dk wolf

so I was told this was an interesting thread....
Hard to jump mid conversation, so I'll start.

Mostly libertarian views... Ron Paul, Gary Johnson... regular avid internet user political compass.. blah blah blah...

Cut spending, increase taxes. Purge the politicans. Downsize overseas military personnel and increase military scientific research (RnD). Dis-interest in world issues that aren't a direct National security threat (rollseyes, I know how that'll be interpreted).


As for the paying back the debt.... we've been paying back the debt.. the debt of WWII.... and korea..... and vietnam... The sum isn't as substantial, but I wouldn't worry about it. Just rest easy knowing you're not about to get taxed 75 percent of your income like my mom is in italy..

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

Your mom's doing her fair share and you're a selfish ******* who hates black people.

dk wolf

My mom is doing more than her fair share.. her income gets taxed 75% in italy, then gets taxed again in commiefornia/USA and that's another 35% IIRC after the 75.

As for me hating black people... Obama isn't even that black

cordycord

iTrader: (2)

Bombshell: Obama.com Owned by Bundler in Shanghai with Business Ties to Chinese Government

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

Good. rich people are satan. she needs to line the pocket books of politicians.

cordycord

iTrader: (2)

Let's face it, the government knows better how to spend your mom's money than she does.

thenuge26

iTrader: (2)

I'd rather have 10 million a year taxed at 75% then the 50k I make now taxed at 30% (or whatever it is I am paying, I don't remember).

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

I'm still trying to figure out what's the point of taxes and why we judge people on the amount htey pay...

I'd rather make 10 million and pay none and donate 7 million to the businesses/organizations of my choice.

cordycord

iTrader: (2)

That sounds very Libertarian of you. Oh wait, you're not the "Libertarian" in the discussion.

And how 'bout mom...she's RICH! Is she cute? Does she live on Lake Como? Does she know George Clooney?

bbundy

Another one whose head firmly planted in the sand over the responsibility of the current deficit. If you are worried about the deficit we need to undo bush policies, get rid of the obstructionist Tea partiers saving every tax loophole and welfare program for the rich and giant corporations in congress and not put somebody in the Whitehouse who is for bush policies on steroids.

Scrappy Jack

iTrader: (2)

Assuming you are single and rent, you're marginal Federal Income Tax bracket is 25% and your effective FIT is probably under 20%.

Taxes effectively serve to regulate aggregate demand and to add legal value to a currency.

Because people are judgmental. If you are wealthy, "we pay too much and the poor are a bunch of welfare freeloaders."

If you are poor, "we pay too much and the rich don't pay enough."

If you are "middle class" (which might mean you make $25k - $500k depending on who you ask), "we pay too much while the poor are a bunch of welfare freeloaders and/or the rich don't pay enough."

Focusing on "the others" is a great distraction from being able to focus on any real substantive issue.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

Like when Bush's tax cuts, wars, and drug program were implemented in the early 2000s, his budget deficit was actually going down and even hit 181 billion in 2007 and then while playing with his Lincoln Logs in the oval office, he accidentally crashed them into the housing market and borke the economy and they skyrocketed?


I think the best solution would just be to lower the blue line...



gosh, notice the rise on the red line during 2000-09, then boom. then continued spending.

i love when bob says the govt shrunk when he posts the amount of federally employeed persons... oh graphs, what work they can do...

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

bbundy

Also note the same tax breaks for the wealthy the halving of capital gains taxes and the deregulation of banks still has not changed since the late 90’s and early 2000. Income for the middle class flat lined and the economy collapsed in the end. Obama has only added more tax breaks but targeted at middle class and small business and yet slowed the expansion of the deficit compared to the lost decade for the middle class when the republicans controlled government handing out welfare for the rich.

thenuge26

iTrader: (2)

I totally believe that quote Brain.

But we also have more income inequality than most countries in Europe, no? So we SHOULD have more rich people paying a larger percent of our taxes than some European countries. No problem there.

dk wolf

I generally don't have "socialist" views such as taxing the wealthy, extra. And I'm currently studying to be a CPA and the more I learn, the more I realize that the richest people in America, can easily afford to pay a large amount on taxes with little to no burden on them financially. My mother is an extreme case, and only recently started to pay double taxes in two countries.

I feel we need to tax investors a shitload. Even I, studying finance, never understood the money machine that is investing. You're literally making money by sitting down and moving it around appropriately. I feel they should be taxed more heavily on those making much larger sums of money. We have a mild investment tax rate See here, Smartmoney. Investment tax brackets for FY2013 And I feel they are headed in the right direction for this next FY. However I feel there should be more taxation at higher income levels. Because first, you aren't actually working for it. Especially for Shorterm gains (up to 6 year investments) need to get jacked up.

Also, the wealthy clearly fall under a heavier tax bracket as stated earlier.

We offer an enormous amount of tax breaks for the low incomed. Don't let the blind jabber of any neo-political thundercunt tell you otherwise that the rich needs tax breaks, or the poor need more government programs. Tax wise, we are on the right path on who's getting taxed, and how much. At least that's my opinion.
unspinning the "fair" tax law. Factcheck.org (also, I love factcheck.. I'm a huge skeptic by nature and generally don't take anything anyone says to me politically without running it through a couple sources that I feel are unbiased. Good habit for everyone else to have.


What we need is to audit the **** out of the fed, and give each politician it's own IRS suit who manages what nonsense they spout financially and has a heavy hand in advising government funded programs. That brings me to my next point.

Some government funded programs should start to be regulated at the state level. I'm not well versed enough to say which ones should exactly. But I think it makes sense most of these programs should be defined, ran, and managed by the state in the method they deem appropriate. (also rendering more taxation planning on the state level, instead of the federal level)

Scrappy Jack

iTrader: (2)

Welcome to the Political/Current Events thread. I am one of the resident ball-busters and nit-pickers.

You use a lot of generalities and platitudes (appropriate for this thread).

Assuming they can afford to, why should the "richest people in America" pay "a large amount on [sic] taxes?"

Define "investors" and "investing" as you are using it. Also, how do you define a "mild investment tax rate?"

Meaning the max of ~24% on LTCG (from 15%) and ~43% on dividends and STCG (from 15% and 35%, respectively)?

More taxation than is currently in place? More than is currently scheduled to go in to effect? Or just "more" in general?

Why?

Scrappy Jack

iTrader: (2)

Also - for any finance/econ majors out there, remember:

"Everything changed in 1971, except the text books."

bbundy

I don’t know where your graph comes from but on average total tax burden in the US for people making income and filing a tax return including state and local, social security and Medicare starts at about 15% for people living in poverty peak at a little over 30% for people in the upper middle class ~ up to ~98th percentile 250k range and for the super wealthy Idle rich making millions from blind trusts investments and off shore accounts and such it drops back down to the low teens or even less than those living in poverty. There are a few outliers like sports stars and celebrities on the high end and legitimately disabled or elderly on the low end. We have significanly higer income ineqality than most first world nations however.

dk wolf

Bad habit, I'm still getting my feet wet with the sort of people in this thread. Seems unlike my surroundings, and past forum experiences. They have stained me with the bad habit of speaking in generalities. Excuse me, I'll try not to let it happen so often.


My reasoning behind this is more romantic than logical. I'm open to anyone pinpointing any irregularities in my statements (still learning).

But I'm an immigrant, and so are my parents. I've seen my parents rise, fall, and rise again throughout their stay in America. And my father has instilled that America is a great country, it has provided my family with all of its blessed opportunities. It would be immoral, and selfish to not repay her back; and continue the growth for future generations. In essence, if you make a lot of money, you should give more of it back. America made you, and lets you stay here. Oil the machine that continues to make new families more successful every year.

Ahh, when I say investors. I mean the general population that has a portfolio and invests in the stock market, private firms, private enterprise and etc. There's no real defining of it here, in my eyes. If all you're really doing is handing someone your capital, and they make more money with it, thus giving you the dividends, I feel you should be taxed more for it. You still experience financial growth, just not as dramatic. (speaking in generalities here on purpose. Hard, at least for me, to specific exactly what I mean. I feel this should encompass the investor in general). As for my statement on a mild tax rate, I meant to say that we should increase investment income taxes mildly. (you'll notice, if you're unfamiliar with me from other forums; that I have a habit of skipping words when I type, "maahh baad").



I'm not sure how you drew these numbers, but it states 20% on the LTCG and ~40% on dividends. If there is another factor I'm missing, feel free to point it out.

Well I'm not aware of the incoming increase in taxes to the fullest extent. So I couldn't be too sure, however. I feel more than is currently in place would be appropriate.

Ron Paul, that's why.

Actually, I haven't been too aware for the most part. Most of my political debates have been bouts with the others arguing in regards to misinformation based on the presidential candidates. Thus, effectively distracting me from realizing that Ron Paul has already effectively passed the bill in July, 25th 2012. And already there is public information regarding the Fed. What I have skimmed over (not fact checked, to ensure credibility) is that there have given trillions on trillions to major US corporations. Take this with a grain of salt. I'll have to thoroughly read through the articles on this subject in order to be best informed.

On the matter as per why? The Federal Reserve, has as you well know, printed massive amounts of money and diluted the value of our own dollar. Simply to be able to give money to companies and the government when it is needed. It even goes as far as to print money to give to foreign countries. When there is an influx of money being physically placed into circulation without it's value going up proportionally, it cripples world economies that bank/invest in the US dollar. And the Fed has had an unjustifiable level of confidentiality in it's dealings in the past. Seems fitting to audit them to know exactly where our money is going. And to prevent any reckless printing.



Clearly, I'll be the first to state this isn't my forte. I'm still young, still learning. Very prone to errors, and although I like to claim I practice fact checking and avoid blindly supporting him or her or sputtering out political rhetoric. I know I do it. My entire educational ideology is based on making mistakes. I don't truly learn something until I make a mistake, and get called on it.

I look forward to the educational benefits of this thread. Thanks again