Log in
Register
Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
Featured content
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
News
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Features
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Install the app
Install
Reply to thread
Home
Forums
Off Topic
The Basement
Gibson raided
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="John Roberts" data-source="post: 35605" data-attributes="member: 126"><p>Re: Gibson raided</p><p></p><p></p><p>Abso_fn_lutely,,, Idividuals and governments must live within their means. </p><p></p><p>Income taxes? A long running debate over taxing active vs passive income. I don't think anybody debates a fair tax rate for income from your day job. But after you pay taxes on that the first time, and put it in the bank to earn interest or buy stocks for capital appreciation, we get taxed again on the fruits from this capital we already paid taxes on, then when we die, it gets taxed again when we try to give it to our children. Histoically interest and capital gains are taxed at a lower rate, but still double taxation. For that matter dividends paid out on stocks, were already taxed at the corporate rate, before distributing to us, to be taxed again. </p><p></p><p>Some wealthy people, who already worked hard and long enough to structure their current revenue to be mostly from interest and dividend income, personally pay a lower rate than ditch diggers, a popular but disingenuous comparison made by Warren Buffet. </p><p></p><p>There is currently a good argument about some hedge funds who have structured their businesses so that their wheeling and dealing, is taxed at a lower capital gains rate. There are good arguments both pro and con for this preferential tax treatment. they do have capital at risk, but generally they are playing with OPM (other people's money), so maybe they need a higher rate, while not as high as simple income to reflect the different risk profile. </p><p></p><p>That's a mouthful. </p><p></p><p>Adjusted for inflation.? Do you realize inflation bumps us into higher tax brackets despite not being any wealthier? Congress has had to amend the AMT several times because this attempt to prevent millionaires from avoiding taxes was affecting the middle class after several years of inflation. I just saw Bernanke reiterate that their target for inflation is 2% and we generally think that is harmless, but why must there be any inflation? I suspect it's just like the economic growth the government needs to cover up their chronic deficit spending. I'm all for giving the economy an updraft, but not so much you distort the basics. </p><p>------</p><p>Yup, them damn military contractors,,, Those DSP ear plugs are $1400 a piece. </p><p></p><p>Lots of funny business in Afghanistan where graft and stealing is part of their culture. That doesn't make it OK, but sharp pencil bookkeeping is not compatible with the fog of war, </p><p></p><p>For better or worse this looks like it is winding down (probably for worse for Afghanistan and Pakistan). I hope we don't give up the gains we've accomplished in Iraq.</p><p></p><p>Do the math on what 2,000 cruise missiles fired into Libya cost! </p><p>. </p><p></p><p></p><p>Where do you think government spending comes from? </p><p></p><p>Government spending ends up with a fraction of the nominal amount spent in any kind of measurable value. Private sector spending and private business spending generally has a multiplier creating more value not less. So government spending crowds out more productive private sector spending. </p><p></p><p>Government stimulus is only capable of short term smoothing of the numbers. We are way past this being a short term economic situation and more short term responses will just prolong the final resolution, but i expect to hear more of the same in tonights speech, because that how government, and people think.. </p><p></p><p>I suspect we would have turned the corner by now, if we took the painful hard correction a year or two ago... but you can't clear and recover until you bottom, and we are still paralyzing the private sector waiting for government to stop messing around. People who are still in houses they can't afford, don't deserve to get the houses for free.... however nice that sounds, it is not fair to everybody else who were responsible. Fannie and Freddie suing the banks is no way to settle housing markets. I'd like to sue Fannie and Freddie representing taxpayers, but being in government receivership they are probably shielded from lawsuits. </p><p></p><p>Note: I am not calling for severe austerity right now, but we do need to deal with long term spending vs. long term revenue. The politicians will kick the can down the road for as long as we let them. </p><p></p><p>Of course I could be wrong. </p><p></p><p>JR</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="John Roberts, post: 35605, member: 126"] Re: Gibson raided Abso_fn_lutely,,, Idividuals and governments must live within their means. Income taxes? A long running debate over taxing active vs passive income. I don't think anybody debates a fair tax rate for income from your day job. But after you pay taxes on that the first time, and put it in the bank to earn interest or buy stocks for capital appreciation, we get taxed again on the fruits from this capital we already paid taxes on, then when we die, it gets taxed again when we try to give it to our children. Histoically interest and capital gains are taxed at a lower rate, but still double taxation. For that matter dividends paid out on stocks, were already taxed at the corporate rate, before distributing to us, to be taxed again. Some wealthy people, who already worked hard and long enough to structure their current revenue to be mostly from interest and dividend income, personally pay a lower rate than ditch diggers, a popular but disingenuous comparison made by Warren Buffet. There is currently a good argument about some hedge funds who have structured their businesses so that their wheeling and dealing, is taxed at a lower capital gains rate. There are good arguments both pro and con for this preferential tax treatment. they do have capital at risk, but generally they are playing with OPM (other people's money), so maybe they need a higher rate, while not as high as simple income to reflect the different risk profile. That's a mouthful. Adjusted for inflation.? Do you realize inflation bumps us into higher tax brackets despite not being any wealthier? Congress has had to amend the AMT several times because this attempt to prevent millionaires from avoiding taxes was affecting the middle class after several years of inflation. I just saw Bernanke reiterate that their target for inflation is 2% and we generally think that is harmless, but why must there be any inflation? I suspect it's just like the economic growth the government needs to cover up their chronic deficit spending. I'm all for giving the economy an updraft, but not so much you distort the basics. ------ Yup, them damn military contractors,,, Those DSP ear plugs are $1400 a piece. Lots of funny business in Afghanistan where graft and stealing is part of their culture. That doesn't make it OK, but sharp pencil bookkeeping is not compatible with the fog of war, For better or worse this looks like it is winding down (probably for worse for Afghanistan and Pakistan). I hope we don't give up the gains we've accomplished in Iraq. Do the math on what 2,000 cruise missiles fired into Libya cost! . Where do you think government spending comes from? Government spending ends up with a fraction of the nominal amount spent in any kind of measurable value. Private sector spending and private business spending generally has a multiplier creating more value not less. So government spending crowds out more productive private sector spending. Government stimulus is only capable of short term smoothing of the numbers. We are way past this being a short term economic situation and more short term responses will just prolong the final resolution, but i expect to hear more of the same in tonights speech, because that how government, and people think.. I suspect we would have turned the corner by now, if we took the painful hard correction a year or two ago... but you can't clear and recover until you bottom, and we are still paralyzing the private sector waiting for government to stop messing around. People who are still in houses they can't afford, don't deserve to get the houses for free.... however nice that sounds, it is not fair to everybody else who were responsible. Fannie and Freddie suing the banks is no way to settle housing markets. I'd like to sue Fannie and Freddie representing taxpayers, but being in government receivership they are probably shielded from lawsuits. Note: I am not calling for severe austerity right now, but we do need to deal with long term spending vs. long term revenue. The politicians will kick the can down the road for as long as we let them. Of course I could be wrong. JR [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Off Topic
The Basement
Gibson raided
Top
Bottom
Sign-up
or
log in
to join the discussion today!
