Cog wrote:Most of us in the private sector do not have government pensions or pensions of any kind. What we do have for retirement is IRA's and 401K's. Throughout our working lives we have contributed to those vehicles and have ridden out recessions and downturns and hope we have saved enough so we won't be living in cardboard boxes at the end of our lives.
I know a lot of progressives see those trillions in a stock market as only belonging to the super-wealthy and a ready source for government confiscation. The reality for many of us in the middle and upper middle class is that the stocks and bonds are the only thing keeping us from living in a cardboard box.
Alfred Tennyson wrote:We are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
Cog wrote:You don't want anyone to be able to balance capital gains with capital losses? WTF?
You want to do a one-time(or so you say) big hit on rich people. Where have I heard this before? Just about every time I listen to a progressive Democrat. Remember yacht taxes? I do. Nearly destroyed the yacht construction industry.
But fortunately for all of us, the new tax cut bill will have zero to do with taxing what you consider the rich on their capital gains.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VVxYOQS6ggk
Cog wrote:The proposal to seize the wealth of others, by the force of government, does not speak of the worthiness of the rich person's character, but speaks volumes about the lack of character of the one proposing it.
Cog wrote:The proposal to seize the wealth of others, by the force of government, does not speak of the worthiness of the rich person's character, but speaks volumes about the lack of character of the one proposing it.
Outcast_Searcher wrote:Cog wrote:The proposal to seize the wealth of others, by the force of government, does not speak of the worthiness of the rich person's character, but speaks volumes about the lack of character of the one proposing it.
And THAT is why the leftists hate Ayn Rand so much. Because she points out their motivations, their lack of character, and the consequences of living within the economic system they dream of dominating. (Which of course is pretty much as UN-PC as it gets!)
And of course, for the left to admit that would be to lose votes. So they attack the messenger.
vtsnowedin wrote:Cog wrote:The proposal to seize the wealth of others, by the force of government, does not speak of the worthiness of the rich person's character, but speaks volumes about the lack of character of the one proposing it.
Expecting the very rich to pay taxes at least at the same percentage as the middle class pays is not "seizing their wealth.
Bernie's and other Democratic proposals are the equivalent of Jacks or better, trips to win progressive progressive
vtsnowedin wrote:Another thing I don't see in the GOP proposal is deductions for the premiums of the ACA (Obama care) or the deductibles and proscription meds. costs. A middle class family making more then $85,000 a year can be paying above $10,000 a year in premiums and have a $10,000 deductible on top of that.
The premium subsidies phase out at 400% of the poverty level so that family of three making $85K or more is paying full freight. Making ever medical dollar (premiums, deductibles or out of pocket ) tax deductible even for those that don't itemize would save a tax payer at least $2400 a year which is more then the rest of the proposal combined.
Cog wrote:@Outcast Searcher As I've tried to explain, taxing unrealized capital gains, i.e. stock that appreciated in value over the long term but has not been sold, would create chaos in the markets. Think about it. Every year, ever holder of a stock that has appreciated in value, would be required to sell a portion of the stock to pay the taxes on that unrealized gain. Stock values would plummet when you have all of this stock being sold into the market with very few buyers.
Cog wrote:The government should not be wedging its way into market decisions on when to buy and sell. That is ripe for abuse and its not THEIR money or capital to begin with. Its literally forcing grandma to eat ALPO because she turned a profit on Wal-Mart stock. Investors take all the upside and downside risk and the government swoops in to the grab the gravy.
No I don't want this particular ox to be gored because there is no reason to gore it. The government already taxes capital gains and dividends.
Yes they do. But it dose not fallow that they could not tax them under different rules that would be fairer to the rest of the tax payers and still,retain the incentive to invest capital (in the hopes of making a profit) rather then cash it out and squander the profits on yachts and bimbos.Cog wrote: The government already taxes capital gains and dividends.
vtsnowedin wrote:Yes they do. But it dose not fallow that they could not tax them under different rules that would be fairer to the rest of the tax payers and still,retain the incentive to invest capital (in the hopes of making a profit) rather then cash it out and squander the profits on yachts and bimbos.Cog wrote: The government already taxes capital gains and dividends.
You are complaining about a "two day settlement rule" when we are discussing how to change the rules.Cog wrote:There is that word fairness again. Anytime I hear it, I hear a code word for raiding someone's pocket that jingles more than yours does.
But here is yet another objection to this. You can balance out your gains and losses throughout the year but I have no idea what the price of say, GM will be on Dec 31st. If you are going to tax me on the value of that unrealized stock appreciation, what happens if it goes up huge that day? I'm stuck with a huge tax bill. And because of the two day settlement rule, I can't actually do anything about it this fiscal year.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests