I have no idea how any of this is related to anything I posted.

__________________
A nation of slaves is always prepared to applaud the clemency of their master who, in the abuse of absolute power, does not proceed to the utmost extremes of injustice and oppression.
Edward Gibbon

That's fine but I don't see what it has to do with taxing income received from already being wealthy at a lower rate than income earned by working.

__________________
A nation of slaves is always prepared to applaud the clemency of their master who, in the abuse of absolute power, does not proceed to the utmost extremes of injustice and oppression.
Edward Gibbon

I used to think that as well, until I did a little research on the subject. I don't remember exactly, so I'll make up percentages for illustration purposes. The top 1% pay 30% of the taxes; the top 10% pay 50% of the taxes, and the top 50% pay 90% of the taxes. Thing is, if you substitute 'pay X% of taxes' with 'own Y% of the wealth' or 'make Z% of the income', X, Y, and Z, are all within 10% of each other. Do the rich pay more than 'their fair share'? Yes. Should those who pay nothing be required to pay Something, or at the very least not have a negative rate? Yes. But the overall situation is not the travesty of justice it can easily be made to sound like without the full story.

It depends on how you define 'already being wealthy'. I have investment income, but the sum total of my various inheritances is all of 4 digits. What I have, I have because I lived in a studio apartment in an inexpensive neighborhood, lived below my means, moved to an even less desirable neighborhood that I knew was poised for 'gentrification', lived below my means, and otherwise invested wisely and worked hard, and lived below my means. My investment income is not some silver spoon that should arguably be yanked out of my mouth, but the result of years of effort and sacrifice. Are those the kind of actions that are beneficial to society and thus should be encouraged? Or things that should be discouraged by punitive tax rates?

__________________
Today's forecast: Government corruption.

Tomorrow's forecast: 100% chance of more 'politics as usual'

Maybe it's finally time to vote Libertarian

It depends on how you define "punitive".

Regardless of whether you worked for the money you originally invested, capital gains and dividend income is received by virtue of you already owning wealth. The vast majority of people who receive capital gains or dividends do so as the result of selling their primary home or as a result of retirement investments. Since capital gains realized from the sale of one's primary home are not taxed unless the profit is over 500k (it could be higher now I'm not sure) and since retirement account earnings are tax deferred, it is only a tiny tiny fraction of the public who pays any significant taxes on capital gains or dividend income. Are those wealthiest americans being "punished" if they are asked to pay taxes on that wealth based income at a rate equal or greater than that payed by americans who receive all their income directly from their work? I don't think so. However hard anyone who pays taxes on their wealth based income may have worked, I see no reason to believe they worked any harder than a person who receives no wealth based income.

__________________
A nation of slaves is always prepared to applaud the clemency of their master who, in the abuse of absolute power, does not proceed to the utmost extremes of injustice and oppression.
Edward Gibbon

Well, I would--and have--argued more broadly that taxing ANY income is wrong. Furthermore, capital gains are not "income you receive for already being wealthy", they are the income one receives for FORGOING the option of current consumption and engaging in risk-taking behavoirs which produce a financial return. Capital gains is the reward for saving and investing we is the SOURCE of most of the unprecedented wealth accumulation by the MIDDLE CLASS in this country.

I am so tired of leftwingers are are so fucking self-righteous and morally indignant that they don't take their heads out of each other's asses long enough to bother to understand the positions of those who disagree with them.

Speaking as a someone who is far more informed and thoughtful on these issues then you, it is not that Republicans view it as "better" income. What we DO believe is that by and large, investment, and entreprenureal risk taking are the most important things to long-term wealth creation by ALL.

When you go to work, you are not risking a financial LOSS, investors do. When you go to work, there is little chance that you will end up with less money as a result of working.

Furthermore, most jobs which generate "earned" income are the RESULT of investment and entreprenureal risk-taking.

Also, there is a concept of externalities which you may not be aware of. In most economic activities there are external costs and benefits, meaning costs and benefits which are borne by or accrue to those outside of the transaction. It just so happens that investment activities tend to have tremendous net external benefits to society as a whole, whereas current consumption has a net external costs.

If you want a more detailed look at my views on this, you can look at "Privatize Profits, Socialize Costs" thread

Actually, by defition, you are wrong. Capital does absolutely nothing for a person's comfort level, because by definition it is invested, rather than consumed. (Bill Gate's isn't living comfortably because he HAS tens of billions of dollars, he lives comfortably because he SPENDS alot of the money he makes)

Really? Then why do over 50% of the American people have accumulated wealth?

So? You like to blather on about all the "benefits" the rich get from our infrastructure and society, how much harder and longer would those NOT born with wealth have to work just to survive absent all the wonderous infrastructure that has been built on capital investment in this country? That you have the time, let alone the computer or electricity to make these posts shows that you are not exactly being forced to scavenge for sustenance or survival like our pre-capitalism anscestors did.

Your last observation is incredibly uninformed. First of all, people are not faced with the choice between investing their capital or having it sitting around depreciating as a result of inflation, they can also SPEND it on current consumption!

Also implicit in your comments is the notion that low or no taxes on capital gains represent an "incentive" to invest. This is not true. Not taxing something is not an "incentive", rather just the opposite, TAXING something represents a DISINCENTIVE.

Put into context, NO taxes on capital gains represents neither an incentive or disincentive all other things being equal. Taxes represent a disincentive given the other alternatives. An "incentive" to investing would be something that creates an affirmative benefit, or that lowers the risk/reward ratio from what it would be in a zero tax environment (like if we were to create refundable tax credits for capital losses)

Who is refusing to acknowledge that? The question is whether or not it is the infracstructure and society which MAKES them rich? Isn't the exact same infrastructure and society that was the underlying foundation of Bill Gates', Warren Buffett's, Sam Walton's, etc. etc. wealth accumulation available to every other person in the society?

The question then becomes why the rich should have to pay a disproportionate share of the cost of the infrastructure and society which we ALL benefit from equally. Would you be able to live the lifestyle you have become acustomed to any more easily than "the rich" could without the infrastructure and society around us?

Really? Nothing other then the infrastructure and society is responsible for that income? If that is the case, why doesn't everyone go out and do that? Seems like a nobrainer to me! Or, is it maybe that there is something OTHER than the infrastructure and society showering "benefit" on lucky random people?

Why is it, if all you need is to be rich in the firstplace, and all this infrastructure and society to be smiling down upon you that most lottery winners end up having a net worth considerably below the amount they win as time goes by, whereas most of the richest people in this country are either self-made (who were NOT rich and who BECAME rich during their lifetimes) or second-generation wealth who were not neccesarily born into wealth, but who's families accumulated that wealth during their lifetimes?

__________________
"It's a good feeling to shoot a bad guy. Something you democrats would never understand. Americans are homesteaders, we want a safe home, keep the money we make, and shoot bad guys!"

----Denny Crane

Sorry, I dont buy that. The amount you shouldnt contribute to the common good, should have nothing to do with how succesful you are. Everyone should contribute equally and everyone should benefit equally. And my life and my property does not deserve any more protection than someone elses.

__________________
http://www.fairtax.org

Elminate all taxes on income and replace with a national sales tax.

I have to disagree with you to the extent that taxing people below a certain means (whether from current income or accumulated wealth) is immoral. It is a simple fact that some level of means is a basic human neccesity, and while I do not believe anyone has a "right" to have those means affirmatively supplied to them, they most certainly have a basic right to keep that for their own survival. What that level of means is we can debate, but that such a level exists is simply a reality.

Again, this is why the various beliefs I hold (both as matters of morality, principal, and pragmatism) lead me inexorabley to a consumption-based tax system with a pre-bate feature to assure that people below the minimum basic means for self-sustenance at the very least aren't pushed further in the hole by taxes.

__________________
"It's a good feeling to shoot a bad guy. Something you democrats would never understand. Americans are homesteaders, we want a safe home, keep the money we make, and shoot bad guys!"

----Denny Crane

Then we get back to the point where if govt cant afford to collect enough money to buy what it wants, it should stop spending. If the govt spends so much that people cant even afford to pay the taxes to cover it, then govt needs to spend less. But I agree, the Fair Tax is a better system than now, and I agree that until we get rid of the idea that not everyone has to contribute something to the common good, then we have to exempt the poor dragging the country down.

Point is, the poor are poor because they choose to be so through their bad financial decisions. Why do I have to pay more taxes because of this? I took advantage of my education, I work, I keep my bills low, I dont have children or luxuries. Why do I have to pay more tax to cover someone who didnt educate themselves, doesnt work hard, had 3 kids, a single parent, and spends their money on Jordans and beer? Half of the income tax I pay goes to pay for other peoples needs that they can not afford to pay for themselves. Even with a consumption tax, the rate is set such that we can exempt the poor, and keep paying for all the entitlements to provide for their neccesities.

__________________
http://www.fairtax.org

Elminate all taxes on income and replace with a national sales tax.

While I agree that poverty, in this country, is overwhelmingly the result of individual choices made over a lifetime, it does not change the fact that there is a mimimum level of means neccesary to survive in life, and it is fundamentally immoral to tax below that amount. I do not believe that the broader society has any collective moral obligation to directly provide for or subsidize those people in their choices, but nor do I believe that people should be made worse of by taxes to the extent that even if they could otherwise afford the basic neccesities of life, they would no longer be able to do so as a result of taxes.

__________________
"It's a good feeling to shoot a bad guy. Something you democrats would never understand. Americans are homesteaders, we want a safe home, keep the money we make, and shoot bad guys!"

----Denny Crane

crash dollar

george holiday = good

hurry

get rid of all income taxes, replace with global 'fail' tax.

Well, I guess we'll just have to disagree. Taxes to fund the protection of our basic freedoms should be shared equally among all. If you can not pay the price, then we can come up with a way that you can. There are of course other countries you can move to. The problem here is that we will eventually get to a point where the few still paying taxes refuse to do so, and then the govt will collapse. As it is, right now we have 10% of americans (about 5 million out of 300) are paying most of the tax. What happens when they move all their income offshore? One could argue that our current budget issues are a result of too few people paying taxes.

__________________
http://www.fairtax.org

Elminate all taxes on income and replace with a national sales tax.

does not compute

__________________
http://www.fairtax.org

Elminate all taxes on income and replace with a national sales tax.

We already have the fail tax in place with USD.

OK, so we all kick in $10 a piece, and it's up to the Pentagon to live within the budget................

And if enough people don't want to move to another country, we can just elect a Hugo Chavez equivalent, and eat the rich.

__________________
“ The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state.”

Adam Smith , The Wealth of Nations 1776

"We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; we know now that it is bad economics"
FDR's second Inaugural Address

Yes. The tax code already is unfair. Those you make low wages pay little or nothing while those who earn more already pay more then their fare share.

Obama wants to squeeze even more blood out of that turnip by using class-warfare against them thus removing any incentive one might have to increase their earnings in this economy.

The government needs to think of ways to save money instead of constantly dreaming up new ways to steal our income from us so they can throw it away on their pet projects. Anyone who supports nailing the crap out of the rich is suggesting the advancement of bigotry through taxes. Whomsoever wants to advance iniquities between groups or classes of people is simply practicing Socialism by rigging the tax code to punish success.

"Screw those rich SOBs. They've made too damned much money to suit me. I want them to share their evil ill-gotten gains with me because I'm too friggen lazy to work for it myself....those rich bastards!!!"

__________________


"We can't screw it up any worse than they have." - Barack Obama

Wanna bet?



"You never want a serious crisis to go to waste...." - Rahm Emmanuel