Obamas plan, the “Buffet Rule” and economic illiteracy = Politics

[Trajan]

Highlights of Obamas Plan can be found here;

Obama Proposes New Plan to Cut Deficit - WSJ.com



First- investment income; capital gains, dividends ,( taxed presently at a flat 15%) is 90% of Buffetts “income”, as opposed to the income tax rate(s) which uses as an example of how badly taxs are skewed as he pays less of a RATE than his secretary.

Well Warren, for a smart guy you sound awfully dumb or you are in fact being willfully duplicitous.

Investment income is taxed at a lower rate than the progressive income (job) tax rates BECAUSE they are investments, long term vehicles that may OR not pay off, INCOME via a job is taxed on the progressive scale because it is straight pay for work, a known, short term quantity that needs little encouragement as we all must work, where in investments are rewarded with a lower rate as they incur risk.



Further he conveniently slides by the fact that this income stream was already taxed once as corporate income at the 35% rate (- deductions). The 15% on capital gains and dividends to individuals is in effect a second tax on the same money, which takes the rate closer to 45%.

200k/250K the new ‘Millionaires’ – the Tale of the tape;

Lets see;

-In 2009, 8,274 filers had income above $10 million, and they paid apporx. $54 billion in taxes.

-In 2009, 237,000 taxpayers had incomes above $1 million and they paid approx. $178 billion in taxes.

-In 2009, there were 3.9 million people who reported income over $200,000, there net tax’s?

$434 billion.


So, some back of the envelope numbers …….it appears approximately 90% of the tax filers who would pay more under Mr. Obama's plan, are the 200/250Ker’s, NOT the millionaires and 99.99% aren't billionaires…..

I am just a schmuck in my jami's behind a keyboard and I can find this information and the WH can’t?

Item-

Jan 2013-

>an Obamacare 3.8 % surtax on investment income on the 200/250ker's goes into effect.

>Medicare payroll tax on the 200/250ker's goes up 1.45% to 2.35%.

Why this is never discussed or part of the conversation?



Item-

>The expiration of the Bush tax cuts would push capital gains rates to 20%, a 25% increase.

> Dividends will be taxed at the 'income tax rate' , as high as 39%.

The 200/250k and above set already pays 90% of the fed.
taxes collected, 48% of folks pay no NET Federal taxes and half of those get taxes 'refunds' ( earned income 'EIC's') back, which in effect refunds their Fica contributions thereby taking them off the hook for their social security insurance and Medicare ….so who picks up that tab?

The 'evil rich' have shared the sacrifice I’d say. In fact, I'd say their is a lack of responsibility by those under that threshold.

Item-

His plan includes a 1.1 Trillion “cut” (which in effect already cooked into the books), for the Iraq and Afghanistan draw down, this nonsense was tried by Harry Reid back in the April/May dust up over closing the 2010 budget, it was rightly dismissed even by the left as BS to be kind.

And of course his plan calls for these taxes to start AFTER 2012 btw.



Unless there is some unknown Entitlement cuts, restructuring etc. we have not heard about? This is just Chicago soup kitchen Community Organizing populism, nothing more.



Here we are near 3 years in and hes never ever had one original idea/thought on the economy, seriously, this is just another punt, who saw that coming?

I didn’t, I thought at the very least he’d exhibit some outside the box thinking, what a sap I was, AND even after seeing the original debate on the you-tube below, goes to show how easy it is to be led when the media is completely in the tank and the populist bandwagon is running full steam ahead.

And a blast from the past, Charlie Rose puts the magic investment income question to Obama during a debate ( he drags out the higher rate sec. crap here to in 2008)…..this whole segment, as seen now is surreal, talk about coming full circle;


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpSDBu35K-8]Obama: Raise Taxes, Capital Gains - "For Purposes of Fairness" - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Nice effort you've put into your post here.

 

[Trajan]

thx....*shrugs* just browsing several sites a day, who know what you pick up I actually read a lot of this during the approach to the debt ceiling deadline, at- The New Republic......

 

[The Infidel]

Great job ...






Just be nice if the libs would pay attention.

 

[signelect]

It is easy to blame the guy at the top for all your problems and that is what our politicians are trying to do. Do some research and see how much money they are making on the sides from deal and contracts that they had done because they have passed laws to make what they do legal instead of calling it a bribe. I just heard that this past year their increased their take on legal payments from contractors that they have influence over by 27 million dollars. That does not count the number of congressional family members who are getting paid from either the government or a contractor the congressman benefits from and I would be the salaries don't make the abilities. It is not just Obama although he will leave offce next year very rich but everyone inside the beltway believe that they are above the law and deserve to make the money even when we don't have it to pay them.

It is not their fault, we, the voters, have sat back and allowed them to get away with it. Wake up and vote for someone who has integrity if you can find one let me know and I will vote for them too.

 

[Wiseacre]

Hey Trajan, Obama is also proposing a cap on deductions and exemptions in the tax code for the rich that would net approx $405 billion in higher taxes paid for ten years starting in 2013. He's really going after them big time, in every conceivable way. I cannot believe anybody can think they can do this and still grow an economy. Unfreakinbelievable.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

The rumor has it that his secretary actually paid less of a percentage than he did.
Which is not surprising.
I am taxed at 28%, before this economy collapse I was at 33%.
So Warren could go on about me in the same way as his secretary...but I don't pay 28%.
I have a daughter in college, I have a 529 plan for my son, I have pre-tax 401k...adding all of this and I am below 20%.
And unless his secretary has no children, is unmarried, has no pre-tax investments etc. etc. etc. - she sure as hell doesn't pay 33% either.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Hey Trajan, Obama is also proposing a cap on deductions and exemptions in the tax code for the rich that would net approx $405 billion in higher taxes paid for ten years starting in 2013. He's really going after them big time, in every conceivable way. I cannot believe anybody can think they can do this and still grow an economy. Unfreakinbelievable.

I agree - however I call bullshit.
First - it is over 10 years...and $405 Bn over 10 years is peanuts considering we will soon have $15 trillion in debt.
Secondly it doesn't begin till 2 years.

The chances that this tax hike will stay in place for 10 years is exactly zero. And Obama is well aware of this. Which is why everyone is asking how is this thing paid for when he has already backed away from entitlement cuts as of today, and this $405bn will never take place.

Only in Obamaland can you introduce a bill to cut the deficit - that would actually increase the deficit.

 

[Trajan]

The rumor has it that his secretary actually paid less of a percentage than he did.
Which is not surprising.
I am taxed at 28%, before this economy collapse I was at 33%.
So Warren could go on about me in the same way as his secretary...but I don't pay 28%.
I have a daughter in college, I have a 529 plan for my son, I have pre-tax 401k...adding all of this and I am below 20%.
And unless his secretary has no children, is unmarried, has no pre-tax investments etc. etc. etc. - she sure as hell doesn't pay 33% either.

OR a home? ????

I know, I was thinking about that too.......sounds like a a set up to me.

and exploring this further, I just didn't have the energy to do it so, low and behold? WSJ did it for me in their article this morning, so lets explode this myth further;

this chart reflects the tax rates paid by folks who made more than $1 million, in AGI (adjusted gross income)= 23.3%.

Buffet and many of those in his range who can, will naturally take 'pay' via Capital gains- bonds, stock etc. , because they pay a lower rate on that, then they would on a salary is taxed at the higher income rate......econ. 101.

Buffet then shields it as he plows it into his foundations and the one he shares with with Bill Gates....seriously, who do they think they are kidding? Well, they are kidding Obama I guess.

IF obama believes what he is saying he ;

a) lacks ability to interpret simple English and grade school math which would make him what? Well, if I may borrow this, in Jillian's view- someone with a Fox viewer level IQ.

b) this is all political, he has ZERO to contribute positively to the debate and the countries economic well being, so this is where he lands.....

c) hes a straight out ideologue and he will follow that star wherever it leads.




AND, lets not forget, they had their go at this via LBJ's last Sec. of Treasury who got the ball rolling on the Alternative Minimum Tax. (AMT).

BUT congress right and left enacts a write out of the AMT application every year becasue they screwed it up ( whats new? their slogan should be "We've been bringing you Incompetence for 40 years!") when they wrote it- they didn't index it which means it would sweep up like 25 million people who most especially live on those High tax Edens (blue states) in the upper middle class etc.

 

[edthecynic]

Highlights of Obamas Plan can be found here;

Obama Proposes New Plan to Cut Deficit - WSJ.com



First- investment income; capital gains, dividends ,( taxed presently at a flat 15%) is 90% of Buffetts “income”, as opposed to the income tax rate(s) which uses as an example of how badly taxs are skewed as he pays less of a RATE than his secretary.

Well Warren, for a smart guy you sound awfully dumb or you are in fact being willfully duplicitous.

Investment income is taxed at a lower rate than the progressive income (job) tax rates BECAUSE they are investments, long term vehicles that may OR not pay off, INCOME via a job is taxed on the progressive scale because it is straight pay for work, a known, short term quantity that needs little encouragement as we all must work, where in investments are rewarded with a lower rate as they incur risk.



Further he conveniently slides by the fact that this income stream was already taxed once as corporate income at the 35% rate (- deductions). The 15% on capital gains and dividends to individuals is in effect a second tax on the same money, which takes the rate closer to 45%.

Hell, if you want to continue your stupidity, you could argue the same money was taxed 3 times. After all, the consumer who spent money for the goods and services of the corporation paid tax on that money.

The fact remains the INDIVIDUAL who has a cap gain pays no tax on that gain as it grows and grows, like an unlimited IRA but with no penalties, until it is "realized." If the investor/speculator looses money he gets to deduct it, so "risk" is minimized and profit is maximized. But having the advantages of an unlimited IRA taxed at a low rate is not enough for these people, they have their paid shills, the GOP, arguing to eliminate the cap gains tax.

The purpose of the cap gains tax was to discourage SPECULATION, which is why it was originally set much higher. A lower or zero cap gains tax encourages speculation and boom and bust markets, the worst atmosphere for a stable economy. That's why the cap gains tax should be high and never ever changed.

 

[edthecynic]

The rumor has it that his secretary actually paid less of a percentage than he did.
Which is not surprising.
I am taxed at 28%, before this economy collapse I was at 33%.
So Warren could go on about me in the same way as his secretary...but I don't pay 28%.
I have a daughter in college, I have a 529 plan for my son, I have pre-tax 401k...adding all of this and I am below 20%.
And unless his secretary has no children, is unmarried, has no pre-tax investments etc. etc. etc. - she sure as hell doesn't pay 33% either.

OR a home? ????

I know, I was thinking about that too.......sounds like a a set up to me.

and exploring this further, I just didn't have the energy to do it so, low and behold? WSJ did it for me in their article this morning, so lets explode this myth further;

this chart reflects the tax rates paid by folks who made more than $1 million, in AGI (adjusted gross income)= 23.3%.

Like all CON$ervative stats, that chart is deliberately misleading. It mixes wage income over a million, from doctors, lawyers, athletes, movie stars, etc., all taxed as wages, with cap gains income over a million making it look like cap gains millionaires pay more than 15%.

 

[editec]

I can certainly understand why this nations superwealthy (that would be those whose net worths is staggeringly high) object to capital gains tax increases.

Clipping coupons is how most of them make their money.

And I do think it a mistake to increase taxes on people AT THIS TIME.

When the economy recovers (if ever) is the time to start thinking about raising taxes to deal with the national debt.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

The rumor has it that his secretary actually paid less of a percentage than he did.
Which is not surprising.
I am taxed at 28%, before this economy collapse I was at 33%.
So Warren could go on about me in the same way as his secretary...but I don't pay 28%.
I have a daughter in college, I have a 529 plan for my son, I have pre-tax 401k...adding all of this and I am below 20%.
And unless his secretary has no children, is unmarried, has no pre-tax investments etc. etc. etc. - she sure as hell doesn't pay 33% either.

OR a home? ????

I know, I was thinking about that too.......sounds like a a set up to me.

and exploring this further, I just didn't have the energy to do it so, low and behold? WSJ did it for me in their article this morning, so lets explode this myth further;

this chart reflects the tax rates paid by folks who made more than $1 million, in AGI (adjusted gross income)= 23.3%.

Buffet and many of those in his range who can, will naturally take 'pay' via Capital gains- bonds, stock etc. , because they pay a lower rate on that, then they would on a salary is taxed at the higher income rate......econ. 101.

Buffet then shields it as he plows it into his foundations and the one he shares with with Bill Gates....seriously, who do they think they are kidding? Well, they are kidding Obama I guess.

IF obama believes what he is saying he ;

a) lacks ability to interpret simple English and grade school math which would make him what? Well, if I may borrow this, in Jillian's view- someone with a Fox viewer level IQ.

b) this is all political, he has ZERO to contribute positively to the debate and the countries economic well being, so this is where he lands.....

c) hes a straight out ideologue and he will follow that star wherever it leads.




AND, lets not forget, they had their go at this via LBJ's last Sec. of Treasury who got the ball rolling on the Alternative Minimum Tax. (AMT).

BUT congress right and left enacts a write out of the AMT application every year becasue they screwed it up ( whats new? their slogan should be "We've been bringing you Incompetence for 40 years!") when they wrote it- they didn't index it which means it would sweep up like 25 million people who most especially live on those High tax Edens (blue states) in the upper middle class etc.

Well well...here is my surprised look :
Leave it up to the CBO and the WHite House to NOT count deductions for below $1 mil filers - but assume every possible deduction for $millionaire filers.

I smelled a turkey when he first announced this. As stated earlier I knew my current tax rate is 28%, but after deductions and pre-tax investments and college plans - I am paying well below 20%.
As the saying goes - "liars tell lies".

 

[rdean]

Highlights of Obamas Plan can be found here;

Obama Proposes New Plan to Cut Deficit - WSJ.com



First- investment income; capital gains, dividends ,( taxed presently at a flat 15%) is 90% of Buffetts “income”, as opposed to the income tax rate(s) which uses as an example of how badly taxs are skewed as he pays less of a RATE than his secretary.

Well Warren, for a smart guy you sound awfully dumb or you are in fact being willfully duplicitous.

Investment income is taxed at a lower rate than the progressive income (job) tax rates BECAUSE they are investments, long term vehicles that may OR not pay off, INCOME via a job is taxed on the progressive scale because it is straight pay for work, a known, short term quantity that needs little encouragement as we all must work, where in investments are rewarded with a lower rate as they incur risk.



Further he conveniently slides by the fact that this income stream was already taxed once as corporate income at the 35% rate (- deductions). The 15% on capital gains and dividends to individuals is in effect a second tax on the same money, which takes the rate closer to 45%.

200k/250K the new ‘Millionaires’ – the Tale of the tape;

Lets see;

-In 2009, 8,274 filers had income above $10 million, and they paid apporx. $54 billion in taxes.

-In 2009, 237,000 taxpayers had incomes above $1 million and they paid approx. $178 billion in taxes.

-In 2009, there were 3.9 million people who reported income over $200,000, there net tax’s?

$434 billion.


So, some back of the envelope numbers …….it appears approximately 90% of the tax filers who would pay more under Mr. Obama's plan, are the 200/250Ker’s, NOT the millionaires and 99.99% aren't billionaires…..

I am just a schmuck in my jami's behind a keyboard and I can find this information and the WH can’t?

Item-

Jan 2013-

>an Obamacare 3.8 % surtax on investment income on the 200/250ker's goes into effect.

>Medicare payroll tax on the 200/250ker's goes up 1.45% to 2.35%.

Why this is never discussed or part of the conversation?



Item-

>The expiration of the Bush tax cuts would push capital gains rates to 20%, a 25% increase.

> Dividends will be taxed at the 'income tax rate' , as high as 39%.

The 200/250k and above set already pays 90% of the fed.
taxes collected, 48% of folks pay no NET Federal taxes and half of those get taxes 'refunds' ( earned income 'EIC's') back, which in effect refunds their Fica contributions thereby taking them off the hook for their social security insurance and Medicare ….so who picks up that tab?

The 'evil rich' have shared the sacrifice I’d say. In fact, I'd say their is a lack of responsibility by those under that threshold.

Item-

His plan includes a 1.1 Trillion “cut” (which in effect already cooked into the books), for the Iraq and Afghanistan draw down, this nonsense was tried by Harry Reid back in the April/May dust up over closing the 2010 budget, it was rightly dismissed even by the left as BS to be kind.

And of course his plan calls for these taxes to start AFTER 2012 btw.



Unless there is some unknown Entitlement cuts, restructuring etc. we have not heard about? This is just Chicago soup kitchen Community Organizing populism, nothing more.



Here we are near 3 years in and hes never ever had one original idea/thought on the economy, seriously, this is just another punt, who saw that coming?

I didn’t, I thought at the very least he’d exhibit some outside the box thinking, what a sap I was, AND even after seeing the original debate on the you-tube below, goes to show how easy it is to be led when the media is completely in the tank and the populist bandwagon is running full steam ahead.

And a blast from the past, Charlie Rose puts the magic investment income question to Obama during a debate ( he drags out the higher rate sec. crap here to in 2008)…..this whole segment, as seen now is surreal, talk about coming full circle;


Obama: Raise Taxes, Capital Gains - "For Purposes of Fairness" - YouTube

None of the Right wingnuts on this board are millionaires. Why are so worried about people they can't really relate to? People who certainly don't care about them.

 

[RWWallpaper]

Highlights of Obamas Plan can be found here;

Obama Proposes New Plan to Cut Deficit - WSJ.com



First- investment income; capital gains, dividends ,( taxed presently at a flat 15%) is 90% of Buffetts “income”, as opposed to the income tax rate(s) which uses as an example of how badly taxs are skewed as he pays less of a RATE than his secretary.

Well Warren, for a smart guy you sound awfully dumb or you are in fact being willfully duplicitous.

Investment income is taxed at a lower rate than the progressive income (job) tax rates BECAUSE they are investments, long term vehicles that may OR not pay off, INCOME via a job is taxed on the progressive scale because it is straight pay for work, a known, short term quantity that needs little encouragement as we all must work, where in investments are rewarded with a lower rate as they incur risk.



Further he conveniently slides by the fact that this income stream was already taxed once as corporate income at the 35% rate (- deductions). The 15% on capital gains and dividends to individuals is in effect a second tax on the same money, which takes the rate closer to 45%.

200k/250K the new ‘Millionaires’ – the Tale of the tape;

Lets see;

-In 2009, 8,274 filers had income above $10 million, and they paid apporx. $54 billion in taxes.

-In 2009, 237,000 taxpayers had incomes above $1 million and they paid approx. $178 billion in taxes.

-In 2009, there were 3.9 million people who reported income over $200,000, there net tax’s?

$434 billion.


So, some back of the envelope numbers …….it appears approximately 90% of the tax filers who would pay more under Mr. Obama's plan, are the 200/250Ker’s, NOT the millionaires and 99.99% aren't billionaires…..

I am just a schmuck in my jami's behind a keyboard and I can find this information and the WH can’t?

Item-

Jan 2013-

>an Obamacare 3.8 % surtax on investment income on the 200/250ker's goes into effect.

>Medicare payroll tax on the 200/250ker's goes up 1.45% to 2.35%.

Why this is never discussed or part of the conversation?



Item-

>The expiration of the Bush tax cuts would push capital gains rates to 20%, a 25% increase.

> Dividends will be taxed at the 'income tax rate' , as high as 39%.

The 200/250k and above set already pays 90% of the fed.
taxes collected, 48% of folks pay no NET Federal taxes and half of those get taxes 'refunds' ( earned income 'EIC's') back, which in effect refunds their Fica contributions thereby taking them off the hook for their social security insurance and Medicare ….so who picks up that tab?

The 'evil rich' have shared the sacrifice I’d say. In fact, I'd say their is a lack of responsibility by those under that threshold.

Item-

His plan includes a 1.1 Trillion “cut” (which in effect already cooked into the books), for the Iraq and Afghanistan draw down, this nonsense was tried by Harry Reid back in the April/May dust up over closing the 2010 budget, it was rightly dismissed even by the left as BS to be kind.

And of course his plan calls for these taxes to start AFTER 2012 btw.



Unless there is some unknown Entitlement cuts, restructuring etc. we have not heard about? This is just Chicago soup kitchen Community Organizing populism, nothing more.



Here we are near 3 years in and hes never ever had one original idea/thought on the economy, seriously, this is just another punt, who saw that coming?

I didn’t, I thought at the very least he’d exhibit some outside the box thinking, what a sap I was, AND even after seeing the original debate on the you-tube below, goes to show how easy it is to be led when the media is completely in the tank and the populist bandwagon is running full steam ahead.

And a blast from the past, Charlie Rose puts the magic investment income question to Obama during a debate ( he drags out the higher rate sec. crap here to in 2008)…..this whole segment, as seen now is surreal, talk about coming full circle;


Obama: Raise Taxes, Capital Gains - "For Purposes of Fairness" - YouTube

None of the Right wingnuts on this board are millionaires. Why are so worried about people they can't really relate to? People who certainly don't care about them.

...so if you are not a member of a particular group you cannot be of the opinion that targeting them is unfair? GTFO with that shit...

 

[Jarhead]

Highlights of Obamas Plan can be found here;

Obama Proposes New Plan to Cut Deficit - WSJ.com



First- investment income; capital gains, dividends ,( taxed presently at a flat 15%) is 90% of Buffetts “income”, as opposed to the income tax rate(s) which uses as an example of how badly taxs are skewed as he pays less of a RATE than his secretary.

Well Warren, for a smart guy you sound awfully dumb or you are in fact being willfully duplicitous.

Investment income is taxed at a lower rate than the progressive income (job) tax rates BECAUSE they are investments, long term vehicles that may OR not pay off, INCOME via a job is taxed on the progressive scale because it is straight pay for work, a known, short term quantity that needs little encouragement as we all must work, where in investments are rewarded with a lower rate as they incur risk.



Further he conveniently slides by the fact that this income stream was already taxed once as corporate income at the 35% rate (- deductions). The 15% on capital gains and dividends to individuals is in effect a second tax on the same money, which takes the rate closer to 45%.

200k/250K the new ‘Millionaires’ – the Tale of the tape;

Lets see;

-In 2009, 8,274 filers had income above $10 million, and they paid apporx. $54 billion in taxes.

-In 2009, 237,000 taxpayers had incomes above $1 million and they paid approx. $178 billion in taxes.

-In 2009, there were 3.9 million people who reported income over $200,000, there net tax’s?

$434 billion.


So, some back of the envelope numbers …….it appears approximately 90% of the tax filers who would pay more under Mr. Obama's plan, are the 200/250Ker’s, NOT the millionaires and 99.99% aren't billionaires…..

I am just a schmuck in my jami's behind a keyboard and I can find this information and the WH can’t?

Item-

Jan 2013-

>an Obamacare 3.8 % surtax on investment income on the 200/250ker's goes into effect.

>Medicare payroll tax on the 200/250ker's goes up 1.45% to 2.35%.

Why this is never discussed or part of the conversation?



Item-

>The expiration of the Bush tax cuts would push capital gains rates to 20%, a 25% increase.

> Dividends will be taxed at the 'income tax rate' , as high as 39%.

The 200/250k and above set already pays 90% of the fed.
taxes collected, 48% of folks pay no NET Federal taxes and half of those get taxes 'refunds' ( earned income 'EIC's') back, which in effect refunds their Fica contributions thereby taking them off the hook for their social security insurance and Medicare ….so who picks up that tab?

The 'evil rich' have shared the sacrifice I’d say. In fact, I'd say their is a lack of responsibility by those under that threshold.

Item-

His plan includes a 1.1 Trillion “cut” (which in effect already cooked into the books), for the Iraq and Afghanistan draw down, this nonsense was tried by Harry Reid back in the April/May dust up over closing the 2010 budget, it was rightly dismissed even by the left as BS to be kind.

And of course his plan calls for these taxes to start AFTER 2012 btw.



Unless there is some unknown Entitlement cuts, restructuring etc. we have not heard about? This is just Chicago soup kitchen Community Organizing populism, nothing more.



Here we are near 3 years in and hes never ever had one original idea/thought on the economy, seriously, this is just another punt, who saw that coming?

I didn’t, I thought at the very least he’d exhibit some outside the box thinking, what a sap I was, AND even after seeing the original debate on the you-tube below, goes to show how easy it is to be led when the media is completely in the tank and the populist bandwagon is running full steam ahead.

And a blast from the past, Charlie Rose puts the magic investment income question to Obama during a debate ( he drags out the higher rate sec. crap here to in 2008)…..this whole segment, as seen now is surreal, talk about coming full circle;


Obama: Raise Taxes, Capital Gains - "For Purposes of Fairness" - YouTube

None of the Right wingnuts on this board are millionaires. Why are so worried about people they can't really relate to? People who certainly don't care about them.

I see.

So we should not support an ideology...we should only support what is in our personal best interest.

So the save the whale people are those that actually want to eat whales and are afraid that if we dont save them, they wont be able to eat them.

Got it.

 

[Wiseacre]

" None of the Right wingnuts on this board are millionaires. "

Well I ain't no millionaire, I got a family that sees to it that I never will be either. LOL, look dude, I don't espouse the conservative line cuz I worship rich people or suck after 'em, I do it cuz I think it's the best way to help the rest of us get more jobs and lead better lives. I know they end up with most of the increase in wealth year to year, but I have yet to see a better economic model that provides as much economic growth and jobs as free market capitalism does.

Sure, you can raise taxes on 'em, especially capital gains taxes to even out the income inequality. But it's gonna mean a lower standard of living for everybody else and fewer jobs.

 

[Trajan]

Highlights of Obamas Plan can be found here;

Obama Proposes New Plan to Cut Deficit - WSJ.com



First- investment income; capital gains, dividends ,( taxed presently at a flat 15%) is 90% of Buffetts “income”, as opposed to the income tax rate(s) which uses as an example of how badly taxs are skewed as he pays less of a RATE than his secretary.

Well Warren, for a smart guy you sound awfully dumb or you are in fact being willfully duplicitous.

Investment income is taxed at a lower rate than the progressive income (job) tax rates BECAUSE they are investments, long term vehicles that may OR not pay off, INCOME via a job is taxed on the progressive scale because it is straight pay for work, a known, short term quantity that needs little encouragement as we all must work, where in investments are rewarded with a lower rate as they incur risk.



Further he conveniently slides by the fact that this income stream was already taxed once as corporate income at the 35% rate (- deductions). The 15% on capital gains and dividends to individuals is in effect a second tax on the same money, which takes the rate closer to 45%.

200k/250K the new ‘Millionaires’ – the Tale of the tape;

Lets see;

-In 2009, 8,274 filers had income above $10 million, and they paid apporx. $54 billion in taxes.

-In 2009, 237,000 taxpayers had incomes above $1 million and they paid approx. $178 billion in taxes.

-In 2009, there were 3.9 million people who reported income over $200,000, there net tax’s?

$434 billion.


So, some back of the envelope numbers …….it appears approximately 90% of the tax filers who would pay more under Mr. Obama's plan, are the 200/250Ker’s, NOT the millionaires and 99.99% aren't billionaires…..

I am just a schmuck in my jami's behind a keyboard and I can find this information and the WH can’t?

Item-

Jan 2013-

>an Obamacare 3.8 % surtax on investment income on the 200/250ker's goes into effect.

>Medicare payroll tax on the 200/250ker's goes up 1.45% to 2.35%.

Why this is never discussed or part of the conversation?



Item-

>The expiration of the Bush tax cuts would push capital gains rates to 20%, a 25% increase.

> Dividends will be taxed at the 'income tax rate' , as high as 39%.

The 200/250k and above set already pays 90% of the fed.
taxes collected, 48% of folks pay no NET Federal taxes and half of those get taxes 'refunds' ( earned income 'EIC's') back, which in effect refunds their Fica contributions thereby taking them off the hook for their social security insurance and Medicare ….so who picks up that tab?

The 'evil rich' have shared the sacrifice I’d say. In fact, I'd say their is a lack of responsibility by those under that threshold.

Item-

His plan includes a 1.1 Trillion “cut” (which in effect already cooked into the books), for the Iraq and Afghanistan draw down, this nonsense was tried by Harry Reid back in the April/May dust up over closing the 2010 budget, it was rightly dismissed even by the left as BS to be kind.

And of course his plan calls for these taxes to start AFTER 2012 btw.



Unless there is some unknown Entitlement cuts, restructuring etc. we have not heard about? This is just Chicago soup kitchen Community Organizing populism, nothing more.



Here we are near 3 years in and hes never ever had one original idea/thought on the economy, seriously, this is just another punt, who saw that coming?

I didn’t, I thought at the very least he’d exhibit some outside the box thinking, what a sap I was, AND even after seeing the original debate on the you-tube below, goes to show how easy it is to be led when the media is completely in the tank and the populist bandwagon is running full steam ahead.

And a blast from the past, Charlie Rose puts the magic investment income question to Obama during a debate ( he drags out the higher rate sec. crap here to in 2008)…..this whole segment, as seen now is surreal, talk about coming full circle;

None of the Right wingnuts on this board are millionaires. Why are so worried about people they can't really relate to? People who certainly don't care about them.

because 90% of you and your ilk, (yup, you've got an Ilk Deanio) are sniveling worms who don't chew the leather or join in the hunt, not because you cannot , but because you don't want to and know you can get away with it..........and you'll make excuse for others so as to have excuses made for yourself.

I live and die on MY ability to make things happen in MY life........any failures are MINE and MINE alone, therefore victories and their Fruits? They are mine and my tribes too.

Its called personal responsibility. There fore I admire these folks, good for them, cause it aint easy.

WHEN you get all that? then you'll know why I don't have the envy and jealously masquerading as that mewling concern you folks parade around for the sheeple to convince them that you love them and care.

I care for the helpless, the clueless? you are on your own.

 

[Trajan]

and from the AP;

FACT CHECK: Are rich taxed less than secretaries?

By STEPHEN OHLEMACHER, Associated Press – 12 hours ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama says he wants to make sure millionaires are taxed at higher rates than their secretaries. The data say they already are.

"Warren Buffett's secretary shouldn't pay a higher tax rate than Warren Buffett. There is no justification for it," Obama said as he announced his deficit-reduction plan this week. "It is wrong that in the United States of America, a teacher or a nurse or a construction worker who earns $50,000 should pay higher tax rates than somebody pulling in $50 million."

On average, the wealthiest people in America pay a lot more taxes than the middle class or the poor, according to private and government data. They pay at a higher rate, and as a group, they contribute a much larger share of the overall taxes collected by the federal government.

The 10 percent of households with the highest incomes pay more than half of all federal taxes. They pay more than 70 percent of federal income taxes, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

In his White House address on Monday, Obama called on Congress to increase taxes by $1.5 trillion as part of a 10-year deficit reduction package totaling more than $3 trillion. He proposed that Congress overhaul the tax code and impose what he called the "Buffett rule," named for the billionaire investor.

The rule says, "People making more than $1 million a year should not pay a smaller share of their income in taxes than middle-class families pay." Buffett wrote in a recent piece for The New York Times that the tax rate he paid last year was lower than that paid by any of the other 20 people in his office.

"Middle-class families shouldn't pay higher taxes than millionaires and billionaires," Obama said. "That's pretty straightforward. It's hard to argue against that."

There may be individual millionaires who pay taxes at rates lower than middle-income workers. In 2009, 1,470 households filed tax returns with incomes above $1 million yet paid no federal income tax, according to the Internal Revenue Service. But that's less than 1 percent of the nearly 237,000 returns with incomes above $1 million.

This year, households making more than $1 million will pay an average of 29.1 percent of their income in federal taxes, including income taxes, payroll taxes and other taxes, according to the Tax Policy Center, a Washington think tank.

Households making between $50,000 and $75,000 will pay an average of 15 percent of their income in federal taxes.

Lower-income households will pay less. For example, households making between $40,000 and $50,000 will pay an average of 12.5 percent of their income in federal taxes. Households making between $20,000 and $30,000 will pay 5.7 percent.

The latest IRS figures are a few years older — and limited to federal income taxes — but show much the same thing. In 2009, taxpayers who made $1 million or more paid on average 24.4 percent of their income in federal income taxes, according to the IRS.

Those making $100,000 to $125,000 paid on average 9.9 percent in federal income taxes. Those making $50,000 to $60,000 paid an average of 6.3 percent.

much more at-
The Associated Press: FACT CHECK: Are rich taxed less than secretaries?

 

[Trajan]

Highlights of Obamas Plan can be found here;

Obama Proposes New Plan to Cut Deficit - WSJ.com



First- investment income; capital gains, dividends ,( taxed presently at a flat 15%) is 90% of Buffetts “income”, as opposed to the income tax rate(s) which uses as an example of how badly taxs are skewed as he pays less of a RATE than his secretary.

Well Warren, for a smart guy you sound awfully dumb or you are in fact being willfully duplicitous.

Investment income is taxed at a lower rate than the progressive income (job) tax rates BECAUSE they are investments, long term vehicles that may OR not pay off, INCOME via a job is taxed on the progressive scale because it is straight pay for work, a known, short term quantity that needs little encouragement as we all must work, where in investments are rewarded with a lower rate as they incur risk.



Further he conveniently slides by the fact that this income stream was already taxed once as corporate income at the 35% rate (- deductions). The 15% on capital gains and dividends to individuals is in effect a second tax on the same money, which takes the rate closer to 45%.

Hell, if you want to continue your stupidity, you could argue the same money was taxed 3 times. After all, the consumer who spent money for the goods and services of the corporation paid tax on that money.

The fact remains the INDIVIDUAL who has a cap gain pays no tax on that gain as it grows and grows, like an unlimited IRA but with no penalties, until it is "realized." If the investor/speculator looses money he gets to deduct it, so "risk" is minimized and profit is maximized. But having the advantages of an unlimited IRA taxed at a low rate is not enough for these people, they have their paid shills, the GOP, arguing to eliminate the cap gains tax.

The purpose of the cap gains tax was to discourage SPECULATION, which is why it was originally set much higher. A lower or zero cap gains tax encourages speculation and boom and bust markets, the worst atmosphere for a stable economy. That's why the cap gains tax should be high and never ever changed.

you don't even know how to read and, how to craft an argument.....and, you're an angry crank.....*shrugs*


Definition of REALITY
1
: the quality or state of being real
2
a (1) : a real event, entity, or state of affairs <his dream became a reality> (2) : the totality of real things and events <trying to escape from reality> b : something that is neither derivative nor dependent but exists necessarily
3
: television programming that features videos of actual occurrences (as a police chase, stunt, or natural disaster) —often used attributively <reality TV>
— in reality
: in actual fact



In philosophy, reality is the state of things as they actually exist, rather than as they may appear or might be imagined.[1] In a wider definition, reality includes everything that is and has been, whether or not it is observable or comprehensible. A still more broad definition includes everything that has existed, exists, or will exist, not just in the mind, or even more broadly also including what is only in the mind.

Historically, philosophers have sometimes considered reality to include nonexistent things such as "gold mountains" in a sense referred to as a subsistence, as well. By contrast existence is often restricted solely to being (compare with nature).

Reality is often contrasted with what is imaginary, delusional, in the mind, dreams, what is abstract, what is false, or what is fictional. To reify is to make more real, and to abstract is the opposite. The truth refers to what is real, while falsity refers to what is not. Fictions are not considered real.