JFlorio wrote:
You don't think government agencies and or publications slant their spin?
You don't think Trump uses that spin either, do you?
Are you kidding, He spins like a top. Says any damn thing pops into his head and then worries about the veracity later. He's a political moron. Obama was a brilliant politician and did more damage to this country then any President in my lifetime. He could stand up there, looking and sounding P**********l while he lied consistently to our faces from health care to prosecuting Wall Street. We haven't had a president that really wanted to change the size and scope of government for years. I think Trump wants to but his rhetoric is so confusing I'm not sure.
buffalo wrote:
You don't think Trump uses that spin either, do you?
buffalo wrote:
J, that is not what I am saying. The dividends, capital GAINS, even INCOME generated from investment property is what I am saying should be taxed at the same rate as wages and other earned incomes. Understand? Yes, the money used to buy a stock or property (invest if you will) has already been taxed. I am talking about taxing the GAIN in value over and above that initial investment or the income generated, such as rental income and taxing it the same as other forms of income. Your the one that thinks everybody should pay the same flat rate, but apparently you think that income (gains) generated from investing should not be taxed at all. I am sure the 1% would completely agree with you.
J, that is not what I am saying. The dividends, ca... (
show quote)
===================
Buffalo, rental income are taxed annually. The rents paid by the tenants are reported as income by the owner, minus all operating costs that were spent that year to generate that income. What you are talking about is the long term capital gains. Long term capital gains, those assets or investments held for more than one year and sold. Net income on those assets are taxed at a lower rate.
Here are some concepts why we pay lower tax on capital gains. E.G on rental properties.
1. The income on that rental property is already paid annually, as regular income. Paying capital gains tax is double taxation. But of course we still pay capital gains, but at a lower rate. That is reasonable.
2. In order to offset inflation. E.g. If you buy a rental home for $100,000 several years ago, even if you sell that home at present at a higher price, the value of the money is much lesser than the value you paid to obtaining that property.
3. Taxing capital gains similar to regular income would restrict market liquidity on investments. It would result to economic decline.
I agree, and appreciate your reasoning.
Radiance3 wrote:
===================
Buffalo, rental income are taxed annually. The rents paid by the tenants are reported as income by the owner, minus all operating costs that were spent that year to generate that income. What you are talking about is the long term capital gains. Long term capital gains, those assets or investments held for more than one year. Net income on those are taxed at a lower rate.
Here are some concepts why we pay lower tax on capital gains. E.G on rental properties.
1. The income on that rental property is already paid annually, as regular income. Paying capital gains tax is double taxation. But of course we still pay capital gains, but at a lower rate. That is reasonable.
2. In order to offset inflation. E.g. If you buy a rental home for $100,000 several years ago, even if you sell that home at present at a higher price, the value of the money is much less than the value you paid to obtaining that property.
3. Taxing capital gains similar to regular income would restrict market liquidity on investments. It would result to economic decline.
=================== br Buffalo, rental income are ... (
show quote)
buffalo wrote:
J, that is not what I am saying. The dividends, capital GAINS, even INCOME generated from investment property is what I am saying should be taxed at the same rate as wages and other earned incomes. Understand? Yes, the money used to buy a stock or property (invest if you will) has already been taxed. I am talking about taxing the GAIN in value over and above that initial investment or the income generated, such as rental income and taxing it the same as other forms of income. Your the one that thinks everybody should pay the same flat rate, but apparently you think that income (gains) generated from investing should not be taxed at all. I am sure the 1% would completely agree with you.
J, that is not what I am saying. The dividends, ca... (
show quote)
To much risk in market investing to get taxed plus or minus 40%.
How about this, lets get the federal and state budgets down to a reasonable number and remove unions from tbe publuc sector. Its a massive conflict of interest having taxpayers services held hostage by union thugs!
vettelover wrote:
To much risk in market investing to get taxed plus or minus 40%.
How about this, lets get the federal and state budgets down to a reasonable number and remove unions from tbe publuc sector. Its a massive conflict of interest having taxpayers services held hostage by union thugs!
==============
The Labor Union in public offices are in quid-pro-quo with the democrat party. That is why the unions demand all lavish benefits from the employer, which is us the taxpayers. In return the labor union donates tens of millions of dollars to the democrat party.
There is a conflict of interest here. We are the taxpayers paying these labor unions. But the unions assault and demand so much benefits which are shared by the democrat party.
Labor unions in government sectors are liabilities. E.g. SEIU. The employees in the union are non-performing, dumb, incompetent, abusive, but no one could remove them from office. Because it was a union agreement when those union was established on the government contracts. Then these labor union bosses are paid millions of dollars annually from the dues that these employees are paying every month.
Congress must stop these government labor union. They are hindrance to optimal performance on their jobs. It is illegal and in conflict of interest. We are the people wo pay them, as they use us to allow them to fund millions of dollars to the democrat party.
JFlorio wrote:
Preaching to the quire here. Exactly why I want a flat tax. Everyone uses roads. Everyone is defended when the country is attacked. Everyone should have skin in the game. I******s are, well illegal. They need to leave.
Good Morning, J..
I support a flat tax as well.. Think it’s exacty what is needed but the IRS will never support it because they would have to reduce their size!!
Like the move towards Term limits.. I read over 75 % support it yet we can’t get it before the Senate!! Guess we know why..
lindajoy wrote:
I read over 75 % support it yet we can’t get it before the Senate!!
Because The Constituents Want To Throw Out Everyone
Else's Bums
Our Bum In Congress Is Doing Just Great !!
Yep. The IRS isn't about revenue as much as it's about power. Only time you can be guilty until proven innocent. Unless of course you are Roy Moore.
lindajoy wrote:
Good Morning, J..
I support a flat tax as well.. Think it’s exacty what is needed but the IRS will never support it because they would have to reduce their size!!
Like the move towards Term limits.. I read over 75 % support it yet we can’t get it before the Senate!! Guess we know why..
karpenter wrote:
Because The Constituents Want To Throw Out Everyone Else's Bums
Our Bum In Congress Is Doing Just Great !!
You got that right!!!!
Do you knowvit first hoes before a gang of Senators to see if it even goes to the floor??
What BS is that?? Should go before the Senate period!!!
JFlorio wrote:
Yep. The IRS isn't about revenue as much as it's about power. Only time you can be guilty until proven innocent. Unless of course you are Roy Moore.
That being the case when do Lynch and Holder get picked up???
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.