• 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!

Delaying Tax Vote Could Crash Stock Market

that's a false dichotomy; in both instances the individual is being productive. the main difference that i can see is that one form is taxed twice.


There is no double tax. Money that makes money is taxed at a lower rate. You are not taxed on the principle.
 
you might be a good teacher

what you are not is more educated about taxes than I am.

I am not saying what the tax code is

I am saying what a fair tax code SHOULD BE

learn the difference

And that is fine with me. Just DO NOT EVER think that you can criticize my teaching simply because I see things in government differently than you do.

And since you are saying what a fair tax should be , your previous comment about my knowledge of the tax code seems to be rather inappropriate since you are not basing your views on what is in the code at all.

You want to talk about pie in the sky? Go for it. The only problem is that you want the biggest piece of pie and you want everyone else to pay more so you can have it all to yourself.
 
There is no double tax. Money that makes money is taxed at a lower rate. You are not taxed on the principle.

corporate profits are where dividends come from and they are taxed twice
 
There is no double tax. Money that makes money is taxed at a lower rate. You are not taxed on the principle.

the labor which is represented by that money (labor i have stored in monetary form) has already been taxed; now it is taxed again? furthermore, it is taxed when it makes money and then again when i get it in the form of 'income'? maybe this is a subjective question; but it doesn't seem to me how this isn't double taxation.
 
And that is fine with me. Just DO NOT EVER think that you can criticize my teaching simply because I see things in government differently than you do.

And since you are saying what a fair tax should be , your previous comment about my knowledge of the tax code seems to be rather inappropriate since you are not basing your views on what is in the code at all.

You want to talk about pie in the sky? Go for it. The only problem is that you want the biggest piece of pie and you want everyone else to pay more so you can have it all to yourself.

and you want to eat pie you did nothing to bake or create merely because you exist in the same area as the cook
 
and you want to eat pie you did nothing to bake or create merely because you exist in the same area as the cook

not exactly - what i do want is a mutual understanding that we all occupy the same space... we all use the same public common resources .... we all use each other .... and we are all a society together
 
not exactly - what i do want is a mutual understanding that we all occupy the same space... we all use the same public common resources .... we all use each other .... and we are all a society together

but you want a system where the many can vote away the wealth of those who are a voting minority and you want the minority to pay for most of the stuff that those in the community use.

the fact that you exist in the same geopolitical area as I do does not create a just claim by you on the property I own

you and those who feel as you do always complain that the rich ought to be more "community minded" while your mindset seems to have problems telling the massive number of people who really give nothing that others will carry the load for them
 
the labor which is represented by that money (labor i have stored in monetary form) has already been taxed; now it is taxed again? furthermore, it is taxed when it makes money and then again when i get it in the form of 'income'? maybe this is a subjective question; but it doesn't seem to me how this isn't double taxation.

You should also include property taxes and sales taxes, government toll roads as well in your calculations. Along with government tariffs, gas taxes etc

All of which are paid for with taxed income
 
You should also include property taxes and sales taxes, government toll roads as well in your calculations. Along with government tariffs, gas taxes etc

All of which are paid for with taxed income

darn good point, and reason # 1,208 to move over to a retail-level sales tax.
 
darn good point, and reason # 1,208 to move over to a retail-level sales tax.

However

As the money that the retail store receives will be taxed, the money it pays to its employees will have been taxed so when they go and buy something that will be double taxed

The conundrum of it all.
 
There is no double tax. Money that makes money is taxed at a lower rate. You are not taxed on the principle.

Send me your paypal account no. and I'll explain the taxation of C Corps, earnings and profits, and accumulated earnings.
 
from Turtledude

but you want a system where the many can vote away the wealth of those who are a voting minority and you want the minority to pay for most of the stuff that those in the community use.

If you do not like representative democracy I suggest you find a nation more to your liking. It is the way it is and that is what it is.


the fact that you exist in the same geopolitical area as I do does not create a just claim by you on the property I own

The Constitution and the government of the people, by the people and for the people disagree with you on that.

you and those who feel as you do always complain that the rich ought to be more "community minded" while your mindset seems to have problems telling the massive number of people who really give nothing that others will carry the load for them

I suspect that much of the rich would not be where they are today if they had not done so on the backs of the common people by enslaving them, exploiting them and dominating them through a rigged and corrupt system for much of our sad history. The great mass of working people indeed have carried the load for them and made it possible for them to be where they are today.
 
If you do not like representative democracy I suggest you find a nation more to your liking. It is the way it is and that is what it is.

were we a representative democracy in 1800?

The Constitution and the government of the people, by the people and for the people disagree with you on that.

fascinating claim. where in the Constitution do you find a rejection of Jeffersons' oft-repeated warning against giving to some the 'right' to the product and property of others?

I suspect that much of the rich would not be where they are today if they had not done so on the backs of the common people by enslaving them, exploiting them and dominating them through a rigged and corrupt system for much of our sad history. The great mass of working people indeed have carried the load for them and made it possible for them to be where they are today.


then you have either no idea of the history you claim to have taught, or no idea of economics. fortunes are not made "off people's backs" unless it is literally slavery; and those who were rich via slavery were a tiny minority even in the antebellum South (and certainly they were ruined with the region after the War of the Rebellion). fortunes were made by helping others. the great mass of working people have benefited from the wealthy.
 
from Turtledude



If you do not like representative democracy I suggest you find a nation more to your liking. It is the way it is and that is what it is.




The Constitution and the government of the people, by the people and for the people disagree with you on that.



I suspect that much of the rich would not be where they are today if they had not done so on the backs of the common people by enslaving them, exploiting them and dominating them through a rigged and corrupt system for much of our sad history. The great mass of working people indeed have carried the load for them and made it possible for them to be where they are today.

my family liked this nation as it was original constituted for the most part. those who were around in the 1860's served in the Union army including the "hero of Fort Sumpter"
 
from cpwill

were we a representative democracy in 1800?

Do use a calendar which reads 1800? I do not. I would guess that the rest of America does not either.


The Constitution and the government of the people, by the people and for the people disagree with you on that.
fascinating claim. where in the Constitution do you find a rejection of Jeffersons' oft-repeated warning against giving to some the 'right' to the product and property of others?

that would be the 16th Amendment to the US Constitution. Perhaps yours is not a copy printed in the last century?

I stated

I suspect that much of the rich would not be where they are today if they had not done so on the backs of the common people by enslaving them, exploiting them and dominating them through a rigged and corrupt system for much of our sad history. The great mass of working people indeed have carried the load for them and made it possible for them to be where they are today.

and your response was

then you have either no idea of the history you claim to have taught, or no idea of economics. fortunes are not made "off people's backs" unless it is literally slavery; and those who were rich via slavery were a tiny minority even in the antebellum South (and certainly they were ruined with the region after the War of the Rebellion). fortunes were made by helping others. the great mass of working people have benefited from the wealthy.

You seem to have swallowed the kool aid in large vat fills. For every Henry Ford, how many workers did it take to produce "his" wealth? For every Rockefeller, how many workers did it take to produce "his" wealth? For every Carnegie, how many workers did it take to produce "his" wealth? Pick one hundred other names and the question is the same. And the answer remains the same. They are legion.

The system was rigged in their favor and they exploited it and exploited the vast majority of those who worked for them. Your wiseguy sarcastic comment about me not knowing history really cannot be that totally ignorant. Certainly you are not that ideologically sheltered not to know that all historians are not working for the Cato Institute and that there are views of history from very highly educated and respected people that differ radically and substantially with yours.

There seems to be a trend here among some right wingers to castigate and excoriate the intelligence of progressives simply because such folks have the bald faced temerity to take a different view of things. Mea culpa mea culpa mea maxima culpa.
 
Last edited:
I agree, but the better solution to that is to eliminate/reduce the corporate tax and have dividends taxed at the normal income rate.

that is an honest position though I oppose progressive tax rates. But at least you do understand that dividends are taxed twice and when some whine about the 15% rate they ignore the almost 40% cut that has already been taken out
 
Why would people rush to pull out their investments before a tax hike? That just doesn't make any sense. [/sarcasm]
 
Why would people rush to pull out their investments before a tax hike? That just doesn't make any sense. [/sarcasm]

Seeing as how the "crash" will be caused by people just pulling stocks from the market to avoid taxes, the actual value and strength of the companies isn't actually changing, so the "real" value of the stock would still be the same. Smart investors will see that those stocks are undervalued after the "crash" and pick them up for a tidy profit.

Of course, I think calling it a "crash" grossly overestimates the magnitude of what might happen.
 
link


This should be a wake up call to every lover of American liberty that we need to put the Democrats out of business permanently. There is not doubt that their behavior for last two years, and especially after the latest election, they have no love for their country. The lying, the corruption and the disrespect for the vote; they need to go. They know that this can happen, and want everyone's retirement to get ****ed up, so they can hash more savior plans to make people dependent on government.

On the contrary, it is an opportunity to make money. When the market crashed in 2008, I raised my weekly contribution into my 401K, and it looked pretty nice a year later when we were at about DOW 10,000 again. Why would you begrudge a small time capitalist like me the fruits of a market drop? Are you some kind of socialist?

But the market won't crash, and one of the guarantees of that is when people like you believe such a thing will happen.
 
At least that will get the socialistsumbeeches working.

Yes. Apparently certain political ideologies are for lazy people and some are for the industrious
 
Back
Top Bottom