Big Tax Increase coming soon.....we told ya so.

[struth]

Great. It's about time we starting paying for things. You all that think everything should be free are going to have to stop your leeching.

Leeching is when you pay little or nothing and expect other people to pay your share and more...... also known as a Democrat.

Why Does Billionaire Warren Buffett Pay a Lower Tax Rate Than His Secretary? | The Motley Fool

I’ve read that article many times. All the more reason why his secretary should keep more of her paycheck. Watch and see what happens.

a

The argument is that income should all be taxed as income. Earlier it was noted that everyone should be taxed the same. O.K.

The only income that's taxed differently are long term investments, that are realized. The reason for that, is that money was first taxed, and we want to encourage people to invest for their future....and that is taxed at the same rate for all levels

The money is NOT taxed. The 'profit" has NEVER been taxed. This is one of the most accepted lies of the gullible.

Even then it's hardly always true. Guy borrows $500,000, invests it and makes $700,000. None of that had been taxed. He pays a lower rate on that $200,000 than the poor guy busting his butt making $60,000.

That needs to end.

you don't know much about how borrowed money is taxed do you?

If you borrow 500K you have to pay it back. BUT the loan principal you pay back is not a tax deduction the interest is the only thing that gets treated as a write off. So the 500K you use to pay back the principal comes from the after tax profit of the business.

Which has nothing to do with what I said.

The 500K isn't taxed because it's not income it's money you pay to borrow.

And the 700K will be taxed as soon as he sells the assets.

So the profit will be taxed. So you're wrong that none of the money is taxed.

I didn't argue that. I argued ONLY the $200,000 is taxed.

it is taxed as soon as he sells his assets and realizes the gains

So? The $200,000 is taxed, not the $700,000 which means nothing was taxed twice.

OK a little clarification is needed here.

Did he make 700K or 200K

The initial 500K isn't part of what he made it was the purchase price of the stock.

So if he made 700K then his stock has to be worth 1.2 million. The 500K isn't taxed because it is not income but a loan and has to be paid back to the bank with interest. ((banks don't usually make loans for stock market speculation but we'll ignore that for now)

So if you want the 500K loan principal to be taxed then all loan principals for all loans have to be taxed. Do you really want to pay tax on your mortgage principal?

I clearly stated the scenario early on.

The hypo you put further before, the investor that took the $500K loan, invested it, and made $200K, would pay cap gains on the $200K, then still owe the lender $500K....not a great situation to be in

At near zero interest rates that's a pretty darn good place to be.

um no not at all...you owe money, you are in debt...that's not a good place to be at all, even with a low interest rate In your hypo the individual lost money...that's a horrible place to be

Please don't speak to me on finance. You fully understand that the $200,000 is profit, not what he is left with.

it's not profit, when he still owes $300K....obviously you know very little about finance if you think it is....he's actually in the hole $300K, well more then that, because he had to pay taxes on that $200K, so he has even less to pay off the loan

This has to be a liberal....now they are going to ask for a bailout

You are only digging your hole further.

I am not, but the person in your hypo surely is, especially if they are listening to your advice.

I offered no advice.

You suggested taking a $500K loan, to invest, but take it out at $200K and call it profit! Come on man!

The money is NOT taxed. The 'profit" has NEVER been taxed. This is one of the most accepted lies of the gullible.

Even then it's hardly always true. Guy borrows $500,000, invests it
. None of that had been taxed. He pays a lower rate on that $200,000 than the poor guy busting his butt making $60,000.

That needs to end.

Exactly what I said.

In your hypo the $200K would be taxed, at what rate would depend on how long the investment was.....long v short term. Then in your hypo the person then still has to pay back the loan, which he took for $500K.....so whatever is left after being taxed on that $200K would go to paying the creditor, and he'd still be in teh hole $300K plus

You really are incapable of reading. Or adding,.......I can't tell which.

You said the person took a loan for $500K and invested it, and got $200K.....have you redefined that?

Do words mean something different to you?

and makes $700,000

That wasn't in your orginial post, if you added that, I didn't see that.

So yes, the person would pay taxes on $700K...depending on the lengh of the investment, depends the rate....then he'd have to pay off his creditor

 

[struth]

Great. It's about time we starting paying for things. You all that think everything should be free are going to have to stop your leeching.

You realize that to "pay for things"... the IRS would have to collect 100% of every paycheck earned in America for over a year to pay what the government is spending.
No - I didn't think you did

Whatever. You want to put on future generations your irresponsible spending?

Whatever = I don't have an answer for what you say

I did answer. Why shouldn't you be responsible for your irresponsible spending as opposed to future generations?

Spending has to be cut, not taxes raised.
It is simple math. As has been repeated over and over and over - if you "taxed the rich" 100% of their earnings - it wouldn't put a dent in the Debt spending.
It is not about taxes.... it is about spending!!

Sorry, not interested. Pay for your debt.

Who is "your"?

It's your debt whether you want to accept it or not.

Yuo are saying "your" as in a third person, as if you are exempt.
It is "our" debt.

I'm willing to pay. You are the one unwilling to pay "your" debt. Not me.

Really? Are you? Cause all I have heard you post about is raising other people's taxes....how much more taxes are you willing to pay? and nobody is stopping you from paying more....the Fed will keep it

I am support the tax increases, no?

So how much more do you think you should be paying? what rate?

and why aren't you already paying more? There is nothing stopping you from giving the Feds more money

Answer the questions please

I can not make any difference alone. Your question is juvenile. Why do you think it's fair to leave our debt to future generations?

So, can you please answer the question what rate do you want to pay?

Of course you can't do it alone, but you can certainly lead by example.....but you apparently don't want to...gotcha...I am still curious what rate do you wish to pay?

Answer the question, stop deflecting

I have NO idea what the proper rate is. Even if I did you would not understand it.

So we could be at the proper rate.......

but you said you want to pay more....how much more? and more over, why aren't you paying more yourself?

 

[pknopp]

Great. It's about time we starting paying for things. You all that think everything should be free are going to have to stop your leeching.

Leeching is when you pay little or nothing and expect other people to pay your share and more...... also known as a Democrat.

Why Does Billionaire Warren Buffett Pay a Lower Tax Rate Than His Secretary? | The Motley Fool

I’ve read that article many times. All the more reason why his secretary should keep more of her paycheck. Watch and see what happens.

a

The argument is that income should all be taxed as income. Earlier it was noted that everyone should be taxed the same. O.K.

The only income that's taxed differently are long term investments, that are realized. The reason for that, is that money was first taxed, and we want to encourage people to invest for their future....and that is taxed at the same rate for all levels

The money is NOT taxed. The 'profit" has NEVER been taxed. This is one of the most accepted lies of the gullible.

Even then it's hardly always true. Guy borrows $500,000, invests it and makes $700,000. None of that had been taxed. He pays a lower rate on that $200,000 than the poor guy busting his butt making $60,000.

That needs to end.

you don't know much about how borrowed money is taxed do you?

If you borrow 500K you have to pay it back. BUT the loan principal you pay back is not a tax deduction the interest is the only thing that gets treated as a write off. So the 500K you use to pay back the principal comes from the after tax profit of the business.

Which has nothing to do with what I said.

The 500K isn't taxed because it's not income it's money you pay to borrow.

And the 700K will be taxed as soon as he sells the assets.

So the profit will be taxed. So you're wrong that none of the money is taxed.

I didn't argue that. I argued ONLY the $200,000 is taxed.

it is taxed as soon as he sells his assets and realizes the gains

So? The $200,000 is taxed, not the $700,000 which means nothing was taxed twice.

OK a little clarification is needed here.

Did he make 700K or 200K

The initial 500K isn't part of what he made it was the purchase price of the stock.

So if he made 700K then his stock has to be worth 1.2 million. The 500K isn't taxed because it is not income but a loan and has to be paid back to the bank with interest. ((banks don't usually make loans for stock market speculation but we'll ignore that for now)

So if you want the 500K loan principal to be taxed then all loan principals for all loans have to be taxed. Do you really want to pay tax on your mortgage principal?

I clearly stated the scenario early on.

The hypo you put further before, the investor that took the $500K loan, invested it, and made $200K, would pay cap gains on the $200K, then still owe the lender $500K....not a great situation to be in

At near zero interest rates that's a pretty darn good place to be.

um no not at all...you owe money, you are in debt...that's not a good place to be at all, even with a low interest rate In your hypo the individual lost money...that's a horrible place to be

Please don't speak to me on finance. You fully understand that the $200,000 is profit, not what he is left with.

it's not profit, when he still owes $300K....obviously you know very little about finance if you think it is....he's actually in the hole $300K, well more then that, because he had to pay taxes on that $200K, so he has even less to pay off the loan

This has to be a liberal....now they are going to ask for a bailout

You are only digging your hole further.

I am not, but the person in your hypo surely is, especially if they are listening to your advice.

I offered no advice.

You suggested taking a $500K loan, to invest, but take it out at $200K and call it profit! Come on man!

The money is NOT taxed. The 'profit" has NEVER been taxed. This is one of the most accepted lies of the gullible.

Even then it's hardly always true. Guy borrows $500,000, invests it
. None of that had been taxed. He pays a lower rate on that $200,000 than the poor guy busting his butt making $60,000.

That needs to end.

Exactly what I said.

In your hypo the $200K would be taxed, at what rate would depend on how long the investment was.....long v short term. Then in your hypo the person then still has to pay back the loan, which he took for $500K.....so whatever is left after being taxed on that $200K would go to paying the creditor, and he'd still be in teh hole $300K plus

You really are incapable of reading. Or adding,.......I can't tell which.

You said the person took a loan for $500K and invested it, and got $200K.....have you redefined that?

Do words mean something different to you?

and makes $700,000

That wasn't in your orginial post, if you added that, I didn't see that.

So yes, the person would pay taxes on $700K...depending on the lengh of the investment, depends the rate....then he'd have to pay off his creditor

It was in the original post. It's still there. It doesn't make sense without it. You simply don't read, you just respond in a Pavlovian manner.

You even quoted it in post #54.

 

[jbander]

All those idiots who thought everything was free....now gonna see somebody always gotta pay for the free stuff.

Biden Plans First Major Federal Tax Hike Since 1993

President Joe Biden is planning the first major federal tax hike since 1993 to help pay for the long-term economic program designed as a follow-up to his pandemic-relief bill, according to people familiar with the matter.Unlike the $1.9 trillion COVID-19 stimulus act, the...

www.newsmax.com

The working class have been paying for the tax give aways to the rich for 40 years. Currently to the tune of $20 Trillion.

The same people who have been paying for the freebies in subsidies to fossil fuel, petro chemical, pharmaceutical, defense contractor, and insurance companies.

The same people that have been paying to bail out the banks, air lines, and Donald Trumps bankruptcies.

You're right. You're getting to see what' it's like to have to give up on those freebies.

That money belongs to the people. The people that actually work for a living in this country, which is the only reason those worthless fucks exist, and we want our money back.

And we're going to get it.

bullshit--the rich pay MORE than their fair share

So why are they the only ones to get much richer with each tax cut?

Because they pay most of the taxes.
How the fuck is a person who pays ZERO taxes suppose to pay less taxes???

They should pay most of the taxes. They get the vast majority of the benefits of our taxes.

They pay the vast majority of taxes - so DUH! they get most of the benefits.
You understand Math Matters right?
If you want to complain about wealth concentration, companies getting too big etc. - I am there also.
But math is math.

Got it. Some are just more equal than others, right?

Exactly. You think people who already pay no income tax should get more of a tax break. Yuo realize that doesn't make sense right?

I believe those at the top have too many tax breaks.
Those at the extreme lower end of the wealth gap can't afford the things that they need, much less pay to help others. If those at the top of the gap were paying their fair share, the gap wouldn't be expanding so quickly. A level playing field isn't too much to ask for.

You are confusing wealth with tax rates.
And it isn't the "extreme lower end".... it is the bottom 45%.
Do you knot know that 44% of the American population has a NEGATIVE tax rate?? Which means they get more back than they pay in.
So just how the heck is a tax break going to affect them?
Like I said - OF COURSE tax breaks give most of the breaks to the upper 56%... because only they pay any!!


Lord almighty

Everybody pays taxes. Just look at your next receipt for ---- anything. You pay taxes.

How much is enough taxes? At what point is the limit?

Makes no more sense than how high is up. For god's sake, get some new talking points. Those are worn out.

Sounds like you are advocating “no limit” for paying taxes when it comes to American’s earned wages. I encourage you to review America’s foundation. Americans can and should pay for the government that supports them; but there are limits. $10M for gender studies in Pakistan yields little or no benefit to any American.

We can discuss what our taxes are spent on if you like. I oppose the billions given to large corporations every year in grants and set asides. However, you mentioned limits. Our top tax rates were above 70% and even as high as above 90% during the biggest financial expansion our country ever saw, and it didn't seem to hurt us a bit.

you forget that after WWII the US was the only industrial power that had any real infrastructure left.

We had no global competition.

It's a different world now, literally.

Money is still money.

not really.

You think a 90% tax bracket would have no effect on our ability to be competitive in the global market? Think again.

what was this countrie best economic times and what was the tax rate

you don't know much about the debt.

The fact is most of the interest paid on the debt is paid to Americans.

And 23% of the debt isn't really debt at all because it's money the government owes itself

That's the most retarded thing I've heard in my life.

Haven't you gotten the memo from Hate Radio- Debt is bad again.

Who Owns the US National Debt?

The majority of the U.S. national debt is owned by Social Security, the Federal Reserve, and foreign investors. Learn how that impacts the economy and you.

www.thebalance.com

The government can't owe money to itself. It's like you saying your electric bill fund owes your car payment fund money when it all comes out of your income anyway.

And I don't listen to talking head radio unless the actual Talking Heads are playing something.

We should let the public own the Social Security debt just like it can own any of the rest of the debt.

And I have always said the debt isn't as bad as you make it out to be.

But then again you only really care about the debt when there's a republican administration.

What else could you call it ,the central bank purchases the Government debt and replaces it with credit, not money and the central bank monetizes it in buying government Security's so the government owes it self , When the security come due they are the ones who give the payout to the holder of the gov security . So you need to get caught up on this.

 

[Concerned American]

Great. It's about time we starting paying for things. You all that think everything should be free are going to have to stop your leeching.

hahahhaha
they need to cut SPENDING!!!! DUH....
taxes kill communities

Lock downs kill communities as well.

 

[Concerned American]

Put a dollar in the bank and get back 98 cents.

Where is this bank? I haven't seen a bank give more that $0.03 on a dollar on a one-year CD in years. Normal pass book accounts give less than $0.01 on a dollar. I don't think Reagan's policies would work now. We had less than a trillion dollars in debt at that time--now we are approaching 30 trillion and China owns most of that debt. Can you speak Mandarin?

 

[GWV5903]

All those idiots who thought everything was free....now gonna see somebody always gotta pay for the free stuff.

Awesome, make the rich pay their fair share.

It’s hard to believe you’re this stupid, but you’ve convinced me....

 

[dudmuck]

You gotta love people who pay no income taxes, saying wealthier people should pay their share.
The irony is deafening.

 

[LeftofLeft]

You gotta love people who pay no income taxes, saying wealthier people should pay their share.
The irony is deafening.

Biden and Obama said the same thing about people making more than $250,000 in 2008. The Middle Class needs to watch its paychecks.

 

[AFrench2]

What's with this dumb *** crap opinion of "Gotta love when people who pay less taxes than billionaires have an opinion on raising taxes"

Like...shut the **** up, bro. Eat the rich. It's that simple.

 

[Blues Man]

All those idiots who thought everything was free....now gonna see somebody always gotta pay for the free stuff.

Biden Plans First Major Federal Tax Hike Since 1993

President Joe Biden is planning the first major federal tax hike since 1993 to help pay for the long-term economic program designed as a follow-up to his pandemic-relief bill, according to people familiar with the matter.Unlike the $1.9 trillion COVID-19 stimulus act, the...

www.newsmax.com

The working class have been paying for the tax give aways to the rich for 40 years. Currently to the tune of $20 Trillion.

The same people who have been paying for the freebies in subsidies to fossil fuel, petro chemical, pharmaceutical, defense contractor, and insurance companies.

The same people that have been paying to bail out the banks, air lines, and Donald Trumps bankruptcies.

You're right. You're getting to see what' it's like to have to give up on those freebies.

That money belongs to the people. The people that actually work for a living in this country, which is the only reason those worthless fucks exist, and we want our money back.

And we're going to get it.

bullshit--the rich pay MORE than their fair share

So why are they the only ones to get much richer with each tax cut?

Because they pay most of the taxes.
How the fuck is a person who pays ZERO taxes suppose to pay less taxes???

They should pay most of the taxes. They get the vast majority of the benefits of our taxes.

They pay the vast majority of taxes - so DUH! they get most of the benefits.
You understand Math Matters right?
If you want to complain about wealth concentration, companies getting too big etc. - I am there also.
But math is math.

Got it. Some are just more equal than others, right?

Exactly. You think people who already pay no income tax should get more of a tax break. Yuo realize that doesn't make sense right?

I believe those at the top have too many tax breaks.
Those at the extreme lower end of the wealth gap can't afford the things that they need, much less pay to help others. If those at the top of the gap were paying their fair share, the gap wouldn't be expanding so quickly. A level playing field isn't too much to ask for.

You are confusing wealth with tax rates.
And it isn't the "extreme lower end".... it is the bottom 45%.
Do you knot know that 44% of the American population has a NEGATIVE tax rate?? Which means they get more back than they pay in.
So just how the heck is a tax break going to affect them?
Like I said - OF COURSE tax breaks give most of the breaks to the upper 56%... because only they pay any!!


Lord almighty

Everybody pays taxes. Just look at your next receipt for ---- anything. You pay taxes.

How much is enough taxes? At what point is the limit?

Makes no more sense than how high is up. For god's sake, get some new talking points. Those are worn out.

Sounds like you are advocating “no limit” for paying taxes when it comes to American’s earned wages. I encourage you to review America’s foundation. Americans can and should pay for the government that supports them; but there are limits. $10M for gender studies in Pakistan yields little or no benefit to any American.

We can discuss what our taxes are spent on if you like. I oppose the billions given to large corporations every year in grants and set asides. However, you mentioned limits. Our top tax rates were above 70% and even as high as above 90% during the biggest financial expansion our country ever saw, and it didn't seem to hurt us a bit.

you forget that after WWII the US was the only industrial power that had any real infrastructure left.

We had no global competition.

It's a different world now, literally.

Money is still money.

not really.

You think a 90% tax bracket would have no effect on our ability to be competitive in the global market? Think again.

what was this countrie best economic times and what was the tax rate

you don't know much about the debt.

The fact is most of the interest paid on the debt is paid to Americans.

And 23% of the debt isn't really debt at all because it's money the government owes itself

That's the most retarded thing I've heard in my life.

Haven't you gotten the memo from Hate Radio- Debt is bad again.

Who Owns the US National Debt?

The majority of the U.S. national debt is owned by Social Security, the Federal Reserve, and foreign investors. Learn how that impacts the economy and you.

www.thebalance.com

The government can't owe money to itself. It's like you saying your electric bill fund owes your car payment fund money when it all comes out of your income anyway.

And I don't listen to talking head radio unless the actual Talking Heads are playing something.

We should let the public own the Social Security debt just like it can own any of the rest of the debt.

And I have always said the debt isn't as bad as you make it out to be.

But then again you only really care about the debt when there's a republican administration.

What else could you call it ,the central bank purchases the Government debt and replaces it with credit, not money and the central bank monetizes it in buying government Security's so the government owes it self , When the security come due they are the ones who give the payout to the holder of the gov security . So you need to get caught up on this.

The reason it was the best time was because we ere the only industrial nation with any manufacturing capacity. That's not true anymore.

And if you can't see that the government borrowing money from itself is just a shell game that's your problem.

The special issue treasury bonds the government issues to itself will not be paid off because they were never meant to be paid off.

If any private fiduciary did what the government does it would be illegal.

 

[JoeB131]

The government can't owe money to itself. It's like you saying your electric bill fund owes your car payment fund money when it all comes out of your income anyway.

Nope, it's still retarded. Stealing from the Trust fund to pay for wars is like using your 401K to pay for a new car.

You are stealing from yourself.

We should let the public own the Social Security debt just like it can own any of the rest of the debt.

And I have always said the debt isn't as bad as you make it out to be.

We're 28 TRILLION in debt, buddy. It's actually a lot worse than we think it is.

 

[JoeB131]

The reason it was the best time was because we ere the only industrial nation with any manufacturing capacity. That's not true anymore.

It wasn't true for very long after WWII, either. By 1955, most of the rest of the world had restored its industrial capability. For instance, the Japanese economy got a big boost from the Korean War when the UN spent a lot of money buying war materials locally.

America was prosperous after WWII for decades because 1) The workforce was unionized and workers got living wages and 2) the rich paid their fair share ,and government invested heavily in infrastructure.

Then some senile actor came along and fucked that all up.

And if you can't see that the government borrowing money from itself is just a shell game that's your problem.

The special issue treasury bonds the government issues to itself will not be paid off because they were never meant to be paid off.

If any private fiduciary did what the government does it would be illegal.

Here's the problem with that. As of now, Medicare has to take those bonds and say, "Pay us to keep operatiosn going". Social Security will have to do the same. And because Medicare and Social Security are White People Welfare - oh, excuse me, "Entitlements", they really aren't going to cut those.

So they only way to really make ends meet is to make the rich finally pay their fair share.

 

[Blues Man]

The government can't owe money to itself. It's like you saying your electric bill fund owes your car payment fund money when it all comes out of your income anyway.

Nope, it's still retarded. Stealing from the Trust fund to pay for wars is like using your 401K to pay for a new car.

You are stealing from yourself.

We should let the public own the Social Security debt just like it can own any of the rest of the debt.

And I have always said the debt isn't as bad as you make it out to be.

We're 28 TRILLION in debt, buddy. It's actually a lot worse than we think it is.

There is no trust fund and there never was.

Most of the debt is owned by Americans and most of the interest on that debt is going right back into the American economy.

I agree we should pay off foreign intersts but that's all

 

[Blues Man]

The reason it was the best time was because we ere the only industrial nation with any manufacturing capacity. That's not true anymore.

It wasn't true for very long after WWII, either. By 1955, most of the rest of the world had restored its industrial capability. For instance, the Japanese economy got a big boost from the Korean War when the UN spent a lot of money buying war materials locally.

America was prosperous after WWII for decades because 1) The workforce was unionized and workers got living wages and 2) the rich paid their fair share ,and government invested heavily in infrastructure.

Then some senile actor came along and fucked that all up.

And if you can't see that the government borrowing money from itself is just a shell game that's your problem.

The special issue treasury bonds the government issues to itself will not be paid off because they were never meant to be paid off.

If any private fiduciary did what the government does it would be illegal.

Here's the problem with that. As of now, Medicare has to take those bonds and say, "Pay us to keep operatiosn going". Social Security will have to do the same. And because Medicare and Social Security are White People Welfare - oh, excuse me, "Entitlements", they really aren't going to cut those.

So they only way to really make ends meet is to make the rich finally pay their fair share.

JFK realized that the war time revenue policies are a drag on the economy in peace time. He's the one that started reducing the top tax rates because he was seeing the economy being dragged down.

And just what is a fair share in actual percentages or actual dollars. It might be nice if you people were actually able to define exactly what it is you want so there can be an actual discussion

And Social Security is a piss poor welfare program as it is and it is meant to keep people dependent on the government

 

[JoeB131]

There is no trust fund and there never was.

Most of the debt is owned by Americans and most of the interest on that debt is going right back into the American economy.

I agree we should pay off foreign intersts but that's all

No, we shouldn't live beyond our means... period.

Part of the problem with this argument is that the government has set interest rates so low, most people aren't seeing any money from the interest paid on the debt. Which means people are actually LESS likely to put money in the bank.

I believe that in the long term, we need both spending cuts AND tax increases to get our financial house in order.

And frankly, the main reason why we aren't making government smaller is because we get so much out of it and we don't have to pay for it.

 

[LeftofLeft]

The reason it was the best time was because we ere the only industrial nation with any manufacturing capacity. That's not true anymore.

It wasn't true for very long after WWII, either. By 1955, most of the rest of the world had restored its industrial capability. For instance, the Japanese economy got a big boost from the Korean War when the UN spent a lot of money buying war materials locally.

America was prosperous after WWII for decades because 1) The workforce was unionized and workers got living wages and 2) the rich paid their fair share ,and government invested heavily in infrastructure.

Then some senile actor came along and fucked that all up.

And if you can't see that the government borrowing money from itself is just a shell game that's your problem.

The special issue treasury bonds the government issues to itself will not be paid off because they were never meant to be paid off.

If any private fiduciary did what the government does it would be illegal.

Here's the problem with that. As of now, Medicare has to take those bonds and say, "Pay us to keep operatiosn going". Social Security will have to do the same. And because Medicare and Social Security are White People Welfare - oh, excuse me, "Entitlements", they really aren't going to cut those.

So they only way to really make ends meet is to make the rich finally pay their fair share.

JFK realized that the war time revenue policies are a drag on the economy in peace time. He's the one that started reducing the top tax rates because he was seeing the economy being dragged down.

And just what is a fair share in actual percentages or actual dollars. It might be nice if you people were actually able to define exactly what it is you want so there can be an actual discussion

And Social Security is a piss poor welfare program as it is and it is meant to keep people dependent on the government

JFK would piss himself today to see how Democrats favor class warfare to get power vs. trying to raise the tide for all to prosper.

 

[Blues Man]

There is no trust fund and there never was.

Most of the debt is owned by Americans and most of the interest on that debt is going right back into the American economy.

I agree we should pay off foreign intersts but that's all

No, we shouldn't live beyond our means... period.

Part of the problem with this argument is that the government has set interest rates so low, most people aren't seeing any money from the interest paid on the debt. Which means people are actually LESS likely to put money in the bank.

I believe that in the long term, we need both spending cuts AND tax increases to get our financial house in order.

And frankly, the main reason why we aren't making government smaller is because we get so much out of it and we don't have to pay for it.

You don't have to put money in a bank.

And since when are you a small government guy?

You want government to do everything for you.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

A simple, easy to understand philosophy of how taxation should work at the federal level.

1) The I.R.S. - The "R" stands for revenue, not redistribution. Not one single American should have a negative tax liability. Someone paying no taxes is one thing. A 1/3 of the population getting more back than they pay in is another thing.
2) The tax system should not be used to take from Peter to give to Paul directly. WHich is half what the IRS does. Take a check from the productive, and write one for the unproductive.
3) There should be no inheritance tax. Not one dime. That is money that has already been taxed.
4) Active military should pay no income tax. (State, Local or Federal)
5) Active college students should pay no income tax. (State, Local or Federal)

There should be no tax breaks for anything. No tax breaks for how many children you have, no tax breaks for putting new Windows in your house.
It is pretty simple. Your tax % should ONLY correlate to your income level PERIOD. Nothing else. The entire personal income tax laws should fit on one side of a single sheet of paper.

Your tax form should be one box to fill in.... [Your Gross Income]
When you enter it, you get how much your tax is.
Done

Sounds great. Same for corporations?

No.
There are good reasons for that.
You can't evenly tax a company based solely on income.
Here is why...
Company 1 - Manufacturer, Revenue $2,000,000. As a manufacturer, they buy and sell enormous amounts of raw materials. They use other companies as vendors, who also have material purchases. Manufacturing companies are extraordinarily good for an economy for these reasons.
Owners compensation is 10% of revenue.
Company 2 - A Doctors office, Revenue $2,000,000. Very little material purchases, very few vendors.
Owners compensation is 20% of revenue.

Should these companies be taxed the same?

 

[struth]

There is no trust fund and there never was.

Most of the debt is owned by Americans and most of the interest on that debt is going right back into the American economy.

I agree we should pay off foreign intersts but that's all

No, we shouldn't live beyond our means... period.

Part of the problem with this argument is that the government has set interest rates so low, most people aren't seeing any money from the interest paid on the debt. Which means people are actually LESS likely to put money in the bank.

I believe that in the long term, we need both spending cuts AND tax increases to get our financial house in order.

And frankly, the main reason why we aren't making government smaller is because we get so much out of it and we don't have to pay for it.

Well, if you want to make money, off an investment, you shouldn't be putting it in a banking savings account...there were never large returns. Put money in a mutual fund, or investment count, they have been booming....we will see what happens after Xiden's tax increases

Wake me up when the DNC decides to offer some tax cuts, then I'll be happy to discuss tax increases.