• 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!

State of the Union Address

TurtleDude said:
silly me, I was under the impression that if I agree to work for someone, I agree to be the best possible worker I can be
Click to expand...

So?

And if the employer wants a healthy work force it is on them now. All costs included.
no more passing the buck to any risk pool where god forbid some one else might pay for another's healthcare.
 
j-mac said:
First off, the money invested, if was derived from a wage of some kind it was absolutely taxed
Click to expand...
You pay tax on the money you earn but you don't pay tax on the money you invest, it was taxed already. WTF is wrong with you people that you can't understand that?? It's not rocket science. Obviously, someone at Conservative headquarters handed out these marching orders very recently because the rightwing nuts have hit the ground running all over the Internet echoing this idiocy.

:roll::roll::roll:
 
Zyphlin said:
So you're saying the rest of what I said isn't true?

How about you put up and actually show me which of my numbers or statements...derived directly from the source provided...was incorrect? Or more were you just trying to white wash all the stuff that wasn't good for your guy in an analysis that was actually intellectually honest and instead decided to want to provide it in your stereotypically hyperpartisan fashion?
Click to expand...

Newt Gingrich a conservative Republican running for president, was the one who came up term "Food Stamp President." Typical bull****
 
TurtleDude said:
what you dishonestly ignore is that if I am paid X amount of money and pay tax on it and I pay you to cut my grass you pay tax on it but there has been an exchange of value and you have derived income from your actions which I pay you for

BIg difference
Click to expand...

so what? Two different people pay two their own tax obligation. Just like with capital gains.
 
Dickieboy said:
Just so I understand, a company generates revenue from a change in ‘owners’ of money. If I own stock in a company and they make a profit isn’t some miniscule portion of that profit mine? The company pays tax on that profit (including my miniscule part). They then MAY distribute any remaining in dividend (which represents my miniscule part of the original PRETAX profit) to me which I pay tax on. How is the ORIGINAL transfer of money not taxed twice?
Click to expand...

You are a shareholder.
The corporation is a legal entity with its own legal obligations. They are separate and distinct from yours. If they make a profit, they pay tax. When you receive your dividend as a shareholder, you then have earned income and you will pay your legal obligation on what you earned which is separate and distinct from the legal entity of the corporation.

That is basic law.
 
TurtleDude said:
asked and answered so many times I must conclude you are trying to disrupt the thread
Click to expand...

You are half right Turtle. It has been asked many many times.
You have never ever provided a defense of it other than the personal gain motivation for you.
 
TurtleDude said:
Sometimes searching for the answer yourself will lead to more enlightenment than having a wise man spoon feed you the answer. You are familiar with the socratic method I assume?
Click to expand...

It is intellectually dishonest to send Adam on a wild goose chase for something that does not exist. Unless one considers the justification that one simply wants more money to be the defense he is suppose to find.
 
haymarket said:
so what? Two different people pay two their own tax obligation. Just like with capital gains.
Click to expand...

it is dishonest to pretend that is what is happening
 
haymarket said:
It is intellectually dishonest to send Adam on a wild goose chase for something that does not exist. Unless one considers the justification that one simply wants more money to be the defense he is suppose to find.
Click to expand...

You know well that there have been dozens of posts explaining why LONG term capital gains are taxed less

those include

1) the risk element
2) to stimulate investment
3) the diminishing of the investment due to inflation

and it is why SHORT TERM capital gains are taxed the same as earned income

what is pathetic is people who are mad that some can avoid having earned income while having no problem with so many voters having no income tax
 
Dickieboy said:
So does that mean I am not a part owner of the corporation?
Click to expand...

Perhaps you should ask someone who actually understands corporate ownership

yes you are, and maybe you should ask Haymarket why he supports the government taking say 350K out of a corporate profit of one million and then the same government taking 40% of the dividends paid to the OWNERS (assuming they are "rich"). What this means is

start with one million and it is reduced by 350 to 650

then apply a 40% income tax (Haymarket wants dividends treated the "same" [he ignores this first cut of taxation which of course doesn't apply to your salary] to the 650 distributed as dividends. that is another 260K taken by the government

so the one million made by the private corporation is diminished by 610 thousand leaving only 390K for the owners

that pretty much defines a parasitic tax system
 
TurtleDude said:
Perhaps you should ask someone who actually understands corporate ownership
Click to expand...

Maybe so but it was my goal to walk through this one step at a time in an effort to understand where he (etal) and I (etal) differ in our opinions.
 
TurtleDude said:
Perhaps you should ask someone who actually understands corporate ownership

yes you are, and maybe you should ask Haymarket why he supports the government taking say 350K out of a corporate profit of one million and then the same government taking 40% of the dividends paid to the OWNERS (assuming they are "rich"). What this means is

start with one million and it is reduced by 350 to 650

then apply a 40% income tax (Haymarket wants dividends treated the "same" [he ignores this first cut of taxation which of course doesn't apply to your salary] to the 650 distributed as dividends. that is another 260K taken by the government

so the one million made by the private corporation is diminished by 610 thousand leaving only 390K for the owners

that pretty much defines a parasitic tax system
Click to expand...

Just to explain why this happens... (to others, TD)

Double Taxation [on dividends]
The two taxes that dividends are hit with are corporate income taxes and individual income taxes.

Corporate Income Taxes
Corporate income taxes are paid on any profits the company has before it pays dividends. According to the Motley Fool, corporate taxes can exceed 35 percent in the United States.

Individual Income Taxes
When the company pays dividends, the individual investors must report those dividends on their income taxes.

Effects
The double taxation greatly decreases the amount of profit that reaches and stays in the hands of the investor. According to the Tax Policy Center, if the corporate income tax is 34 percent and the personal income tax rate equals 33 percent, for each dollar of profit to be paid out in dividends, only 44 cents remains with the investor after taxes.

Considerations
If the dividend is a qualified dividend, meaning it is paid by a U.S. company or a qualified foreign company and you owned the dividend for a least 61 of the 121 days around the ex-dividend date, they dividend is taxed at the lower capital gains rates rather than your ordinary income tax rate.

Read more: Why Are Dividends Taxed Twice? | eHow.com Why Are Dividends Taxed Twice? | eHow.com
Click to expand...
 
TurtleDude said:
Perhaps you should ask someone who actually understands corporate ownership
Click to expand...

That clearly would not be you Turtle since you repeatedly seem ignorant to the fact that a corporation is a legal entity with its own separate legal obligations including taxes. A shareholder who gets dividends from owning that share or shares is a whole different entity with their own legal obligations of taxation. This is been explained to you over and over and over in thread after thread after thread by poster after poster after poster and you simply ignore it and skate on by with blinders on your eyes.

Again, for at least the tenth time from the Wikipedia article on CORPORATIONS - in fact the opening lines

A corporation is created under the laws of a state as a separate legal entity that has privileges and liabilities that are distinct from those of its members
Click to expand...

Not that this is going to do any good.
 
Last edited:
TurtleDude said:
You know well that there have been dozens of posts explaining why LONG term capital gains are taxed less

those include

1) the risk element
2) to stimulate investment
3) the diminishing of the investment due to inflation

and it is why SHORT TERM capital gains are taxed the same as earned income

what is pathetic is people who are mad that some can avoid having earned income while having no problem with so many voters having no income tax
Click to expand...

All you have done is to make a shorthand drive-by post listing three reasons without any explanation of HOW they do these things because of a lower capital gains tax or why the government should extend a discriminatory and preferential tax rate some 60% lower than other income in the same tax bracket for the top bracket.

In short, you offered NOTHING.
In short, you have proved NOTHING.
In short, you are still spouting beliefs and axioms and not actual evidence which can be verified and proven as true and factual.
 
haymarket said:
That clearly would not be you Turtle since you repeatedly seem ignorant to the fact that a corporation is a legal entity with its own separate legal obligations including taxes. A shareholder who gets dividends from owning that share or shares is a whole different entity with their own legal obligations of taxation. This is been explained to you over and over and over in thread after thread after thread by poster after poster after poster and you simply ignore it and skate on by with blinders on your eyes.

Again, for at least the tenth time from the Wikipedia article on CORPORATIONS - in fact the opening lines



Not that this is going to do any good.
Click to expand...

remind me of the number of corporations you own and your stock holdings (rounded to the nearest hundred k)

we understand why the big government types try to justify this double taxation

but the fact remains

the same pool of money is subjected to TWO CUTS by the government and since you want the tax on dividends to be the same as earned income tax (40% for people like me) that means the GOVERNMENT takes more than 60% of that pool of money

you can pretend its different entities BEING taxed but it is the same ENTITY TAKING the money

You can spew that you EXPLAINED IT and you still cannot figure out that this does not JUSTIFY such parasitic activity

Now I will EXPLAIN to you that I am tired of being told that its OK for the government to take that much money to make those who don't have the skill or productivity to actually invest money feel better
 
from Turtle to me

remind me of the number of corporations you own and your stock holdings (rounded to the nearest hundred k)
Click to expand...

I do not wish to use my personal financial situation as the evidence in this debate. It matters NOT how much stock I own or you own or anyone owns. I own stock. And that is enough said. Unlike others here, I do not base my political positions on if the sun shines on my own ass.


we understand why the big government types try to justify this double taxation
Click to expand...

One cannot justify what does exist. If your slur about big government types is aimed at me, you are a blind man throwing darts at a target in a different cave altogether. I do not believe in big government - whatever that phrase means to you.

but the fact remains

the same pool of money is subjected to TWO CUTS by the government and since you want the tax on dividends to be the same as earned income tax (40% for people like me) that means the GOVERNMENT takes more than 60% of that pool of money
Click to expand...

What do you not understand when you are told the reality over and over again that money is repeatedly taxed over and over and over and over again most often when it changes hands from one entity to a different entity. This is true when it changes hands from a corporations ( a separate legal entity with its own obligations of taxation) to a shareholder ( a separate legal entity with its own obligations of taxation)

you can pretend its different entities BEING taxed but it is the same ENTITY TAKING the money
Click to expand...

Nobody need to pretend. It is the legal reality of the situation. Double taxation is NOT based on the entity taking the money but on who is paying the money.




Now I will EXPLAIN to you that I am tired of being told that its OK for the government to take that much money to make those who don't have the skill or productivity to actually invest money feel better
Click to expand...

That is your personal opinion based on your priority of your own personal tax situation.
 
and your position is based on what advances the interests of the party that you work for and the union that you were a member of
 
poweRob said:
So you'd rather watch a man receive and enema than a woman have an orgasm? Interesting.
Click to expand...
Most of the time I'd rather watch the woman, but I would have to ponder it with Pelosi...
 
Last edited:
liblady said:
well, what's wrong with that?
Click to expand...

nothing but pretending its the moral high ground over someone who is tired of paying too much taxes is specious

he derives benefits from his dem masters winning elections and he pretends that is some sort of noble cause that trumps others objecting to paying more taxes so his Dem masters can use that to buy votes
 
Don't forget about Subchapter S Corporations...now that's a fun topic...

Oh...did I miss the part about Capital Gains being "Income". Sure it's income, but not Ordinary Income. Each are mutually exclusive and are subject to different rules.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom