If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Politico)   We may be close to a budget deal. And the Democrats only gave up everything for it   (politico.com) divider line 190
    More: Unlikely, Democrats, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, United States House Committee on Appropriations, Party leaders of the United States Senate  
•       •       •

2410 clicks; posted to Politics » on 20 Nov 2013 at 9:15 AM (35 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



190 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-11-20 08:37:10 AM
So eleventy billion more for defense, and in exchange one randomly chosen poor family gets a turkey sandwich to split on thanksgiving?
 
2013-11-20 09:06:26 AM

dookdookdook: So eleventy billion more for defense, and in exchange one randomly chosen poor family gets a turkey sandwich to split on thanksgiving?


That seems excessive, I don't think they're giving away that much. Stop being so negative. How about a can of cranberry jelly shaped into a welfare check?
 
2013-11-20 09:19:13 AM

dookdookdook: So eleventy billion more for defense, and in exchange one randomly chosen poor family gets a turkey sandwich to split on thanksgiving?


Technically it's an interest free turkey sandwich rather than a credit.  Their tax liability over the next 5 years will go up to pay for it.
 
2013-11-20 09:20:14 AM
Wow, they are really optimistic this time if they are giving it a 50-50 chance.
 
MFK
2013-11-20 09:21:04 AM
WHY ISN'T CAPITAL GAINS TAXED AS REGULAR INCOME??
 
2013-11-20 09:25:44 AM
fta It is still entirely likely that the talks could fall apart, leading to yet another bitter partisan impasse,

Only if by "likely" you mean "guaranteed"
 
2013-11-20 09:26:13 AM
There are certain people in Washington who should not be allowed near any serious budget negotiation. Paul Ryan is right near the top of that list.

Anything that makes him smile is probably bad for America.
 
2013-11-20 09:26:47 AM
The Democrats should have shoved a budget through during the Shutdown  Publicly, when the GOP's numbers were spiraling downward and they were under pressure to STFU.

The Democratic Party has repeatedly squandered opportunities and failed to deal the final, winning blow on numerous occasions.  As a matter of fact, every occasion where they could have won by using power.

Much as I dislike the GOP and what it stands for, the Democratic Party's inherent and proud weakness makes me want to vomit.
 
2013-11-20 09:27:32 AM
So, this isn't so much a budget deal as a deal to avoid the next round of the sequester cuts (which cut military funding even more which is of course unbearable) and pass  something so that House Republicans can fend off the Tea Party long enough to avoid another embarrassing shutdown battle.
 
2013-11-20 09:29:28 AM

MFK: WHY ISN'T CAPITAL GAINS TAXED AS REGULAR INCOME??


You want to hurt the job creators?  If you tax them to much they will fire people they need.  If you throw money at them, they will hire workers they don't need and drive the economy.
 
2013-11-20 09:30:39 AM

pkellmey: Wow, they are really optimistic this time if they are giving it a 50-50 chance.


FTFA:It is still entirely likely that the talks could fall apart, leading to yet another bitter partisan impasse, something that once again seemed possible after Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell addressed the spending issue at a closed-door House GOP Conference on Tuesday.
 
2013-11-20 09:30:54 AM

MFK: WHY ISN'T CAPITAL GAINS TAXED AS REGULAR INCOME??


They just isn't, that's why.
They could be, however. I could see an argument in favor of doing so if the bulk of your income is passive. I could see an argument in favor of doing so even if it isn't but then you wind up farking the small fries.
 
2013-11-20 09:31:29 AM
Increase defense spending, cut taxes on the wealthy, and cut programs for the poor.

Its a win win win!

/except for the poor, who lose.
 
2013-11-20 09:32:15 AM

odinsposse: So, this isn't so much a budget deal as a deal to avoid the next round of the sequester cuts (which cut military funding even more which is of course unbearable) and pass  something so that House Republicans can fend off the Tea Party long enough to avoid another embarrassing shutdown battle.


No. This is a purity test for RINOs who want to volunteer for a primary challenge.
 
2013-11-20 09:34:47 AM

vernonFL: Increase defense spending, cut taxes on the wealthy, and cut programs for the poor.

Its a win win win!

/except for the poor, who lose.


They're the ones with the most practice at it. It's the right thing to do
 
2013-11-20 09:35:35 AM

vernonFL: Increase defense spending, cut taxes on the wealthy, and cut programs for the poor.

Its a win win win!

/except for the poor, who lose.


But on the upside, you've got a state of the art military to make sure the poors can't rise up against the job creators.
 
2013-11-20 09:36:50 AM

skullkrusher: They could be, however. I could see an argument in favor of doing so if the bulk of your income is passive. I could see an argument in favor of doing so even if it isn't but then you wind up farking the small fries.


What small fries?  Seriously, we're talking about decidedly less than ten percent of the population that has more than, say, $50k in cap-gain-eligible investments that aren't housed in IRA/401ks.  The majority of Americans will never see a (non-IRA/401k) capital gain in their lives.
 
2013-11-20 09:40:41 AM

timswar: There are certain people in Washington who should not be allowed near any serious budget negotiation. Paul Ryan is right near the top of that list.

Anything that makes him smile is probably bad for America.


If they are successful he was absolutely the right person.
 
2013-11-20 09:41:12 AM
The Best Democracy Money Can Buy
 
2013-11-20 09:44:02 AM

Lawnchair: skullkrusher: They could be, however. I could see an argument in favor of doing so if the bulk of your income is passive. I could see an argument in favor of doing so even if it isn't but then you wind up farking the small fries.

What small fries?  Seriously, we're talking about decidedly less than ten percent of the population that has more than, say, $50k in cap-gain-eligible investments that aren't housed in IRA/401ks.  The majority of Americans will never see a (non-IRA/401k) capital gain in their lives.


Anyone who sells a house at a profit has a cap gain. Mutual funds. Mutual funds within 401ks pay cap gains. Plenty of regular people own individual stock as well whether from open market purchases, employee stock purchase plans, etc.
 
2013-11-20 09:44:29 AM

Lawnchair: skullkrusher: They could be, however. I could see an argument in favor of doing so if the bulk of your income is passive. I could see an argument in favor of doing so even if it isn't but then you wind up farking the small fries.

What small fries?  Seriously, we're talking about decidedly less than ten percent of the population that has more than, say, $50k in cap-gain-eligible investments that aren't housed in IRA/401ks.  The majority of Americans will never see a (non-IRA/401k) capital gain in their lives.


We are also talking about more than 75% of all the "income" generated in America, dollar wise. Seriously, almost all the money made in this country is through capital gains, and it all goes to a few thousand people/corporations
 
2013-11-20 09:46:29 AM

odinsposse: So, this isn't so much a budget deal as a deal to avoid the next round of the sequester cuts (which cut military funding even more which is of course unbearable) and pass  something so that House Republicans can fend off the Tea Party long enough to avoid another embarrassing shutdown battle.


In other words, Kick-the-Can-Palooza continues in DC.
 
2013-11-20 09:46:39 AM
1. Politico

2. Don't give up! Democrats appear spineless because liberals FLEE at the first sign of trouble. Maybe if we actually stood up and backed congressional Dems, let them know that we support them, and understand that in big-boy world, sometimes compromises, even unpalatable ones, have to be made for progress, they wouldn't buckle so easily.

It's easy to snipe at what you perceive as weak when that's your go-to defense of your side.
 
MFK
2013-11-20 09:49:13 AM

skullkrusher: Lawnchair: skullkrusher: They could be, however. I could see an argument in favor of doing so if the bulk of your income is passive. I could see an argument in favor of doing so even if it isn't but then you wind up farking the small fries.

What small fries?  Seriously, we're talking about decidedly less than ten percent of the population that has more than, say, $50k in cap-gain-eligible investments that aren't housed in IRA/401ks.  The majority of Americans will never see a (non-IRA/401k) capital gain in their lives.

Anyone who sells a house at a profit has a cap gain. Mutual funds. Mutual funds within 401ks pay cap gains. Plenty of regular people own individual stock as well whether from open market purchases, employee stock purchase plans, etc.


yeah, so?

Why isn't this taxed as income?
 
2013-11-20 09:49:23 AM

skullkrusher: Anyone who sells a house at a profit has a cap gain.


I think you have to afford owning a house for this to apply to you.

/wait, maybe that's just me
 
2013-11-20 09:49:36 AM

Lost Thought 00: Lawnchair: skullkrusher: They could be, however. I could see an argument in favor of doing so if the bulk of your income is passive. I could see an argument in favor of doing so even if it isn't but then you wind up farking the small fries.

What small fries?  Seriously, we're talking about decidedly less than ten percent of the population that has more than, say, $50k in cap-gain-eligible investments that aren't housed in IRA/401ks.  The majority of Americans will never see a (non-IRA/401k) capital gain in their lives.

We are also talking about more than 75% of all the "income" generated in America, dollar wise. Seriously, almost all the money made in this country is through capital gains, and it all goes to a few thousand people/corporations


It's not implementation that's the hurdle, that would be trivially easy. The plutocrats own the politicians, and the politicians like it that way.
 
2013-11-20 09:50:57 AM
All I'm seeing here is yet another patch when what the federal government needs is a service pack update.
 
2013-11-20 09:52:30 AM
It's becoming increasingly clear that this whole budget fiasco is theater. The D's and the R's all want the same five things:

1. To get campaign funds
2. To privatize government services, enriching the companies that would provide them. See 1.
3. To keep the tax burden away from the wealthy. See 1.
4. To make Joe Six-Pack so desperate for work he'll do any job, under any conditions, for any pay. See 1.
5. To get elected. See 1.

It's clear that the DNC and RNC made a deal. The RNC looks foolish and unreasonable, while slowly getting all the things they publicly support. The DNC looks brave and stalwart, while slowly giving ground on all the things they publicly support. The end result is neutral, politically.
 
2013-11-20 09:52:59 AM

un4gvn666: skullkrusher: Anyone who sells a house at a profit has a cap gain.

I think you have to afford owning a house for this to apply to you.

/wait, maybe that's just me


Skullkrusher is concerned that small fries might sell their refrigerator at a profit.  Who was even infromed that the poors had those?
 
2013-11-20 09:54:21 AM

skullkrusher: Anyone who sells a house at a profit has a cap gain. Mutual funds. Mutual funds within 401ks pay cap gains. Plenty of regular people own individual stock as well whether from open market purchases, employee stock purchase plans, etc.


The fact that you can exclude $250,000 of gain from the sale of a personal residence could be preserved without the special treatment for millionaires capital gains.  Mutual funds within 401ks do indeed pay out capital gains.... which the holder of the 401k actually pays conventional tax rates on when they withdraw in retirement (one reason that 401ks aren't all that special).  And, no, the vast majority of Americans don't own any individual stocks or non-401k/IRA mutual funds.
 
2013-11-20 09:55:15 AM

vernonFL: Increase defense spending, cut taxes on the wealthy, and cut programs for the poor.

Its a win win win!

/except for the poor, who lose.


No, that's the beautiful part.  When wintertime rolls around, the poor simply freeze to death.
 
2013-11-20 09:57:58 AM
In a disussion on another blog, regarding LBJ,  a poster commented.

"Sen. Harry Byrd was an exemplar of the "old school" Democrat Party ... fiscally conservative ... down to earth. No head in the clouds, no "rectal cranial inversion", no "pink" socialistic taint (or worse) ... imagine right now if some key Democrat Senator put the same on the floor/in play ...budget cuts, balanced budget, etc. Apoplexy among the coastal elites and the lame-stream media... America needs to see the likes of some conservative Democrats to put some rationality into US politics - Henry Jackson, Edmund Muskie, Hubert Humphrey, etc... "


You know,  if you really are concerned about budgets and think some change is needed... you could vote in some fiscally conservative democrats.

Rational....
 
2013-11-20 09:58:01 AM

skullkrusher: Lawnchair: skullkrusher: They could be, however. I could see an argument in favor of doing so if the bulk of your income is passive. I could see an argument in favor of doing so even if it isn't but then you wind up farking the small fries.

What small fries?  Seriously, we're talking about decidedly less than ten percent of the population that has more than, say, $50k in cap-gain-eligible investments that aren't housed in IRA/401ks.  The majority of Americans will never see a (non-IRA/401k) capital gain in their lives.

Anyone who sells a house at a profit has a cap gain. Mutual funds. Mutual funds within 401ks pay cap gains. Plenty of regular people own individual stock as well whether from open market purchases, employee stock purchase plans, etc.


So what?

The fact remains that they are paying less in taxes on money that they did not work for than people pay for money that they did work for.

Sitting on an investment is not work. It should not be taxed at a lower rate than actual work. All people are asking for is equal treatment. This attempt to make it seem like it would screw over the little guy is disengenuous at best.
 
2013-11-20 09:58:02 AM

MFK: WHY ISN'T CAPITAL GAINS TAXED AS REGULAR INCOME??


Because if you want less of something, you tax it more!

And obviously we want fewer people to work, and that's why we tax it more than investing.
 
2013-11-20 09:58:39 AM

Lawnchair: skullkrusher: They could be, however. I could see an argument in favor of doing so if the bulk of your income is passive. I could see an argument in favor of doing so even if it isn't but then you wind up farking the small fries.

What small fries?  Seriously, we're talking about decidedly less than ten percent of the population that has more than, say, $50k in cap-gain-eligible investments that aren't housed in IRA/401ks.  The majority of Americans will never see a (non-IRA/401k) capital gain in their lives.


It's the same tactic they used with "Death tax". Make a vague statement that little Timmy and his family would be hurt if they had to lose the farm because of the tax. Then the Congressional Budget Office looked at what the numbers actually meant and that with a $2 million exemption, only 123 farms per year in the U.S. would owe any estate tax. And when the New York Times asked the American Farm Bureau Federation (who was in favor of repealing the estate tax, so they'd have a BIG vested interest in being able to give at least one example) if they could give just one example of a family farm that had to be sold off because of the old tax level, they could not cite a single case of a family farm lost due to the estate tax.

Again: a cited example of "oh no, think of the small fries that will be affected by all of this."

I did.I thought of all the small fries that would be affected.

Here they are in a room. All the small fries.

2.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-11-20 10:00:22 AM

MFK: skullkrusher: Lawnchair: skullkrusher: They could be, however. I could see an argument in favor of doing so if the bulk of your income is passive. I could see an argument in favor of doing so even if it isn't but then you wind up farking the small fries.

What small fries?  Seriously, we're talking about decidedly less than ten percent of the population that has more than, say, $50k in cap-gain-eligible investments that aren't housed in IRA/401ks.  The majority of Americans will never see a (non-IRA/401k) capital gain in their lives.

Anyone who sells a house at a profit has a cap gain. Mutual funds. Mutual funds within 401ks pay cap gains. Plenty of regular people own individual stock as well whether from open market purchases, employee stock purchase plans, etc.

yeah, so?

Why isn't this taxed as income?


They are when they're short term. We handle long term differently, in part, to incentivize LT investment
 
2013-11-20 10:02:07 AM

MFK: skullkrusher: Lawnchair: skullkrusher: They could be, however. I could see an argument in favor of doing so if the bulk of your income is passive. I could see an argument in favor of doing so even if it isn't but then you wind up farking the small fries.

What small fries?  Seriously, we're talking about decidedly less than ten percent of the population that has more than, say, $50k in cap-gain-eligible investments that aren't housed in IRA/401ks.  The majority of Americans will never see a (non-IRA/401k) capital gain in their lives.

Anyone who sells a house at a profit has a cap gain. Mutual funds. Mutual funds within 401ks pay cap gains. Plenty of regular people own individual stock as well whether from open market purchases, employee stock purchase plans, etc.

yeah, so?

Why isn't this taxed as income?


Every morning, poor people get up to dig food out of farm dirt, dig coal out of the ground, or (graphic content warning) do municipal work like maintain the sewer system.  Obviously, the money they earn for their labor becomes tainted with the smell of their poorness.  So we have to tax income earned through work more than almost any other way to earn money (SS, Medicare, then increasing brackets on the income itself), because someone ought to pay to have that "fresh bills" smell re-sprayed.

In contrast, when a noble Job Creator deigns to have their footman or valet push a button on their computer, converting Class A shares of Soylent Green Amalgamated into futures on the iron shackles market, the profits they make are just electrons moving through wires.  Electrons are odorless, so we only tax them at 15%.

Does that clarify skullkrusher's opinion?
 
2013-11-20 10:03:18 AM

chimp_ninja: un4gvn666: skullkrusher: Anyone who sells a house at a profit has a cap gain.

I think you have to afford owning a house for this to apply to you.

/wait, maybe that's just me

Skullkrusher is concerned that small fries might sell their refrigerator at a profit.  Who was even infromed that the poors had those?


Funny thing about that refrigerator thing...

3.bp.blogspot.com

...I've lived in two rented-from-a-landlord properties in my adult life. Both had refrigerators. Both were in the place when I moved in.

The celebs at Fox News are so out of touch, they don't know that people rent apartments and houses that already have some kitchen equipment in there. They're so used to building their mansions from scratch or completely ripping out the five year-old kitchen to "update" it when they buy an existing property, they've never thought of what a day is like for a regular person.
 
2013-11-20 10:04:22 AM

MFK: WHY ISN'T CAPITAL GAINS TAXED AS REGULAR INCOME??


The logic is that because investment drives economic expansion, making taxes on it lower encourages that behavior and helps the economy. Many even argue that taxing investments at all is a bad idea because of this. Of course by that logic we shouldn't have income taxes because higher effective wages drive economic expansion, we shouldn't have sales taxes because commerce drives economic expansion, and we shouldn't have property taxes because having higher established equity allows a greater ability to borrow which drives economic expansion.


*insert Tom the Dancing Bug comic about double taxation here*
 
2013-11-20 10:04:29 AM

skullkrusher: MFK: skullkrusher: Lawnchair: skullkrusher: They could be, however. I could see an argument in favor of doing so if the bulk of your income is passive. I could see an argument in favor of doing so even if it isn't but then you wind up farking the small fries.

What small fries?  Seriously, we're talking about decidedly less than ten percent of the population that has more than, say, $50k in cap-gain-eligible investments that aren't housed in IRA/401ks.  The majority of Americans will never see a (non-IRA/401k) capital gain in their lives.

Anyone who sells a house at a profit has a cap gain. Mutual funds. Mutual funds within 401ks pay cap gains. Plenty of regular people own individual stock as well whether from open market purchases, employee stock purchase plans, etc.

yeah, so?

Why isn't this taxed as income?

They are when they're short term. We handle long term differently, in part, to incentivize LT investment


Actually we handle long term investment differently to shift the tax burden onto the working class. The only problem we have now is that the working class keeps shrinking. The jig will be up soon so the scumbags who have made money off the backs of the working class are trying to bleed the last cents out of us before the gravy train comes off the tracks.

The investor (aka criminal) class in this country needs to be stopped.
 
2013-11-20 10:04:35 AM
One senior Democratic aide said it appears McConnell is "sticking a knife" in Ryan's back.

GOOD.
 
2013-11-20 10:07:14 AM

skullkrusher: They are when they're short term. We handle long term differently, in part, to incentivize LT investment


This is incorrect.  We give special breaks on long-term capital gains because short-term capital gains can still have some of that residual poors smell on it.  It takes about a year to air it out.  That's just science.

Some goes back to the poors anyway.  Caddies, for example, are nearly exclusively funded by money saved from the government by special exclusions on long-term capital gains.
 
2013-11-20 10:07:27 AM
Bunch of whining libs in this thread - my Elysium mansion isn't going to build itself - get to work you sad little farkers...
 
2013-11-20 10:09:08 AM
Paul Ryan exists to cut taxes on the rich and foist more expenses onto everyone else. That is his single goal.
 
2013-11-20 10:09:51 AM

Lawnchair: skullkrusher: Anyone who sells a house at a profit has a cap gain. Mutual funds. Mutual funds within 401ks pay cap gains. Plenty of regular people own individual stock as well whether from open market purchases, employee stock purchase plans, etc.

The fact that you can exclude $250,000 of gain from the sale of a personal residence could be preserved without the special treatment for millionaires capital gains.  Mutual funds within 401ks do indeed pay out capital gains.... which the holder of the 401k actually pays conventional tax rates on when they withdraw in retirement (one reason that 401ks aren't all that special).  And, no, the vast majority of Americans don't own any individual stocks or non-401k/IRA mutual funds.


True on the primary home sale. Mutual funds pay cap gains thereby reducing the value of the fund if those gains are increased. 401ks are great if you're in a high enough bracket by reducing taxable income and allowing you to invest what would have previously gone to taxes. At retirement, your taxable income is likely lower than while you're workin as well. IRAs don't pay cap gains.
I can't find breakouts of stock/fund ownership outside of 401ks but I think you are underestimating that. 52% own stock/funds but that includes holdings in retirement accounts
 
2013-11-20 10:09:57 AM

Jackpot777: The celebs at Fox News are so out of touch, they don't know that people rent apartments and houses that already have some kitchen equipment in there. They're so used to building their mansions from scratch or completely ripping out the five year-old kitchen to "update" it when they buy an existing property, they've never thought of what a day is like for a regular person.


img.fark.net

My apologies.  In my above explanations, I also forgot to put "poor" in sarcastic double quotes.  My typing manservant will be sacked after completing this sente
 
2013-11-20 10:12:55 AM

TopoGigo: It's becoming increasingly clear that this whole budget fiasco is theater. The D's and the R's all want the same five things:

1. To get campaign funds
2. To privatize government services, enriching the companies that would provide them. See 1.
3. To keep the tax burden away from the wealthy. See 1.
4. To make Joe Six-Pack so desperate for work he'll do any job, under any conditions, for any pay. See 1.
5. To get elected. See 1.

It's clear that the DNC and RNC made a deal. The RNC looks foolish and unreasonable, while slowly getting all the things they publicly support. The DNC looks brave and stalwart, while slowly giving ground on all the things they publicly support. The end result is neutral, politically.


Good point.  Except, the DNC could accomplish anything even if they wanted to.
 
2013-11-20 10:13:32 AM

zeroman987: skullkrusher: Lawnchair: skullkrusher: They could be, however. I could see an argument in favor of doing so if the bulk of your income is passive. I could see an argument in favor of doing so even if it isn't but then you wind up farking the small fries.

What small fries?  Seriously, we're talking about decidedly less than ten percent of the population that has more than, say, $50k in cap-gain-eligible investments that aren't housed in IRA/401ks.  The majority of Americans will never see a (non-IRA/401k) capital gain in their lives.

Anyone who sells a house at a profit has a cap gain. Mutual funds. Mutual funds within 401ks pay cap gains. Plenty of regular people own individual stock as well whether from open market purchases, employee stock purchase plans, etc.

So what?

The fact remains that they are paying less in taxes on money that they did not work for than people pay for money that they did work for.

Sitting on an investment is not work. It should not be taxed at a lower rate than actual work. All people are asking for is equal treatment. This attempt to make it seem like it would screw over the little guy is disengenuous at best.


I've said tax cap gains as ordinary income if you're one of the idle rich. Just saying do it in a way that doesn't hurt the little guy. At the VERY LEAST, only make it applicable to holdings acquired after the change takes place
 
2013-11-20 10:15:05 AM

skullkrusher: Lawnchair: skullkrusher: Anyone who sells a house at a profit has a cap gain. Mutual funds. Mutual funds within 401ks pay cap gains. Plenty of regular people own individual stock as well whether from open market purchases, employee stock purchase plans, etc.

The fact that you can exclude $250,000 of gain from the sale of a personal residence could be preserved without the special treatment for millionaires capital gains.  Mutual funds within 401ks do indeed pay out capital gains.... which the holder of the 401k actually pays conventional tax rates on when they withdraw in retirement (one reason that 401ks aren't all that special).  And, no, the vast majority of Americans don't own any individual stocks or non-401k/IRA mutual funds.

True on the primary home sale. Mutual funds pay cap gains thereby reducing the value of the fund if those gains are increased. 401ks are great if you're in a high enough bracket by reducing taxable income and allowing you to invest what would have previously gone to taxes. At retirement, your taxable income is likely lower than while you're workin as well. IRAs don't pay cap gains.
I can't find breakouts of stock/fund ownership outside of 401ks but I think you are underestimating that. 52% own stock/funds but that includes holdings in retirement accounts


To the googles:

In terms of types of financial wealth, the top one percent of households have 35% of all privately held stock, 64.4% of financial securities, and 62.4% of business equity. The top ten percent have 81% to 94% of stocks, bonds, trust funds, and business equity, and almost 80% of non-home real estate. Since financial wealth is what counts as far as the control of income-producing assets, we can say that just 10% of the people own the United States of America; see Table 3 and Figure 2 for the details.
 
2013-11-20 10:17:25 AM

Jackpot777: Lawnchair: skullkrusher: They could be, however. I could see an argument in favor of doing so if the bulk of your income is passive. I could see an argument in favor of doing so even if it isn't but then you wind up farking the small fries.

What small fries?  Seriously, we're talking about decidedly less than ten percent of the population that has more than, say, $50k in cap-gain-eligible investments that aren't housed in IRA/401ks.  The majority of Americans will never see a (non-IRA/401k) capital gain in their lives.

It's the same tactic they used with "Death tax". Make a vague statement that little Timmy and his family would be hurt if they had to lose the farm because of the tax. Then the Congressional Budget Office looked at what the numbers actually meant and that with a $2 million exemption, only 123 farms per year in the U.S. would owe any estate tax. And when the New York Times asked the American Farm Bureau Federation (who was in favor of repealing the estate tax, so they'd have a BIG vested interest in being able to give at least one example) if they could give just one example of a family farm that had to be sold off because of the old tax level, they could not cite a single case of a family farm lost due to the estate tax.

Again: a cited example of "oh no, think of the small fries that will be affected by all of this."

I did.I thought of all the small fries that would be affected.

Here they are in a room. All the small fries.


Point would be valid if I were using it as a reason to tax all cap gains for all people at current rates. Since I'm not, you're point is shiat
 
Displayed 50 of 190 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report