| Author | Message | ||
     Aussie2126 |
Blake, Yet on this board there is a constant whine about how 50% of the population pays zero taxes. Anybody that has income is paying a significant portion of their income in taxes if the measure is that Court is paying 55%. Everybody pays gasoline taxes, FICA, sales tax, etc. yet nobody challenges "fifty percent have no skin in the game". Let's keep the conversation legit. | ||
| Aussie2126 |
Yea, I have always heard that Holmes was an idiot. | ||
| Aesquire |
... but if I did, I would expect to pay a higher percentage of my income in taxes than a waitress. Which time? The first time you earned it? Or the second time when you risked it and are getting "income" off your gamble? That 15% ( capital gains ) is on money already taxed. That's on top of the 30+% FIT he already paid. Or even higher, depending on when he took that money as pay & income. He hasn't made as good a salary ( paid for work ) the last 6 years as he could have, because he's been doing a very expensive application for a job. So expensive they ask other people to GIVE them money to get it. One so expensive that the guy who has it now wants other people to GIVE him a Billion dollars to keep it. A Billion. Barack didn't pay a penny more than the law requires. ( I suspect the only reason he paid that much is to look good ) He's a millionaire. Warren Buffet pays as little as he can, and even less, when you count his company. ( and will make out like a bandit as you pay ever increasing fuel costs ) You don't like the tax code? Welcome to the crowd. I pay about 50% tax, state, local federal, sales. I make just about "average" money. Less some years, more when the OT is heavy. Let me be clear, I don't particularly like Romney. But I do know... He who uses envy and hate to gain power is evil. Period fracking dot. Why are some here being willing tools of rich evil men who want to use your rage ( justified or not ) to gain power... and later steal your stuff, after they steal from the ones they WANT YOU TO HATE? | ||
| Strokizator |
Roosevelt may have started his political career as a republican but ended as a progressive and founder of the Bull Moose party. That quote though is from his state of the union speech in 1906. | ||
| Slaughter |
I challenge the other whiners to "tithe" - to give up at least 10% of every income dollar toward charitable work. Want more of a write off, throw MORE money into business investments - it aint rocket science to pay nearly zero in taxes. | ||
| Moxnix |
The biggest danger American investors face, by far, is not market risk — huge as that will be — but political risk. The only way to insulate yourself from such risk is to diversify yourself politically and geographically. The news today said Mitt closed his Swiss accounts in preparation for his political run. Even though it is perfectly legal for an American to have foreign accounts. Hope he kept the money offshore, for his family's sake. And the Mittster tithed, which comes off the top. Everyone can tithe, until the kleptocrats make that illegal. I used to read the financial pages of the paper in junior high school as creative avoidance to delay doing my homework. And that was so long ago, schools were actually teaching things. I'm glad I did. Someone once told me I didn't care about money, but what money can do. Fair assessment. Anyway, Mitt may be on his way out if the GOP recruits Mitch Daniels. But he'll still pay only what his account tells him. And why not? | ||
| Johnnymceldoo |
Ok I can give in and say its bogus mitt isnt paying more. I mean, we cant afford the programs we have now let alone potus and first ladys lavish vacation habits if we dont start asking for more. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
The biggest danger American investors face, by far, is not market risk —huge as that will be —but political risk. Oddly enough, it's the same problem in third world countries. It's why the economics never get better. Why would someone invest long term if the political winds could change overnight and all that capital could be seized. | ||
| Bluzm2 |
The 15% or so number that's being thrown around is also in error. If you look at the tax return numbers the calculations were done by the MSM folks. They took the total "income" gross before deductions and did the percentage math with that. If you figure in the LEGAL charitable deductions the rate is closer to 25%. Also keep in mind that this money is double taxed. It is CAPITAL GAINS money. In order to have capital gains you have to have invested CAPITAL. That money was already taxed when it was initially earned and then invested. So when you factor that in, the real tax rate approaches 50%. | ||
| Gregtonn |
It is our money. We should not be letting the government tell us how much we can keep. We should be telling them how much we will allow them to have and what they can spend it on. G | ||
| Blake |
>>> Aussie2126 Posted on Tuesday, January 24, 2012 - 06:01 pm: Blake, Yet on this board there is a constant whine about how 50% of the population pays zero taxes. Wrong on all counts. See if you can brain-up, get honest, and figure out why. >>> Anybody that has income is paying a significant portion of their income in taxes if the measure is that Court is paying 55%. Not in FIT, which if you were paying attention you would see is the subject of the thread. >>> Everybody pays gasoline taxes, That is false. >>> FICA, Correct, some pay a lot more and double the rate. >>> sales tax, etc. Some pay very little, no sales tax on clothing and food. >>> yet nobody challenges "fifty percent have no skin in the game". Let's keep the conversation legit. It is perfectly legitimate to focus on the federal budget and revenue stream that funds it, namely federal income tax. In that, and concerning how all that VAST revenue is spent, less than 50% have ANY vested interest, they are beneficiaries voting to take more of other people's money. It's evil. Wake up. | ||
| Buellkowski |
Also keep in mind that this money is double taxed. I disagree. The principal of that investment was already taxed, and it will not be taxed again as long as it sits where it is. It is the profit from that investment that is taxed at the capital gains rate. The original investment is not taxed all over again, and if the investment loses money, no tax is collected. Don't be fooled by the "double-taxation" argument. | ||
| Johnnymceldoo |
Gregtonn, how will my extended family member who gets wic and government aid make the switch from her 3g smartphone to the new 4g iphone? On top of cable and internet its just not affordable to people who dont work for a living. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
The GAIN is taxed. The loss is not credited. When you earn income, the outcome of that labor is certain. You got paid. When you invest, there is zero certainty that you will even get your already taxed principal back let alone have any gain. Losses deducted against income are capped at $3000. Wanna open up the deduction for losses? | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
I don't think it's fair for someone to pay nothing when other pay everything. Please fix that first before you start bitching about what the top 1% pay in taxes. | ||
| Aussie2126 |
The outcome of labor is not certain - ask any contractor about the jobs that did not come in as they may have bid it. I have on occasion worked hours that I got paid nothing for. Capital gains tax is on the GAIN - the principle is NOT taxed again. In fact without inheritance taxes even the gain may not be taxed because it is only taxed when the investment is sold - gain realized. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
The outcome of labor is not certain - ask any contractor about the jobs that did not come in as they may have bid it. I have on occasion worked hours that I got paid nothing for. That is a matter of contract law. If you did word and didn't get paid as contracted, you have recourse to sue for breach of contract. You may choose not to, but you still have that recourse. If you invest and you lose, you just lose. In fact without inheritance taxes even the gain may not be taxed because it is only taxed when the investment is sold - gain realized. It isn't very realistic that someone would buy and hold an investment for a lifetime just to avoid capital gains taxes. A prudent investment advisor would recommend diversification. Now, you start a business from scratch paying your taxes your entire lifetime and build a thriving enterprise. How much of that business do you feel the government should take when you transfer it to your kids? You have a family farm that was passed to you by your father. Because of where your farm is located the property values have driven the value up. Now it's subject to estate taxes. How much of that family farm should the government take? | ||
| Kenm123t |
Buellowski its called corporate taxes which are paid before the stock holder gets a dividend Try being a S corp we get every thing taxed at the personal rates even dividends. Then you get to pay estimated taxes in the amount you just paid in case you make money next year. | ||
| Aussie2126 |
>>>>>That is a matter of contract law. If you did word and didn't get paid as contracted, you have recourse to sue for breach of contract. You may choose not to, but you still have that recourse. If I bid a transmission job that goes badly and has to be redone - now I need double materials, you expect that I will also get my labor reimbursed? That a customer will say OK, under "contract law I will pay double?" yea that works!! If I make a stupid investment the outcome is bad, if a contractor makes a mistake the outcome is also bad - labor is often no more certain than capital gains. >>>>It isn't very realistic that someone would buy and hold an investment for a lifetime just to avoid capital gains taxes. A prudent investment advisor would recommend diversification. It only has to be held when you die, not a lifetime, isn't limited to only one investment. Tax is not due for the capital gains if the stock is transferred without inheritance tax. | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
If I bid a transmission job that goes badly and has to be redone - now I need double materials, you expect that I will also get my labor reimbursed? You know what? That's business. If I screw up, I sometimes have to eat the expense too. That's running a business. If you are a W-2 employee, the outcome of your labor is governed under contract law as well. If I make a stupid investment the outcome is bad, if a contractor makes a mistake the outcome is also bad - labor is often no more certain than capital gains. If you screw up as a contractor, you can deduct 100% of your screw up against your earned income. You only get $3000 of capital gains losses to claim. It only has to be held when you die, not a lifetime, isn't limited to only one investment. Tax is not due for the capital gains if the stock is transferred without inheritance tax. So you would just need to make sure that your death coincided with the 13th month? I don't understand your point? The reason they grant a step up in basis is BECAUSE there is an estate tax. Otherwise, your beneficiaries would be taxed at 35-55% and then be taxed again at 15%. Under the "repeal" of the estate tax, the step up in basis disappeared. By the way, they DO double tax qualified money on estate transfer. First it is taxed for estate taxes and then it is taxed as income with respect to decedent (IRD). Usually, this is taxed at the top tax bracket. So a $1M IRA account could loose $550,000 to estate taxes as well as $350,000 in IRD tax. Out of $1M, you kids could get $100,000. Sound fair? | ||
| Aussie2126 |
If you lose money on an investment - hey that's the investing game - that is my point exactly, why is there a lower tax rate for playing the investment game. According to you it is because it is uncertain of the outcome - tough just like you tell the contractor. Investment gains are INCOME!! why do the rich need to be coddled? Your death only needs to coincide with the 13th through the end of your life, not just the 13th month. Contrary to what this board seems to have convinced it self of by repeating as a mantra, the principle is not taxed again. The gain is INCOME. If you tax my income at a sweetheart rate, I will also have more money to be invested. Wow, that would make me a JOB CREATOR not just a regular guy. Then can I be coddled too? | ||
| Blake |
The only people being coddled are the ones living off the test of us and the ones who pay no FIT. Double tax? Corp income is taxed, then dividends paid to shareholders are taxed. Seems like a double tax to me. How is it not? | ||
| Aussie2126 |
Well.... Mitt claims that corporations are people, they are allowed unlimited "freedom of speech", they use our common resources (their trucks use "our" interstate, their ships use our ports, their buildings use our fire protection). Why would they not be taxed? If I am taxed on my income, and then I hire you to fix my sidewalk and you are taxed on that income - is that also double taxation? Two separate entities being taxed does not make for double taxation. If you own the corporation as a single proprietor, you have the option of S corp status - pass through to the owners return. There fixed it!! | ||
| Blake |
Your analogy fails. I'm not counting all the money spent by the corp, paid out to vendors, employees, and utilities and the like. The fact is that owners of the corp pay taxes on the profit of the corp, said corp profit being also taxed. It is double taxation pure and simple. No outside vendors are involved. Your analogy is entirely invalid. As to corp taxes, that was not previously an issue of debate here. What is your point? My inclination on the issue? Get rid of loopholes and lower the max corp rate to 20%. Watch businesses flock back to America. | ||
| Johnnymceldoo |
Its like our house is on fire and you guys are saying someone forgot to put away the dishes. | ||
| Two_seasons |
Biden gave $369 to charity in one taxable year recently. Remember that uber stiff dude named Al Gore when he was running for president. Remember his charity giving...$3xx for a taxable year...Really! Don't ever tell me you liberals give as much as us conservatives. http://harndenblog.dailymail.co.uk/2012/01/much-ad o-about-nothing-mitt-romney-is-very-rich-he-also-g ave-millions-to-charity-and-the-taxman.html | ||
| Ft_bstrd |
If you lose money on an investment - hey that's the investing game - that is my point exactly, why is there a lower tax rate for playing the investment game. According to you it is because it is uncertain of the outcome - tough just like you tell the contractor. Investment gains are INCOME!! why do the rich need to be coddled? No. The original point is that there is a difference between EARNED income and INVESTMENT income. There is also a difference between EARNED income and RENTAL income or between EARNED income and DIVIDEND income. For there to be INVESTMENT income, there must FIRST have been EARNED income. There simply isn't any other way to do it. This means that the income from investing first had to be taxed at a HIGHER rate as EARNED income. The ultimate reason for the lower tax rate for INVESTMENT income is to promote INVESTMENT. The gain is INCOME. If you tax my income at a sweetheart rate, I will also have more money to be invested. No one is claiming that it isn't income. Yes, you would have more money to reinvest. Investing isn't just about the guy (or gal) doing the investing making the money. It's also about the business venture finding capital for expansion. The MORE of that capital that is available for investment, the more there is capital available for expansion, growth, jobs. I have been working with a friend of mine for over two years to get a new business venture off the ground. We are seeking investment capital. Our business can't get going without it. The MORE the government takes of that investment capital, the LESS there is available for start up companies like mine. Make sense? Wow, that would make me a JOB CREATOR not just a regular guy. If you had more capital to purchase goods, invest, hire employees, expand, then YES you would be a JOB CREATOR. | ||
| Reepicheep |
And don't forget the death tax. You give up so much through your life, and at the end of it you have a ton of regrets and about the only thing to show for it is money... and when you try to pass it on to your kids, so they can take over a business, or the farm, or just pocket so college is covered for a few generations... and you have to give 50% of it to the government... even though it's already been taxed several times already. | ||
| Aussie2126 |
So much anger and class envy here!! If I don't like how the rich are treated... You tell me to just go out and get rich. If you think the rich are so oppressed, then just don't earn so much money. Two sides of the same coin. Newt thinks the capital gains tax should be zero - why not "it's been taxed so many times before" according to this board. boo hoo, boo hoo, poor Richie Rich. | ||
| Hootowl |
Why do you harbor such disdain for successful people? |
