Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
The increase in wealth that the AAPL stock gained from the time you bought it has NOT been taxed, not now and not while it grew. It will only be taxed for the FIRST time when and if you sell it. You don't pay cap gains taxes on the dollars you bought the stock with, and you know it, so don't give me that crap that cap gains has already been taxed.You obviously never bought or sold a stock in your life or you would know that only the gains over and above what you paid for the stock is taxed, and only when the stock is sold, as I said before. That increase in stock value has never been taxed and is not taxed while it is growing. It is only taxed when "realized" AKA "sold," and then at a special lower rate.Do what?
1) its not your money
2) it is not your money
3) it is not your money
Do you libs understand that? do you also understand that taxes are paid on capital gains? do you also understand that most of that wealth has been taxed once?
and before you claim thats not true, I trade stocks with money I earned from my job
Free ride?
Capital gains tax in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
JRK earns the welath by working 10 hours a day
Pays taxes on that wealth
JRK puts part of whats left at risk by buying stocks in an American company that will us that wealth to expand there product, to create wealth and jobs for others
JRK makes gains on that wealth he put at risk (sometimes)
JRK pays taxes on that welath that you my friend at no time lifted one finger to help, and now you call me greedy and you want more
THATS NUTS
It seems that growing tax free is not enough of a special tax privilege to satisfy the greedy, and neither is a discounted tax rate when the stock is sold, the elitist cap gains tycoons want a completely free ride and they have their GOP puppets working overtime to get them that free ride.
bought and sold close to amillion dollars last year
The wealth I use to trade stocks I got from working, that welath has been taxed once, before I ever used it to buy AAPL
Why in gods name you would make up some BS story like that is beyond me.
You need to start acutalay thinking and using your god given brainYou libs really need to do some DD
The increase in wealth that the AAPL stock gained from the time you bought it has NOT been taxed, not now and not while it grew. It will only be taxed for the FIRST time when and if you sell it. You don't pay cap gains taxes on the dollars you bought the stock with, and you know it, so don't give me that crap that cap gains has already been taxed.You obviously never bought or sold a stock in your life or you would know that only the gains over and above what you paid for the stock is taxed, and only when the stock is sold, as I said before. That increase in stock value has never been taxed and is not taxed while it is growing. It is only taxed when "realized" AKA "sold," and then at a special lower rate.
It seems that growing tax free is not enough of a special tax privilege to satisfy the greedy, and neither is a discounted tax rate when the stock is sold, the elitist cap gains tycoons want a completely free ride and they have their GOP puppets working overtime to get them that free ride.
bought and sold close to amillion dollars last year
The wealth I use to trade stocks I got from working, that welath has been taxed once, before I ever used it to buy AAPL
Why in gods name you would make up some BS story like that is beyond me.
At far lower rates the regular income. SO why do you think that poor people should subside rich people?Very deceptive use of language. First off, most married filers file joint returns, yet you use the term "people" to obscure that. Second, and more importantly, you use the term "taxes" instead of "income taxes". Even people making under $50K pay significant taxes. They'd include excise taxes on phone bills, tobacco, alcohol, tires, gasoline, etc..
listen retard.. it was clear he was talking about FEDERAL INCOME TAX.. and if you're too damn poor to pay taxes you should not be buying tobacco and alcohol,, why should the taxpayers subsidize you're nasty addictions?
Do you libs understand that? do you also understand that taxes are paid on capital gains?Again, that is only the taxes on wage earners. Capital gains tycoons can make millions each year and pay nothing on that income. Their cap gains are like an unlimited IRA growing tax free with no early withdrawal penalty. When they do finally cash in their capital assets they get a lower tax rate, but they still are not satisfied. They want their puppets in the GOP to eliminate ALL taxes on cap gains, the greedy fucks!According to statistics compiled from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) by the Tax Foundation, those people making above $50,000 had an effective tax rate of 14.1 percent, and carried 93.3 percent of the total tax burden.
In contrast, Americans making less than $50,000 had an effective tax rate of 3.5 percent and their total share of the tax burden was just 6.7 percent.
Americans making more than $250,000 had an effective tax rate of 23.4 percent and their total share of the tax burden was 45.7 percent.
Out of the 143 million tax returns that were filed with the IRS in 2010, 58 million or 41 percent of those filers were non-payers.
In other words, only 85 million actually paid taxes.
Americans Making Over $50,000 a Year Paid 93.3 Percent of All Taxes in 2010 | CNSNews.com
No one is denying that the common wage earners pay nearly all the taxes, but its not fair that the elitist Capital Gains Tycoons get a free ride.
No dumbass the money you make from capital gains hasn't already been taxes. You've been told this a dozen times but you still keep spewing the same bullshit. It is as if you cannot read and are just copy and pasting like a total ignorant tool.do you also understand that most of that wealth has been taxed once?
Here are some more factsJRK earns the welath by working 10 hours a day
Pays taxes on that wealth
JRK puts part of whats left at risk by buying stocks in an American company that will us that wealth to expand there product, to create wealth and jobs for others
JRK makes gains on that wealth he put at risk (sometimes)
JRK pays taxes on that welath that you my friend at no time lifted one finger to help, and now you call me greedy and you want more
We were within $163 billion of a balanced budget in 2007 as sure as Clinton left a surplus!We were with-in 163 billion dollars of a balanced budget in 2007.
Yes dumbass only the gains will be taxedThe increase in wealth that the AAPL stock gained from the time you bought it has NOT been taxed, not now and not while it grew. It will only be taxed for the FIRST time when and if you sell it. You don't pay cap gains taxes on the dollars you bought the stock with, and you know it, so don't give me that crap that cap gains has already been taxed.bought and sold close to amillion dollars last year
The wealth I use to trade stocks I got from working, that welath has been taxed once, before I ever used it to buy AAPL
Why in gods name you would make up some BS story like that is beyond me.
The welath I used to purchase that stock has
The gians I make (hopefully) on that stock will be taxed when I sell it
Because as a result billionaires pay lower taxes then those in poverty[
Now I am still confused as to why you think that thes rates are not enough?
ROTFL so what you want is the same thing you are attempting to argue against.[
I want the millionaires investing, I want them to be taxed on there profits no more than I am, also no less
ROTFL you yourself even has said that revenues dropped by more then half a trillion dollars; that is despite higher GDP.[
We were with-in 163 billion dollars of a balanced budget in 2007. Now we are 700 billion dollars in spending additions further away from a balnced budget as well as another 657 billion in lost revenue
thats a 1.5 trillion dollar defict
Get real job growth to match 07 levels
go back to the 07 budget with inflation
and we are there
This is not a revenue issue
This is a policy issue
Furthermore all the polices you advocate make the economy worse or are things that 5 yaer olds would make
We were within $163 billion of a balanced budget in 2007 as sure as Clinton left a surplus!We were with-in 163 billion dollars of a balanced budget in 2007.
Do you deny the Clinton SURPLUS???????
We were within $163 billion of a balanced budget in 2007 as sure as Clinton left a surplus!We were with-in 163 billion dollars of a balanced budget in 2007.
Do you deny the Clinton SURPLUS???????
According to statistics compiled from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) by the Tax Foundation, those people making above $50,000 had an effective tax rate of 14.1 percent, and carried 93.3 percent of the total tax burden.
In contrast, Americans making less than $50,000 had an effective tax rate of 3.5 percent and their total share of the tax burden was just 6.7 percent.
Americans making more than $250,000 had an effective tax rate of 23.4 percent and their total share of the tax burden was 45.7 percent.
Out of the 143 million tax returns that were filed with the IRS in 2010, 58 million or 41 percent of those filers were non-payers.
In other words, only 85 million actually paid taxes.
Americans Making Over $50,000 a Year Paid 93.3 Percent of All Taxes in 2010 | CNSNews.com
Very deceptive use of language. First off, most married filers file joint returns, yet you use the term "people" to obscure that. Second, and more importantly, you use the term "taxes" instead of "income taxes". Even people making under $50K pay significant taxes. They'd include excise taxes on phone bills, tobacco, alcohol, tires, gasoline, etc..
Not one Republican voted for the Clinton tax increase that paid the bills. They don't get to claim they had anything to do with the success of that tax increase.We were within $163 billion of a balanced budget in 2007 as sure as Clinton left a surplus!We were with-in 163 billion dollars of a balanced budget in 2007.
Do you deny the Clinton SURPLUS???????
and who ran the house and the senate?
You avoided admitting that Clinton had a surplus, but you seem to be trying to give the GOP some credit for something. CON$ claim there was no Clinton surplus but give the GOP credit for the non-existent surplus.We were within $163 billion of a balanced budget in 2007 as sure as Clinton left a surplus!We were with-in 163 billion dollars of a balanced budget in 2007.
Do you deny the Clinton SURPLUS???????
Clinton had a GOP congress as did GWB in 06 (the birth place of the 07 budget)
GWB had 2 wars to fight that we had no choice in fighting.
Clinton did not have the additions of homeland security, another needed addition to prevent another 9-11
Hey, Cinton when he got a GOP congress did ok, never said he didn't
According to statistics compiled from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) by the Tax Foundation, those people making above $50,000 had an effective tax rate of 14.1 percent, and carried 93.3 percent of the total tax burden.
In contrast, Americans making less than $50,000 had an effective tax rate of 3.5 percent and their total share of the tax burden was just 6.7 percent.
Americans making more than $250,000 had an effective tax rate of 23.4 percent and their total share of the tax burden was 45.7 percent.
Out of the 143 million tax returns that were filed with the IRS in 2010, 58 million or 41 percent of those filers were non-payers.
In other words, only 85 million actually paid taxes.
Americans Making Over $50,000 a Year Paid 93.3 Percent of All Taxes in 2010 | CNSNews.com
Very deceptive use of language. First off, most married filers file joint returns, yet you use the term "people" to obscure that. Second, and more importantly, you use the term "taxes" instead of "income taxes". Even people making under $50K pay significant taxes. They'd include excise taxes on phone bills, tobacco, alcohol, tires, gasoline, etc..
He specifically mentioned the IRS (I put that in blue for your viewing pleasure), that specifically means federal income tax. It's pretty obvious to me what he was talking about, despite your attempt at obfuscation.
Not one Republican voted for the Clinton tax increase that paid the bills. They don't get to claim they had anything to do with the success of that tax increase.We were within $163 billion of a balanced budget in 2007 as sure as Clinton left a surplus!
Do you deny the Clinton SURPLUS???????
and who ran the house and the senate?
You avoided admitting that Clinton had a surplus, but you seem to be trying to give the GOP some credit for something. CON$ claim there was no Clinton surplus but give the GOP credit for the non-existent surplus.We were within $163 billion of a balanced budget in 2007 as sure as Clinton left a surplus!
Do you deny the Clinton SURPLUS???????
Clinton had a GOP congress as did GWB in 06 (the birth place of the 07 budget)
GWB had 2 wars to fight that we had no choice in fighting.
Clinton did not have the additions of homeland security, another needed addition to prevent another 9-11
Hey, Cinton when he got a GOP congress did ok, never said he didn't
Again, the 163 billion Bush 2007 deficit is as real as the Clinton surplus from the tax increase every Republican voted against. If there was no Clinton surplus then the Bush 2007 deficit was $500 billion.
The Clinton tax increase on the wealthy and middle class tax cut paid for the budgets. Without that revenue there would be deficits as far as the eye can see. The proof is once Bush replaced Clinton, the same GOP congress never had another "surplus" again!!!! Tax cuts and deficit spending was what the GOP congress produced without Clinton there to keep them in line.Not one Republican voted for the Clinton tax increase that paid the bills. They don't get to claim they had anything to do with the success of that tax increase.and who ran the house and the senate?
Nope
welfare reform
budgets
shutting down the federal govt to get those budgets had nothing to do with that surplus
years after Clintons tax increase
Back to your patented dumb act again.You avoided admitting that Clinton had a surplus, but you seem to be trying to give the GOP some credit for something. CON$ claim there was no Clinton surplus but give the GOP credit for the non-existent surplus.Clinton had a GOP congress as did GWB in 06 (the birth place of the 07 budget)
GWB had 2 wars to fight that we had no choice in fighting.
Clinton did not have the additions of homeland security, another needed addition to prevent another 9-11
Hey, Cinton when he got a GOP congress did ok, never said he didn't
Again, the 163 billion Bush 2007 deficit is as real as the Clinton surplus from the tax increase every Republican voted against. If there was no Clinton surplus then the Bush 2007 deficit was $500 billion.
Do what?
Do you have any idea what we are talking about?
what does the actual cost for 2001 have to do with actual cost for 2007?
wow Obama really brainwashed a good percentage of this country. to think that poor folks pay any kind of tax.(sales don't count, it won't pay for infrastructure or anything ACTUALLY needed in this country) it's nuts to be that jealous of well off people. Yeah it must be nice so why don't ya just get motivated to go get "your own" money. lolThe Clinton tax increase on the wealthy and middle class tax cut paid for the budgets. Without that revenue there would be deficits as far as the eye can see. The proof is once Bush replaced Clinton, the same GOP congress never had another "surplus" again!!!! Tax cuts and deficit spending was what the GOP congress produced without Clinton there to keep them in line.Not one Republican voted for the Clinton tax increase that paid the bills. They don't get to claim they had anything to do with the success of that tax increase.
Nope
welfare reform
budgets
shutting down the federal govt to get those budgets had nothing to do with that surplus
years after Clintons tax increase
hey starcraftzzz
what part of ignore dont you get?
No-one cares what you have to say.
Just go away. Insulting your fellow Americans is for people who have issues
I wish you luck with resolving that
