- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 4/22/21 at 11:13 pm to RebelExpress38
A news report about an alleged plan is a long way from a bill that passes the house and evenly divided senate. A no vote from Manchin or any other D senator, and it’s dead.
Posted on 4/22/21 at 11:33 pm to RebelExpress38
There are posters ITT that voted for this.
“Biden is a politician and doesn’t actually mean what he says.”
“Biden is a politician and doesn’t actually mean what he says.”
Posted on 4/22/21 at 11:45 pm to kywildcatfanone
quote:
Elections have consequences
But I guess only hollywood high earners vote democrat.
When will there be a taxpayer revolt? They waste 80 cents of every dollar they take in.
How can you say that. I've ridden the Acela train from NYC to DC and had one of those $12 hamburgers that cost $80 to make!
Posted on 4/23/21 at 7:06 am to Drizzt
quote:
Please tell me what the worst case is then wise one.
That you sell because of this, none of it happens, and you’re left holding cash in your hand while the market continues to climb...
Posted on 4/23/21 at 8:05 am to slackster
That’s not worst case. The market can always grow just like it can always fall. Also, I seriously doubt a home office taking millions out is just going to sit in cash. There are so many opportunities outside the market where they can make 5-7%. As I’ve said before, you give awful advice.
Posted on 4/23/21 at 8:28 am to RebelExpress38
frick BIDEN and every pos that voted for him.
Posted on 4/23/21 at 8:29 am to VADawg
they didn't win by votes.
Posted on 4/23/21 at 8:30 am to down time
Right. They cheated in swing states. Didn’t even follow state voting legislation.
Posted on 4/23/21 at 8:57 am to RebelExpress38
Nancy Pelosi's husband runs an investment firm and has a shite load of Tesla calls the last time they disclosed their holdings. There's no way even the most progressive dems are going to be cool with this new proposal.
Posted on 4/23/21 at 9:07 am to lsu777
quote:good luck finding me , bro
becomes a taxable event at that point and you must pay income taxes on the portion used to buy based off original current price at time of buying said product - original purchase price
Posted on 4/23/21 at 9:46 am to DaTruth7
quote:How about a real response?
What a moron
Posted on 4/23/21 at 9:57 am to bayoubengals88
if I had to guess, the idea is that there was an immediate dip in stock prices because wealthy people were liquidating now out of fear that their tax burden was doubling if they held.
There is also a fear that future stock market returns will be impacted in a negative way as wealthier people either move their money into real estate where they get friendlier tax treatment or there will be a more capital flight in which money leaves the tax sphere of the United States; and this means less capital flowing into the exchanges
And of course, the fear and uncertainty of what the the future brings for lower income investors and their tax burden.
There is also a fear that future stock market returns will be impacted in a negative way as wealthier people either move their money into real estate where they get friendlier tax treatment or there will be a more capital flight in which money leaves the tax sphere of the United States; and this means less capital flowing into the exchanges
And of course, the fear and uncertainty of what the the future brings for lower income investors and their tax burden.
This post was edited on 4/23/21 at 9:59 am
Posted on 4/23/21 at 10:03 am to RebelExpress38
quote:You did not describe my opinion. I am not a person who doesn't care.
“it doesn’t apply to me so I don’t care” might be the dumbest opinion you can have when it comes to government taking something away from citizens
I simply want to know what's inherently wrong with a 43% capital gains tax on people who make more than 1 million dollars every year.
We live in a liberal society. We were founded on liberal, enlightenment, principles that promote concepts of equality and justice, responsibility, and sacrifice. By sacrifice, I mean the the Social Contract where we give in order to receive.
Why would a person with means not be expected to shoulder some of the burden of his fellow man? The social gospel of the late 19th century stems from this idea. Even Rockefeller and Carnegie understood this. Both donated untold sums of money to improve society before an income tax even existed.
When I say "improve society" I mean an increased standard of living for all. Carnegie wrote this in The Gospel of Wealth:
“The poor enjoy what the rich could not before afford. What were the luxuries have become the necessaries of life. The laborer has now more comforts than the landlord had a few generations ago.”
Now, you might object by mentioning how the federal government mismanages money, and you'd find me cheering you on. But that doesn't mean that a 40+ percent tax on capital gains for those making more than a million dollars annually is a bad or inherently evil idea. Or, not worthy of consideration. I'd ask you to think about why you have such a visceral reaction to this headline. Then decide whether it is warranted or not. Likely, it's not.
One of my goals in life is for people who don't consider both sides of the argument to begin doing so. This can and should be done on any and every issue. The world would be a better place.
EDIT: What I've written above certainly represents a change in my thinking, and it largely comes from me reconsidering where my Christianity fits into large economic issues and debates.
I just can't see where the concept of "Mine! Mine! Mine!" fits into a Biblical overview of stewardship. And as it turns out, we were taxed at much higher rates before the convergence of "The Right" with evangelicalism.
This post was edited on 4/23/21 at 10:40 am
Posted on 4/23/21 at 10:13 am to DaTruth7
quote:It's as if a lot of you don't realize that for most of the modern era the highest income levels were taxed at a minimum of 50% with many years seeing a number above 90%.
What a moron
With this being true, you might ask yourself "hmm...what actually is the "American way" regarding taxation? Is my view actually inconsistent with the historical majority opinion?"
Posted on 4/23/21 at 11:00 am to bayoubengals88
quote:
It's as if a lot of you don't realize that for most of the modern era the highest income levels were taxed at a minimum of 50% with many years seeing a number above 90%.
I don’t really disagree with your overall point, but this stat is always a bit disingenuous. Upper income American households pay out a higher percentage of their income now in totality than they did back then due to social security, increases to local taxes, increased costs of government services, etc.
As far as Biden’s plan goes, I don’t see this causing a crash. The wealthy have to put their assets somewhere, so I imagine they’d just hold the rope.
Quite frankly, most our elitist class is so morally disgusting that I don’t really get mad about these sorts of proposals anymore.
Posted on 4/23/21 at 11:06 am to bayoubengals88
quote:
We live in a liberal society. We were founded on liberal, enlightenment, principles that promote concepts of equality and justice, responsibility, and sacrifice. By sacrifice, I mean the the Social Contract where we give in order to receive.
The Social Contract you are alluding to requires personal responsibility as the bedrock of society for it to all work. You won't find a single conservative who complains about supporting people who cannot take care of themselves, but we all know that is not how the current "safety net" is being used. The idea of personal responsibility has been replaced with entitlement and it is the reason why no matter how pure our "liberal society" intentions are with wealth redistribution in the name of justice, the problem of poverty has not gone away. If these programs did what politicians claim, why do they keep growing each year, and keep requiring more money? We need more than good intentions to actually solve the problem.
Taking money away from wealthy people in the name of whatever idea you think you are fighting for because you think it will lead to "justice or responsibility" or whatever is just nonsense. No nation in the history of the world has taxed its citizens into prosperity for all. This is the fundamental difference between capitalism and socialism.
I'm glad that you brought up charity. When you give charity, it is much more personal. People dont abuse charity like they abuse government programs because there is a much more personal element to it. People happily take advantage of milking whatever they can out of the government because it is this massive nameless and faceless blob, even though that money comes from people like you and me through taxes. Why is that? On the flip side, the same people are much less likely to abuse charity because it isn't a nameless faceless middleman. It is more direct, and more personal.
This movie scene will illustrate my point.
Can you imagine anyone doing this today? Be honest with yourself and you will know what the heart of this issue is. Taxing people to death will not do what you think it will.
Posted on 4/23/21 at 11:11 am to rocket31
quote:
it's just what they hope, but not reality
Really? Hows that crypto doing for you today? Gonna sell why its still high, or ride it back down?
quote:
Over $200 billion wiped off cryptocurrency market in a single day
Panic selling has ensued
Posted on 4/23/21 at 11:21 am to TomRollTideRitter
quote:I think disingenuous is a bit too strong a word here. High income earners hardly feel FICA. We're talking less than an 8% tax with a cap around 140k. State and locals taxes are much lower relative to what I'm about to show you as well.
I don’t really disagree with your overall point, but this stat is always a bit disingenuous. Upper income American households pay out a higher percentage of their income now in totality than they did back then due to social security, increases to local taxes, increased costs of government services, etc.
Federal Income Taxes:
1920
Income above 72k was taxed at 43%
Funny enough, 72k in 1920 amounts to right at a million in today's money ($953,557).
Income above 200k was taxed at 68% (2.65 million now, and income above 1 million was taxed at 73% (the highest bracket)
1950
Income above 90k was taxed at 87%
90k in 1950 is rougly one million today (989,167).
Income above 200k was taxed at 91% (2.2m today)
1980
Income above 215,400 was taxed at 70%
That was the highest bracket (translates to 692k today)
2010
Incomes above 373,650 were taxed at 35% and that was the highest bracket then.
Reagan changed everything in the late 80s, and now many of you feel that a tax rate above 30% on some of your money is criminal. That's pretty comical in light of the historical record. This response is not directed at TomRollTideRitter.
Posted on 4/23/21 at 11:24 am to RobbBobb
quote:
Really? Hows that crypto doing for you today? Gonna sell why its still high, or ride it back down?
Oh no! Crypto is having a rough week? Definitely unchartered territory.
It’s up enormously on the year, friend.
Page 5 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News