GOP Counteroffer

[LeftCoastVoter]

So every country with road, bridges, railways, airports and ports should have an economy like the USA?

Really?

North Korea and Cuba, well I can't use Cuba anymore because even they've abandoned the American Left's economic ideas, have road, bridges, railways, airports and ports, how are they doing?

Shows what poor infrastructure does to the the ability of "job creators" to be successful

Not to mention emphasising the military over the citizens

Poor Infrastructure? Really?

Wait I thought a lot of countries actually has better infrastructure that us, that we were laggards? How many different and totally conflicting stores can you guys tell?

i see youve abandoned your theory on capitals gains and double taxation.....

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Shows what poor infrastructure does to the the ability of "job creators" to be successful

Not to mention emphasising the military over the citizens

Poor Infrastructure? Really?

Wait I thought a lot of countries actually has better infrastructure that us, that we were laggards? How many different and totally conflicting stores can you guys tell?

i see youve abandoned your theory on capitals gains and double taxation.....

No, you lost that badly. Are you doubling down on a losing bet?

 

[LeftCoastVoter]

Poor Infrastructure? Really?

Wait I thought a lot of countries actually has better infrastructure that us, that we were laggards? How many different and totally conflicting stores can you guys tell?

i see youve abandoned your theory on capitals gains and double taxation.....

No, you lost that badly. Are you doubling down on a losing bet?

tell us all again how capitals have their principle taxed. i just want everyone else to know how foolish you really are.

"When a capital asset is sold, the difference between the basis in the asset and the amount it is sold for is a capital gain or a capital loss"

Tax Topics - Topic 409 Capital Gains and Losses

 

[kwc57]

it still doesnt change the fact the small businesses rely on the government to provide things that support their business that they did not directly build.







the reason that 47% of american dont pay income tax is actually due to the republican policies of lowering tax rates and the amount of exemptions that they can take.

the only real thing that needs to change is you need to tax capital gains as ordinary income, instead of at a lower rate. this is the "welfare" that the wealthy get. it makes not sense that an individual working a job will pay an effective tax rate twice that of someone who gets the majority of their income from investing. you could leave income tax rates at the same level but simply change the way capital gains are taxed.

Back the **** up! I thought the Bush Tax Cuts only benefited the wealthy at the expense of the middle class. Remember all of the lefties and media making that claim for the last 4+ years? Now you want to retain them because of the benefit to the little guy? You need to pick a story and stick to it.

the republican policy of lowering tax rates, increasing deductions and exemptions have pushed the lower and lower middle class into tax brackets that do not require them to pay "federal income tax" only. this does not exempt them from FICA or SSI taxes.

youre confusing 2 separate issues. you are complaining that 47% dont pay federal income taxes but are unwilling to look what has actually caused that, which is GOP tax policy. why are you complaining about getting exactly what you want which is lower taxes all around?

i have said several times on this board, that you could leave income taxes at the same level they are now and simply change the tax code to treat capital gains as ordinary income.

I'm not and neither is any conservative. We want to maintain the tax cuts for ALL Americans. It's the liberals who want to maintain it for SOME Americans. The tax code is the tax code and applies to everyone equally. Want to pay no income tax, get a job that pays less and throws you in that bracket. Want to take advantage of the fat cat's deductions, start a business and build wealth. Contrary to popular media fairytales, there are NOT two sets of rules.

 

[LeftCoastVoter]

Back the **** up! I thought the Bush Tax Cuts only benefited the wealthy at the expense of the middle class. Remember all of the lefties and media making that claim for the last 4+ years? Now you want to retain them because of the benefit to the little guy? You need to pick a story and stick to it.

the republican policy of lowering tax rates, increasing deductions and exemptions have pushed the lower and lower middle class into tax brackets that do not require them to pay "federal income tax" only. this does not exempt them from FICA or SSI taxes.

youre confusing 2 separate issues. you are complaining that 47% dont pay federal income taxes but are unwilling to look what has actually caused that, which is GOP tax policy. why are you complaining about getting exactly what you want which is lower taxes all around?

i have said several times on this board, that you could leave income taxes at the same level they are now and simply change the tax code to treat capital gains as ordinary income.

I'm not and neither is any conservative. We want to maintain the tax cuts for ALL Americans. It's the liberals who want to maintain it for SOME Americans. The tax code is the tax code and applies to everyone equally. Want to pay no income tax, get a job that pays less and throws you in that bracket. Want to take advantage of the fat cat's deductions, start a business and build wealth. Contrary to popular media fairytales, tere are NOT two sets of rules.

youre failing to understand that there are actually 2 set of rules. one for income earned from a job or business, and one for income earned through investing. Income from a job is taxed at a much higher rate than income from investments. do you fail to see this or just rail to recognize this?

and really?? no conservatives are complaining the 47% of the population doesnt pay any federal income taxes? have you even been paying attention here?

 

[kwc57]

the republican policy of lowering tax rates, increasing deductions and exemptions have pushed the lower and lower middle class into tax brackets that do not require them to pay "federal income tax" only. this does not exempt them from FICA or SSI taxes.

youre confusing 2 separate issues. you are complaining that 47% dont pay federal income taxes but are unwilling to look what has actually caused that, which is GOP tax policy. why are you complaining about getting exactly what you want which is lower taxes all around?

i have said several times on this board, that you could leave income taxes at the same level they are now and simply change the tax code to treat capital gains as ordinary income.

I'm not and neither is any conservative. We want to maintain the tax cuts for ALL Americans. It's the liberals who want to maintain it for SOME Americans. The tax code is the tax code and applies to everyone equally. Want to pay no income tax, get a job that pays less and throws you in that bracket. Want to take advantage of the fat cat's deductions, start a business and build wealth. Contrary to popular media fairytales, tere are NOT two sets of rules.

youre failing to understand that there are actually 2 set of rules. one for income earned from a job or business, and one for income earned through investing. Income from a job is taxed at a much higher rate than income from investments. do you fail to see this or just rail to recognize this?

No. No I don't. You fail to realize that the tax code is the tax code and it applies to everyone equally depending on variables codified by both sides over many years. If you think income from a job should be treated the same as income from investing, elect people who will change the tax code. Until then, the code is the code and if you invest, your income is treated one way and if you work, it is treated a different way. You do realize that for each of the codes in the tax code, there were arguments made for and against that resulted in voting and signing by a president into law don't you? Perhaps you should research why your elected officials decided to treat different types of income differently instead of blindly saying the wealthy who already bear the brunt of taxes should pay more. It smacks of envy.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

i see youve abandoned your theory on capitals gains and double taxation.....

No, you lost that badly. Are you doubling down on a losing bet?

tell us all again how capitals have their principle taxed. i just want everyone else to know how foolish you really are.

"When a capital asset is sold, the difference between the basis in the asset and the amount it is sold for is a capital gain or a capital loss"

Tax Topics - Topic 409 Capital Gains and Losses

It taxes as income, taxed as dividends, then taxed again as gains

 

[Claudette]

The wealthiest Americans benefit the most??

WOW I guess those that pay no taxes don't benefit??

They don't use the schools??

They don't use the roads??

They get no police or fire protection??

They don't have clean water or food??

Seems to me that that 49% do pretty well for themselves on the backs of the rich who pay what 70% of the FED taxes right now??

Who again isn't paying their fair share??

it still doesnt change the fact the small businesses rely on the government to provide things that support their business that they did not directly build.

So every country with road, bridges, railways, airports and ports should have an economy like the USA?

Really?

North Korea and Cuba, well I can't use Cuba anymore because even they've abandoned the American Left's economic ideas, have road, bridges, railways, airports and ports, how are they doing?

the reason that 47% of american dont pay income tax is actually due to the republican policies of lowering tax rates and the amount of exemptions that they can take.

the only real thing that needs to change is you need to tax capital gains as ordinary income, instead of at a lower rate. this is the "welfare" that the wealthy get. it makes not sense that an individual working a job will pay an effective tax rate twice that of someone who gets the majority of their income from investing. you could leave income tax rates at the same level but simply change the way capital gains are taxed.

Back the **** up! I thought the Bush Tax Cuts only benefited the wealthy at the expense of the middle class. Remember all of the lefties and media making that claim for the last 4+ years? Now you want to retain them because of the benefit to the little guy? You need to pick a story and stick to it.

Yup and we all benefit.

Its just that some of us pay for it and some of us don't.

Oh and BTW I hope none of you on this board hope to live off your Capital Gains when you retire because hey, they want it taxed as regular income. Again.

 

[LeftCoastVoter]

No, you lost that badly. Are you doubling down on a losing bet?

tell us all again how capitals have their principle taxed. i just want everyone else to know how foolish you really are.

"When a capital asset is sold, the difference between the basis in the asset and the amount it is sold for is a capital gain or a capital loss"

Tax Topics - Topic 409 Capital Gains and Losses

It taxes as income, taxed as dividends, then taxed again as gains

keep digging, keep digging.... you are only ever taxed on your principle once. not twice, not 3 times. only once. capital gains refers to anything you make about the principle, capital loses refers to anything you lose from your principle. go back and take a basic investing class, but then again it is pretty fun showing everyone how much of a fool you are.

 

[LeftCoastVoter]

I'm not and neither is any conservative. We want to maintain the tax cuts for ALL Americans. It's the liberals who want to maintain it for SOME Americans. The tax code is the tax code and applies to everyone equally. Want to pay no income tax, get a job that pays less and throws you in that bracket. Want to take advantage of the fat cat's deductions, start a business and build wealth. Contrary to popular media fairytales, tere are NOT two sets of rules.

youre failing to understand that there are actually 2 set of rules. one for income earned from a job or business, and one for income earned through investing. Income from a job is taxed at a much higher rate than income from investments. do you fail to see this or just rail to recognize this?

No. No I don't. You fail to realize that the tax code is the tax code and it applies to everyone equally depending on variables codified by both sides over many years. If you think income from a job should be treated the same as income from investing, elect people who will change the tax code. Until then, the code is the code and if you invest, your income is treated one way and if you work, it is treated a different way. You do realize that for each of the codes in the tax code, there were arguments made for and against that resulted in voting and signing by a president into law don't you? Perhaps you should research why your elected officials decided to treat different types of income differently instead of blindly saying the wealthy who already bear the brunt of taxes should pay more. It smacks of envy.

hence what is going on right now. if you make the change, then there are not 2 sets of rules only 1 no matter where your incomes comes from. thanks for making my point for me.

 

[kwc57]

youre failing to understand that there are actually 2 set of rules. one for income earned from a job or business, and one for income earned through investing. Income from a job is taxed at a much higher rate than income from investments. do you fail to see this or just rail to recognize this?

No. No I don't. You fail to realize that the tax code is the tax code and it applies to everyone equally depending on variables codified by both sides over many years. If you think income from a job should be treated the same as income from investing, elect people who will change the tax code. Until then, the code is the code and if you invest, your income is treated one way and if you work, it is treated a different way. You do realize that for each of the codes in the tax code, there were arguments made for and against that resulted in voting and signing by a president into law don't you? Perhaps you should research why your elected officials decided to treat different types of income differently instead of blindly saying the wealthy who already bear the brunt of taxes should pay more. It smacks of envy.

hence what is going on right now. if you make the change, then there are not 2 sets of rules only 1 no matter where your incomes comes from. thanks for making my point for me.

Different types of income is taxed differently. That isn't two sets of rules. It is one set of rules that taxes different types differently. There are reasons the code was written the way it was. For every rich person benefiting from how they are taxed, there are thousands of middle class folks benefiting by not being taxed and actually getting money back from the government......which came from those who supposedly are not paying their "fair share". Crazy isn't it?

 

[candycorn]

About time! Shame they fell short on giving specifics.

"The Republican proposal does not specify what would be immediately enacted"

Had my hopes up for a moment.

 

[LeftCoastVoter]

No. No I don't. You fail to realize that the tax code is the tax code and it applies to everyone equally depending on variables codified by both sides over many years. If you think income from a job should be treated the same as income from investing, elect people who will change the tax code. Until then, the code is the code and if you invest, your income is treated one way and if you work, it is treated a different way. You do realize that for each of the codes in the tax code, there were arguments made for and against that resulted in voting and signing by a president into law don't you? Perhaps you should research why your elected officials decided to treat different types of income differently instead of blindly saying the wealthy who already bear the brunt of taxes should pay more. It smacks of envy.

hence what is going on right now. if you make the change, then there are not 2 sets of rules only 1 no matter where your incomes comes from. thanks for making my point for me.

Different types of income is taxed differently. That isn't two sets of rules. It is one set of rules that taxes different types differently. There are reasons the code was written the way it was. For every rich person benefiting from how they are taxed, there are thousands of middle class folks benefiting by not being taxed and actually getting money back from the government......which came from those who supposedly are not paying their "fair share". Crazy isn't it?

it is 2 sets of rules, why not make it the reverse that investment income is taxed at a higher rate then income earned form a job? this would give a huge tax break the middle class and boost the economy.

money should not be treated in a different way because of the method in which it is earned. youre so partisan that you cant see this simple fact. if Reagan is the champion of the conservative party why not follow his lead and treat capital gains as ordinary income? he did it twice and the world didnt collapse.

 

[G.T.]

No, you lost that badly. Are you doubling down on a losing bet?

tell us all again how capitals have their principle taxed. i just want everyone else to know how foolish you really are.

"When a capital asset is sold, the difference between the basis in the asset and the amount it is sold for is a capital gain or a capital loss"

Tax Topics - Topic 409 Capital Gains and Losses

It taxes as income, taxed as dividends, then taxed again as gains

This is arrogance in the face of ignorance, and it's not in your favor dude.

 

[mudwhistle]

About time! Shame they fell short on giving specifics.

"The Republican proposal does not specify what would be immediately enacted"

The only specifics Obama gave is $1.6 trillion in new taxes, $80 billion in new spending, no specific cuts, and elimination of the debt-ceiling.

Oh, and for years the Dems lied about the Bush tax-cuts being only for the rich. Whatever happened to that?

Lying SOBs the lot of em.

 

[Wacky Quacky]

You can't be serious? You want to know how my wanting you to define "fair share" relates to you saying the Republican proposal is a blank piece of paper? Tit for tat. "fair share" is a nebulous fluff word Obama throws out as a peice of red meat for his supporters. You think the Republican propsal is empty and meaningless......yet you support "fair share". If you want real meaning i nthe proposal, I want real defintion of "fair share". You don't get to demand something while oferring nothing. Define it......in real terms. How much is enough from the people who already pay the bulk of the taxes while many pay nothing? Doesn't "fair share" apply across the board? How is zero a share?

What are you rambling on about. For the love of god, take off your partisan blinders and join the conversation.

I have never even mentioned anything relating to a "fair share", so why do you keep bringing it up?

Pull your head out of your ass and pay attention. You don't get to claim that conservatives are acting vague on one hand without explaining the vague notions on the liberal side. So can I put you down on the side of thinking "fair share" is just a vague term used as a divisive class warfare ploy by Obama and the left?

Why do I give a shit about liberals and their "fair share" mantra? More importantly, what the **** does it have to do with the conversation? You're asking me to explain a vague liberal philosophy that I don't care about or have anything to do with, and in return you'll explain a vague republican proposal.

THEY'RE BOTH VAGUE!!! And by definition cannot be fully explained or detailed. End of retarded explanation! Holy shit you're dumb.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

tell us all again how capitals have their principle taxed. i just want everyone else to know how foolish you really are.

"When a capital asset is sold, the difference between the basis in the asset and the amount it is sold for is a capital gain or a capital loss"

Tax Topics - Topic 409 Capital Gains and Losses

It taxes as income, taxed as dividends, then taxed again as gains

keep digging, keep digging.... you are only ever taxed on your principle once. not twice, not 3 times. only once. capital gains refers to anything you make about the principle, capital loses refers to anything you lose from your principle. go back and take a basic investing class, but then again it is pretty fun showing everyone how much of a fool you are.

Honey, using your logic, you could tax Capital gains 100% since it's not my money.

See how wrong you are?

 

[LeftCoastVoter]

It taxes as income, taxed as dividends, then taxed again as gains

keep digging, keep digging.... you are only ever taxed on your principle once. not twice, not 3 times. only once. capital gains refers to anything you make about the principle, capital loses refers to anything you lose from your principle. go back and take a basic investing class, but then again it is pretty fun showing everyone how much of a fool you are.

Honey, using your logic, you could tax Capital gains 100% since it's not my money.

See how wrong you are?

do you even know what capital gains (or losses even are)? wait for it class, this will be a nail biter.

 

[LeftCoastVoter]

it still doesnt change the fact the small businesses rely on the government to provide things that support their business that they did not directly build.







the reason that 47% of american dont pay income tax is actually due to the republican policies of lowering tax rates and the amount of exemptions that they can take.

the only real thing that needs to change is you need to tax capital gains as ordinary income, instead of at a lower rate. this is the "welfare" that the wealthy get. it makes not sense that an individual working a job will pay an effective tax rate twice that of someone who gets the majority of their income from investing. you could leave income tax rates at the same level but simply change the way capital gains are taxed.

Back the **** up! I thought the Bush Tax Cuts only benefited the wealthy at the expense of the middle class. Remember all of the lefties and media making that claim for the last 4+ years? Now you want to retain them because of the benefit to the little guy? You need to pick a story and stick to it.

Yup and we all benefit.

Its just that some of us pay for it and some of us don't.

Oh and BTW I hope none of you on this board hope to live off your Capital Gains when you retire because hey, they want it taxed as regular income. Again.

and why shouldnt it be taxes as regular income?

 

[mudwhistle]

The Obama media could convince Obama supporters that repeatedly slamming their dicks in the door will help the economy.

All they need is a snappy sloagan.