The_Sponge: *Fist bump*

TERRORIST!

Dancin_In_Anson: Because I risked it.

Already covered, dude. There is a difference between earning something through your own work, and through shouldering risk. I'm not in any way slamming shouldering risk, but they are entirely, entirely different.

DrowningLessons:
If his actions are resulting in profit (action: initial investment), then yes he is earning money.

Do you think there is a useful distinction between money one earns from selling one's labor, and money earned by investment?

Dancin_In_Anson: This has enhanced the value of the property quite a bit from when I purchased it...And if I have this right, if I sell it under Obama's capital gains increase, my tax burden will go from 15 to 28% on the gain.

I am not a big fan of raising the capital gains tax on everyone by 8% either, but this tax was just an unforeseen cost of doing the work yourself. Since you are looking to capitalize on what the market value would have been for these improvements you are still way ahead.

Obdicut: Do you think there is a useful distinction between money one earns from selling one's labor, and money earned by investment?

There is an easy way to solve the problems of raising the capital gains tax. First make it progressive. Second allow people to spread out profit from sale over the same time period that they owned the investment.

Dancin_In_Anson: Obdicut: So why do you say you "earned" it?

Because I risked it.


Let's also look at my property...Google Earth puts the coordinates at 32°47'04.03" N and 99° 47'33.87W.

47.47 acres of mesquite and prickly pear. Now I paid to have the plowed field and the area around the stock pond grubbed as well as a little road work at the entrance. All of the paths you see through the pasture and all of the fence work have been done by me with little capital expenditure (too expensive to hire out) and in my spare time. This has enhanced the value of the property quite a bit from when I purchased it...And if I have this right, if I sell it under Obama's capital gains increase, my tax burden will go from 15 to 28% on the gain.

Headso: the profit on your house is going to be half-a-mil?

We're not talking homesteads.

I think you should pay straight up income tax on it. It is income, no?

DaSwankOne: There is an easy way to solve the problems of raising the capital gains tax. First make it progressive. Second allow people to spread out profit from sale over the same time period that they owned the investment.

Agreed.

Dancin_In_Anson: We're not talking homesteads.

well, if you've got 50 acres of land in addition to your primary residence and you're going to take a massive butt raping on your stock profits you just might be wealthy...pardon me if I don't cry you a river.

Dancin_In_Anson: Headso: well, if you've got 50 acres of land in addition to your primary residence and you're going to take a massive butt raping on your stock profits you just might be wealthy...

I have been investing for years...I don't have a lot but it's mine and what I hope to retire on one day. And I have been doing this while raising a family and currently sending one to college. This is somehow wrong and I owe the government 28% of what I make on it?

The geovernment is not taxing to punish. That argument sounds like a small child that is asked to share his toys and responds, "Why are you punishing me???"

Think of it as your patriotic contribution to the country that gave you the opportunity to pursue the American dream.

Why shouldn't you be taxed at the full income rate for what is actually income?

I've both earned money and "sort of earned" money asObdicut might say, and believe me, taking the risk where the risk is real and painful, is much more satisfying . Anyone can earn money through labor. It takes stones and thought to gain a profit through investment.

Dancin_In_Anson: Headso: well, if you've got 50 acres of land in addition to your primary residence and you're going to take a massive butt raping on your stock profits you just might be wealthy...

I have been investing for years...I don't have a lot but it's mine and what I hope to retire on one day. And I have been doing this while raising a family and currently sending one to college. This is somehow wrong and I owe the government 28% of what I make on it?

Our deficit is huge sooner or later taxes will be raised to try to correct it. The question is will it be your kids and grandkids taxes or yours? I am going to guess you voted for Bush so your choice was kids and grandkids.

Money does not grow on trees.

The_Sponge: Dancin_In_Anson: I have been investing for years...I don't have a lot but it's mine and what I hope to retire on one day. And I have been doing this while raising a family and currently sending one to college. This is somehow wrong and I owe the government 28% of what I make on it?


Unfortunately, there are too many socialists in this thread who would like to see the government take more money from hard-working people.

/Say no to an increase in the capital gains tax.
//Nobama.

Who has that graph that shows the deficit when there is a republican or democratic president?

It's funny to see people who vigorously support(ed) the invasion of Iraq biatching and moaning about having to pay hard earned money to the government.

/funny weird not funny haha

Dancin_In_Anson: This is somehow wrong and I owe the government 28% of what I make on it?

There's nothing "wrong" about it, but having a tax rate that is less than the income tax rate people pay isn't going to garner you any sympathy, especially for a guy who cheerleads wasting tax payer money through military adventurism. If you were a libertarian you'd atleast have a moral leg to stand on..

Dancin_In_Anson: So what incentive is that viewpoint going to do to the small investor like me (and there are hundreds of thousands of us who put hundreds of millions at risk)? Since my risk is not considered earning it, I might as well buy some more land...oh wait if it goes up in value, I'm farked there too.

Well, there's always a coffee can in the back yard...

That's a total change of arguments. As I said, I'm not in the least bit slamming the risk of capital investment. I'm merely pointing out that it is not the same as earning it through the sweat of your brow.

And since you only are taxed on capital gains, your incentive is making profit. If you have a coffee can in the back yard, you are slowly losing money. If you want to make money with capital, you invest it.

Do you disagree with treating capital gains like all other income, and making it a progressive system?

Obdicut: Dancin_In_Anson: So what incentive is that viewpoint going to do to the small investor like me (and there are hundreds of thousands of us who put hundreds of millions at risk)? Since my risk is not considered earning it, I might as well buy some more land...oh wait if it goes up in value, I'm farked there too.

Well, there's always a coffee can in the back yard...

That's a total change of arguments. As I said, I'm not in the least bit slamming the risk of capital investment. I'm merely pointing out that it is not the same as earning it through the sweat of your brow.

And since you only are taxed on capital gains, your incentive is making profit. If you have a coffee can in the back yard, you are slowly losing money. If you want to make money with capital, you invest it.

Do you disagree with treating capital gains like all other income, and making it a progressive system?

No, there are two classes of income that we tax. The kind that poor people get and the kind that rich people get. Thats called fairness and equality.

Nothing sounds quite like the howl of the better off losing some advantage they have enjoyed...save that cat out my window.

The_Sponge: Mighty Taternuts: Our deficit is huge sooner or later taxes will be raised to try to correct it. The question is will it be your kids and grandkids taxes or yours? I am going to guess you voted for Bush so your choice was kids and grandkids.


What if I don't have kids? Or what if I don't plan on having kids?

I hope you don't procreate. Wait that word may be too big for you. Hmmm... I hope you don't bump uglies with your cousin.

If you do not like that argument there is always the idea that a smaller deficit makes our currency stronger because no matter what Obama does the devastation the dollar took in the world market these past few years has had a bigger effect on your costs and investments.

The_Sponge: //But I'm placing some smart investments right now, so when I retire, I'll be very well off.

what smart investments are you making that'll make you very well off?

It doesn't matter if Obama or McCain gets elected, the reign of the radical right is over either way


O RLY?

The_Sponge: Oooooh....you got me there.

I agree that we need a smaller deficit, but instead of increasing taxes, we should slash social programs and pork barrel spending.

I think we should look into defense spending as well and not even think about starting up another war (Iran).

The_Sponge:
Oooooh....you got me there.

I agree that we need a smaller deficit, but instead of increasing taxes, we should slash social programs and pork barrel spending.

I personally have been mulling over repealing the 03 tax cuts and cutting spending, I have become a major deficit hawk. I would like to see a system that the increased tax load equals the drop in spending. That and no new programs/spending.

No politician would ever run on that platform.

Dancin_In_Anson: As opposed to not spending more...God forbid that should ever happen.

That is my first choice too but no one is really offering that one. Obama idea to make pork a searchable database is nice and I think he will cut defense spending which really needs it, also he won't go looking for another war. Like I said above, Iran I think is in play if McCain gets the office and it will be paid for by a larger deficit.

Dancin_In_Anson: Is there anything else that could be cut from the behemoth that is the federal budget?

You could streamline the school system.

You could quit investigating and locking people up for hiring a woman to suck their dongs or for betting on the game or for smoking a bong.

You could streamline and cut as much fraud as possible out of the socialized medical care.

You could stop the corporate welfare.

You could stop the personal welfare although I think you would spend more policing and locking up those people instead of just buying them off with a pittance each month.

Military adventurism is just the most morally objectionable of the bunch.

The_Sponge: Real Estate
401K
Roth IRA
Stock Market (Long Term)

The way shiat is going you'd probably be better off buying pennies from before 1982 if you want a real solid long term investment...

Dancin_In_Anson:

I've sweated out more than one investment. Lost a chunk on more than one.

Great. Still not the same as earning it through selling your labor.

I like the idea of the Fair Tax. It eliminates all forms of taxation on income and replaces it with a very progressive form of taxation.

The fair tax is massively idiotic and anyone who supports it doesn't understand the first thing about finance. It's regressive, unworkable, immediately creates a gigantic black market for goods and services, and works from the fallacy that companies sell goods at cost+N, rather than, as everyone with a brain knows, what the market will bear.

Dancin_In_Anson: Tell me this (honestly). Have you read the books?

The Boortz/Lind-whoever ones? Yes.

It's a system of taxation marginally more idiotic than our current one.

Saiga410

I screamed against schip because of two issues. One is it was a horrible use of a pigovian tax. Those taxes should be paid to combat associated costs from the items uses, there was no connection between smoking and childrens health (there is a very small overlaying I admit, not enough though for it to fully fund the expansion). Secondly I see that health care is more of a state issue. If a state wants to fund these programs fine with me, I do not see a reason for the federal govt to be involved.

For just those same reasons the public health is a reflection of sum environmental factors that have impact on the need for care. This could be asbestos related, water and air quality, non degrading carcinogenic plastics, dietary, any number of factors - some of them state, some of them federal. All environmental factors would figure into a purely pigovian model for universal health care.

Dancin_In_Anson: So from now on, I'll just keep it to myself so it doesn't cost me as much to work it.

Sorry, I didn't notice this sentence. So, from now on instead of investing your money, you'll bury it in a coffee can in your back yard? And you're doing this because I'm pointing out that selling your labor and gaining money from the use of capital are different things?

I don't get how McCain can make a foreign policy speech where he threatens to kick Russia out of the G8 and then pull a whole bunch of other countries in to make it a anti-russo-chinese coalition cold war style, and somehow not get labeled as being part of the radical right.

It wasn't the religious right that farked up U.S. foreign policy, they just galvanized the electoral support to make it possible for the neocon right. McCain is clearly not the religious right, he is however - just as clearly - a soldier of the neocons.

Dancin_In_Anson: don't think so. Where the problem exists now is the constant tweaking of this or that aspect of the tax code as done by those in DC...Take a cut here, replace it with something else there close one "loophole" while opening another...all at the expense of Mr & Mrs. John Q Taxpayer...you know, the people that can't buy policy but vote on the words of the candidates. What are your specific problems with the plan?

A) It assumes that price of goods would drop because the company's selling the goods would no longer have to pay taxes on precursor materials. Goods are not priced from cost, they are priced from what the market will bear. This is the most idiotic thing in the Fair Tax.

B) A huge black market would spring up for almost every good. Right now, heavily taxed goods such as cigarettes are smuggled from state to state on margins of tax as low as %3. When every item is taxed, the shadow economy will explode.

C) The fair tax calculations do not include the cost of the "prebates", a bit of absolutely shameless lying.

D) The tax is regressive, hitting the poor much, much, much, much, much, much higher than the rich. In terms of percentage of disposable income consumed by tax, the fair tax causes an absolutely shameful disparity between rich and poor-- and middle class.

E) The system of tracking income in order to give prebates would be nearly as complicated as the modern IRS.

There's a shiatload more. There's basically nothing about the fair tax, in the way that it's presented, that is honest or true.

Dancin_In_Anson: To me...the guy with the money to invest it is one and the same. That is the logic that many little investors have. If you want 30% of any gain, I want 30% of any loss.

Who is "you"? You mean, the government? You're trying to say that the government should cover your losses in investment, because they take taxes on your profits?

You realize that makes no sense whatsoever, right? That's exactly the same as saying, "Taxes shouldn't exist."

But sure, let's treat them as exactly the same-- so pay a progressive tax on capital gains like all other kinds of income.