wants to mess with us so it saves us a lot of money and lives in the long run. The military has helped innovate and create a lot of technology we use today. GPS, microwaves, air travel,ect.

https://www.digitaltrends.com/cool-tech/modern-civilian-tech-made-possible-wartime-research-development/

 

2. Illegal immigrants cost American taxpayer jobs. We have to spend 135 billion dollars for illegal immigrants and they hurt our education system since we have to lower the standard and spend more resources on them (I know from personal experience). They only make up a good chunk of the workforce due to cheap labor because they don't pay taxes or do the simple things like getting car insurance/register their cars. More Americans would get those jobs if they paid a little more or if we have a shortage for some reason we could easily create a similar H-2B program for it.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/record-135-billion-a-year-for-illegal-immigration-average-8075-each-25000-in-ny/article/2635757

3. We waste so much money in the government we could easily eliminate high taxes on companies. Big companies or billionaires wouldn't move to those countries if we were more competitive. Since we both agree companies and people move their money elsewhere we get nothing from it. Offshore accounts aren't just for taxes, but for protection to diversify your portfolio. Some Countries also use the U.S as an offshore banking so it's a mutual thing. 

 

The laffer curve is an economic theory that some disagree while some agree with. I personally agree with it because why couldn't a company or a billionaire move their money else where if they start getting taxed a lot.