• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Census shows 1 in 2 people are poor or low-income

Pop us a link that proves Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford, and Reagan pushed for lowering the capital gains tax rate?

I couldn't care less. REagan lowered the confiscatory top marginal income tax rate massively

That some republicans in the past were wrong on this issue is no justification for the fact that you try to justify envy of the wealthy by not understanding why LTCG should be taxed at a lower rate
 
I couldn't care less. REagan lowered the confiscatory top marginal income tax rate massively

That some republicans in the past were wrong on this issue is no justification for the fact that you try to justify envy of the wealthy by not understanding why LTCG should be taxed at a lower rate

So make us understand Turtle. Give us some logical and good reasons why the United States of America should have as its tax policy for all Americans, a preferential rate for long term capital gains that is different that the income tax on normal wages and salary.

If we do not understand - as you put it in your post - help us to do that with a rational case for the discriminatory preference enjoyed largely by the wealthy.
 
So make us understand Turtle. Give us some logical and good reasons why the United States of America should have as its tax policy for all Americans, a preferential rate for long term capital gains that is different that the income tax on normal wages and salary.

If we do not understand - as you put it in your post - help us to do that with a rational case for the discriminatory preference enjoyed largely by the wealthy.

asked and answered. Hundreds of times

why should the rich not have lower LTCG tax rates when everyone else does
 
So make us understand Turtle. Give us some logical and good reasons why the United States of America should have as its tax policy for all Americans, a preferential rate for long term capital gains that is different that the income tax on normal wages and salary.

If we do not understand - as you put it in your post - help us to do that with a rational case for the discriminatory preference enjoyed largely by the wealthy.

Because you've already had the income you are using for long term investments taxed once. Its a "thank you" from the government for your long term investment.

There is nothing discriminatory about it, since anyone can have a long term investment and in fact, if you are in the low income tax brackets( 10 & 15 percent ), your long term capital gains rate is 0.
 
Because you've already had the income you are using for long term investments taxed once. Its a "thank you" from the government for your long term investment.

There is nothing discriminatory about it, since anyone can have a long term investment and in fact, if you are in the low income tax brackets( 10 & 15 percent ), your long term capital gains rate is 0.

Those are not answers. You are avoiding the question.

Your point about you already paid tax on the income once is irrelevant because the income from capital gains investment is NEW INCOME that has not been taxed. You have NOT paid income tax upon it.

Your claim that is it not discriminatory in favor of the wealthy flies in the face of reality and the statistics available on capital gains which clearly demonstrates two things
1) you first have to have available funds for these long term investments and working people do not have them since almost all of their income goes for basic living expenses
2) those who do have the available funds for such investments are disproportionally the wealthy - thus they benefit while average wage earners do not.

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/key-elements/capital-gains/lower-rate.cfm

The benefits of low tax rates on capital gains accrue disproportionately to the wealthy. In 2013, an estimated 94 percent of the tax benefit of low rates on capital gains will go to taxpayers with cash incomes over $200,000, and three-fourths of the benefits will accrue to millionaires.

Reality often proves theory wrong. This is one very clear case of it.
 
Last edited:
Because you've already had the income you are using for long term investments taxed once. Its a "thank you" from the government for your long term investment.

There is nothing discriminatory about it, since anyone can have a long term investment and in fact, if you are in the low income tax brackets( 10 & 15 percent ), your long term capital gains rate is 0.

some are mad that the wealthy have lots of LTCG

their argument is not based on a rational argument that LTCG should be taxed at the same rate as STCG or ordinary income based on the nature of the income

rather they are motivated by class envy and are upset that the rich can pay a lower rate than the 35-39-40-45-70 percent rates they want to impose on the rich

It has nothing to do with understanding and then arguing that each form of income ought to be taxed the same rather they are upset that a billionaire with only dividend or LTCG income can pay a lower effective overall income tax rate than someone who has a million in earned income or even a couple hundred k

they squeal about "fairness" in one breath but whine that the rich should pay rates of 40% or more while others should pay 10-15-20% in the next

In other words, the rants have NOTHING TO DO with why different forms of income are taxed at different rates but WHO has such income
 
None of that content of your post Turtle gives us one rational reason why the US government should have a tax policy which gives a preferential rate for capital gains which benefits mostly the wealthy while taxing income and salary of workers at higher rates.
 
In other words, the rants have NOTHING TO DO with why different forms of income are taxed at different rates but WHO has such income
See exhibit #630:
Your claim that is it not discriminatory in favor of the wealthy flies in the face of reality and the statistics available on capital gains which clearly demonstrates two things
1) you first have to have available funds for these long term investments and working people do not have them since almost all of their income goes for basic living expenses
2) those who do have the available funds for such investments are disproportionally the wealthy - thus they benefit while average wage earners do not.
It's all about class warfare.
 
None of that content of your post Turtle gives us one rational reason why the US government should have a tax policy which gives a preferential rate for capital gains which benefits mostly the wealthy while taxing income and salary of workers at higher rates.

and you have never given a rational argument why I should pay a higher effective rate than others.
 
Those are not answers. You are avoiding the question.

Your point about you already paid tax on the income once is irrelevant because the income from capital gains investment is NEW INCOME that has not been taxed. You have NOT paid income tax upon it.

Your claim that is it not discriminatory in favor of the wealthy flies in the face of reality and the statistics available on capital gains which clearly demonstrates two things
1) you first have to have available funds for these long term investments and working people do not have them since almost all of their income goes for basic living expenses
2) those who do have the available funds for such investments are disproportionally the wealthy - thus they benefit while average wage earners do not.

What is the effect of a lower tax rate?



Reality often proves theory wrong. This is one very clear case of it.

Your statistic is based on the assumption that a non-equal capital gains scale to income scale is discriminatory. If that is discriminatory, then so is the fact that we have tax brackets based on income.
 
buying the votes of the many with the coins of the few

As John Adams said, "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." Once the people are convinced that they can benefit at the expense of others, the end of the republic can't be far behind. Appeals to the mob and class warfare are always a sign of the transition from republic to empire.
 
Your statistic is based on the assumption that a non-equal capital gains scale to income scale is discriminatory. If that is discriminatory, then so is the fact that we have tax brackets based on income.

You are confusing apples and cinderblocks. I have always advocated taxing ALL FORMS OF INCOME at the same rates where ever they may fall on the schedules and charts. That is not at all discriminatory since ALL forms of income would be taxed at the same rate depending on where they fall on the schedule.

Capital gains taxed do the complete opposite. A person who earns a salary of $800,000.00 will pay 35%. A person who reaps capital gains of the same amount of $800,000.00 will pay only 15%. They both are on the same schedule accoriding to the same income level but the discriminatory preference for one type of income over another causes one to pay over twice as much taxes as the other.
 
and you have never given a rational argument why I should pay a higher effective rate than others.

I do not want you to pay any higher rate than anyone else in your income bracket. Why would you think that?
 
As John Adams said, "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." Once the people are convinced that they can benefit at the expense of others, the end of the republic can't be far behind. Appeals to the mob and class warfare are always a sign of the transition from republic to empire.

So what? John Adams can say anything he wants. So what?
 
You are confusing apples and cinder blocks. I have always advocated taxing ALL FORMS OF INCOME at the same rates where ever they may fall on the schedules and charts. That is not at all discriminatory since ALL forms of income would be taxed at the same rate depending on where they fall on the schedule.

Capital gains taxed do the complete opposite. A person who earns a salary of $800,000.00 will pay 35%. A person who reaps capital gains of the same amount of $800,000.00 will pay only 15%. They both are on the same schedule according to the same income level but the discriminatory preference for one type of income over another causes one to pay over twice as much taxes as the other.

And you are confusing apples and pickaxes.

If it doesn't matter where you get your income from, then there would be a single tax rate, regardless of income made, regardless of how much is made.

You can't think that different schedules with different rates based on source of income is discriminatory and NOT think that a schedule isn't discriminatory. Its almost as though you feel that people making different incomes is discriminatory itself.
 
And you are confusing apples and pickaxes.

If it doesn't matter where you get your income from, then there would be a single tax rate, regardless of income made, regardless of how much is made.

You can't think that different schedules with different rates based on source of income is discriminatory and NOT think that a schedule isn't discriminatory. Its almost as though you feel that people making different incomes is discriminatory itself.

You are confused.

Sources of income are one thing.
Levels of income are a different thing.

This is this, this isn't something else, this is this.
Robert DeNiro in THE DEERHUNTER

If anything I am recognizing the differences between your apples and pickaxes. Thanks for noticing. :)
 
Last edited:
I couldn't care less.

Easy to see why you are unaware the capital gains tax rate under Reagan was 33%. Over twice the rate it has been for the last decade.

Does that make Reagan a socialist?
 
Last edited:
Once the people are convinced that they can benefit at the expense of others, the end of the republic can't be far behind. Appeals to the mob and class warfare are always a sign of the transition from republic to empire.

Yes, you've hit the nail on the head. It's perfectly obvious that the wealthy and their lobbyists have purchased unequaled access and influence in order to rewrite the tax code as they see fit. How else could you explain the fact that billionaire hedge fund managers pay at a lower rate than mechanics who maintain their yachts?
 
Yes, you've hit the nail on the head. It's perfectly obvious that the wealthy and their lobbyists have purchased unequaled access and influence in order to rewrite the tax code as they see fit. How else could you explain the fact that billionaire hedge fund managers pay at a lower rate than mechanics who maintain their yachts?
I was under the impression that the rates for both earned income and for capital gains were progressive. Is this not the case?
 
I was under the impression that the rates for both earned income and for capital gains were progressive. Is this not the case?

It's the case that the top rate for LTCG is 15%.
 
Back
Top Bottom