43% of Liberal Iowans describe themselves as Socialist

Page 10 of Originally Posted by capt278 You didn't answer his question. Sure he did. You just didn't get the answer you wanted. Advertisement Jan 22, 16, 08:... 175 comments | 3999 Views | Go to page 1 →

  1. #136
    LIPTON BASH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 13
    Posts
    10,079

    Quote Originally Posted by Hellcats View Post
    Nope they've done it before. They can do it now. If we can't expect them to do the right thing they don't need to be there.

    I do walk the walk. I pay my taxes.

    That is frustrating to you. Is it also frustrating to you that Warren Buffet and other billionaires pay a smaller tax rate than some of their middle class employees when they make middle class yearly salary in a minute?
    The Warren Buffet example has been one of the biggest jokes ever. His secretary they used as an example made well over 100k a year.

    Warren Buffet should pay lower tax rates if a majority of his income is long term capital gains. If you don't understand why earned income and investment income are taxed differently then you shouldn't be having this discussion.
    Advertisement

  2. #137
    Hellcats's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 14
    Posts
    5,775

    Quote Originally Posted by LIPTON BASH View Post
    The Warren Buffet example has been one of the biggest jokes ever. His secretary they used as an example made well over 100k a year.

    Warren Buffet should pay lower tax rates if a majority of his income is long term capital gains. If you don't understand why earned income and investment income are taxed differently then you shouldn't be having this discussion.
    I fully understand it, and to be honest it doesn't matter if he makes his money on a lemonade stand.

    The point is the man came out and said we have an issue with obviously skewed tax codes in the United States.

    FWIW when you tell posters they shouldn't be having this argument, because they don't understand it the way you do doesn't work. As a matter of fact, that comment discredits your expertise on the subject since you are supporting an obviously flawed system.

    By all means, continue.

  3. #138
    mcpapa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 05
    Location
    Home of a proud papa
    Posts
    61,602

    Quote Originally Posted by Hellcats View Post
    Correct. 91%, $200K and above.

    1954. The decade of prosperity.

  4. #139
    LIPTON BASH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 13
    Posts
    10,079

    Quote Originally Posted by Hellcats View Post
    I fully understand it, and to be honest it doesn't matter if he makes his money on a lemonade stand.

    The point is the man came out and said we have an issue with obviously skewed tax codes in the United States.

    FWIW when you tell posters they shouldn't be having this argument, because they don't understand it the way you do doesn't work. As a matter of fact, that comment discredits your expertise on the subject since you are supporting an obviously flawed system.

    By all means, continue.
    There is nothing flawed about taxing long term capital gains at a lower rate. It's proven to spur investment in the economy. We already tax short term capital gains at the same rate as earned income.

  5. #140
    capt278's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 08
    Posts
    4,320

    Quote Originally Posted by rockmom View Post
    If the to keep getting richer, and the bottom keep getting poorer, and the middle keep getting pushed to the bottom, the top will have to up their share even more. As the top controls not only the majority of the wealth, but the economy as a whole and the political spectrum as well, their choice is help improve the situation for the bottom and bottom-middle now, keep jobs in the country, sacrifice some profits to improve the situation for the people they employee and depend upon to buy their goods and services now, or fully support a growing number later. Or, let people struggle into death...either way, no one will be buying their goods and services and eventually theor profits will dry up. But hey... at least they got to keep their money.
    It is their money. You didn't work for it and neither did I.

    Here's the problem you don't want to admit, if they did raise the taxes on the rich, it wouldn't raise that much money. Not enough to offset the spending of Obama and Congress.

  6. #141
    capt278's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 08
    Posts
    4,320

    Quote Originally Posted by Hellcats View Post
    I fully understand it, and to be honest it doesn't matter if he makes his money on a lemonade stand.

    The point is the man came out and said we have an issue with obviously skewed tax codes in the United States.

    FWIW when you tell posters they shouldn't be having this argument, because they don't understand it the way you do doesn't work. As a matter of fact, that comment discredits your expertise on the subject since you are supporting an obviously flawed system.

    By all means, continue.
    Then why has Warren been fighting NOT to pay some of his taxes?

  7. #142
    LIPTON BASH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 13
    Posts
    10,079

    Quote Originally Posted by mcpapa View Post
    Correct. 91%, $200K and above.

    1954. The decade of prosperity.
    Peter Schiff: The Fantasy of a 91% Top Income Tax Rate - WSJ

    I was actually waiting for you to pose this liberal myth of how the rich paid much more taxes during this period. Bernie Sanders who has continued to show a lack of understanding of economics and history has spouted this off many times.

    What isn't taken into account when discussing this rate is wages adjusted due to inflation. Less taxpayers in that era paid an effective rate above 35%than today. The higher income earner today actually pay more in taxes than the era of this much higher tax rate. Only 10 thousand filers even qualified for the highest rate you quoted and a majority of those paid no where near that rate due to deductions.

    2.75% of tax filers paid a rate obove 35% in the 1950s era , today over 4% of tax filers pay an effective rate higher than 35%.

    Any historian from that era on tax policy realizes the rate of 91% wasn't real and never will be

  8. #143
    LIPTON BASH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 13
    Posts
    10,079

    Quote Originally Posted by capt278 View Post
    Then why has Warren been fighting NOT to pay some of his taxes?
    Warren Buffet is no fool he comes out under ever president and agrees with their objectives so he gets help with his business. He has played both sides like a fiddle for years.

  9. #144
    Hellcats's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 14
    Posts
    5,775

    Quote Originally Posted by LIPTON BASH View Post
    Peter Schiff: The Fantasy of a 91% Top Income Tax Rate - WSJ

    I was actually waiting for you to pose this liberal myth of how the rich paid much more taxes during this period. Bernie Sanders who has continued to show a lack of understanding of economics and history has spouted this off many times.

    What isn't taken into account when discussing this rate is wages adjusted due to inflation. Less taxpayers in that era paid an effective rate above 35%than today. The higher income earner today actually pay more in taxes than the era of this much higher tax rate. Only 10 thousand filers even qualified for the highest rate you quoted and a majority of those paid no where near that rate due to deductions.

    2.75% of tax filers paid a rate obove 35% in the 1950s era , today over 4% of tax filers pay an effective rate higher than 35%.

    Any historian from that era on tax policy realizes the rate of 91% wasn't real and never will be
    0% pay 91% today.

  10. #145
    LIPTON BASH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 13
    Posts
    10,079

    Quote Originally Posted by Hellcats View Post
    0% pay 91% today.
    Literally no one did then either. Tax loop holes were so much easier. A higher percentage today pay in the 30-35% or higher rage today than they did then.

    Also back then everyone paid income tax , where as today something like half of all tax filers pay no income tax at all.

    So with this dream of going back to such high rates that literally next to no one paid , are you also willing to set the same rates on all tax filers top to bottom and also allow all the same loopholes.

    If we want to compare apple to apple it's only "fair".

  11. #146
    Hellcats's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 14
    Posts
    5,775

    Quote Originally Posted by capt278 View Post
    Then why has Warren been fighting NOT to pay some of his taxes?
    Buffett is playing the same game everybody is. I hate for baserunners to take out the 2nd baseman, but until there is a hard and fast rule that holds baserunners and their teams accountable then teams are going to toe the line.

  12. #147

    Join Date
    Aug 12
    Posts
    5,816

    Quote Originally Posted by Bert View Post
    There are numerous smart educated people who only know of economics what they see/hear in the media. Unfortunately most journalists know virtually nothing about economics either. The problem is economics is not a subject taught in schools which it should be, just like math, science, history, grammar, etc.. So many times, when someone asks why did the election to the way it did, people reply, the economy stupid but most Americans have no understanding of why the economy acts as it does.

    I HIGHLY encourage Anyone who wants to get a better understanding of economics to go on YouTube and watch Milton Friedman on the Donahue show. What he says in 1979 is just as applicable today as it was then. You can't miss it, it is in 5 10 minute sections and he is wearing an ugly 1970's yellow blazer. Maybe tan and the film is bad. He masterfully discusses economics in a very easy to understand method. His commentary on greed in American business really eye opening. When asked to speak at Columbia University, he goes into even further. I could watch his videos repeatedly because I always learn something new.
    You are so right. I have a Bachelors degree in Economics and it is utterly amazing how basically ignorant the media and many are when it comes to the subject...

  13. #148
    LIPTON BASH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 13
    Posts
    10,079

    Quote Originally Posted by ggclfan View Post
    You are so right. I have a Bachelors degree in Economics and it is utterly amazing how basically ignorant the media and many are when it comes to the subject...
    I honestly don't see how economics isn't mandatory at every school in America.

  14. #149

    Join Date
    Aug 02
    Location
    Louisville, Kentucky
    Posts
    8,538

    Quote Originally Posted by LIPTON BASH View Post
    The Warren Buffet example has been one of the biggest jokes ever. His secretary they used as an example made well over 100k a year.
    Really? If so, that certainly takes away from the Buffet secretary story to a large degree Because such an income would put her in the top 10% easily and all her income would be highly taxed ordinary income.

  15. #150
    capt278's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 08
    Posts
    4,320

    Quote Originally Posted by Hellcats View Post
    Buffett is playing the same game everybody is. I hate for baserunners to take out the 2nd baseman, but until there is a hard and fast rule that holds baserunners and their teams accountable then teams are going to toe the line.
    Then don't trot him out as your example of the way the rich should pay. He's not paying.

Top