Page 110 of 159 FirstFirst ... 1060100108109110111112120 ... LastLast
Results 1,091 to 1,100 of 1582

Thread: State of the Union Address

  1. #1091
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

    Re: State of the Union Address

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    Your comment meant to attack me is absurd. I state a legal principle that is how it is in the world of reality and you have the unmitigated gall to attack me for it!?!?!?!?!?

    Amazing.
    The world of reality is always considered a personal attack by a liberal. My comments weren't a personal attack on you but defined liberalism quite well. All liberals ever care about is getting more money never how that money is wasted

  2. #1092
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    07-25-17 @ 12:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    5,878

    Re: State of the Union Address

    Quote Originally Posted by liblady View Post
    i don't think deductions for creating jobs are loopholes.
    So some deductions are loopholes and others are not? See I just disagree with this. It is another example of government meddling in the (supposed) free market. These are EXACTLY the activities that distort markets and promote the boom/bust cycle.

  3. #1093
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

    Re: State of the Union Address

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    I don't think that's accurate. Top marginal rates were considerably higher in the 70s and 80s and are now extremely low by historical standards.
    Still waiting for you to explain the Tax Relief Act of 1997 on tax revenue since you are quick to claim that higher tax rates create lower deficits?

  4. #1094
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: State of the Union Address

    Look there is no denying that dividends are taxed at the corporate level and at the investor level. Personally I don't see why they aren't deductible at the corporate level as are other business expenses. It would certainly encourage more dividend paying. But they should be taxed as regular income to the holder of the dividends. What would the net effect be? Probably not much.

  5. #1095
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    07-25-17 @ 12:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    5,878

    Re: State of the Union Address

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    I don't think that's accurate. Top marginal rates were considerably higher in the 70s and 80s and are now extremely low by historical standards.
    That's true but 'marginal' is not effective. The only credible data that I have found reveals that since 1979 the effective individual Federal Income tax rate has held relatively unchanged, between 19.8 and 23.0%, at least to 2005.

    http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/98xx/doc9...tes_Letter.pdf

  6. #1096
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: State of the Union Address

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    Still waiting for you to explain the Tax Relief Act of 1997 on tax revenue since you are quick to claim that higher tax rates create lower deficits?
    What's there to explain? There always has to be a balance in taxation so that we can maintain a sufficient revenue stream, but without overburdening the economy. In '97 they decided that the Clinton tax hikes had gone a little too far, so they rolled them back a little. Much as Reagan raised taxes about a dozen times after his initial, too-large tax cuts. I would argue that Reagan didn't raise taxes enough, and Clinton cut them too much in '97. But it is always a balance. Taxes can be too high and they can be too low.
    Last edited by AdamT; 01-27-12 at 01:32 PM.

  7. #1097
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:42 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    89,877

    Re: State of the Union Address

    Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
    The world of reality is always considered a personal attack by a liberal. My comments weren't a personal attack on you but defined liberalism quite well. All liberals ever care about is getting more money never how that money is wasted
    That is just silly as well as false. I never defined liberalism.

    Perhaps you can quote my definition and prove that you are not lying?
    __________________________________________________ _
    There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.... John Rogers

  8. #1098
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    07-25-17 @ 12:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    5,878

    Re: State of the Union Address

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    Look there is no denying that dividends are taxed at the corporate level and at the investor level. Personally I don't see why they aren't deductible at the corporate level as are other business expenses. It would certainly encourage more dividend paying. But they should be taxed as regular income to the holder of the dividends. What would the net effect be? Probably not much.
    WOW, I had never thought of that. Sounds like a pretty good alternative. It COULD compel companies to ‘share the wealth’ with their stockholders thus stimulating more investment. The ‘double taxation’ would be reduced, especially on those of us who don’t pay at the ‘35%’. I would expect the net effect to be substantial. More investment into markets, more economic growth, more tax receipts.

  9. #1099
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

    Re: State of the Union Address

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    What's there to explain? There always has to be a balance in taxation so that we can maintain a sufficient revenue stream, but without overburdening the economy. In '97 they decided that the Clinton tax hikes had gone a little too far, so they rolled them back a little. Much Reagan raised taxes about a dozen times after his initial, too-large tax cuts. I would argue that Reagan didn't raise taxes enough, and Clinton cut them too much in '97. But it is always a balance. Taxes can be too high and they can be too low.
    Nice attempt at diversion, you claimed that higher tax rates led to more tax revenue and a reduced deficit. Clinton claimed a surplus AFTER the Tax Relief Act of 1997 which reduced tax rates after having higher deficits prior to August 1997, That destroys your argument

  10. #1100
    Sage
    Conservative's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    67,270

    Re: State of the Union Address

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    That is just silly as well as false. I never defined liberalism.

    Perhaps you can quote my definition and prove that you are not lying?
    Yes, you did without knowing it. Oh, look, another personal attack because again I showed that you continue to care more about more tax revenue vs. how tax dollars are spent.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •