Taxes and the Mega-Wealthy

#231
#231
volinbham said:
why would they be investigating an act that isn't a crime? If being a public figure means tax confidentiality doesn't apply then there would be nothing to investigate eh?
Click to expand...
Are you suggesting that the federal government only investigates things that are crimes and don't do so out of spite and/or publicity?

Again if the investigation turns into a prosecution, which then turns into a conviction, which is then upheld by SCOUTS please get back to me.
 
#232
#232
McDad said:
those two questions followed the post you answered. kinda quick succession but not addressed to you specifically.
Click to expand...
IDK if you've noticed but everyone and their Mom wants my opinion about this topic RN.
 
#236
#236
n_huffhines said:
Non sequitur.

The example was just to illustrate the point that legality of opportunity doesn't make outcomes (more) fair.

You pay for the McDonald's you eat. If Bezos eats more, he pays for more. That's the way taxes should work, too. I'd be all too happy to simplify our tax code to something even easier to understand than a McDonald's menu. How about x% of all revenue/income? 3%? I'll take it.
Click to expand...
of course your example doesn't reflect equality of outcome. it wasn't set up to. and it also doesn't reflect the real situation, which is why I made the changes I did.

i am in favor of sales taxes. its fair because everyone gets to determine their own taxes paid, instead of worrying what someone else is paying.
something like 1% for basic food stuffs, basic stuff for survival. 5% for other food stuff and additional survival. 10% for recreation. 30% for luxury items. whatever the numbers need to be, might be twice what I am showing.
 
#237
#237
Tyler Durden said:
There's a key word in there - investigation. When the investigation turns into a prosecution, that prosecution turns into a conviction, and then the conviction is upheld by the SCOTUS please get back to me.
Click to expand...
You do know an IRS employee went to jail for releasing some tax info on Michael Cohen...you know what? Your argument is terrible, stupid, wrong, and lazy. It's not worth it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NorthDallas40
#238
#238
LouderVol said:
of course your example doesn't reflect equality of outcome. it wasn't set up to. and it also doesn't reflect the real situation, which is why I made the changes I did.

i am in favor of sales taxes. its fair because everyone gets to determine their own taxes paid, instead of worrying what someone else is paying.
something like 1% for basic food stuffs, basic stuff for survival. 5% for other food stuff and additional survival. 10% for recreation. 30% for luxury items. whatever the numbers need to be, might be twice what I am showing.
Click to expand...

And to be clear, nothing is going to create equality of outcome. A flat tax doesn't take into account cost of living in your area, and that's going to mess with tax fairness outcomes. Many other factors to be considered, too.

To me, we should be attempting to lighten the burden as much as possible, and distribute the burden as evenly as possible, based on means/activity.
 
#239
#239
McDad said:
You're still wrong. His unrealized wealth isn't paying for the house on Martha's Vineyard. BezoCorp is. He hasn't used unrealized wealth. His CPA and Tax Attorneys have used deductions available to the Corporation. I don't have a home through my corporation. But if it is like anything else my corporation funds, then there are strict rules governing usage for BezoCorp's home in Marhas Vineyard. It isn't Jeff's house. And he is probably limited on using it so it can meet the definition of a corp retreat (it's also likely it has to be made available to other executives is BezoCorp).

@BigOrangeMojo has forgotten more than I will ever know about this stuff. He should help us all.
Click to expand...

Yessir, Most folks don't know someone like Bozo is receiving a w-2 or a constructive 1099-div for his use of corporate assets. He has more control and may use the assets (and that may not be fair), but, it's not tax free. You could bet a boatload of tax accountants are working on it all the time to make sure of compliance.
 
#240
#240
n_huffhines said:
And to be clear, nothing is going to create equality of outcome. A flat tax doesn't take into account cost of living in your area, and that's going to mess with tax fairness outcomes. Many other factors to be considered, too.

To me, we should be attempting to lighten the burden as much as possible, and distribute the burden as evenly as possible, based on means/activity.
Click to expand...
Activity sure. Means never. At least if you are trying to be fair.

When the masses can elect politicians that just spend spend spend it's not fair for society to pick up the tab for every program the people decide they want.
 
#242
#242
McDad said:
You're still wrong. His unrealized wealth isn't paying for the house on Martha's Vineyard. BezoCorp is. He hasn't used unrealized wealth. His CPA and Tax Attorneys have used deductions available to the Corporation. I don't have a home through my corporation. But if it is like anything else my corporation funds, then there are strict rules governing usage for BezoCorp's home in Marhas Vineyard. It isn't Jeff's house. And he is probably limited on using it so it can meet the definition of a corp retreat (it's also likely it has to be made available to other executives is BezoCorp).

@BigOrangeMojo has forgotten more than I will ever know about this stuff. He should help us all.
Click to expand...


May be in a blind trust at this point.
 
#243
#243
Is this really news to anyone? I mean the mega rich are that way for a reason. Of course without their contributions, our economy would be garbage. In the end, who cares what the mega rich pay in taxes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Y9 Vol
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top