Syphon
Rookie
- Feb 22, 2012
- 1,449
- 84
- 0
- Banned
- #61
youre still advocating for earned money to be treated differently. i could make the same argument for lowering middle class tax rates. the more money the middle class has, the more money they can put into the economy which spurs economic growth. so why dont we make middle class tax rates 15% to spur growth?If you earned 100K extra one year...
And yopu paid 35K in taxes on it....
And then invested the remaining 65K in the market...
And a year later that 65K had a 10% return...or $6500.....
would you think it is right to pay $2300 taxes on it compared to $975?
why do you want to treat money earned through the stock market differently than money earned through a job?
if you are in the 30% tax bracket, all your income from any source should be taxed at the same rate. if i go to the casino and win $1M should i not have to pay taxes on it because i took the risk and earned it? what if i wont the lottery? should i only pay 15% in taxes on it even though i took the risk and earned it?
why are you advocating that earned money should be treated differently? what incentive does one have to actually keep and hold a job if they can sit at home invest, never actually work and pay a lower tax rate than those working 40-60 hours a week and help spur the economy?
have you ever performed a cost benefit analysis?
If yoiu have, you would not have prersented the post I just quoted.
Investors helpo businesses...not just public...but priovate as well.
You INCREASE the tax on an estimated ROI, the actual ROI is much less...and the chances one will still invest decreases dramatiucally.
For example.....
Will I risk LOSING 100K for a 10% return...that is really more like 8.5% after my cap gains tax?
Yes.
Will I rsik the same for a net ROI (after 35% tax) of 6.5%?
Less likely.