Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 34 of 34
  1. #31  
    Power CUer
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    10,090
    Quote Originally Posted by NJCardFan View Post
    Once again for the slow to learn: Romney made money. He was taxed on that money. He took what was left and invested it. Those investments lead to more money(not all the time this is why investing is a risk). The money he makes from those investments is called a capital gain. Based on that, he is taxed on these capital gains. Now I'm going to go real slow for you, k? This means that the money that was already taxed and made him more money is taxed AGAIN. Hence, he is being taxed twice on basically the same dollar. Now, you, Obama, and everyone else who works and takes in an income gets taxed on that income ONCE by the federal government. Understand now?
    Thank you.

    This is, in fact, the major reason capital gains are taxed at a lower rate. Taxes on earned income are higher than those on investment income. If you are someone who earned income (taxed) and then invested it (taxed again) you are getting double taxed. That's why so many people want the capital gains rate to go to zero.

    On the other hand, one can argue that some people inherit their wealth and never work, so they never work (no tax) and all they have is investment income (taxed at a low rate). It's this type of thing that creates resentment and the desire to "tax the rich."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2. #32  
    Senior Member Bailey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    6,157
    Quote Originally Posted by FlaGator View Post
    Actually that is not accurate. He received money that was taxed, he invested it, his is taxed on the money he earned minus the principle investment. Example, he invests $100.00 makes $25.00 and the total now in the investment is $125.00 but he is taxed on the $25.00 he made. Once that is taxed his new principle starts at $125.00 if he doesn't withdraw his profit.

    The profit is technically being taxed twice because the business he invested in paid taxes on the profit of which he received $25.00 and then he is taxed on his $25.00 portion.
    No my point is all they are seeing is that rate he paid on capital gains and not that he paid income tax on the money to begin with.
    We're from Philadelphia, We Fight- Chip Kelly
    Reply With Quote  
     

  3. #33  
    Sin City Moderator RobJohnson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Nevada
    Posts
    17,257
    Quote Originally Posted by noonwitch View Post
    To be honest, I don't understand why a person who makes $14 million a year would have a problem with paying the same tax rate that I pay. If I made that much, I really wouldn't mind paying 33% of my income in taxes. I don't have a problem with paying it now, if rich people paid the same percentage that I do.
    Nice spin.

    Let's stick to the facts and truth.

    IRS data from 2010 shows someone making between $50,000 and $75,000 on average pays an effective rate of 7.8 percent
    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012...#ixzz27d7triMB

    I do understand you are single and without kids so you might pay a few bucks more. Is that fair? I have never thought it was fair for a single person to pay more then a family that creates more wear and tear on the system, but that is just me.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #34  
    LTC Member Odysseus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    FT Belvoir, VA
    Posts
    15,638
    Quote Originally Posted by noonwitch View Post
    If a beggar asks me for change and I have it, I give it to him or her. It's his responsibility what he does with that money. I'm not going to ask "Lord, when did I see you hungry" when I die, because it's a really stupid question for a person living in Detroit to ask.
    And if that beggar uses that money for drugs, and perpetuates violent crime in your neighborhood, then it's his responsibility, not yours? Noonie, you really infuriate me some times. You're not feeding the hungry, you're subsidizing drug abuse, alcoholism, violence and the collapse of your community.

    Quote Originally Posted by noonwitch View Post
    It's easy to be generous when you make $14 million a year. But as a "government elite", I only make $52,000 a year. Romney's running mate wants to take the only deduction I get (other than charity) by eliminating my mortgage deduction-I guess that Ryan really could care less about the middle class, since that is who benefits the most from a mortgage deduction.
    If it's so easy to be generous, why haven't the Obamas or Bidens done it? And I hate to say it, because I benefit from the mortgage deduction, too, but if we're going to continue to pay your salary (and mine, let's not forget that I work for the government, too), we're going to have to look at simplifying the tax code, making the rates lower and flatter, and that means that many deductions will go by the wayside. But, perhaps you are correct, and your taxes are too high (as are mine). What programs (aside from the military, which is already being cut to the bone) would you be willing to reduce spending on? Ryan has a plan. Does Obama?

    Quote Originally Posted by noonwitch View Post
    I am generous with what I have, but I don't really have that much. I do have skills, and I prepare food for people frequently, for church events, for community events and so on. I spend my money on the kids I work with because our system does not provide all of the things they need, nonetheless things that kids want, like toys and such. It's not about charity or tax deductions to me, it's about being generous today with what I have today.

    To be honest, I don't understand why a person who makes $14 million a year would have a problem with paying the same tax rate that I pay. If I made that much, I really wouldn't mind paying 33% of my income in taxes. I don't have a problem with paying it now, if rich people paid the same percentage that I do.
    The difference is, Romney will take that money and reinvest it, which will put some of the people that you give charity to back into the job market. Admittedly, they wouldn't need your charity as much, if at all, which probably means that you could spend more time and money for yourself, and possibly put yourself in a position to employ others, but that's not nearly as satisfying as giving handouts to derelicts, now is it?
    --Odysseus
    Sic Hacer Pace, Para Bellum.

    Before you can do things for people, you must be the kind of man who can get things done. But to get things done, you must love the doing, not the people!
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •