- 4,837
- 215
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2010
Oh Rick.
He will.
Rick Perry: Middle Income Americans Don't Pay Enough Income Taxes
- Thread in 'General' Thread starter Started by finnns2003,
- Start date
Oh Rick.
He will.
- 6,247
- 18
- Joined
- Jun 27, 2009
well thats how Obama was elected, it goes both sides.
- 21,365
- 812
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2003
And THIS is the problem, who cares about the #$@%@$@ sides?! Not important.
LazyJ, that's crazy...
weekz
Banned
- 2,800
- 168
- Joined
- May 27, 2011
a lot of wealth people do not even pay income taxes. they only pay capital gains taxes. these taxes are essentially taxes on many made from investments and because you did not actually work to make the
money it isnt counted as income. capital gains taxes are ridiculously low and oft times many millionaire and billionaire investors walk away paying close to nothing.
Call capital gains what you want, but it is a form a tax and frankly, I don't believe the gov't should take ordinary tax rates on my investing skill. I make $1,000 and have a 10% return. Why should I give the gov't $250-300 versus $150? Over taxing capital gains, IMO, makes it very hard to incentivize common people investing. Further, too many of our future retirements are linked to the market.
- 8,894
- 1,395
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2010
guess that marketing degree is starting to kick in.
i feel smart.
- 482
- 11
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2005
G14 wrote:
RON PAUL NEEDS TO TAKE EM DOWN
Ron Paul is F.A. Hayek with a tinfoil hat. And he looks like Barney Rubble's dad.
- 21,365
- 812
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2003
^
So not funny but damn...
- 9,141
- 1,797
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2009
Lol my dad said the same thing, like dude is worse than bush... I've been behind on politics past few weeks so I didn't kno what to make of perry. Bachman I knew was an abomination, but it seems she's not alone from what im hearing.
weekz
Banned
- 2,800
- 168
- Joined
- May 27, 2011
It does nothing to hinder investment. The way to top bracket invest, it doesn't matter if the government takes a 15% cut because they still are making so much money.
"I didn’t refuse, nor did others. I have worked with investors for 60 years and I have yet to see anyone — not even when capital gains rates were 39.9 percent in 1976-77 — shy away from a sensible investment because of the tax rate on the potential gain. People invest to make money, and potential taxes have never scared them off."- Warren Buffett
- 2,343
- 28
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2010
They never have and they never will.
The average person isn't going to make as much money as Warren did/has/will. Therefore, when you're talking returns in relation to percentages, then yes, capital gains do in fact matter. Again, I mentioned the average person above. A 10% return before taxes assessed at ordinary rates would indeed turn some people away from investing, especially when you then factor in the cost inccured to have such a gain.
This isn't even factoring risk associated with a 10% gain. I'm not trying to say capital gains is solely responsible in people's decisions to invest or not, but it is certainly a factor. Again, it goes into tax planning.
Further, explain to me that something done as a passive activity (i.e - not my 9-5) warrants being taxed at a ridiculous rate? I'm taking on risk to get a better rate of return (versus the meager <1.0% APY the bank offers, of which, your interest is taxed) as a means to keep up with the falling dollar and plan for the future. The gov't then has the audacity to take 20-40%?!? Get out of my pocket.
- 106,577
- 78,219
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2011
be getting any votes at all.
- 5,163
- 3,167
- Joined
- Jun 14, 2007
Anybody! > Rick Perry, Mitt Romney, Newt Gingrich
- 2,706
- 14
- Joined
- May 3, 2003
Ok, but financially responsible members of the middle class should be voting democrat, I unless the fight against gay marriage and the fight for xenophobia are more important than money in your bank account.
- 4,837
- 215
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2010
For all the morons who claim Ron Paul can't get elected, these candidates are sure stealing his ideas. Especially Rick Perry, first the Fed, now warning against an aggressive foreign policy?
“I do not believe that America should fall subject to a foreign policy of military adventurism. We should only risk shedding American blood and spending American treasure when our vital interests are threatened and we should always look to build coalitions among the nations to protect the mutual interests of freedom loving people. It’s not our interest to go it alone. We respect our allies and must always seek to engage them in military missions," Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) said at the Veterans of Foreign Wars convention in San Antonio.
http://www.realclearpolit...ilitary_adventurism.html
Rick Perry <3 Hillary Care in 1993.
http://dailycaller.com/20...1993-hillarycare-praise/
- 991
- 10
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2009
HE DID SAY HE WANTED TO END THE FED BUT HE'S PROBABLY JUST PLAYING TO CONSPIRACY THEORISTS
- 3,171
- 11
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2006
http://www.realclearpolit...ilitary_adventurism.html
Rick Perry <3 Hillary Care in 1993.
http://dailycaller.com/20...1993-hillarycare-praise/
Perry was a democrat when he wrote that letter.
- 4,837
- 215
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2010
Perry was a democrat when he wrote that letter.Originally Posted by Toy Collector123
http://www.realclearpolit...ilitary_adventurism.html
Rick Perry <3 Hillary Care in 1993.
http://dailycaller.com/20...1993-hillarycare-praise/
Perry is a Neocon, it doesn't matter what letter is behind his name. NeoConservatism = Progressivism, read their history.
- 67,834
- 102,857
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2010
it seems like this is all cooked up to make a reelection for Obama definite, these gop candidates are all way too outlandish. Or it's a batman sort of thing, where unique figures attract unique "enemies".
- 36,279
- 11,076
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2008
Politics is a funny paradox in which reality just doesn't exist...
And by the way Neoconservatism was "started" by Irving Kristol and signifies moving from the left spectrum of politics to the right.... Neoconservatism =/= progressivism... Reagan was also once very liberal.. A self proclaimed "New Deal Democrat". But began his treck to Conservatism in the 1950s & 1960s when he began getting big money by Corporations including GE (which is now considered the liberal corporation.. Ironic)... Because he was once a liberal doesn't mean he is classified as a liberal in history.. As no historian with a clear point of view would call Reagan a liberal politician...
And by the way Neoconservatism was "started" by Irving Kristol and signifies moving from the left spectrum of politics to the right.... Neoconservatism =/= progressivism... Reagan was also once very liberal.. A self proclaimed "New Deal Democrat". But began his treck to Conservatism in the 1950s & 1960s when he began getting big money by Corporations including GE (which is now considered the liberal corporation.. Ironic)... Because he was once a liberal doesn't mean he is classified as a liberal in history.. As no historian with a clear point of view would call Reagan a liberal politician...
- 6,420
- 15,517
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2004
The tax base should be broaded and while regressive taxes like the payroll tax should be restructured so that dollars zero through twenty thousand are not taxed, that approximately four or six percent on the employee and six percent on the employee side (economically, speaking the payroll tax is about ten to twelve percent, elasticities determine who shoulders how much of a tax on a transactions, the same as any sales tax) and the payroll and other entitlemnet taxes should be raised to much higher levels.
I still believe in a progressive income tax system, where the higher income earners get the highest share but the highest income earners are not the sameas the highest share. Like Warren Buffet famously said, he gets taxed at a higher level then does his secretary because he gets all of his income through capital gains taxes. I think that capital gain taxes should be low or at zero because it is double tax, on money that was once earned throug hwork at some point (unless to are part of the banking elite but even with this deluge of Federal Reserve hyperminting, most banks even a most investment houses and mutual funds get their money from clients that earned it. What we should do is tax large accumulations of wealth and actually soak the rich, the actual billionaires who would feel feel very little pain (and most of the very richest trust fund babies usually vote democrat anyway so they should not have a right to complain. Conventional wisdom should be turned on its head and wealth for some wit ha net worth over 50 million or more should have his foreign investmnt taxed like yo uwould the highest income bracket and investments thatare not aggressive should b taxed heavily and the 15% rate should be on investment that is in ventre capital or for smaller public firms. That would make sure that the idle rich's money is working for them and it is out their funding Research and Development and growth drving firms.
In adition, everyone who makes money should pay some Federal income tax, even if it is 50 dollars pr year. When the public asks for higher income taxes, they should be mind full that they will get less take home pay, no matter how little they make, Federal income taxes escape no one. It is like war. When it is fought by the sons of people who are not neo cons, it is easy to be pro war, when taxes means something that you do not have to pay, it is easy to be all in favor of them.
The corporate tax exemptions should be removed, except for itemized deductions for depreciations, accelerated depreciation, "green" credits, the semi fixed labor costs (those are one time costs for hiring anyone employee) and charity. Other wise it is a flat and relatively low rate for corporations.
Finally, since I want lower income taxes, we need VAT on all non food items and to avoid it being regressive, we give income take payers a short list of deductions and not kake them have to pick between the standard and the itemized. We should have charity (and not phased out at about 107k either but unlimited, if yo uare rich and want to not pay dime to Uncle Sam, so be it), medical bills, a portion of rent (we need to get capital to flow out of houses), education and vocational training (twice the cost of vocational training in order to incentivise students away from universities and into practical skill training) and hand full of other things.
A simple and flat tax is flatout too simple. Taxes present a very useful incentive structure but they should be accesible and they should be simplified and while they should remain progressive (and the regressive ones should be made neutral or at least much less reggresive), the tax base should be broadened so that everyone is in togther and that more voters will favor spending cuts and not simply askin gfor more from those making over 250k, aka "the rich" (who are not really "the rich," as President Obama and other Democrats would have you imagine them because high income is not same as being rich. High income correlatse with high productivity, the life blood of any economy. Taking high incomes not only kills productivity and the economy, it leaves untoched the Paris Hilton's of the world and their largely untaxed or low taxed, muni bond heavy trust funds. The actual "millionaires and billionaires" put their riches in tax free investments and some can technically have no income and those ultra right trust fund babies are actualy more likely to vote Democrat).
I still believe in a progressive income tax system, where the higher income earners get the highest share but the highest income earners are not the sameas the highest share. Like Warren Buffet famously said, he gets taxed at a higher level then does his secretary because he gets all of his income through capital gains taxes. I think that capital gain taxes should be low or at zero because it is double tax, on money that was once earned throug hwork at some point (unless to are part of the banking elite but even with this deluge of Federal Reserve hyperminting, most banks even a most investment houses and mutual funds get their money from clients that earned it. What we should do is tax large accumulations of wealth and actually soak the rich, the actual billionaires who would feel feel very little pain (and most of the very richest trust fund babies usually vote democrat anyway so they should not have a right to complain. Conventional wisdom should be turned on its head and wealth for some wit ha net worth over 50 million or more should have his foreign investmnt taxed like yo uwould the highest income bracket and investments thatare not aggressive should b taxed heavily and the 15% rate should be on investment that is in ventre capital or for smaller public firms. That would make sure that the idle rich's money is working for them and it is out their funding Research and Development and growth drving firms.
In adition, everyone who makes money should pay some Federal income tax, even if it is 50 dollars pr year. When the public asks for higher income taxes, they should be mind full that they will get less take home pay, no matter how little they make, Federal income taxes escape no one. It is like war. When it is fought by the sons of people who are not neo cons, it is easy to be pro war, when taxes means something that you do not have to pay, it is easy to be all in favor of them.
The corporate tax exemptions should be removed, except for itemized deductions for depreciations, accelerated depreciation, "green" credits, the semi fixed labor costs (those are one time costs for hiring anyone employee) and charity. Other wise it is a flat and relatively low rate for corporations.
Finally, since I want lower income taxes, we need VAT on all non food items and to avoid it being regressive, we give income take payers a short list of deductions and not kake them have to pick between the standard and the itemized. We should have charity (and not phased out at about 107k either but unlimited, if yo uare rich and want to not pay dime to Uncle Sam, so be it), medical bills, a portion of rent (we need to get capital to flow out of houses), education and vocational training (twice the cost of vocational training in order to incentivise students away from universities and into practical skill training) and hand full of other things.
A simple and flat tax is flatout too simple. Taxes present a very useful incentive structure but they should be accesible and they should be simplified and while they should remain progressive (and the regressive ones should be made neutral or at least much less reggresive), the tax base should be broadened so that everyone is in togther and that more voters will favor spending cuts and not simply askin gfor more from those making over 250k, aka "the rich" (who are not really "the rich," as President Obama and other Democrats would have you imagine them because high income is not same as being rich. High income correlatse with high productivity, the life blood of any economy. Taking high incomes not only kills productivity and the economy, it leaves untoched the Paris Hilton's of the world and their largely untaxed or low taxed, muni bond heavy trust funds. The actual "millionaires and billionaires" put their riches in tax free investments and some can technically have no income and those ultra right trust fund babies are actualy more likely to vote Democrat).
- 21,365
- 812
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2003
^ I have heard a lot of people want VAT like Europe, what impact does that have on items like Macs, PS3, etc.? Shy people away from buying?
foxdawg2000
Supporter
- 474
- 24
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2011
So people in Europe don't buy I phones and PS3s?? uhh yes they do... my buddy is stationed over there .... there's your answer...Did people stop driving when gas got to 2 dollars a gallon? 3 dollars?. I believe certain European countries way of taxation definitely > ours.. Look at the German economy.. I understand you posed a question and I'm not arguing with you just attempting to provide an answer to your question.. Just my thoughts sir..
- 21,365
- 812
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2003
Right but I was merely asking. I know things like PS3 and Macs cost a lot more in Europe than they do here. Not sure if this takes out the lower class folks who somehow buy this stuff... But either way I'm curious to see what happens.