Total Posts:55|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Taxaton of Capital Gains

jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/18/2012 10:30:29 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
This is an interesting and relevant topic. Barack Obama would raise the top capital gains rate from 15% to 25% (15%+5% from expiration of Bush Tax cuts+3.8% from new Investment tax in Obamacare+1.2% from limiting high income Deductions). Mitt Romney would maintain the current 15% top capital gains tax rate, but eliminate the capital gains tax for the middle class. Newt Gingrich would just eliminate the capital gains tax.

I agree with Newt Gingrich. The capital gains tax discourages savings/investing and keeps investments "hoarded". And, it is a blazen example of double taxation.
President of DDO
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/18/2012 10:38:53 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/18/2012 10:30:29 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
This is an interesting and relevant topic. Barack Obama would raise the top capital gains rate from 15% to 25% (15%+5% from expiration of Bush Tax cuts+3.8% from new Investment tax in Obamacare+1.2% from limiting high income Deductions). Mitt Romney would maintain the current 15% top capital gains tax rate, but eliminate the capital gains tax for the middle class. Newt Gingrich would just eliminate the capital gains tax.

I agree with Newt Gingrich. The capital gains tax discourages savings/investing and keeps investments "hoarded". And, it is a blazen example of double taxation.

Agreed. While I don't mind a small capital gains tax, I don't understand why Democrats don't understand the potential harm of such a tax.

They scream bloody murder that the rich don't pay enough because capital gains is only 15%.

This argument is ludicrous. Take Mitt Romney for example who is coming under fire for this. He only pays 15%... but is worth 200 million... so 15% of 200 million is ... well well, 30 million dollars. Hmmm now to me that sounds like a lot more than the average American pays... but I could be wrong.
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/18/2012 10:49:48 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/18/2012 10:38:53 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 1/18/2012 10:30:29 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
This is an interesting and relevant topic. Barack Obama would raise the top capital gains rate from 15% to 25% (15%+5% from expiration of Bush Tax cuts+3.8% from new Investment tax in Obamacare+1.2% from limiting high income Deductions). Mitt Romney would maintain the current 15% top capital gains tax rate, but eliminate the capital gains tax for the middle class. Newt Gingrich would just eliminate the capital gains tax.

I agree with Newt Gingrich. The capital gains tax discourages savings/investing and keeps investments "hoarded". And, it is a blazen example of double taxation.

Agreed. While I don't mind a small capital gains tax, I don't understand why Democrats don't understand the potential harm of such a tax.

They scream bloody murder that the rich don't pay enough because capital gains is only 15%.

This argument is ludicrous. Take Mitt Romney for example who is coming under fire for this. He only pays 15%... but is worth 200 million... so 15% of 200 million is ... well well, 30 million dollars. Hmmm now to me that sounds like a lot more than the average American pays... but I could be wrong.

You're right. And, don't forget that Romney has already paid the standard income tax on his original income before he could even invest in capital gains. SO, this income is being doubletaxed.
President of DDO
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/18/2012 10:52:13 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/18/2012 10:49:48 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 1/18/2012 10:38:53 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 1/18/2012 10:30:29 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
This is an interesting and relevant topic. Barack Obama would raise the top capital gains rate from 15% to 25% (15%+5% from expiration of Bush Tax cuts+3.8% from new Investment tax in Obamacare+1.2% from limiting high income Deductions). Mitt Romney would maintain the current 15% top capital gains tax rate, but eliminate the capital gains tax for the middle class. Newt Gingrich would just eliminate the capital gains tax.

I agree with Newt Gingrich. The capital gains tax discourages savings/investing and keeps investments "hoarded". And, it is a blazen example of double taxation.

Agreed. While I don't mind a small capital gains tax, I don't understand why Democrats don't understand the potential harm of such a tax.

They scream bloody murder that the rich don't pay enough because capital gains is only 15%.

This argument is ludicrous. Take Mitt Romney for example who is coming under fire for this. He only pays 15%... but is worth 200 million... so 15% of 200 million is ... well well, 30 million dollars. Hmmm now to me that sounds like a lot more than the average American pays... but I could be wrong.

You're right. And, don't forget that Romney has already paid the standard income tax on his original income before he could even invest in capital gains. SO, this income is being doubletaxed.

Indeed, Democrats are so dumb sometimes... he pays less than my secretary HA
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/18/2012 10:53:11 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/18/2012 10:52:13 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 1/18/2012 10:49:48 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 1/18/2012 10:38:53 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 1/18/2012 10:30:29 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
This is an interesting and relevant topic. Barack Obama would raise the top capital gains rate from 15% to 25% (15%+5% from expiration of Bush Tax cuts+3.8% from new Investment tax in Obamacare+1.2% from limiting high income Deductions). Mitt Romney would maintain the current 15% top capital gains tax rate, but eliminate the capital gains tax for the middle class. Newt Gingrich would just eliminate the capital gains tax.

I agree with Newt Gingrich. The capital gains tax discourages savings/investing and keeps investments "hoarded". And, it is a blazen example of double taxation.

Agreed. While I don't mind a small capital gains tax, I don't understand why Democrats don't understand the potential harm of such a tax.

They scream bloody murder that the rich don't pay enough because capital gains is only 15%.

This argument is ludicrous. Take Mitt Romney for example who is coming under fire for this. He only pays 15%... but is worth 200 million... so 15% of 200 million is ... well well, 30 million dollars. Hmmm now to me that sounds like a lot more than the average American pays... but I could be wrong.

You're right. And, don't forget that Romney has already paid the standard income tax on his original income before he could even invest in capital gains. SO, this income is being doubletaxed.

Indeed, Democrats are so dumb sometimes... he pays less than my secretary HA

The Democratic party is dangerously ignorant on economic matters. They are blind populists who know nothing of how the economy actually works. It is kind of funny sometimes, but it is scary how much damage they have done.
President of DDO
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/18/2012 10:56:14 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/18/2012 10:53:11 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 1/18/2012 10:52:13 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 1/18/2012 10:49:48 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 1/18/2012 10:38:53 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 1/18/2012 10:30:29 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
This is an interesting and relevant topic. Barack Obama would raise the top capital gains rate from 15% to 25% (15%+5% from expiration of Bush Tax cuts+3.8% from new Investment tax in Obamacare+1.2% from limiting high income Deductions). Mitt Romney would maintain the current 15% top capital gains tax rate, but eliminate the capital gains tax for the middle class. Newt Gingrich would just eliminate the capital gains tax.

I agree with Newt Gingrich. The capital gains tax discourages savings/investing and keeps investments "hoarded". And, it is a blazen example of double taxation.

Agreed. While I don't mind a small capital gains tax, I don't understand why Democrats don't understand the potential harm of such a tax.

They scream bloody murder that the rich don't pay enough because capital gains is only 15%.

This argument is ludicrous. Take Mitt Romney for example who is coming under fire for this. He only pays 15%... but is worth 200 million... so 15% of 200 million is ... well well, 30 million dollars. Hmmm now to me that sounds like a lot more than the average American pays... but I could be wrong.

You're right. And, don't forget that Romney has already paid the standard income tax on his original income before he could even invest in capital gains. SO, this income is being doubletaxed.

Indeed, Democrats are so dumb sometimes... he pays less than my secretary HA


The Democratic party is dangerously ignorant on economic matters. They are blind populists who know nothing of how the economy actually works. It is kind of funny sometimes, but it is scary how much damage they have done.

I would not call them dumb at all. Just wrong. *Waits for and contra*
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/18/2012 11:02:54 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/18/2012 10:56:14 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 1/18/2012 10:53:11 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 1/18/2012 10:52:13 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 1/18/2012 10:49:48 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 1/18/2012 10:38:53 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 1/18/2012 10:30:29 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
This is an interesting and relevant topic. Barack Obama would raise the top capital gains rate from 15% to 25% (15%+5% from expiration of Bush Tax cuts+3.8% from new Investment tax in Obamacare+1.2% from limiting high income Deductions). Mitt Romney would maintain the current 15% top capital gains tax rate, but eliminate the capital gains tax for the middle class. Newt Gingrich would just eliminate the capital gains tax.

I agree with Newt Gingrich. The capital gains tax discourages savings/investing and keeps investments "hoarded". And, it is a blazen example of double taxation.

Agreed. While I don't mind a small capital gains tax, I don't understand why Democrats don't understand the potential harm of such a tax.

They scream bloody murder that the rich don't pay enough because capital gains is only 15%.

This argument is ludicrous. Take Mitt Romney for example who is coming under fire for this. He only pays 15%... but is worth 200 million... so 15% of 200 million is ... well well, 30 million dollars. Hmmm now to me that sounds like a lot more than the average American pays... but I could be wrong.

You're right. And, don't forget that Romney has already paid the standard income tax on his original income before he could even invest in capital gains. SO, this income is being doubletaxed.

Indeed, Democrats are so dumb sometimes... he pays less than my secretary HA


The Democratic party is dangerously ignorant on economic matters. They are blind populists who know nothing of how the economy actually works. It is kind of funny sometimes, but it is scary how much damage they have done.


I would not call them dumb at all. Just wrong. *Waits for and contra*

Either they completely ignore the basic principles of economics or they are plain dumb. Either way they're dangerous to this country.
Lasagna
Posts: 2,440
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/18/2012 11:16:46 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
The Republican party worships economics "dangerously." How imbecilic to neglect all other fields of study just to focus on business econ. Republicans are horrible at consideration in matters of

Ethics: They define morality in terms of religion. That's too bad if your an immigrant, a minority, a homosexual, or a woman.

Sociology: The very nature of conservatism is self-centric; self-superior. The disease of conservatism spreads to other countries who, in defiant retaliation to our nationalistic tendencies, choose to enflame their own ethnocentric pride and thus creating the need for military.

The natural sciences: Constantly ignoring scientists' pleas on environmental issues, Republicans attempt to downplay science at every turn on the strength of economic arguments that are assumed to be more responsible and sensible.

Republicans are about business, religion, and military. When an issue that should be primarily viewed as sociological or ethical is presented, they turn to bullisht religion. When something that should be viewed as scientific arises, they turn to economics and think "business" instead of "science."
Rob
1Historygenius
Posts: 1,639
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/18/2012 11:17:13 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Newt Gingrich 2012!
"The chief business of the American people is business." - Calvin Coolidge

Latest debate - Reagan was a better President than Obama: http://www.debate.org...
mongeese
Posts: 5,387
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/19/2012 12:14:55 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/18/2012 11:17:13 PM, 1Historygenius wrote:
Newt Gingrich 2012!



Please stop spamming. Your post was irrelevant to this thread, and contributed nothing.
1Historygenius
Posts: 1,639
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/19/2012 12:25:01 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/19/2012 12:14:55 AM, mongeese wrote:
At 1/18/2012 11:17:13 PM, 1Historygenius wrote:
Newt Gingrich 2012!



Please stop spamming. Your post was irrelevant to this thread, and contributed nothing.

Wrong it encourages people to support the correct candidate. Now I don't know where you come from but in the place where I live called the United States there is something called from of speech. That being said however, I will attempt to contribute it more. So lets redo that post:

Vote for Newt Gingrich he has the best plans!

He wants to move toward an optional flat tax of 15% that would allow Americans the freedom to choose to file their taxes on a postcard, saving hundreds of billions in unnecessary costs each year. This optional flat tax system will preserve deductions on charitable giving and home ownership, and create a new personal deduction of $12,000 for every American. This deduction is well above the current poverty level, ensuring that this new system does not unfairly target the poor.

Vote Newt 2012!

There I re-edited it just for you.
"The chief business of the American people is business." - Calvin Coolidge

Latest debate - Reagan was a better President than Obama: http://www.debate.org...
mongeese
Posts: 5,387
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/19/2012 12:56:56 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/19/2012 12:25:01 AM, 1Historygenius wrote:
At 1/19/2012 12:14:55 AM, mongeese wrote:
At 1/18/2012 11:17:13 PM, 1Historygenius wrote:
Newt Gingrich 2012!

Please stop spamming. Your post was irrelevant to this thread, and contributed nothing.

Wrong it encourages people to support the correct candidate.

But it mentions nothing about the taxation of capital gains, which is kind of the topic of this thread.

Now I don't know where you come from but in the place where I live called the United States there is something called from of speech.

"From of speech"? Doesn't sound very useful. In any case, there is no right to spam, since this thread is supported by Juggle servers, so you have to follow Juggle's forum rules, which includes no spamming.

That being said however, I will attempt to contribute it more. So lets redo that post:

Vote for Newt Gingrich he has the best plans!

He wants to move toward an optional flat tax of 15% that would allow Americans the freedom to choose to file their taxes on a postcard, saving hundreds of billions in unnecessary costs each year. This optional flat tax system will preserve deductions on charitable giving and home ownership, and create a new personal deduction of $12,000 for every American. This deduction is well above the current poverty level, ensuring that this new system does not unfairly target the poor.

Vote Newt 2012!

There I re-edited it just for you.

And yet you still managed to miss the topic of the thread, taxation of capital gains, completely. Personally, I support Ron Paul's plan, with the freedom to choose to file as much in taxes as you please, but I digress. Stop spamming.
1Historygenius
Posts: 1,639
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/19/2012 8:25:31 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/19/2012 12:02:43 AM, Lasagna wrote:
Newy Gingrich: empowering poor people everywhere.

LOL - good meme idea.

Newt*
"The chief business of the American people is business." - Calvin Coolidge

Latest debate - Reagan was a better President than Obama: http://www.debate.org...
1Historygenius
Posts: 1,639
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/19/2012 8:26:56 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/19/2012 12:56:56 AM, mongeese wrote:
At 1/19/2012 12:25:01 AM, 1Historygenius wrote:
At 1/19/2012 12:14:55 AM, mongeese wrote:
At 1/18/2012 11:17:13 PM, 1Historygenius wrote:
Newt Gingrich 2012!

Please stop spamming. Your post was irrelevant to this thread, and contributed nothing.

Wrong it encourages people to support the correct candidate.

But it mentions nothing about the taxation of capital gains, which is kind of the topic of this thread.

Now I don't know where you come from but in the place where I live called the United States there is something called from of speech.

"From of speech"? Doesn't sound very useful. In any case, there is no right to spam, since this thread is supported by Juggle servers, so you have to follow Juggle's forum rules, which includes no spamming.

That being said however, I will attempt to contribute it more. So lets redo that post:

Vote for Newt Gingrich he has the best plans!

He wants to move toward an optional flat tax of 15% that would allow Americans the freedom to choose to file their taxes on a postcard, saving hundreds of billions in unnecessary costs each year. This optional flat tax system will preserve deductions on charitable giving and home ownership, and create a new personal deduction of $12,000 for every American. This deduction is well above the current poverty level, ensuring that this new system does not unfairly target the poor.

Vote Newt 2012!

There I re-edited it just for you.

And yet you still managed to miss the topic of the thread, taxation of capital gains, completely. Personally, I support Ron Paul's plan, with the freedom to choose to file as much in taxes as you please, but I digress. Stop spamming.

The topic of the thread those not matter. Also my mistake *freedom of speech* was what I meant Mr. SOPA.
"The chief business of the American people is business." - Calvin Coolidge

Latest debate - Reagan was a better President than Obama: http://www.debate.org...
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/19/2012 8:31:56 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/19/2012 12:02:43 AM, Lasagna wrote:
Newy Gingrich: empowering poor people everywhere.

LOL - good meme idea.

Done.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/19/2012 8:34:18 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/19/2012 8:31:56 AM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 1/19/2012 12:02:43 AM, Lasagna wrote:
Newy Gingrich: empowering poor people everywhere.

LOL - good meme idea.

Done.

http://www.quickmeme.com...
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
mongeese
Posts: 5,387
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/19/2012 5:05:13 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/19/2012 8:26:56 AM, 1Historygenius wrote:

The topic of the thread those not matter. Also my mistake *freedom of speech* was what I meant Mr. SOPA.

If that is the case, then what would ever qualify as spam?

My opinions are nothing like SOPA enforcement. I don't believe the government should be able to control this website, but Juggle owns this website, and can therefore handle posts on its threads however it wants.
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/19/2012 7:00:45 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/19/2012 8:26:56 AM, 1Historygenius wrote:
At 1/19/2012 12:56:56 AM, mongeese wrote:
At 1/19/2012 12:25:01 AM, 1Historygenius wrote:
At 1/19/2012 12:14:55 AM, mongeese wrote:
At 1/18/2012 11:17:13 PM, 1Historygenius wrote:
Newt Gingrich 2012!

Please stop spamming. Your post was irrelevant to this thread, and contributed nothing.

Wrong it encourages people to support the correct candidate.

But it mentions nothing about the taxation of capital gains, which is kind of the topic of this thread.

Now I don't know where you come from but in the place where I live called the United States there is something called from of speech.

"From of speech"? Doesn't sound very useful. In any case, there is no right to spam, since this thread is supported by Juggle servers, so you have to follow Juggle's forum rules, which includes no spamming.

That being said however, I will attempt to contribute it more. So lets redo that post:

Vote for Newt Gingrich he has the best plans!

He wants to move toward an optional flat tax of 15% that would allow Americans the freedom to choose to file their taxes on a postcard, saving hundreds of billions in unnecessary costs each year. This optional flat tax system will preserve deductions on charitable giving and home ownership, and create a new personal deduction of $12,000 for every American. This deduction is well above the current poverty level, ensuring that this new system does not unfairly target the poor.

Vote Newt 2012!

There I re-edited it just for you.

And yet you still managed to miss the topic of the thread, taxation of capital gains, completely. Personally, I support Ron Paul's plan, with the freedom to choose to file as much in taxes as you please, but I digress. Stop spamming.

The topic of the thread those not matter. Also my mistake *freedom of speech* was what I meant Mr. SOPA.

you do not understand the constitution. He can censor you any day, only the government cannot censor. I could censor you, he could, the mods could, it only violates rights when the government does it.
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/19/2012 7:25:28 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I would not call them dumb at all. Just wrong. *Waits for and contra*


The Republican party worships economics "dangerously." How imbecilic to neglect all other fields of study just to focus on business econ. Republicans are horrible at consideration in matters of

Ethics: They define morality in terms of religion. That's too bad if your an immigrant, a minority, a homosexual, or a woman.

Sociology: The very nature of conservatism is self-centric; self-superior. The disease of conservatism spreads to other countries who, in defiant retaliation to our nationalistic tendencies, choose to enflame their own ethnocentric pride and thus creating the need for military.

The natural sciences: Constantly ignoring scientists' pleas on environmental issues, Republicans attempt to downplay science at every turn on the strength of economic arguments that are assumed to be more responsible and sensible.

Republicans are about business, religion, and military. When an issue that should be primarily viewed as sociological or ethical is presented, they turn to bullisht religion. When something that should be viewed as scientific arises, they turn to economics and think "business" instead of "science."


I have to say that I do not fully agree with your first point. Now I FULLY agree with what you say, but when you say that they are "fully devoted" and worship economics, they have a strategic way of thinking. They connect the issues to give them a higher advantage. For example, tort reform, while is pretty useless if even accomplished, prohibits all of the potential lawsuits that are the basis for future environmental regulation and other regulations. It is related to the regulation of everything. Then, independent parties cannot sue immoral corporations for large sums of cash, and the corporations are let free to harm the public. It is a slippery-slope argument. The Left needs to learn of these strategies.

Plus, I think that the Capital Gains tax should be raised. Many wealthy citizens pay a lower tax rate than the middle class, even though they have the ability to pay the same percentage and more. People have also suggested counting Capital Gains as income, so taxing Capital Gains and dividends the same percentage of income.
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/19/2012 11:29:20 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/19/2012 7:25:28 PM, Contra wrote:
I would not call them dumb at all. Just wrong. *Waits for and contra*


The Republican party worships economics "dangerously." How imbecilic to neglect all other fields of study just to focus on business econ. Republicans are horrible at consideration in matters of

Ethics: They define morality in terms of religion. That's too bad if your an immigrant, a minority, a homosexual, or a woman.

Sociology: The very nature of conservatism is self-centric; self-superior. The disease of conservatism spreads to other countries who, in defiant retaliation to our nationalistic tendencies, choose to enflame their own ethnocentric pride and thus creating the need for military.

The natural sciences: Constantly ignoring scientists' pleas on environmental issues, Republicans attempt to downplay science at every turn on the strength of economic arguments that are assumed to be more responsible and sensible.

Republicans are about business, religion, and military. When an issue that should be primarily viewed as sociological or ethical is presented, they turn to bullisht religion. When something that should be viewed as scientific arises, they turn to economics and think "business" instead of "science."


I have to say that I do not fully agree with your first point. Now I FULLY agree with what you say, but when you say that they are "fully devoted" and worship economics, they have a strategic way of thinking. They connect the issues to give them a higher advantage. For example, tort reform, while is pretty useless if even accomplished, prohibits all of the potential lawsuits that are the basis for future environmental regulation and other regulations. It is related to the regulation of everything. Then, independent parties cannot sue immoral corporations for large sums of cash, and the corporations are let free to harm the public. It is a slippery-slope argument. The Left needs to learn of these strategies.

Plus, I think that the Capital Gains tax should be raised. Many wealthy citizens pay a lower tax rate than the middle class, even though they have the ability to pay the same percentage and more. People have also suggested counting Capital Gains as income, so taxing Capital Gains and dividends the same percentage of income.

This is what I mean by Democrats and other liberals putting populism above sound economic policy.

Taxing capital at the same rate as regular income would be disasterous for the economy. We already double tax capital enough. If we raist capital taxes to 35%, where regular taxes are, that would be an economic disaster.
President of DDO
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/19/2012 11:59:56 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
As hard a pill as it is to swallow, it's best to have capital gains tax substantially lower than income tax in order to encourage investment.
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/20/2012 12:01:26 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/19/2012 11:59:56 PM, Wnope wrote:
As hard a pill as it is to swallow, it's best to have capital gains tax substantially lower than income tax in order to encourage investment.

Yes. Exactly.
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/20/2012 12:21:41 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/19/2012 11:59:56 PM, Wnope wrote:
As hard a pill as it is to swallow, it's best to have capital gains tax substantially lower than income tax in order to encourage investment.

Wnope, I am actually starting to (gulp) like you.
President of DDO
MikeLoviN
Posts: 746
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/20/2012 1:04:02 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
What's with this double taxation nonsense I'm hearing? There's a reason its called a capital 'gains' tax. It's because the tax is levied only on profits made on investment. ie.) if you buy stock at $5 a share and sell it later on at $7 a share, the tax is applied only on the $2 premium. The initial investment is not taxed again. If you then re-invest the remaining profits, then you are effectively generating new income. Why should that be tax exempt?

Though its a valid argument, personally, I find the whole 'investment incentive' argument somewhat flawed. Let's assume that all rational economic agents want to maximize profit (I'm sure most people would agree with this). This in no way detracts from the fact that less profit is preferred to no profit. When you make a capital investment, there is a finite probability that it will turn a profit at some point in time. That probability is in no way related to the tax rate on capital gains. Whether the capital gains tax is 20% or 15%, the chances that my investment of X dollars in some company will prove to be profitable is exactly the same. Why, all of a sudden, when the tax rate is increased would I suddenly decide to not invest?

Now I know what you're thinking, and yes, theoretically you are correct. The diminished profit potential will mean that I'm less inclined to take a risk on an unsure investment. And I would agree if the rates we were talking about were in the range of ridiculous (ie. pushing 50%). But a change from 15% to 20 or even 25% is the difference between a 5mil and 4.5mil profit. At the scale of the vast majority of transactions, I'd argue that the absolute difference is near-negligible and certainly not likely to noticeably affect investment patterns.
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/20/2012 1:20:06 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/19/2012 12:14:55 AM, mongeese wrote:
At 1/18/2012 11:17:13 PM, 1Historygenius wrote:
Newt Gingrich 2012!



Please stop spamming. Your post was irrelevant to this thread, and contributed nothing.

I wonder if you would have said that if it was a Ron Paul ad?
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/20/2012 2:21:29 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/20/2012 1:04:02 AM, MikeLoviN wrote:
What's with this double taxation nonsense I'm hearing? There's a reason its called a capital 'gains' tax. It's because the tax is levied only on profits made on investment. ie.) if you buy stock at $5 a share and sell it later on at $7 a share, the tax is applied only on the $2 premium. The initial investment is not taxed again. If you then re-invest the remaining profits, then you are effectively generating new income. Why should that be tax exempt?

Though its a valid argument, personally, I find the whole 'investment incentive' argument somewhat flawed. Let's assume that all rational economic agents want to maximize profit (I'm sure most people would agree with this). This in no way detracts from the fact that less profit is preferred to no profit. When you make a capital investment, there is a finite probability that it will turn a profit at some point in time. That probability is in no way related to the tax rate on capital gains. Whether the capital gains tax is 20% or 15%, the chances that my investment of X dollars in some company will prove to be profitable is exactly the same. Why, all of a sudden, when the tax rate is increased would I suddenly decide to not invest?

Now I know what you're thinking, and yes, theoretically you are correct. The diminished profit potential will mean that I'm less inclined to take a risk on an unsure investment. And I would agree if the rates we were talking about were in the range of ridiculous (ie. pushing 50%). But a change from 15% to 20 or even 25% is the difference between a 5mil and 4.5mil profit. At the scale of the vast majority of transactions, I'd argue that the absolute difference is near-negligible and certainly not likely to noticeably affect investment patterns.

15%+5%=20%+5%=25%...40%+5%=45%+5%=50%

Each small increase in the tax rate does not seem like it will have a large impact on incentives. However, if you raise a tax rate 1% every year for 30 years, the tax rate is 30% higher.

Tax rates matter less for those already in the market than for those who are entering a market. Still, I think your theory ignores the whole concept of choice.

If you are investing 1 million dollars. If that 1 million dollars doubles in 30 years to 2 million dollars, you have to pay 200,000 dollars.

However, as you'll note, the capital gains tax is not adjusted for inflation. So, if the dollar loses half of its value during this period, you have made no "real" profit, but you are taxed on nominal profit.

So, you are essentially paying $200,000 on an investment that you made no profit on. And, of course, there is a good chance that you will lose money.

Given that there is a solid chance that this could happen, you would probably be much more likely to invest in a "tax free" investment, even if it is a less efficient investment. You would also be more likely to do more immediate consumption.

All of these distortions are bad for the overall economy.
President of DDO
JaxsonRaine
Posts: 3,606
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/20/2012 9:11:23 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 1/20/2012 1:04:02 AM, MikeLoviN wrote:
Though its a valid argument, personally, I find the whole 'investment incentive' argument somewhat flawed. Let's assume that all rational economic agents want to maximize profit (I'm sure most people would agree with this). This in no way detracts from the fact that less profit is preferred to no profit. When you make a capital investment, there is a finite probability that it will turn a profit at some point in time. That probability is in no way related to the tax rate on capital gains. Whether the capital gains tax is 20% or 15%, the chances that my investment of X dollars in some company will prove to be profitable is exactly the same. Why, all of a sudden, when the tax rate is increased would I suddenly decide to not invest?

It's all about risk/reward. Whether you are investing long-term in fortune 500 companies, or day trading forex, it's all about risk/reward.

Let's say you have a fund with 10,000(and we'll simplify some things). You consider buying ABC because it has been fluctuating between $1.00/share and $1.10/share, with occasional bounces down to $0.90/share. If you buy in at $1.00, a sound exit strategy would be a stop-loss at, or slightly below $0.90, and the sell point at $1.10. Here, you are risking 1:1, dollar for dollar. Excluding transaction fees, if you get out at $1.10, you'll have $1000 profit. With tax though, it's $850 profit, with a $1000 risk. Depending on how often ABC dips below $1.00, it could be a good trade, but 1:1 risk:reward is too little in my experience. In this situation, a trader has to pick a winning trade 54% of the time just to break even.

If tax were at 35%, then the profit on that trade would only be $650. In this situation, you have to pick a winning trade 61% of the time just to break even.

The short story is, any tax on investments discourages investing. All investors have a risk:reward threshhold they don't cross. Increasing taxes by 20% would require a 20% increase to the reward in every trade for investors to break even compared to what they are doing now.

If you ever got into investing, you could ask yourself and other investors how difficult it would be if you lost an additional 20% on every win... it's a very bad idea.

Now I know what you're thinking, and yes, theoretically you are correct. The diminished profit potential will mean that I'm less inclined to take a risk on an unsure investment. And I would agree if the rates we were talking about were in the range of ridiculous (ie. pushing 50%). But a change from 15% to 20 or even 25% is the difference between a 5mil and 4.5mil profit. At the scale of the vast majority of transactions, I'd argue that the absolute difference is near-negligible and certainly not likely to noticeably affect investment patterns.

It's also the difference between a lot of mutual funds being profitable or not. It's the difference between a lot of day traders making a living or not(it's not easy). It would also mean less total investing in all markets, meaning less money for businesses to start-up, expand, or carry through tough times.
twocupcakes: 15 = 13
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/20/2012 10:31:20 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
As hard a pill as it is to swallow, it's best to have capital gains tax substantially lower than income tax in order to encourage investment.

What investment? Wall Street? It is already a huge institution that dominates much of our economy. We should reduce the financial sector's role in this economy and replace some of our economy with health care, manufacturing, etc. Financial Institutions do not create or sell anything, they just move money around. Plus, when wealthy investors get nearly all of their income from Capital Gains, they pay a lower rate than the middle class, even though they are not really contributing to society.
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan