Navy SEALS slam Obama.

#176
#176
T-TownVol said:
LG is in a Google frenzy right about now......calling Robert Reich.......Robert Reich please
Click to expand...


No, I'm done with the issue for purposes of this thread.

There are two ways to analyze it. You guys do it one way, I look at it another. I think we can see the other's point of view, though we believe our own is correct.

Classic agree to disagree.
 
#177
#177
Is it a coincidence that the CG rates go down, the national debt go up ?

Maximum_Federal_Tax_Rate_on_Long_Term_Capital_Gains_%281972_-_2012%29.jpg




64982ae0.png
 
#183
#183
T-TownVol said:
Then why are you so hell bent on raising a tax that will slow the economic recovery?
Click to expand...


First and foremost, to me its an issue of intellectual honesty and fairness. Defenders of the special tax treatment of income derived from investment contend that it is a policy choice based on doing what's good for the economy.

I think that is utter crap.

I think that such treatment is purely a result of Congress effectively being bought off by the wealthiest, including individuals and business groups to which they belong. Its purely quid pro quo.

Second, and related, I don't think it would slow the economy significantly because the reality is that those dollars are being hoarded or going overseas now, anyway.

So, third, when weighed against the non-existent benefit to such special treatment for capital gains, and considering how it came to be that such special treatment was adopted, I am personally offended by it. It makes me angry.

Heck, when you see Romney talk about it in terms of his own personal fortune, he looks like he feels guilty about it. You know why? He does.

He should.
 
#185
#185
Addition: I have yet to hear Romney claim that he spends any of the money he saves on creating jobs.

Not a cent.
 
#187
#187
lawgator1 said:
First and foremost, to me its an issue of intellectual honesty and fairness. Defenders of the special tax treatment of income derived from investment contend that it is a policy choice based on doing what's good for the economy.

I think that is utter crap.

I think that such treatment is purely a result of Congress effectively being bought off by the wealthiest, including individuals and business groups to which they belong. Its purely quid pro quo.

Second, and related, I don't think it would slow the economy significantly because the reality is that those dollars are being hoarded or going overseas now, anyway.

So, third, when weighed against the non-existent benefit to such special treatment for capital gains, and considering how it came to be that such special treatment was adopted, I am personally offended by it. It makes me angry.

Heck, when you see Romney talk about it in terms of his own personal fortune, he looks like he feels guilty about it. You know why? He does.

He should.
Click to expand...

Not an economic history buff are ya. When was this county's best period of tax revenues?

The "this was made up to help the wealthy" crap is BS. The help comes to all when the wealthy do well and bring all that money that they are "hording" back into the market. I know that is true for me. I am dang sure waiting to see who wins before I come out of cash and launch a new product line in my business.
 
#188
#188
I wonder how many people realize that the old tax and spend Jimmy Carter gave the rich the most sacred tax cut they hold dear: a capital gains tax cut in 1978, from 39 to 28 percent. Thus, Carter gave the rich their first tax cut in 15 years.
 
#189
#189
Gramps said:
I wonder how many people realize that the old tax and spend Jimmy Carter gave the rich the most sacred tax cut they hold dear: a capital gains tax cut in 1978, from 39 to 28 percent. Thus, Carter gave the rich their first tax cut in 15 years.
Click to expand...

didn't help that mortgage interest rates were just south of 30%
 
#191
#191
lawgator1 said:
First and foremost, to me its an issue of intellectual honesty and fairness. Defenders of the special tax treatment of income derived from investment contend that it is a policy choice based on doing what's good for the economy.

I think that is utter crap.

I think that such treatment is purely a result of Congress effectively being bought off by the wealthiest, including individuals and business groups to which they belong. Its purely quid pro quo.

Second, and related, I don't think it would slow the economy significantly because the reality is that those dollars are being hoarded or going overseas now, anyway.

So, third, when weighed against the non-existent benefit to such special treatment for capital gains, and considering how it came to be that such special treatment was adopted, I am personally offended by it. It makes me angry.

Heck, when you see Romney talk about it in terms of his own personal fortune, he looks like he feels guilty about it. You know why? He does.

He should.
Click to expand...

There is no special treatment for capital gains; in fact, there is a special penalty. The income, which has already been earned, is already taxed at the corporate rate; it is then taxed again at the capital gains rate. To say anything else is either ignorance or willful dishonesty.
 
#193
#193
MG1968 said:
didn't help that mortgage interest rates were just south of 30%
Click to expand...

ding, ding, ding.....and then the REAL cut came and look what happened through the 80s and 90s.....then the spending started and here we stand
 
#195
#195
therealUT said:
There is no special treatment for capital gains; in fact, there is a special penalty. The income, which has already been earned, is already taxed at the corporate rate; it is then taxed again at the capital gains rate. To say anything else is either ignorance or willful dishonesty.
Click to expand...

He actually thinks he is educated on this subject.
 
#196
#196
Gramps said:
I wonder how many people realize that the old tax and spend Jimmy Carter gave the rich the most sacred tax cut they hold dear: a capital gains tax cut in 1978, from 39 to 28 percent. Thus, Carter gave the rich their first tax cut in 15 years.
Click to expand...

Here is the thing Gramps, raising the CG tax will hurt the average American more than it will hurt the wealthy. Think what it will cost the Boomer that plans to retire in the next couple of years and has some investments that he was palnning on living off of.

The wealthy CAN afford the increase but NO ONE should have to pay it to support more spending by the government.
 
#197
#197
therealUT said:
Where do you think jobs come from?
Click to expand...


Demand.

If you want to see this economy turn around overnight, end the Bush tax cuts for those making over $500,000 a year and make corollary cut in that amount for those making $50,000 to $200,000 a year.

Demand for cars, appliances, computers, vacations, new homes, etc., will skyrocket.
 
#198
#198
lawgator1 said:
Demand.

If you want to see this economy turn around overnight, end the Bush tax cuts for those making over $500,000 a year and make corollary cut in that amount for those making $50,000 to $200,000 a year.

Demand for cars, appliances, computers, vacations, new homes, etc., will skyrocket.
Click to expand...

Negative, Professor Keynes. Jobs come from production; production comes from capital. You would be better off discarding Keynes and Krugman and picking up Smith, Friedman, Nozick, and Hayek.

Look at what has happened to the American economy since Keynesian Economics became the "mod" school of economics: over 1,000% inflation.
 
#199
#199
....trut beat me to him.....carry on sir....he does not listen to me or any one of the many others that try to educate him....good luck
 
#200
#200
T-TownVol said:
ding, ding, ding.....and then the REAL cut came and look what happened through the 80s and 90s.....then the spending started and here we stand
Click to expand...

The CG rate was 28% when Reagan took office and 28% when Reagan left office.
He signed 11 tax increases into law in 7 years.

Yeah that was the REAL cuts that Reagan signed it law.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top