real story on taxes

[Jarhead]

So prove it. The article wasn't specific about what was and wasn't included and excluded. What about capital gains taxes and income tax deferred because it was capital gains instead of earned income?

Since you don't know your response is as or more dishonest and misleading than the OP.

huh?
Prove it?

What the hell do you thin the reason IS for what the article describes.

Do you think the rich get write offs simply becuase people like them?

Jeez...do you have any idea why there are write offs and tax credits?

They are known as INSENTIVES to do what you otherwise may not do.

I am dealing with idiots.

I hope you understand the importance of an incentive over a tax increase or a mandate.

Incentive, or tax-breaks are not evil you know.

Thats the point I was making.
Tax credits and tax deductions were designed as incentives.
And without them, charities would be non existant wand we would have aboandoned buildings and communities all over the country.

 

[skeptic]

The "system" as you put it is designed for a lot more that what you say.

It is designed so the "top" 10% invest in ideas that create jobs for the other 90%..it is designed so that the top 10% invest in projects such as community development projects that are used by the lower 20%...

But this seldom ever happens anymore. The wealthy and even businesses are merely hoarding and not investing. And when they do invest it is usually abroad.

If you "HOARD" what you earn, then you are taxed on it.....so I dont understand what you are saying.

This article is referring to the income that is non taxable...whyich means it is used for charitable contributions or community investment projects, etc....

Capital gains are not taxed until they are cashed in, meanwhile they are hoarded, tax free, in usually non productive investments.

You don't appear to have any idea what you are talking about, and clearly a lot of that is because the OP was extremely short on details.

 

[Jarhead]

In this thread I have seen the words "hoard" and "capital gains" and "the rich"...

Amazing how those talking points words and phrases are simply tossed around by the left.

 

[skeptic]

What about capital gains taxes and income tax deferred because it was capital gains instead of earned income?

Since you don't know your response is as or more dishonest and misleading than the OP.

So do you think the government should send people bills who own homes for any market value gain they had that year as well?

Definitionally, the size of the "American economy" is the sum of all financial transactions that happen in the United States for a year. Like when you buy beer and cigarettes or when I sell stock. When someone doesn't sell something, that wasn't a financial transaction and it's not counted as part of the economy. If you start taxing people for holding an asset, then you are completely disassociating taxes from the economy and you are opening Pandora's box. I know you won't get this, but someone else might.

I see, you prefer to limit the "economy" merely to it's artificial character rather than it's real character.

 

[skeptic]

What about capital gains taxes and income tax deferred because it was capital gains instead of earned income?

Since you don't know your response is as or more dishonest and misleading than the OP.

So do you think the government should send people bills who own homes for any market value gain they had that year as well?

Definitionally, the size of the "American economy" is the sum of all financial transactions that happen in the United States for a year. Like when you buy beer and cigarettes or when I sell stock. When someone doesn't sell something, that wasn't a financial transaction and it's not counted as part of the economy. If you start taxing people for holding an asset, then you are completely disassociating taxes from the economy and you are opening Pandora's box. I know you won't get this, but someone else might.

Jeez..

These liberal sheep hear terms like "capital gains" and how the "rich" capitalize on it...yet they have no idea what capital gains is ..

We are seeing the epitome "talking points" being tossed around.

LMAO. You really are idiotic. Why do you assume that folks who don't agree with your illogic are liberals, sheeple, or tossing out talking points?

Is because you are in way over your head and have no idea what an effective tax rate is?

 

[skeptic]

What that article is saying...without the spin....
The more wealthy are able to take action that creates tax credits and deductions....such actions include things such as investing in lower developed communities for tax credits....donating money to philinthropic organizations for write offs..

In essence...that article is taking out of the formula the "non taxable" income that is ALSO not spendable income by the wealthy...but instead spent to better the community....

Include that money and it would be a completely reverse situation.

So prove it. The article wasn't specific about what was and wasn't included and excluded. What about capital gains taxes and income tax deferred because it was capital gains instead of earned income?

Since you don't know your response is as or more dishonest and misleading than the OP.

huh?
Prove it?

What the hell do you thin the reason IS for what the article describes.

Do you think the rich get write offs simply becuase people like them?

Jeez...do you have any idea why there are write offs and tax credits?

They are known as INSENTIVES to do what you otherwise may not do.

I am dealing with idiots.

The biggest write off that the rich get are the capital gains loophole, interest writeoffs, business expenses and offshore tax shelters.

NOT donations to charitable organizations.

And yes the rich apparently do pay a lower effective tax rate just because people like them, you said so yourself on the previous page.

 

[Jarhead]

But this seldom ever happens anymore. The wealthy and even businesses are merely hoarding and not investing. And when they do invest it is usually abroad.

If you "HOARD" what you earn, then you are taxed on it.....so I dont understand what you are saying.

This article is referring to the income that is non taxable...whyich means it is used for charitable contributions or community investment projects, etc....

Capital gains are not taxed until they are cashed in, meanwhile they are hoarded, tax free, in usually non productive investments.

You don't appear to have any idea what you are talking about, and clearly a lot of that is because the OP was extremely short on details.

lol....really?
I have no idea what I am talking about?

You can not hoard capital gains..they are not income....they are nothing more than a value put on something...of course it is tax free...becuse you are not getting it in cash....and sure you can flip it...but it is still not income...

And as for the OP...you dont need more info to see what the article was referring to.
You just need to understand the basics of the tax system to understand why the data is as they are.

So saying the OP was short on details simply shows that you are short on knowledge of something you are trying to debate.

 

[Jarhead]

So prove it. The article wasn't specific about what was and wasn't included and excluded. What about capital gains taxes and income tax deferred because it was capital gains instead of earned income?

Since you don't know your response is as or more dishonest and misleading than the OP.

huh?
Prove it?

What the hell do you thin the reason IS for what the article describes.

Do you think the rich get write offs simply becuase people like them?

Jeez...do you have any idea why there are write offs and tax credits?

They are known as INSENTIVES to do what you otherwise may not do.

I am dealing with idiots.

The biggest write off that the rich get are the capital gains loophole, interest writeoffs, business expenses and offshore tax shelters.

NOT donations to charitable organizations.

And yes the rich apparently do pay a lower effective tax rate just because people like them, you said so yourself on the previous page.

Capital gains is NOT income...so how can you pay an income tax on it.
When you sell and it beocmes an income, you are taxed on it.
Interest write offs is on real estate...and everyone knows the advantages of people bying real estate....so nothing wrong with that.
One day look into LIHTC...look into section 42...
You have it all wrong.
In other words...ytou only reguritate what you hear...and the far left know sheep like you are clueless to the reality of the tax code and how it works.

 

[mnbasketball]

why don't you read the whole article and not just pick a sentence somewhere along the line and say see what we are talking about.

State and local taxes are a much bigger burdend to the bottom 80% by far. The fact that most of these peoples income is already taken just to fend for their families and prepare them to be able to get a job, leaves little of real spendable income.

If the system was fair the people at the top would be better off then those at the bottom and this is the case, but it has shown over time that it has allowed those at the top of the income levels to be able to use the system to develop ownership of more and more of the country while the majority loses share. Most of us don't think it's fair for a system to be put in place that allows this to happen. Esp since the rich used everything that our country provides in their quest to develop wealth, where most people use it to survive and prepare them and their families to be used by the wealthy in their attemp to get more of the pie.
The wealthy should pay for most of the system we have as common people use it in an attemp to lead a life aimed at the American dream and the rich is using it to accumulate wealth.

The difference is most of us look at ourselfs as needed value, and the rich look at us as cattle.

 

[kaz]

What about capital gains taxes and income tax deferred because it was capital gains instead of earned income?

Since you don't know your response is as or more dishonest and misleading than the OP.

So do you think the government should send people bills who own homes for any market value gain they had that year as well?

Definitionally, the size of the "American economy" is the sum of all financial transactions that happen in the United States for a year. Like when you buy beer and cigarettes or when I sell stock. When someone doesn't sell something, that wasn't a financial transaction and it's not counted as part of the economy. If you start taxing people for holding an asset, then you are completely disassociating taxes from the economy and you are opening Pandora's box. I know you won't get this, but someone else might.

I see, you prefer to limit the "economy" merely to it's artificial character rather than it's real character.

It's not me, it's the economic definition. I figured you'd never taken an econ 101 course from your body of work on the subject.

So you would send a bill to a little old lady who's home value went up that year?

 

[Jarhead]

why don't you read the whole article and not just pick a sentence somewhere along the line and say see what we are talking about.

State and local taxes are a much bigger burdend to the bottom 80% by far. The fact that most of these peoples income is already taken just to fend for their families and prepare them to be able to get a job, leaves little of real spendable income.

If the system was fair the people at the top would be better off then those at the bottom and this is the case, but it has shown over time that it has allowed those at the top of the income levels to be able to use the system to develop ownership of more and more of the country while the majority loses share. Most of us don't think it's fair for a system to be put in place that allows this to happen. Esp since the rich used everything that our country provides in their quest to develop wealth, where most people use it to survive and prepare them and their families to be used by the wealthy in their attemp to get more of the pie.The wealthy should pay for most of the system we have as common people use it in an attemp to lead a life aimed at the American dream and the rich is using it to accumulate wealth.

The difference is most of us look at ourselfs as needed value, and the rich look at us as cattle.

The first line in bold...
All, if not most of us have tried do the same. Just so happens that some do it better than others.

The second line in bold....
Total crap....if you looked at yourself as a needed value, then you would not have the class envy you have. You see yourself as underpriveleged...and thus why you hate the rich.

Me? I am not rich. I am not poor. I am upper middle class. I see myself as a needed value, and as a result I make a handsome living and have no jealousy towqard the wealthy.

And do they see me as cattle? What the hell do I care how they see me. All I know is I make my living becuase they exist...and likely, so do you.

 

[Jarhead]

So do you think the government should send people bills who own homes for any market value gain they had that year as well?

Definitionally, the size of the "American economy" is the sum of all financial transactions that happen in the United States for a year. Like when you buy beer and cigarettes or when I sell stock. When someone doesn't sell something, that wasn't a financial transaction and it's not counted as part of the economy. If you start taxing people for holding an asset, then you are completely disassociating taxes from the economy and you are opening Pandora's box. I know you won't get this, but someone else might.

I see, you prefer to limit the "economy" merely to it's artificial character rather than it's real character.

It's not me, it's the economic definition. I figured you'd never taken an econ 101 course from your body of work on the subject.

So you would send a bill to a little old lady who's home value went up that year?

Thats where they just dont get it.

 

[kaz]

Me? I am not rich. I am not poor. I am upper middle class. I see myself as a needed value, and as a result I make a handsome living and have no jealousy towqard the wealthy

You get rich in this country not by being greedy for money, you do by taking responsibility for your own life and responsibilities, which includes paying your own bills

 

[Jarhead]

Me? I am not rich. I am not poor. I am upper middle class. I see myself as a needed value, and as a result I make a handsome living and have no jealousy towqard the wealthy

You get rich in this country not by being greedy for money, you do by taking responsibility for your own life and responsibilities, which includes paying your own bills

You make smart decisions...and those decisions should be based on fear of making the wrong decision.

Sadly, now you are deemed as a victim if you did not read the fine print and as a result got killed with interest.

You are deemed a victim if you re-fid with an ARM...even though you did it becuase it gave you a greater spending power.....for the moment....

You are deemed a victim if you took a no income check loan and lied about your income knowing they wouldnt check on it.

Great lessons being learned lately.....no?

 

[mnbasketball]

My problem is that if there are 5 million people you want to share the cost of providing what the country provides. When the fact is most of what is paid for by the govt is to ensure that the middle class survives and stays healthy. The fact is without these things being met there would not be a workforce that is trained or healthy or for that matter feeling that their existence is any more than being cattle. The bottom line is these things need to happen to make sure you have a way to produce, a way to get things around the country and world and a clientele that buys the products.

 

[kaz]

When the fact is most of what is paid for by the govt is to ensure that the middle class survives and stays healthy

And that is why we are failing. What provides the middle class opportunity is jobs. Jobs are provided by the market. The market is being sucked dry by your liberal spending "to ensure that the middle class survives and says healthy." And that is killing the middle class. Typical liberal program, accomplishes the opposite of it's stated purpose. And you're a typical liberal who's prescription for your failure is to ramp up spending on the solution that didn't work...

 

[Jarhead]

My problem is that if there are 5 million people you want to share the cost of providing what the country provides. When the fact is most of what is paid for by the govt is to ensure that the middle class survives and stays healthy. The fact is without these things being met there would not be a workforce that is trained or healthy or for that matter feeling that their existence is any more than being cattle. The bottom line is these things need to happen to make sure you have a way to produce, a way to get things around the country and world and a clientele that buys the products.

What do you think is better..

A job with a company who is out there marketing and looking to grow and make an impact...

or...

A job with a company that needs to hire you becuase the government contracted them for a 1 year project.

Which do you beleive offers greater stability?

 

[kaz]

My problem is that if there are 5 million people you want to share the cost of providing what the country provides. When the fact is most of what is paid for by the govt is to ensure that the middle class survives and stays healthy. The fact is without these things being met there would not be a workforce that is trained or healthy or for that matter feeling that their existence is any more than being cattle. The bottom line is these things need to happen to make sure you have a way to produce, a way to get things around the country and world and a clientele that buys the products.

What do you think is better..

A job with a company who is out there marketing and looking to grow and make an impact...

or...

A job with a company that needs to hire you becuase the government contracted them for a 1 year project.

Which do you beleive offers greater stability?

A job working for the government forcibly taking money from the company to put up bureaucratic hurdles for the company to clear

 

[mnbasketball]

are you trying to tell me that the top 20% is suffering in some way.

what you people are saying is pure BULLSHIT. The rich are not suffering, if so tell us how.

The truth is as it has always been, the savings to be had are to benefit those who have the wealth. Cost cutting and tax reduction is just another way to grab more for the wealthy and make the poor either do without or pay more of the cost.

Instead of there being profit motive in proving jobs you believe that the workers owe the wealthy for the chance to make them money.

 

[mnbasketball]

The market is being sucked dry by your liberal spending "to ensure that the middle class survives and says healthy." And that is killing the middle class

The market is being sucked dried, would you like to make us understand just how is this happening since the rich are getting richer and the semi rich are getting richer and the taxes not being collected are being asked to be picked up by those who work for a living by paying a much larger portion of their incomes in all taxes then the rich do.

The country has decided that a certain level of income should be excluded from taxes for EVERONE, because it takes about 40,000 or more to get to above poverty level.

Once the cost of a family of four is taken away the bottom 60% pays a much larger share of what they have left to taxes.

I'm so sick and tired of your fucking crying about how bad the rich have it, it makes me want to puke on you.

You want to tell us what the 192 billion in tax cuts each year since Bush enacted them has gone to, it sure the hell wasn't creating jobs, now was it. The economy hasn't even kept up with population growth as far as jobs being created since 2002, so where did the money go that your side said would surge the economy and create JOBS?

It went right along with the all the rest of the money, right into your pockets, and you guys are getting screwed, right on clowns.
'