Question for Romney supporters

#51
#51
hog88 said:
That's about what I thought. But the question is relevant when the Dems campaign on taxing the "rich" but will not tell us where rich starts.

What if I struggled to start a "painting" buisness worked my a$$ off for years, started hiring people, purchased equipment (and yes took the tax breaks) and now employee 40+ people. I don't have Buffett money by any stretch but when the Dems want to tax the rich "their fair portion" I want to know the number.
Click to expand...

This. Some people seem to think it's as simple as "you earn more therefore you should pay more". Without some incentive for entrepreneurs to assume risk to start up a new business, there would be less businesses created. If there are fewer small businesses being created, then there would be a significant reduction in workforce needed.... yada, yada, yada.

There is a BIG difference between being "doing well" rich and "Bill Gates" rich.
 
#52
#52
Romney understand how to make money and business. This makes me like him. Due to that I am 50/50. If it wasnt for his business background and everything else was the same it would then be 99% due to wanting Obama out.

His business background gives me great hope.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#53
#53
hog88 said:
That's about what I thought. But the question is relevant when the Dems campaign on taxing the "rich" but will not tell us where rich starts.

What if I struggled to start a "painting" buisness worked my a$$ off for years, started hiring people, purchased equipment (and yes took the tax breaks) and now employee 40+ people. I don't have Buffett money by any stretch but when the Dems want to tax the rich "their fair portion" I want to know the number.
Click to expand...

IBlvNTmWrk said:
This. Some people seem to think it's as simple as "you earn more therefore you should pay more". Without some incentive for entrepreneurs to assume risk to start up a new business, there would be less businesses created. If there are fewer small businesses being created, then there would be a significant reduction in workforce needed.... yada, yada, yada.

There is a BIG difference between being "doing well" rich and "Bill Gates" rich.
Click to expand...



Only uninformed dolts fail to see the distinction as it is repeated every time by the administration whenever the issue comes up.

So you have some company, I guess.
 
#54
#54
when has Obama ever separated those making more than 250K from billionaires.

show me these sound bites.
 
#55
#55
lawgator1 said:
Only uninformed dolts fail to see the distinction as it is repeated every time by the administration whenever the issue comes up.

So you have some company, I guess.
Click to expand...

and yet you believe, along with Obama, that raising taxes on a tiny fraction of people, is somehow going to solve the debt/deficit problem
 
#56
#56
NEOCON said:
Romney understand how to make money and business. This makes me like him. Due to that I am 50/50. If it wasnt for his business background and everything else was the same it would then be 99% due to wanting Obama out.

His business background gives me great hope.
Click to expand...


I also like his business background. I think he would definitely be in favor of some deregulation, which is a good thing.

I do worry that he will feel beholden to certain people and industries where too much deregulation will be harmful. But time would tell the story on that, should he win.

I also worry that he cannot relate to the middle and lower classes and their concerns. I think that is a legitimate campaign criticism of him.

I don't think he would make a bad president. If he wins I don't see any great gnashing of teeth over it by me or most people.

I'd say that any real animosity towards him is pretty tiny, really. Its more boredom than anything else with him. I just don't think he has any significant ideas.

But as I say, if he wins I won't be bothered by it.
 
#57
#57
lawgator1 said:
Only uninformed dolts fail to see the distinction as it is repeated every time by the administration whenever the issue comes up.

So you have some company, I guess.
Click to expand...

Ok, I'm a Dolt.. So help me, is the number $250,000 a year, $300,000 or $1,000,000 per year. To me the Dolt is the person that votes for the party or person that refuses to lay out what they want to do. Why is it so hard, could it be that in reality a fairly comfortable middle class family just might fall into the mythical "rich" catagory?

Why would I, after working my tail off vote for someone that "might" consider me rich and take even more money from me?
 
#58
#58
MG1968 said:
and yet you believe, along with Obama, that raising taxes on a tiny fraction of people, is somehow going to solve the debt/deficit problem
Click to expand...


No one believes that. Stop pretending that is the argument, because it is not.

It is simply not reasonable to tax a fellow who makes $2 million a year owning stock in a painting business 15 % but tax someone who painted night and day and made $2 million 33 %.

You can't justify that. No one can. And so you transparently reframe the argument as whether it would solve the deficit.

We need a combination of revenue and spending cuts. A turnaround in the economy will help. It would help a lot more if the gains people are making by investing were taxed as ordinary income.

I haven't run the numbers but my suspicion is that if you lowered the top rate to 28 % but taxed all income, regardless of source, at the same rate, we'd make a lot of progress.

But that won't happen.

You should take the blinders off and ask yourself why that won't happen.

Pretty obvious, really.
 
#59
#59
hog88 said:
Ok, I'm a Dolt.. So help me, is the number $250,000 a year, $300,000 or $1,000,000 per year. To me the Dolt is the person that votes for the party or person that refuses to lay out what they want to do. Why is it so hard, could it be that in reality a fairly comfortable middle class family just might fall into the mythical "rich" catagory?

Why would I, after working my tail off vote for someone that "might" consider me rich and take even more money from me?
Click to expand...


You, of all people, ought to love me. I want to tax someone who sits back and makes money off investments at the same rate you are taxed for working so hard. If you make the same money, tax you and he the same.

If you both make a million, you pay, to the penny, the same amount. If you make $50,000, again, you pay the same rate.

Honestly, why do people think that is a bad idea?
 
#60
#60
lawgator1 said:
No one believes that. Stop pretending that is the argument, because it is not.

It is simply not reasonable to tax a fellow who makes $2 million a year owning stock in a painting business 15 % but tax someone who painted night and day and made $2 million 33 %.

You can't justify that. No one can. And so you transparently reframe the argument as whether it would solve the deficit.

We need a combination of revenue and spending cuts. A turnaround in the economy will help. It would help a lot more if the gains people are making by investing were taxed as ordinary income.

I haven't run the numbers but my suspicion is that if you lowered the top rate to 28 % but taxed all income, regardless of source, at the same rate, we'd make a lot of progress.

But that won't happen.

You should take the blinders off and ask yourself why that won't happen.

Pretty obvious, really.
Click to expand...

how about instead of raising capital gains taxes (an action that has proven to decrease revenue) how about eliminating the progressive tax code altogether and adopting either a flat tax system with zero loopholes/exemptions/deductions or switch over to a purely consumption based revenue system.

all you want to do is follow the Obama/democrat meme of class warfare
 
#61
#61
lawgator1 said:
You, of all people, ought to love me. I want to tax someone who sits back and makes money off investments at the same rate you are taxed for working so hard. If you make the same money, tax you and he the same.

If you both make a million, you pay, to the penny, the same amount. If you make $50,000, again, you pay the same rate.

Honestly, why do people think that is a bad idea?
Click to expand...

Every dime that I've ever invested has already been taxed. I'm not sure why i should have to pay the same rate twice on the same money.
 
#62
#62
lawgator1 said:
No one believes that. Stop pretending that is the argument, because it is not.

It is simply not reasonable to tax a fellow who makes $2 million a year owning stock in a painting business 15 % but tax someone who painted night and day and made $2 million 33 %.

You can't justify that. No one can. And so you transparently reframe the argument as whether it would solve the deficit.

We need a combination of revenue and spending cuts. A turnaround in the economy will help. It would help a lot more if the gains people are making by investing were taxed as ordinary income.

I haven't run the numbers but my suspicion is that if you lowered the top rate to 28 % but taxed all income, regardless of source, at the same rate, we'd make a lot of progress.
But that won't happen.

You should take the blinders off and ask yourself why that won't happen.

Pretty obvious, really.
Click to expand...

Uh Oh, hell just frosted, I tend to agree with LG. Except I'd like to see it around 15% for corporations, to include all forgein investment income with no 7 year hold and around 25% for individuals.
 
#63
#63
lawgator1 said:
You, of all people, ought to love me. I want to tax someone who sits back and makes money off investments at the same rate you are taxed for working so hard. If you make the same money, tax you and he the same.

If you both make a million, you pay, to the penny, the same amount. If you make $50,000, again, you pay the same rate.

Honestly, why do people think that is a bad idea?
Click to expand...

Your not a partner in your firm are you? Let me lay it out for you, say you are a senior partner and own 50+ % of your firm, you started it you built it. What do you do with your shares when you want to retire? You sell them back to the firm, your sucsessor ext, you can do this over a timed buyout or lump sum as the codes are now you pay 15% cap gain not the income tax rate.

Seeing how you would be "sitting back" making money off of your investments you fall into the catagory you so hate.
 
#64
#64
bamawriter said:
Every dime that I've ever invested has already been taxed. I'm not sure why i should have to pay the same rate twice on the same money.
Click to expand...

Hmmm. I don't think any of those dimes that you invested are ever taxed again. What gets taxed is the gain/profit you make by investing those dimes. You haven't paid any taxes on gains you haven't made yet, have you? If so, you need a better accountant.

Of course I'm willing to learn something here if I'm wrong.
 
#65
#65
Danl said:
Hmmm. I don't think any of those dimes that you invested are ever taxed again. What gets taxed is the gain/profit you make by investing those dimes. You haven't paid any taxes on gains you haven't made yet, have you? If so, you need a better accountant.

Of course I'm willing to learn something here if I'm wrong.
Click to expand...

Spoken like a true 49%'er.
 
#66
#66
Danl said:
Hmmm. I don't think any of those dimes that you invested are ever taxed again. What gets taxed is the gain/profit you make by investing those dimes. You haven't paid any taxes on gains you haven't made yet, have you? If so, you need a better accountant.

Of course I'm willing to learn something here if I'm wrong.
Click to expand...

The interest, dividends, or gains I receive from investing in a business have already been taxed, and the taxes were paid by the business I invested in.
 
#68
#68
bamawriter said:
The interest, dividends, or gains I receive from investing in a business have already been taxed, and the taxes were paid by the business I invested in.
Click to expand...

but....but.....but.....its.....its not YOUR money.......its......its the guberments money
 
#69
#69
So are people okay with raising the capital gains tax? What would be the point of investing if you are taking risks, and then the upside is severely limited by taxes?

I don't understand the raising of the taxes argument.
 
#70
#70
Vols520 said:
So are people okay with raising the capital gains tax? What would be the point of investing if you are taking risks, and then the upside is severely limited by taxes?

I don't understand the raising of the taxes argument.
Click to expand...

ironic that lowering the CGs is proven to bring in MORE tax revenue
 
#72
#72
Vols520 said:
Yeah no clue why people are so worried about capital gains tax. People investing is what we need.
Click to expand...

companies and individuals, like my self, are sitting on large amounts of cash that we are not investing until all this is resolved....if CGs are raised investors will continue to hold out mainey and even pull more out of the pipe line......any one that thinks just adding money, by way of taxes, will solve any of our deficit problems is an idiot
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top