3rdnlng Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 The rich can hoard their money all they want, just pay your fair share in taxes! I don't care if they burn the damn money. Don't come back with that weak ass bull **** that they are paying their fair share. You know damn well they don't! I tried to engage you and help your idiot ass see the light, but idiot posts such as this makes me realize that I was wasting my time. You are hopeless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 The rich can hoard their money all they want, just pay your fair share in taxes! I don't care if they burn the damn money. Don't come back with that weak ass bull **** that they are paying their fair share. You know damn well they don't! And if they hoard money they already earned, then they aren't paying taxes. That is something you feeble minded liberals just don't get. It's called income taxes, not savings taxes. They paid the tax already. In fact them hoarding money is good for the dollar value and investments. Trust me when a rich person has money, they don't lock it in a safe somewhere. It's put into safe investments. Again, make it worth their while to invest those dollars instead of trying to take what has already been taxed. Lower taxes on any long term investments they make because that is how the economy grows. By investing and building and coping up with "things" that people want and will spend money on. Money that people will have when these rich people invest their money and put people to work because corporations have money to build things people want. Keep bitching about rich people hoarding money, but don't make it worth their while and you won't get more money from them. They'll just hole up with their already taxed money, and watch the economy tank. They've already made theirs they could give a **** if John, Judy, or Jose have a job and money. Again, they've already paid taxes on the money they've earned. You aren't getting anymore until they invest it and make more money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 What rate would you suggest VA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 What rate would you suggest VA? What rate for what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 What rate for what? the various capital gains categories Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 the various capital gains categories What's your purpose of taxing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 What's your purpose of taxing? lol jesus Christ if you would like to enter the fold and give your take on what scheme would be best then just do so Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 What rate would you suggest VA? Make it advantageous to invest. My point though is if it isn't advantageous then the money people have is already taxed. If the incentive isn't there to risk their money they won't. The concept of risk reward has to be introduced. What's wrong with 15% ? The problem is a lot of money has been divested because that rate is going away currently. If a rich person is going to be taxed at 40% next year, why not divest now at 15%. They need to find a way to make up lost 25% if they stay invested for one more year. As Chef shared before energy companies live with 7% ROI, that means it would take 3.5 years to make up the difference and assuming the current tax and spenders in DC don't screw them even more. It's going to have to stay at or near 15% or people will pull their money with no risk at 15% now, hold it until the next administration comes in. They gain nothing by investing and risk more over the 4 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 lol jesus Christ if you would like to enter the fold and give your take on what scheme would be best then just do so No, I'm not going to make a road trip and play on your field until the ground rules are set. Again, what is your purpose for taxing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 Make it advantageous to invest. My point though is if it isn't advantageous then the money people have is already taxed. If the incentive isn't there to risk their money they won't. The concept of risk reward has to be introduced. What's wrong with 15% ? The problem is a lot of money has been divested because that rate is going away currently. If a rich person is going to be taxed at 40% next year, why not divest now at 15%. They need to find a way to make up lost 25% if they stay invested for one more year. As Chef shared before energy companies live with 7% ROI, that means it would take 3.5 years to make up the difference and assuming the current tax and spenders in DC don't screw them even more. It's going to have to stay at or near 15% or people will pull their money with no risk at 15% now, hold it until the next administration comes in. They gain nothing by investing and risk more over the 4 years. Have they been talking about 40%? I thought it was 20% max? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 Republican party, this is what you need to do: 1. Grow a collective set of nuts - Stop being the Conservative version of the John Kerry. Distinguish yourselves on the most imprtant issues and take them head on. Particularly on economic issues. Our economic model is unsustainable, impossible to defend, and easy to explain. Stop dancing around the issue and dive in and hammer it in common sense terms. Talk to people straight, and assume they're not retarded. A lot are, but you'll win more with logic than gimmicks and talking points. And read Milton Friedman. 2. Stop alienating women - Don't get sucked in to these stupid birth control debates (thank you Rick Santorum). And damn it, STOP TALKING ABOUT RAPE!!! What are you trying to accomplish here? How about acknowledging that although abortion is morally abhorrent, regulation of abortion is not an essential function of the federal government. That doesn't mean go pro-choice, it means talk about abortion reduction through methods other than prohibition. You'll pick up 2 voters for every 1 you lose and ironically, you'll do a lot more to reduce the number of babies snuffed out in the womb. 3. Stop demonizing Hispanics. They're actually a lot more conservative than you think. An effective immigration policy involves securing the border and making legal immigration significantly more streamlined. Cracking down on immigrants who are working is pointless. And cracking down on their employers isn't much better. If we could get them documented so they pay taxes and so we can process them w/n our criminal justice system, we eliminate most of the problems associated with illegal immigration. And stop worrying about them taking jobs. People who work help the economy. You sound like liberals talking about outsourcing. 4. Explain to blacks why free market principles are in their best interest. And talk straight; don't be patronizing or handle them with kid gloves. You'd be amazed what you can say to a black guy if you just cut through the BS and talik to him like a man. He'll respect you for it. Don't think it will work? How's your current strategy working? 5. Put your bible away. You can be as religious as you want to be, and you don't have to be shy about it, but make it damn clear that you understand the value of separation of church and state. You can acknowledge that our country was largely built on judeo-christian values, but make it clear you don't want to impose your will on others. Honestly, the most important values you derive from your religion are universal. You'd be surprised how many people have an irrational fear of a conservative theocracy. 6. Stop talking about gays. The family unit has survived across the globe and across virtually all cultures from the dawn of civilization. It's not going to collapse b/c gays get to have federally sanctioned monogamous relationships. You don't have to like it. Hell, you don't even have to support it. Just let it go. Follow this recipe, find some politicians who are halfway cool to communicate it, and not only will the party rise from the ashes, you might actually do some wonderful things to help the country. Rob- as always, direct, to the point and highly intelligent. If you were running Mitt Romney's campaign, he would have won the election. Tough thing is getting the tone of the primary changed, as winning that may have cost him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 Have they been talking about 40%? I thought it was 20% max? Try 43.8%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 (edited) Try 43.8%. That's worse case scenario for dividends...probably won't happen and in any event much lower for capital gains... Edited November 15, 2012 by TheNewBills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 That's worse case scenario for dividends...probably won't happen and in any event much lower for capital gains... Again, if I don't know and choice is 15% now or 43.8% next year. I am divesting. Even 20%, I can pull now at 15% and then hold and pretty much ensure no losses for 4 years. With current interest at 1% basically, the incentive just isn't to invest right now. Trying to make them invest to earn income won't work under these scenerio won't work until the government, both fed and states make it worth the risk. The government just wants to collect the money. Putting all the risk on the people with the money. Isn't going to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 That's worse case scenario for dividends...probably won't happen and in any event much lower for capital gains... Next year I'll be paying 43.8% on dividends, 42.3% on short term cg, and what I believe will be 20% on long term cg. I'll be 100% out of equities by 01/01/2013. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 Again, if I don't know and choice is 15% now or 43.8% next year. I am divesting. Even 20%, I can pull now at 15% and then hold and pretty much ensure no losses for 4 years. With current interest at 1% basically, the incentive just isn't to invest right now. Trying to make them invest to earn income won't work under these scenerio won't work until the government, both fed and states make it worth the risk. The government just wants to collect the money. Putting all the risk on the people with the money. Isn't going to happen. If the argument is things adjust to new rates I don't disagree I just am not buying that people in mass will just say "eff it" and all the sudden there is no capital just b/c it goes from 18 to 23 or something like that...ideally you would like to have it at 0...but if part of the revenue recipe includes some acceptable increases in capital gains I doubt it will kill us... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 (edited) Please define "fair share." This question gets asked in many circles and publically I have rarely heard a Democrat answer the question. I think that's because deep down many really feel that the government should be able to take whatever it wants or needs and people are afraid to say that. I'll put a number out there. I think the combination of state and fed income tax should never exceed 33% no matter how much a person earns. Obviously we're much higher than that now in many places and headed higher. Very few pay taxes only at cap gains rates. A good argument can be made that cap gains taxes on investments should be 0. The question then is how do you define "investment"? Edited November 15, 2012 by keepthefaith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 (edited) This question gets asked in many circles and publically I have rarely heard a Democrat answer the question. I think that's because deep down many really feel that the government should be able to take whatever it wants or needs and people are afraid to say that. I'll put a number out there. I think the combination of state and fed income tax should never exceed 33% no matter how much a person earns. Obviously we're much higher than that now in many places and headed higher. Very few pay taxes only at cap gains rates. A good argument can be made that cap gains taxes on investments should be 0. The question then is how do you define "investment"? I think a lot of Dems want the cap gains up to about 23 to put it around the middle effective rate if not slightly above before deductions...argument being it'll help revenue w/ out disrupting investment too much and would be more equitable. Edited November 15, 2012 by TheNewBills Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VABills Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 I think a lot of Dems want the cap gains up to about 23 to put it around the middle effective rate if not slightly above before deductions...argument being it'll help revenue w/ out disrupting investment too much and would be more equitable. That's too high. Anything beyond 17% and people will take money out. Why should the government reap the rewards when I risk, but assume no risks themselves. People on the left like to take without consideration of this fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TakeYouToTasker Posted November 15, 2012 Share Posted November 15, 2012 VABills point becomes even more relevant if you believe markets will continue to be volatile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts