More than 1,400 millionaires paid no U.S. income taxes in 2009, according to the IRS

[Big Fitz]

And whose taxes do you want to raise to replace the revenue you lose from that?

Your own?

Cut out unconstitutional spending and you don't need that money.

Problem solved.

do you have any confidence that either party (save maybe paul) will do that in your lifetime?

Barring a Weimar Republic incident or conservative/founders revolution.... not really. Depressing to say, but till a crisis hits the pocketbooks and punch clocks of the average voter, they do not change their habits. Look at the 2008 election, then the 2010. What changed the most? Pocketbooks and punchclocks. The pain came home.

 

[DontBeStupid]

But a coal miner cannot lose his entire fortune in that same day, Cantbesmart.

True. He can only lose his life.


See above.

Additionally, the only traders who lose their entire fortune in one day are the bad ones.

BTW, how many more jobs does a coal miner make as compared to an investor?

They both make none.

All fun aside, it is pretty clear how little you think of people who actually work for a living. That's fine. You're entitled to whatever twisted opinion you want. But the rest of us know that this country does not move forward by punishing working class Americans.

You are a short sighted little man... and I use the term 'man' loosely.

I'm sure you use the term "man" loosely in more than just online discussions. Clearly you think some "men" are more important than others.

 

[The T]

Here's you're explanation:

Capital gains taxes should be ELIMINATED... COMPLETELY.

And whose taxes do you want to raise to replace the revenue you lose from that?

Your own?

Cut out unconstitutional spending and you don't need that money.

Problem solved.

Simple concept...but when is the left ever concerned with Article 1, Section 8?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Here's you're explanation:

Capital gains taxes should be ELIMINATED... COMPLETELY.

And whose taxes do you want to raise to replace the revenue you lose from that?

Your own?

Cut out unconstitutional spending and you don't need that money.

Problem solved.

No, you have to propose something that could actually get done. It's a waste of time talking about things that no Congress and no President will ever do.

 

[DontBeStupid]

And whose taxes do you want to raise to replace the revenue you lose from that?

Your own?

Cut out unconstitutional spending and you don't need that money.

Problem solved.

Simple concept...but when is the left ever concerned with Article 1, Section 8?

U.S. Constitution - Article 1 Section 8 - The U.S. Constitution Online - USConstitution.net

Whose interpretation? Yours? Or an educated person's?

 

[NYcarbineer]

And whose taxes do you want to raise to replace the revenue you lose from that?

Your own?

Cut out unconstitutional spending and you don't need that money.

Problem solved.

Simple concept...but when is the left ever concerned with Article 1, Section 8?

Neither is the Right, except for a few of you crackpot extremists.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

For wanting capital gains to be taxed the SAME as wages? Explain that.

Here's you're explanation:

Capital gains taxes should be ELIMINATED... COMPLETELY.

And whose taxes do you want to raise to replace the revenue you lose from that?

Your own?

I pay more than enough already thank you. Let's get you and the forty-seven per centers to start coughing up some cash.. coupled with eliminating about 25% of the federal budget.

We'll be fine.

 

[CaughtInTheMid]

since i am actually a trader, and most in this thread probably aren't, does that mean my opinion means more?

Absolutely not. I'm glad to hear your input. Wish I could do your line of work, but I'm not skilled or funded in a way I can at this time of my life.

bummer. there are some topics here where certain people's opinion means more (since they worked in that field).

 

[DontBeStupid]

Here's you're explanation:

Capital gains taxes should be ELIMINATED... COMPLETELY.

And whose taxes do you want to raise to replace the revenue you lose from that?

Your own?

I pay more than enough already thank you. Let's get you and the forty-seven per centers to start coughing up some cash.. coupled with eliminating about 25% of the federal budget.

We'll be fine.

The Right's total argument against taxes, right there in a nut shell.

 

[DontBeStupid]

since i am actually a trader, and most in this thread probably aren't, does that mean my opinion means more?

Absolutely not. I'm glad to hear your input. Wish I could do your line of work, but I'm not skilled or funded in a way I can at this time of my life.

bummer. there are some topics here where certain people's opinion means more (since they worked in that field).

You're on the wrong board for that. It's actually the opposite here. For example, the handful of us who actually have degrees in Economics are openly insulted and ridiculed.

Here, you'll get more for your opinion if you DON'T know the subject.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

And whose taxes do you want to raise to replace the revenue you lose from that?

Your own?

I pay more than enough already thank you. Let's get you and the forty-seven per centers to start coughing up some cash.. coupled with eliminating about 25% of the federal budget.

We'll be fine.

The Right's total argument against taxes, right there in a nut shell.

How do you make that leap that I'm against taxes? Taxes are a necessary evil.. I get that. Good grief...

 

[CaughtInTheMid]

Absolutely not. I'm glad to hear your input. Wish I could do your line of work, but I'm not skilled or funded in a way I can at this time of my life.

bummer. there are some topics here where certain people's opinion means more (since they worked in that field).

You're on the wrong board for that. It's actually the opposite here. For example, the handful of us who actually have degrees in Economics are openly insulted and ridiculed.

Here, you'll get more for your opinion if you DON'T know the subject.

i wasn't talking about economics.

 

[eflatminor]

What rich guy puts his entire life and livelihood on the line when he makes an investment?

Pretty much anytime an entrepreneur starts his own business.

 

[The T]

What rich guy puts his entire life and livelihood on the line when he makes an investment?

Pretty much anytime an entrepreneur starts his own business.

Indeed...thus the axiom: Takes money to make money...and to further? Takes alot of risk...Hell? This Republic was built on one huge risk.

 

[GoneBezerk]

Uh Stupid, we believe the capital gains tax should exist but not at the same level as income tax.

It's been proven if you raise the Capital Gains tax too high, then investment goes down and the economy gets worse.

You won't be able to convince any "conservatives" here of needed changes to the tax code. "Conservatives" incorrectly believe that taxes on capital gains are double taxation, that that money was earned first and they refuse to acknowledge capital loss.

They simply don't understand what's going on.

 

[The T]

I pay more than enough already thank you. Let's get you and the forty-seven per centers to start coughing up some cash.. coupled with eliminating about 25% of the federal budget.

We'll be fine.

The Right's total argument against taxes, right there in a nut shell.

How do you make that leap that I'm against taxes? Taxes are a necessary evil.. I get that. Good grief...

They are indeed necessary to fund the government...even the Founders knew it.

But they warned about the degree, and the balance. Right now? The balance is in favour of Government by a long shot...too large to the point it is choking off the citizen.

 

[DontBeStupid]

The Right's total argument against taxes, right there in a nut shell.

How do you make that leap that I'm against taxes? Taxes are a necessary evil.. I get that. Good grief...

They are indeed necessary to fund the government...even the Founders knew it.

But they warned about the degree, and the balance. Right now? The balance is in favour of Government by a long shot...too large to the point it is choking off the citizen.

Really? Our tax burden is the lowest its been in generations. No one argues against that.

 

[BillyV]

It makes no sense because you're choosing to not think about it.

Person A works in a factory. He works hard all year building products and at the end of the year he has earned $50,000.

Person B sits in front of his computer at home and moves money around in the stock market. One day he gets lucky and makes $50,000. He then decides he doesn't need to do anything more the rest of the year.

Under our current system, Person B is rewarded with a lower tax rate and Person A is punished with a higher one. Person A is punished for working hard all year and building products.

How long before Person A stops doing that?

Actually, in most cases where someone was relying on capital gains for income (if we assume Person B is trading often), both would pay the exact same rate; the capital gains rate is only available if you have held the stock for more than one year. And in any case, fairness is only one consideration in the capital gains tax discussion, and not a particularly useful one (although I do think it’s fair to tax capital gains at a lower rate – despite arguments to the contrary, most increases in stock price are a result of income earned by the company that has already been taxed once). The difference between capital gains and other forms of income is how easily the former can be avoided by simply choosing not to sell an asset. Studies have shown over and over that high capital gains rates are accompanied by low capital gains tax collections, and vice versa. If I own a building that I bought for $1,000 30 years ago and it is now worth $10 million, I might be more likely to hang on to it rather than pay the tax on the $9,999,000 gain; the market may not pay enough of a premium for me to decide it’s worth selling, especially if the rate is 35-40% ($3.5-4 million). However, that analysis is likely to change if the rate is only 15% and I would only pay $1.5 million. So the question is – would you rather collect $1.5 million today or perhaps $4 million 20 years from now?
In 1977, the capital gains tax rate was almost 40%. Over the next several years, the rate was both lowered and raised; the effects on collections were predictable; while rates were hovering near 40%, capital gains realized (resulting in tax income) was only 1.5% of GDP. However, when the rates were reduced to 20% in 1982, the gains increased to 4.1% of GDP. When they were raised back to 28% in 1988, the gains decreased to 2.3%. When they were again reduced to 21% in 1998, the gains increased again to 4.3%.

It seems pretty clear that investors are highly influenced by tax rates, and that they will be more likely to follow the economics of a transaction and create taxable gains if tax policy does not exert an undue influence. This actually increases the amount of revenue generated. So chances are, raising capital gains rates will not have the desired effect of raising revenues, and short term traders do not get the benefit of those rates. However, we can all feel better about “getting” those darn rich people.

TDP - Tax Rates vs. Revenues

 

[DontBeStupid]

It makes no sense because you're choosing to not think about it.

Person A works in a factory. He works hard all year building products and at the end of the year he has earned $50,000.

Person B sits in front of his computer at home and moves money around in the stock market. One day he gets lucky and makes $50,000. He then decides he doesn't need to do anything more the rest of the year.

Under our current system, Person B is rewarded with a lower tax rate and Person A is punished with a higher one. Person A is punished for working hard all year and building products.

How long before Person A stops doing that?

Actually, in most cases where someone was relying on capital gains for income (if we assume Person B is trading often), both would pay the exact same rate;

Would you feel better if I said Person B earned income from qualified dividends? In that case, Person B wouldn't have to do anything productive all year and could earn more than a coal miner while paying less in taxes.

 

[Dr Grump]

I had to stop reading when you said the world was not fooled. Many intelligence agencies around the world believed Saddam, and took him at his word.

There would be no point in continuing any discussion if you can not acknowledge that fact,.

Those in opposition were found to have profited from the BS for oil program.

You seem a bit slow just sayin................

The fact you won't address my other points speaks volumes of your mind set.

The world fell lock step behind the US because they believed YOUR intelligence. Some did not, including my govt. Including me.

Just because they profited from the oil program doesn't mean they believed Sadman had WMDs. There are plenty of threads on other boards (some now closed like the old CNN one) where I, and plenty of others, didn't believe what was going down and pointed to reasons why.

If you fell for it, that is on you...

Let's see - I have said from Day 1 there were know WMD's. You naively believed there were. I was right, your were wrong. If I'm slow what does that make you? Lobotomised?