Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: One of them will be President?  (Read 5479 times)

54826

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 93
    • View Profile
Re: One of them will be President?
« Reply #30 on: April 18, 2008, 05:37:00 PM »
There is no sense in arguing whether or not a low tax on capital gains is good for the economy.  IT IS good for the economy, and that fact is supported by indisputable evidence.  And it doesnít take a PhD economist to understand why.  Obama isnít an idiot, he knows this fact.  So why would he still support such a drastic hike in the capital gains tax rate in spite of the damage it will do to our economy?  Itís based on his fundamental belief that we can only be a moral society when the fruits of our labor are widely shared.  And whatís so wrong with that?  Well, in essence, he wants to punish competence, and by competence, I mean the careful, planned and strategic investment decisions by middle income households seeking to build wealth (not just big bad Wall Street as he so often alludes to).  Unfortunately, nothing will change this left wing view of his.

Majmun

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 752
  • Now Featuring Excess Whiteness
    • View Profile
Re: One of them will be President?
« Reply #31 on: April 18, 2008, 05:42:01 PM »
There is no sense in arguing whether or not a low tax on capital gains is good for the economy.  IT IS good for the economy, and that fact is supported by indisputable evidence.  And it doesnít take a PhD economist to understand why.  Obama isnít an idiot, he knows this fact.  So why would he still support such a drastic hike in the capital gains tax rate in spite of the damage it will do to our economy?  Itís based on his fundamental belief that we can only be a moral society when the fruits of our labor are widely shared.  And whatís so wrong with that?  Well, in essence, he wants to punish competence, and by competence, I mean the careful, planned and strategic investment decisions by middle income households seeking to build wealth (not just big bad Wall Street as he so often alludes to).  Unfortunately, nothing will change this left wing view of his.

are there taxes that don't punish competence?

Cigarette taxes  come to mind

Majmun

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 752
  • Now Featuring Excess Whiteness
    • View Profile
Re: One of them will be President?
« Reply #32 on: April 18, 2008, 05:46:16 PM »
oops, i should have said income taxes.

Lottery winnings are taxed pretty heavily.

Majmun

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 752
  • Now Featuring Excess Whiteness
    • View Profile
Re: One of them will be President?
« Reply #33 on: April 18, 2008, 05:51:50 PM »
oops, i should have said income taxes.

Lottery winnings are taxed pretty heavily.

are those specific to lottery winnings?  because if not, you're taxing a lot of competence as well. 

Where's an accountant?  I know that gambling winnings are reported separately on a 1040 but have know clue what it's taxed as.  Regardless, taxing lottery winnings is definitely not taxing competence.  Never mind that the lottery itself is basically a tax.

Majmun

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 752
  • Now Featuring Excess Whiteness
    • View Profile
Re: One of them will be President?
« Reply #34 on: April 18, 2008, 05:56:24 PM »
Being bad at math/probability makes one more subject to tax?

State run lotteries are a bizarre phenomenon.

mconnett

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 31
    • View Profile
    • LSN
Re: One of them will be President?
« Reply #35 on: April 18, 2008, 05:56:39 PM »
There is no sense in arguing whether or not a low tax on capital gains is good for the economy.  IT IS good for the economy, and that fact is supported by indisputable evidence.  And it doesnít take a PhD economist to understand why.  Obama isnít an idiot, he knows this fact.  So why would he still support such a drastic hike in the capital gains tax rate in spite of the damage it will do to our economy?  Itís based on his fundamental belief that we can only be a moral society when the fruits of our labor are widely shared.  And whatís so wrong with that?  Well, in essence, he wants to punish competence, and by competence, I mean the careful, planned and strategic investment decisions by middle income households seeking to build wealth (not just big bad Wall Street as he so often alludes to).  Unfortunately, nothing will change this left wing view of his.

Wow... You'd think after the utterly horrible failure of trickle down economics, that such biblical statements of "fact" would somehow be tempered by now. After all, it's 2008, not 1981.

But I guess there is no limit to the self-delusion that plagues the economic theories developed by rich white men. Ah, it would be refreshing for a trickle-downer to speak directly and honestly for once (and leave the self-delusion behind). Get your placards and let your inner Friedman run free. Long live the aristocracy! Democracy is over-rated. And economic equality is for losers.

nike6075

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 797
    • View Profile
Re: One of them will be President?
« Reply #36 on: April 18, 2008, 06:02:53 PM »
There is no sense in arguing whether or not a low tax on capital gains is good for the economy.  IT IS good for the economy, and that fact is supported by indisputable evidence.  And it doesnít take a PhD economist to understand why.  Obama isnít an idiot, he knows this fact.  So why would he still support such a drastic hike in the capital gains tax rate in spite of the damage it will do to our economy?  Itís based on his fundamental belief that we can only be a moral society when the fruits of our labor are widely shared.  And whatís so wrong with that?  Well, in essence, he wants to punish competence, and by competence, I mean the careful, planned and strategic investment decisions by middle income households seeking to build wealth (not just big bad Wall Street as he so often alludes to).  Unfortunately, nothing will change this left wing view of his.


Wow... You'd think after the utterly horrible failure of trickle down economics, that such biblical statements of "fact" would somehow be tempered by now. After all, it's 2008, not 1981.

But I guess there is no limit to the self-delusion that plagues the economic theories developed by rich white men. Ah, it would be refreshing for a trickle-downer to speak directly and honestly for once (and leave the self-delusion behind). Get your placards and let your inner Friedman run free. Long live the aristocracy! Democracy is over-rated. And economic equality is for losers.

Obviously this guy is flame.
dont worry guys, i had lotsof drinks, and now i feel better. hth.

54826

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 93
    • View Profile
Re: One of them will be President?
« Reply #37 on: April 18, 2008, 06:05:03 PM »
There is no sense in arguing whether or not a low tax on capital gains is good for the economy.  IT IS good for the economy, and that fact is supported by indisputable evidence.  And it doesnít take a PhD economist to understand why.  Obama isnít an idiot, he knows this fact.  So why would he still support such a drastic hike in the capital gains tax rate in spite of the damage it will do to our economy?  Itís based on his fundamental belief that we can only be a moral society when the fruits of our labor are widely shared.  And whatís so wrong with that?  Well, in essence, he wants to punish competence, and by competence, I mean the careful, planned and strategic investment decisions by middle income households seeking to build wealth (not just big bad Wall Street as he so often alludes to).  Unfortunately, nothing will change this left wing view of his.

Wow... You'd think after the utterly horrible failure of trickle down economics, that such biblical statements of "fact" would somehow be tempered by now. After all, it's 2008, not 1981.

But I guess there is no limit to the self-delusion that plagues the economic theories developed by rich white men. Ah, it would be refreshing for a trickle-downer to speak directly and honestly for once (and leave the self-delusion behind). Get your placards and let your inner Friedman run free. Long live the aristocracy! Democracy is over-rated. And economic equality is for losers.

Tell what is equal about working for another manís benefit?  Lets just go ahead and change the constitutionÖhow about life, liberty and the pursuit of everyone elseís happiness?

Oh, and Milton Friedman was born to a working class family of Hungarian immigrants.  I also come from a lower middle class family.

Anyway, what I was going to say was that the whole discussion on competence is irrelevant.  To clarify, when I said competence, I meant competent investment decisions.  Middle income households holding onto assets, waiting for the right time to sell, are suddenly 15% less wealthy if capital gains taxes are hiked 15% in order to be ďfairĒ.  Even more, theyíll feel less wealthy and then spend less.

just dot

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 3416
  • I just want to be wonderful.
    • View Profile
Re: One of them will be President?
« Reply #38 on: April 18, 2008, 06:12:52 PM »
Questions about trade- 0

Questions about process, Jeremiah Wright, and other trivial nonsense- At least a dozen

Great job, ABC.  ::)

You can't just say we should ignore fairness to increase revenue. Slavery was good for the economy too but that doesn't mean we should bring it back. So many things in this country are such a struggle because there is an incredible inertia in Washington against fixing past mistakes because those who benefit from the current situation are loathe to change it and have to adjust their money-making strategy.

I'm not saying we should ignore fairness to incerase revenue.  I'm saying we shouldn't solely base our tax system on some politician's idea of fairness.  Besides, who gets to say what is "fair?"  That is a very subjective word.  There is nothing "fair" about our current tax system, thus my support for the Fair Tax.  A TRULY fair tax system.

At only 30 more cents on every purchase!


But that's a different discussion entirely...

It is a different discussion, but I can't let your false statement stand.  If you know anything about our current tax system at all (and I'm assuming you do), you know there is already an embedded tax from our current tax system in everything we buy.  That would be eliminated.  You wouldn't "feel" the full 30 cents (really 23, BTW, but I won't even get into the whole inclusive/exclusive debate).  I will fully admit to any potential problems in the Fair Tax, but on a board full of so many intelligent people, can we please resolve not to sink to repeating misleading half-truths?
To put it bluntly, I seem to have a whole superstructure with no foundation. But I`m working on the foundation.

nike6075

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 797
    • View Profile
Re: One of them will be President?
« Reply #39 on: April 18, 2008, 06:26:51 PM »
Questions about trade- 0

Questions about process, Jeremiah Wright, and other trivial nonsense- At least a dozen

Great job, ABC.  ::)

You can't just say we should ignore fairness to increase revenue. Slavery was good for the economy too but that doesn't mean we should bring it back. So many things in this country are such a struggle because there is an incredible inertia in Washington against fixing past mistakes because those who benefit from the current situation are loathe to change it and have to adjust their money-making strategy.

I'm not saying we should ignore fairness to incerase revenue.  I'm saying we shouldn't solely base our tax system on some politician's idea of fairness.  Besides, who gets to say what is "fair?"  That is a very subjective word.  There is nothing "fair" about our current tax system, thus my support for the Fair Tax.  A TRULY fair tax system.

At only 30 more cents on every purchase!


But that's a different discussion entirely...

It is a different discussion, but I can't let your false statement stand.  If you know anything about our current tax system at all (and I'm assuming you do), you know there is already an embedded tax from our current tax system in everything we buy.  That would be eliminated.  You wouldn't "feel" the full 30 cents (really 23, BTW, but I won't even get into the whole inclusive/exclusive debate).  I will fully admit to any potential problems in the Fair Tax, but on a board full of so many intelligent people, can we please resolve not to sink to repeating misleading half-truths?

Well, it is 23% of the new total, but that amount is found by adding 30% to the current, non-taxed price.  That is, if something now costs $1.00, your new total on the item is $1.30 (that extra $.30 is 23% of this new total).  Simply because the tax is 'inclusive' - that is, the price on the sticker already includes the tax - doesn't change the fact that we're paying an extra 30 cents on the dollar.

In reality, the percentage would have to be much more than that, because the proposal accounts for government spending in that the government receives revenue from the tax on items it purchases, but does not include the tax in its governmental budgeting for expenditures.  That is, the federal government would pay taxes to itself based on its own purchases, but the price of those purchases is not shown to increase to include the tax.

Also, state and local governments would get crushed by this system.


http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/files/bartlett_fair_tax.pdf
dont worry guys, i had lotsof drinks, and now i feel better. hth.