- 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
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
frogtown
| Favorite team: | Georgia  |
| Location: | |
| Biography: | |
| Interests: | |
| Occupation: | |
| Number of Posts: | 5953 |
| Registered on: | 8/30/2017 |
| Online Status: | Online |
Recent Posts
Message
quote:
Self directed retirement is an extremely conservative ideal.
When the government doesn't provide any funds for it, it is. You should already know this.
I agree with setting up tax free accounts at birth. The problem comes when you ask me, the taxpayer, to fund it.
Let me tell you where this is headed.
At some point in the future the Democrats will regain power. They will co-opt this program in short order. Using government funds in these accounts is their idea BTW. Most recently in a 2023 bill authored by Ayanna Pressley and Cory Booker.
You can expect this program to grow both in size and scope. The seed money will increase and perhaps there will be a yearly cash infusion.
This will be done in the name of closing the wealth gap.
In the end, it will just be good ole fashioned wealth redistribution.
0
quote:
How do you think social security is funded?
What is the difference between a payroll deduction from both the worker and employer and funds from the US Treasury?
How do you think the money got into the social security system?
How do you think the money got into the US Treasury?
You appear "angry" about something. And I don't think you need to be. Or maybe you need to be more angry about things like social security. Be consistent.
:lol:
I simply replied to a poster who commented about whether or not these accounts,that were funded with some government funds either totally or partially, fit conservative ideals. I opined they did not.
quote:
It isnt per account.
It is for kids born during Trump's second term.
As of early 2026, the federal government provides a one-time, $1,000 seed deposit for "Trump Accounts" for U.S. citizen children born between January 1, 2025, and December 31, 2028
quote:
Most of the funding is from parents or philanthropists.
That still does not change the fact that taxpayers are funding the accounts at $1000 per account, which is something conservatives should be against.
That is my point.
quote:
Conservatives are against savings accounts?
No. They are against taxpayers funding the accounts.
quote:
Isn't it privately funded
taxpayer funded
quote:
The libertarian party sucks
I can count maybe five members of this board who are actual members of the Libertarian party.
quote:
As I said earlier, its the socialism of the right: a good idea that will never work because man is too flawed to implement it without causing chaos and bad outcomes to everything it touches.
The majority of libertarians on this board are "economic libertarians". Economic libertarianism is being tried right now in Argentina. Let us know if you believe this is not working in Argentina.
re: Stocks under $50 that pay a dividend
Posted by frogtown on 3/21/26 at 2:15 pm to bayoubengals88
quote:
Far better to accumulate QQQ
Stick to the topic.
QQQ doesn't give out "qualified dividends". Or if it does, it is miniscule. Many need these qualified dividends for tax purposes.
re: Stocks under $50 that pay a dividend
Posted by frogtown on 3/21/26 at 6:18 am to texas tortilla
quote:
Campbell's soup is at a 52 week low around 20. Dividend up over 7%.
A lot of the food stocks are at lows.
CAG is around 15 with a 9% yield.
KHC is around 21 with a 7% yield.
re: Good News For The Mid Terms
Posted by frogtown on 3/19/26 at 7:13 am to dickkellog
quote:
paid $3.09 yesterday in arkansas,
Your gas station is working off old inventory.
As others have stated, you probably live in the sticks.
Give it another two weeks and then report back the price.
re: Former DOGE Advisor: WH worked to clamp down on spending cuts
Posted by frogtown on 3/18/26 at 12:55 pm to SallysHuman
quote:
Would it have passed?
They had the DJT tax cuts as leverage. I believe so.
re: Former DOGE Advisor: WH worked to clamp down on spending cuts
Posted by frogtown on 3/18/26 at 12:31 pm to SallysHuman
quote:
People get pissy that Trump hasn't "done something"
In order to get some spending cuts, they(the cuts) needed to be in the BBB. That was his opportunity to "do something".
re: Why wouldn’t I park big chunks in QQQI and JEPI???
Posted by frogtown on 3/18/26 at 8:30 am to RedlandsTiger
quote:
You're going to have a pretty big tax bill. All of these dividends are going to be taxed a regular income if it's a taxable account (it needs to be in a Roth).
The fund utilizes Section 1256 contracts (NDX options), resulting in a 60/40 capital gains split (60% long-term, 40% short-term).
So 40% will be taxed as regular income. 60% long term cap gain.
quote:
I wish people would watch soaps again for their drama fix and tune all these meatheads out. We've turned politics into The Young and the Restless.
Privacy•Ad
This is a bingo. I used to listen to Limbaugh because he made me laugh. We have a group that is way way way to hung up on these influencers and every little post they make or word they say.
quote:
Looks like they turned on him.
Trump first threatened to primary Massie when Massie voted against the Cares Act.
She says she wants to be Great Britain's version of Javier Milei, which is what GB needs.
re: An economic collapse scenario by Citrini Research:
Posted by frogtown on 2/25/26 at 6:51 am to bayoubengals88
Reads like an Ayn Rand novel.
re: Who pays the tariffs?
Posted by frogtown on 2/24/26 at 3:57 pm to Harry Caray
quote:
I really wish people would be as disgusted with the income tax as much as they are with with tariffs.
I am disgusted with all of it. What equally disgusts me is there are many in the GOP who cannot even admit tariffs are a tax.
re: Who pays the tariffs?
Posted by frogtown on 2/24/26 at 3:49 pm to Harry Caray
quote:
Know what the top income tax bracket was when "America was great" through the 1950s? 91%
The top bracket was 91%, but they weren't paying it.
During the 1950s, the top federal marginal income tax rate was famously high, peaking at 91% or 92% for income over $200,000 (roughly $2 million today). However, the actual effective tax rate (the percentage of total income paid after deductions) for the top 1% was much lower, averaging around 42% for all federal, state, and local taxes, or ~17% for federal income tax alone, due to loopholes.
Tax Foundation
Tax Foundation
+3
Key 1950s Tax Data Points
Top Marginal Rate: 91%–92% (on income over $200,000).
Top 1% Effective Rate: ~42% (total federal/state/local)
re: Obamacare failure
Posted by frogtown on 2/23/26 at 9:21 am to Auburn1968
quote:
Very high deductible catastrophic only plans were very cheap
Just for reference.
Pre ACA, I had a HDHP with AETNA. My policy premium was only $150/month. Deductible was around 8k if I remember correctly.
Exactly what I needed since I was self employed. This kept me from going bankrupt.
Popular
14
