Page 42 of 109 FirstFirst ... 3240414243445292 ... LastLast
Results 411 to 420 of 1085

Thread: What purpose did the tax cut for the wealthiest serve?

  1. #411
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Theoretical Physics Lab
    Last Seen
    01-06-15 @ 11:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    25,120

    Re: What purpose did the tax cut for the wealthiest serve?

    Quote Originally Posted by lpast
    Thats why the whining that the Poor and Middleclass that are powerless abuse the rich is just garbage, the rich manipulate EVERYTHING from the economy to politics, some whine the rich pay to much taxs...thats because the rich have to much of the WEALTH, which they got off the poor and middleclass
    Why does more wealth necessarily mean more tax burden? Does Bill Gates use more highway than you? Is Steven Jobs more defended by our military than you? Do police and firefighters respond faster to Warren Buffet than you?

    It's already been determined ad nauseum that the rich pay a MUCH higher tax burden than the low and middle classes. When the top 1% pays more than the bottom 96%, you shouldn't hear a word from that 96%.

  2. #412
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Windy City
    Last Seen
    09-21-11 @ 11:55 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    397

    Re: What purpose did the tax cut for the wealthiest serve?

    Quote Originally Posted by LesGovt View Post
    Apparently, we differ over what the United States is. It is not a democracy. We do not have equal say. Look at the populations of California and Wyoming. Each state has two Senators. Which state do you think you would have a better chance of being heard by your Senator? .
    What about the House of Representatives? We may not have a true democracy in the literal sense of the word, but what the point I’m making is that the Billionaire is going to have a much louder voice in crafting policy than the One-thousandaire, even if they live in the same city, same state.



    Quote Originally Posted by LesGovt View Post
    You are assuming that wealthy people go around and hand out money to politicians for votes. I don't believe that most politicians vote that way.
    Les, these are exactly what campaign contributions are. Do you think Goldman Sachs gave Obama a million bucks in 2008 because they were move to tears by his “Yes We Can” speech? I don’t think so. When corporations give money it’s for a reason, and I also think the decisions of the largest corporations are generally controlled by those who are wealthiest in our country. Congresspeople want to get reelected and it’s only natural to keep your largest donors in mind when voting. This is not to say that they don’t have a free will and opinions of their own, just saying that money talks in many situations.



    Quote Originally Posted by LesGovt View Post
    or example, take whichever side of abortion you want, do you think that someone as rich as Bill Gates could persuade you to vote the opposite of your beliefs. I doubt it. Or, how about the Affordable Health Care Act which was recently passed. Do you believe that the Democrats were bought and paid for because they voted for it? And, were the Republicans bought and paid for because they voted against it? I don't think that was the case. I believe that philosophical differences exist between the GOP and the Dems and that is why bipartisan votes are difficult to come by. If people with money could just walk in a bribe people to vote the way they wanted them to, there would be no gridlock in Washington. George Soros would have the GOP voting as if they were Dems and the Koch Brothers would have Dems voting for GOP items..
    Now you are over-generalizing.

    Do I think that every vote a congressperson makes is directly related to a bribe? Answer is no. Do I think that congresspeople at times (especially with a key vote that will affect the way business will be done in America) can be persuaded with outside money (legally) in one way shape or form – of course.

    Not saying it’s evil, or it’s a big conspiracy, just saying that it’s human nature to look out for oneself and when the game is setup so that a congressperson can be manipulated through CASH one way shape or form, you’re gonna have problems.
    Last edited by David D.; 08-24-11 at 07:22 PM.

  3. #413
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:14 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    90,092

    Re: What purpose did the tax cut for the wealthiest serve?

    Quote Originally Posted by American View Post
    Where did this ever occur? OMG, you defend the Constitution??? Yeah, like the wolf defending the sheep.
    I have never stopped defending the Constitution. I noticed the painful absence of any attending evidence of any lack of evidence in your attack on me.
    __________________________________________________ _
    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

  4. #414
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:14 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    90,092

    Re: What purpose did the tax cut for the wealthiest serve?

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post
    More frantic postings--I am posting in reference to your claims, not your beliefs.

    the rich do not payer lower LTCG rates and they pay the highest STCG rates

    Capital gains tax in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    How can you participate in a discussion but yet be completely and utterly oblivious to the main points of that discussion? I know - willful blindness brought on by an ideological belief system.

    The facts are undeniable: capital gains are taxed at a lower rate than income would be for the people most likely to hold investments that pay decent levels of capital gains .... guess who that would be Turtle???????
    __________________________________________________ _
    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

  5. #415
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:14 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    90,092

    Re: What purpose did the tax cut for the wealthiest serve?

    Quote Originally Posted by TurtleDude View Post

    the tax rates on LTCG are not validly attacked by whining about which groups of tax payers may have LTCG income
    Its not whining to point out the painfully obvious that is truthful even if it is painful to you and that cause the whining to come from yourself. it is indeed relevant and important that certain groups of taxpayers have large amounts of capital gains income and certain groups of taxpayers tend not to have capital gains income or very low levels of capital gains income. And it is indeed relevant and important to the discussion that wealthy Americans would pay all of their income in the highest tax bracket but their large amounts of income from capital gains are taxed at half what their income would be for the same levels.

    from the earlier link for the tax Policy center

    The 3 percent of returns with AGI over $200,000 reported 31 percent of AGI and 83 percent of capital gains; the 0.3 percent with AGI over $1,000,000 reported 15 percent of AGI and 61 percent of capital gains. Many more Americans accrue capital gains on corporate shares they hold within tax-deferred employer-sponsored retirement plans, but they do not pay capital gains tax on these gains.
    Those numbers speak loud and speak volumes. That is discriminatory and unequal treatment of what should be considered as income.

    All sources of income should be taxed as such.

    Or can you now do Turtle what you have been unable to do up until this point - make a coherent and rational case for this discriminatory tax rate for capital gains?

    If a single person files for this year and declares $213,000 in taxable income, they will pay a rate of 33%.
    That same person declaring only $213,000 of long term capital gains only pays a rate of 15% - a preferential rate over a full 50% lower than that of other income.

    If a single person files for this year and declares $380,000 in taxable income, they will pay a rate of 35%.
    That same person declaring only $380,000 of long term capital gains only pays a rate of 15% - a preferential rate over 55% lower than that of other income.

    So please Turtle, do what you have unable to do in any thread on this board up to this moment - provide some intellectual and rational justification why this obvious discrimination should be allowed.
    Last edited by haymarket; 08-24-11 at 07:47 PM.
    __________________________________________________ _
    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

  6. #416
    Sage
    lpast's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Fla
    Last Seen
    05-21-16 @ 10:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    13,565

    Re: What purpose did the tax cut for the wealthiest serve?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gipper View Post
    Why does more wealth necessarily mean more tax burden? Does Bill Gates use more highway than you? Is Steven Jobs more defended by our military than you? Do police and firefighters respond faster to Warren Buffet than you?

    It's already been determined ad nauseum that the rich pay a MUCH higher tax burden than the low and middle classes. When the top 1% pays more than the bottom 96%, you shouldn't hear a word from that 96%.
    It comes with the ability to pay....there are many so called conservatives on here who say there should not be a minimum wage...tell me how can a single person live on 7.00 an hour...even in the cheapest cost of living area in the country.....The top pay the most because they have it and family of 4 making two minimum wage salaries cant MAKE it...they still pay sales tax and all the other fees...

  7. #417
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: What purpose did the tax cut for the wealthiest serve?

    Quote Originally Posted by lpast View Post
    ....there are many so called conservatives on here who say there should not be a minimum wage...tell me how can a single person live on 7.00 an hour...even in the cheapest cost of living area in the country.....
    You don't realize you just made the argument against minimum wage do you?

    The top pay the most because they have it and family of 4 making two minimum wage salaries cant MAKE it...they still pay sales tax and all the other fees...
    That is not the top payers problem.

  8. #418
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: What purpose did the tax cut for the wealthiest serve?

    Quote Originally Posted by lpast View Post
    It comes with the ability to pay....there are many so called conservatives on here who say there should not be a minimum wage...tell me how can a single person live on 7.00 an hour...even in the cheapest cost of living area in the country.....The top pay the most because they have it and family of 4 making two minimum wage salaries cant MAKE it...they still pay sales tax and all the other fees...
    That is absolutely correct. It also has to do with the painfully obvious fact that an economy cannot sustain itself when 85% of the country's wealth is concentrated in 20% of the population. It doesn't provide enough consumerism for our economy to prosper.
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  9. #419
    Sage

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:14 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    90,092

    Re: What purpose did the tax cut for the wealthiest serve?

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    You don't realize you just made the argument against minimum wage do you?


    Actually, he made a good argument for a significantly HIGHER minimum age.
    __________________________________________________ _
    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

  10. #420
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Last Seen
    07-19-17 @ 03:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    60,458

    Re: What purpose did the tax cut for the wealthiest serve?

    Quote Originally Posted by haymarket View Post
    Actually, he made a good argument for a significantly HIGHER minimum age.
    Nope. A minimum wage of 7.00 dollars is no different than a minimum wage of 50.00 dollars. The idea is economically unsound.

Page 42 of 109 FirstFirst ... 3240414243445292 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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