- 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
re: The "tax the rich" ideaology.
Posted on 6/24/26 at 2:15 pm to GoCrazyAuburn
Posted on 6/24/26 at 2:15 pm to GoCrazyAuburn
quote:
Because you are still allowing the risk basis of the compensation to exist, while not allowing for the entire reason the tax calculation is lower. Compensation is coming from a split of the profits of the investment, yet you are taxing one recipient of those profits differently than another recipient of the exact same profits. If you want to tax speculative, risk based income at ordinary income rates, it needs to be a guaranteed income.
Eh, it wasn’t the manager’s capital at risk. If it was earned in a managed account, as opposed to a private fund, it would be treated as ordinary income to the manager despite being the very same profits.
1
Posted on 6/24/26 at 2:16 pm to Byron Bojangles III
quote:
you know i mean college not K-12 but lets keep acting naive
I know exactly what you meant and responded accordingly. How about you stop acting naive?
Posted on 6/24/26 at 2:17 pm to theliontamer
Implies the rich aren't taxed.
They are. It's stupid. Like assault weapon, climate change or gender affirming care. All lies.
They are. It's stupid. Like assault weapon, climate change or gender affirming care. All lies.
Posted on 6/24/26 at 2:22 pm to Mo Jeaux
quote:
First of all, like I said, I would ask that you go back and read the question to which I was responding carefully. It’s clear that you did not do so.
quote:
Do you think they aren't getting taxed now?
No.
Posted on 6/24/26 at 2:23 pm to Mo Jeaux
quote:
Should we not tax the rich?
They are taxed and well taxed.
Posted on 6/24/26 at 2:24 pm to SoFlaGuy
quote:
Most everyone is liberal until they start earning income and paying taxes.
Not me. That way of thinking was always asinine to me. A character flaw.
Posted on 6/24/26 at 2:24 pm to Byron Bojangles III
We have free public education and it is a failing system. We have low cost community colleges and state schools. The services are there, the people are not using them properly. So your solution is to give more "free" services that are abused and taken for granted.
Posted on 6/24/26 at 2:24 pm to LsuNav
quote:
We had a 72% tax braket until the 1970s then we destroyed the tax system. Has our society improved or devolved since the 1970s? We were arguably a greatest country in 1970 than we are now.
We had that system through the 70s and the 70s sucked economically for the US.
Posted on 6/24/26 at 2:25 pm to Mo Jeaux
quote:
Should we not tax the rich?
We already do dumbass. Who do you think funds the majority of the US Treasury?
Posted on 6/24/26 at 2:26 pm to LsuNav
quote:
We had a 72% tax braket until the 1970s then we destroyed the tax system. Has our society improved or devolved since the 1970s? We were arguably a greatest country in 1970 than we are now.
Why are you focused on society in making an argument about tax rates? It should be the US economy and American wealth that you focus on, and on both those accounts we are far better off today than we were in 1970.
Posted on 6/24/26 at 2:27 pm to LsuNav
quote:
We had a 72% tax braket until the 1970s then we destroyed the tax system
It takes a pretty loathsome person to think it's okay to take almost 75% of what someone else has earned just so they can get some free shite
Posted on 6/24/26 at 2:28 pm to Mo Jeaux
quote:
Eh, it wasn’t the manager’s capital at risk. If it was earned in a managed account, as opposed to a private fund, it would be treated as ordinary income to the manager despite being the very same profits.
I mean, generally this is not true. The managers generally have to contribute their own capital to the partnership entity, to act as the GP and all investors & managers are legally binded to the entity.
If we just want to gloss over the differences in a Fund Partnership and a Managed custodial account, then sure they are the same.
Posted on 6/24/26 at 2:32 pm to GoCrazyAuburn
quote:Wall St investment fund compensation often entails a 2&20 structure -- 2% fee on funds under management (taxed as ordinary income) and 20% of generated ROI. The latter is currently taxed as "carried interest" at CapGains rates.
What would your exact proposal be to "close" the so called loophole?
The proposal would be to tax carried interest as ordinary compensation.
i.e., Profits received by a fund manager in exchange for investment management services, including an interest carveout would be treated as ordinary income. The income would be recognized when the manager received the economic benefit (vesting/distribution).
This post was edited on 6/24/26 at 2:34 pm
Posted on 6/24/26 at 2:32 pm to BBONDS25
quote:
He asked “do [I] think they aren’t getting taxed”.
My response is no, I do not think that they aren’t getting taxed (i.e., they are getting taxed).
Also, I’m still waiting for you to point out where I mentioned something about 1% loans.
Posted on 6/24/26 at 2:34 pm to GoCrazyAuburn
quote:
I mean, generally this is not true. The managers generally have to contribute their own capital to the partnership entity, to act as the GP and all investors & managers are legally binded to the entity.
That’s a capital investment though. It receives the same treatment as LP Capital.
Posted on 6/24/26 at 2:36 pm to LsuNav
quote:
We had a 72% tax braket until the 1970s
That’s meaningless without citing what the effective tax rate was.
Posted on 6/24/26 at 2:38 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
Wall St investment fund compensation often entails a 2&20 structure -- 2% fee on funds under management (taxed as ordinary income) and 20% of generated ROI. The latter is currently taxed as "carried interest" at CapGains rates.
The proposal would be to tax carried interest as ordinary compensation.
i.e., Profits received by a fund manager in exchange for investment management services, including an interest carveout would be treated as ordinary income. The income would be recognized when the manager received the economic benefit (vesting/distribution).
I mean I get it, but the proposal can't just be tax the long term capital gains as ordinary income instead. Youd have to eliminate the entire construct of the partnerships and only allow managed, custodial accounts.
Posted on 6/24/26 at 2:42 pm to LsuNav
quote:
We had a 72% tax braket until the 1970s then we destroyed the tax system.
It's rare to see so many erroneous thoughts expressed in so few words
Posted on 6/24/26 at 2:45 pm to Mo Jeaux
quote:
That’s a capital investment though. It receives the same treatment as LP Capital.
...yes, and for a manager the be paid via carried interest, this is generally how it works.
Posted on 6/24/26 at 2:46 pm to Broke
quote:
The rich get fricked at a disproportionate rate.
They pay more taxes
It looks like they're managing to get by
Page 4 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News