Taxes

[RIJIMMY]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Wrong.

Investing in a company (whether you are hoping for dividends or capital gains) involves RISK, LOTS OF RISK. We need to encourage investors to take on that risk, and the way you do that is to make the "reward" comparable to the risk.

Capital gains are the "cost" of making money by investing. Chapter 1 of any economics text will clearly state that when you increase the cost of something, the demand for that something (no matter what it is), goes down. You don't want to stifle the demand for investment returns, particularly in a recession.

Money earned through investing is very, very different than what you earn in a bi-weekly paycheck. I don't need to risk any of my personal assets in order to earn a paycheck. There are, in my opinion, valid reasons why capital gains are taxed at a rate lower than income.

Here's what gets me about all this...John Kerry is worth 10 times what Mitt Romney is worth, and Kerry's effective tax rate is a little lower than Romney's. Where was all this outrage when Kerry ran for President? Menaing, it's OK when rich liberals do this, but when conservatives do it, they are out to screw the middle class. It's bullsh*t.

God help me, Im on the side of the libs with this one!
Why this wasnt an issue with Kerry is because the republicans were not making the deficit a major battle cry when Kerry ran. They couldnt because Bush was key culprit in raising it
To be straight - I am for significantly lowering government spending and for lowering taxes. But we have significant loopholes that WAY overbenefit the wealthy and honestly are not fair. I've spent my career in investments, i know cap gains inside and out. I get this stuff.
But its crap that I pay $30 a day to commute to my job, make good money, take the "risk" every day of major decisions, sacrifice a shat load but due to AMT, I can barely take any deductions and NO TAX code benefits me. Yet multi millionaires can take all kinds of deductions and pay a less effective rate. The tax code needs to be changed. Loopholes need to be closed

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by RIJIMMY

God help me, Im on the side of the libs with this one!
Why this wasnt an issue with Kerry is because the republicans were not making the deficit a major battle cry when Kerry ran. They couldnt because Bush was key culprit in raising it

Jim in CT was not talking about making the deficit a major battle cry, but about not making Kerry's tax rate an issue.

To be straight - I am for significantly lowering government spending and for lowering taxes.

And how is this on the liberal side?

But we have significant loopholes that WAY overbenefit the wealthy and honestly are not fair.

"Conservatives" are not against closing loopholes, and they are in favor of various "fair" forms of taxation, including everybody paying the same rate, and even excluding the poorest from that rate. But, then, "fair" is in the eyes of the beholder.

I've spent my career in investments, i know cap gains inside and out. I get this stuff.
But its crap that I pay $30 a day to commute to my job, make good money, take the "risk" every day of major decisions, sacrifice a shat load but due to AMT, I can barely take any deductions and NO TAX code benefits me. Yet multi millionaires can take all kinds of deductions and pay a less effective rate. The tax code needs to be changed. Loopholes need to be closed

Fine, eliminate loopholes, get rid of the AMT, give RIJimmy a tax code that benefits him, etc. I don't think Jim in CT was talking about that. I think he was clearly explaining the rationale behind using the tax code to encourage investment.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by RIJIMMY

But its crap that I pay $30 a day to commute to my job, make good money, take the "risk" every day of major decisions, sacrifice a shat load but due to AMT, I can barely take any deductions and NO TAX code benefits me. Yet multi millionaires can take all kinds of deductions and pay a less effective rate. The tax code needs to be changed. Loopholes need to be closed

Jim, you know that I love you and harkening back to the Sowell quote I posted earlier, "if you care about people you tell them the truth"...I was reading the CBO projections going foward the other day and the two scenarios mentioned were the "rosy" scenario and the one where we were screwed....the "rosy" scenario is counting on the Bush tax cuts sunsetting and an expansion of the AMT to adversely affect many, many more Americans, so I'm telling you the truth...you will continue to get screwed and it is very likely to get worse for those in your earning range because you represent the largest portion of the population both actually paying taxes and sitting on significant savings and investments...and you have stuff like trucks and boats(I think Spence referred to these as luxuries when you mentioned them previously) so noone is going to feel sorry for you...if you have money they have a bullseye on you...that's just how it is

and they never, ever stop...

The UN also has a habit of using money designated for relief projects to enrich its own coffers, including the $732.4 million budget for earthquake-shattered Haiti, two thirds of which was spent on “the salary, perks and upkeep of its own personnel, not residents of the devastated island.”

UN Wants World Tax To ‘Help The Poor’

Global levy needed to aid “needy people” get free housing, education and healthcare

Friday, February 3, 2012

The United Nations wants a world tax imposed on all financial transactions to fund a global model of social services that will provide “needy people” with a basic income, free healthcare, education and housing.

The drive is part of the UN’s mission to create a “social protection floor” under the auspices of the Commission on Social Development, which began this week in New York. The SPF will become the UN’s primary focus from 2015 onwards when the Millennium Development Goals project concludes.

“The money to fund these services may come from a new world tax,” reports the Deseret News, quoting Jens Wandel, Deputy Director of the United Nations Development Program, who said that a long term funding plan for the project would center around “a minimal financial transaction tax (of .005 percent). This will create $40 billion in revenue.”

“No one should live below a certain income level,” stated Milos Koterec, President of the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations. “Everyone should be able to access at least basic health services, primary education, housing, water, sanitation and other essential services.”

According to the report, the new global tax is designed to be a progressive scale, with higher earners paying more to help provide “all needy people with a basic income, healthcare, education and housing.”

[scottw]

Originally Posted by RIJIMMY

. Loopholes need to be closed

Loopholes...this is one of those words that gets thrown around a lot..probably thoroughly focus group tested to illicit anger particularly with regard to corporations(except the liberal ones) and millionaires and billionaires(except the liberal ones) and which carries credability for some reason while never referring to anything specific...intentionally....

can you name a few?

oh, Jimmy, I forgot to mention, you can also expect to be means tested out of both Social Securtiy and Medicare..it's the only way....

loopholes should be called leghold traps....

politicians create exemptions and incentives to get corporations and businesses, individuals to behave in a way that politicians would like them to behave......

corporations and businesses or individuals take advantage or these ...

time goes by...

the same politicians publically assault corporations, businesses and individuals for unfairly exploiting "loopholes" all the while acting as though they had absolutely nothing to do with it and usually having exploited many of these or gained some benefit themselves...