IMO...

For one, Obama is wanting to double the capital gains tax. This would further amplify then banking problem in our country. What do our banks lack right now? Capital. Obama's policy would drive capital offshore.

 

Obama has trumpeted that he would give 47 million people health insurance. However, a fair amount of those 47 million are illegal immigrants. One in four of those individuals that lack health insurance are here illegally.

Obama's camp disputes that saying illegals would not be covered. However, the Congressional Budget Office says that number includes illegals.

 

I don't know about you, maybe McCain is afraid of alienating the hispanic vote, but I have a hard time seing tax dollars being used for illegals to get healthcare comparable to a US COngressman.

If I understand capital gains taxes, it's a tax on success. In some cases, consider that an average person may have only one or two chances at a really big, life changing payday in their life. A freeway or shopping center through a previously worthless piece of property, a major antique or jewelry discovery, coal, gas or oil discovered on a rocky piece of ground, a really good stock payoff such as early shares of Microsoft. It just seems wrong to me to tax away what could change a person's life.

 

BTW, I love Wikopedia's definition of capital gains tax. "A capital gains tax is a tax on capital gains." Sounds reasonable.

A capital gains tax is truly double taxation. When we decide to reinvest our after-tax income (notice, AFTER-TAX income), we invest in companies who, once they make money (and are even taxed on their revenue), are taxed again.

 

This is why we need either a flat consumption tax or a flat income tax (either, NOT both) with minimal deductions. It is fair, it eliminates much of the IRS's tax code, and it has few loopholes.

A capital gains tax is truly double taxation. When we decide to reinvest our after-tax income (notice, AFTER-TAX income), we invest in companies who, once they make money (and are even taxed on their revenue), are taxed again.

Not quite true. The investment is not taxed again. Only your gain on the investment is taxed. Dividends are double taxation because both the corporation and investor are taxed on the same money. Fortunately, most corporate dividends are taxed as capital gains, so the tax is somewhat lower than it used to be.

McCain has missed many opportunities to differentiate himself. I heard today that he showed up somewhere in PA yesterday unannounced (ie no fans) and then spoke about issues re: Israel. I'm guessing that's not a hot button for the fine folks in PA.

 

I've heard others seriously question his campaign strategy and leaders so far.

Didn't realize he HAD a campaign strategy.

Didn't realize he HAD a campaign strategy.

 

Exactly.

Hold on here. The capitol gains tax is 15% as I understand it. The government takes quite a bit more than 15% out of most of our paychecks every couple weeks.

 

Why is it better for the government to pull a larger percentage from what you worked for than for what you sat on your butt and collected? I think it rather regressive in that it makes it more difficult to create a wealth to invest than it does for those who already had the money anyway.

 

Currently many people are making a pretty penny figuring out how to turn income into capitol gains to receive a major tax break.

 

For every complaint I hear about how much the rich are taxed, I can't look at the fact that the richest have gained exponentially in comparison to the working class and feel any sympathy. The supply side has reached a point where it is so unrestrictive to wealthiest of our nation that they no longer act in responsibility to the benefit of the economy. Execs and board members are cutting cost to pay for themselves and create a profit in stocks (a profit which is more like a property sell off) rather than make real capitol investment in our economy. Of course not everyone is doing this, but enough are to deserve a response.

 

Today our economy is in a struggle, we need MORE progressive taxation if we want rebuild a economically stable and strong nation.

Hold on here. The capitol gains tax is 15% as I understand it. The government takes quite a bit more than 15% out of most of our paychecks every couple weeks.

 

Why is it better for the government to pull a larger percentage from what you worked for than for what you sat on your butt and collected? .

 

The last sentence tells me that you either suffer from class envy or you are simply misguided.

 

I own stocks. Some I got from my employer. Some I bought with money earned from my job.

 

You're telling me that when I sell that stock, my capital gains were derived from me sitting on my butt? You're that naive?

Hold on here. The capitol gains tax is 15% as I understand it. The government takes quite a bit more than 15% out of most of our paychecks every couple weeks.

 

Why is it better for the government to pull a larger percentage from what you worked for than for what you sat on your butt and collected? I think it rather regressive in that it makes it more difficult to create a wealth to invest than it does for those who already had the money anyway.

 

Currently many people are making a pretty penny figuring out how to turn income into capitol gains to receive a major tax break.

 

For every complaint I hear about how much the rich are taxed, I can't look at the fact that the richest have gained exponentially in comparison to the working class and feel any sympathy. The supply side has reached a point where it is so unrestrictive to wealthiest of our nation that they no longer act in responsibility to the benefit of the economy. Execs and board members are cutting cost to pay for themselves and create a profit in stocks (a profit which is more like a property sell off) rather than make real capitol investment in our economy. Of course not everyone is doing this, but enough are to deserve a response.

 

Today our economy is in a struggle, we need MORE progressive taxation if we want rebuild a economically stable and strong nation.

The bottom 50% of wage earners pay about 3-1/2% of this nation's federal income taxes. How much less do you believe that they should pay to make things fair?

The last sentence tells me that you either suffer from class envy or you are simply misguided.

 

I own stocks. Some I got from my employer. Some I bought with money earned from my job.

 

You're telling me that when I sell that stock, my capital gains were derived from me sitting on my butt? You're that naive?

Yes, when you sell your stock, you did less in watching it grow than you did in earning your paycheck. It isn't rocket science.

Now what I will admit to not knowing is the rate you were taxed on receiving the stock, which should in my opinion be the same as if you were to receive it in cash. But any growth of that stock (unless it was from the company you work for) had nothing to do with your efforts.

Yes, when you sell your stock, you did less in watching it grow than you did in earning your paycheck. It isn't rocket science.

Now what I will admit to not knowing is the rate you were taxed on receiving the stock, which should in my opinion be the same as if you were to receive it in cash. But any growth of that stock (unless it was from the company you work for) had nothing to do with your efforts.

 

I worked for the CASH I paid for that stock, correct? You're discounting the work required to earn the money necessary to invest in the stock.

I worked for the CASH I paid for that stock, correct? You're discounting the work required to earn the money necessary to invest in the stock.

 

Did you pay taxes when you earned that money before you invested it, made more money off of it and getting taxed on it?

Did you pay taxes when you earned that money before you invested it, made more money off of it and getting taxed on it?

 

I'm not sure exactly what you're asking. Yes, I did pay taxes on the cash I paid for the stocks I bought.

The bottom 50% of wage earners pay about 3-1/2% of this nation's federal income taxes. How much less do you believe that they should pay to make things fair?

Look at the national wealth, in the US 10% of the population owned 71% of the wealth, and the top 1% controlled 38%, the bottom 40% owned less than 1% of the nation's wealth.

 

So the bottom 40% pays a larger percentage of taxes than amount of wealth they own.

 

Also look rate top salaries have risen while average salaries have grown only modestly. Today that modest growth is not helping pay the gas bill.

 

To be fair, is not the right question to ask. It isn't always fair to show leadership, and that is what is needed. The top 5% needs to show leadership and responsibility in ensuring a healthy middle class exist in this country.

 

We are in a banking crisis because the poor class couldn't afford itself. They (the poor) bear a great deal of responsibility for this. The fact is that higher wages, more jobs, and stronger community services can be delivered by this top 5%, and in spite of there growth they didn't deliver this to the bottom. The top earners have a responsibility to the economy, just the same as the bottom earners do, I don't understand why they are so forgiven for not playing there role.