Those Darn Dems are ging to raise taxes

Under Bush-republican economics, if you derive most of your income from dividends, interest on bonds, capital gains, or estate inheritance ....you'll never pay more than a 15% effective tax rate. At most.


If you're middle class, and earn wages to make your living, your marginal tax rate will be up into the 30 percentiles. And your effective rate is likely to be much higher than 15%.


15% for wealthy investors. 30% for the rest of us schmucks.

Someone want to explain the fairness in that? ;)
 
even when purchasing equipt and materials that is now tax expempt ?

Boy will that cause more to move offshore.
Cheaper to move than expand.

So if ATT buys Bellsouth for lets say 6 bill they pay 40% of that in taxes ?
 
Last edited:
uscitizen said:
even when purchasing equipt and materials that is now tax expempt ?

Boy will that cause more to move offshore.
Cheaper to move than expand.

So if ATT buys Bellsouth for lets say 6 bill they pay 40% of that in taxes ?
Click to expand...
That wouldn't be consumption. They would be purchasing products, not companies.

They would pay it on lawyers though. Services would usually have to be included to make such a tax base strong enough to pay for itself.

Where necessary confusion would run would be selling your own vehicle privately. You would also necessarily end up with a progressive system that would exempt many people otherwise it could never be passed.
 
That was clear as mud Damo.

So corporate loopholes will still be with us and the working class will still be getting screwed percentage wise is my take on the consumption tax at this point.
 
uscitizen said:
That was clear as mud Damo.

So corporate loopholes will still be with us and the working class will still be getting screwed percentage wise is my take on the consumption tax at this point.
Click to expand...
No. But if you can't see the difference between purchasing interest in a company and purchasing a product or a service then I can't help you.

You would be able to buy stocks without having to pay consumption tax because they are not "consumption". You would pay tax on the service of your broker because you are then "consuming" a product/service.

Corporations would pay taxes on their purchases because it isn't who is buying, but what is sold that taxes are charged on.
 
Purchasing a company is purchasing all their products and services.


So companies would pay consumption tax on materials sold to them that they will use to make products to sell ?
 
uscitizen said:
Purchasing a company is purchasing all their products and services.


So companies would pay consumption tax on materials sold to them that they will use to make products to sell ?
Click to expand...
No it isn't. Purchasing telephone service from AT&T is buying their service, buying stock in the company is not consuming any of their services. Taxes were already paid in purchasing the equipment, etc. This is a wish to retax what has already been taxed.

You fail to understand the meaning of consumption and choose to believe that any money spent is to consume something. This isn't true. Hence the reason I explained the consumption difference, the broker's services would be taxed, the purchase of the stock itelf would not be as it is not consumption, but investment.

And yes, companies would purchase those products to consume and therefore would pay the tax. The only reason that they were exempt before was because the tax would be collected in income.
 
And yes, companies would purchase those products to consume and therefore would pay the tax. The only reason that they were exempt before was because the tax would be collected in income.
//

I doubt if that would be true. Ie an Iron mill paying consumption taxes on Iron ore to turn into steel.
 
uscitizen said:
And yes, companies would purchase those products to consume and therefore would pay the tax. The only reason that they were exempt before was because the tax would be collected in income.
//

I doubt if that would be true. Ie an Iron mill paying consumption taxes on Iron ore to turn into steel.
Click to expand...
It would be, the taxes that normally would be collected on income would then be collected on consumption.
 
I remain unconvinced that consumption taxes are a good thing for the working class.

I prefer flat rate income taxes. lest say 18% on every bit of income you get, no deductions.
 
"But I don't know why they just didn't set the AMT to inflation in the first place. Honestly, they were asking for it when they didn't."

For the same reason they did not set social security to be automatically adjusted by the average life expectancy when it was created.... politicians do not care about the future. They care about the here and now... THAT is what gets them re-elected.

Which is why we have seen our national debt increase every fiscal year since 1960. Even in the so called "surplus" years... we still increased the national debt.
 
"Or they could stop spending so freakin' much. I have to say, between sales taxes, "governmental fees", Federal income taxes, state income taxes and property taxes, I think we are taxed enough. Poor or rich. We all need to look at the fckers in office and start holding them accountable for wasting our money away."

Amen.
 
Cypress said:
sounds reasonable.

Between the estate tax, dividend tax cuts, capital gains tax cuts, nearly all the republican tax cuts have benefited the super wealthy. I say high time to give the middle class a break.


Personally, I think taxes should be raised on red states, to pay for their war on Iraq ;)
Click to expand...

i still dissagree with this statement... the tax cuts helped me out alot, the company i work for has tripled its profit sharing programs, they are paing for more of my helth and dental insurances. all that and i got a bigger raise then i would normaly get, witch could be for other resons too . but the profit sharing and the insurance, they would not be able to do that without the cuts that were made.... and in the end ether way wit or without the cuts, our CEO and other officers pay wouldnt have been affected.
 
"Under Bush-republican economics, if you derive most of your income from dividends, interest on bonds, capital gains, or estate inheritance ....you'll never pay more than a 15% effective tax rate. At most. "

1) Dividends... taxed as ordinary income unless they meet the criteria for Qualified dividend income... then it is 15%

2) Taxable bonds... income is taxed at ordinary income tax brackets up to 28%

3) Muni bonds... city/state/non-profits can be federal tax exempt (state as well if your state allows and you live in the state the bond was issued). For profit muni bonds are subject to the AMT.

4) Capital gains... short term are taxed as ordinary income up to 28%. Long term gains at 15%.

5) Inheritance taxes... same rules apply, but it is generally the wealthy that pay estate taxes (although the minimums were never truly adjusted for inflation, so now more small business owners/farmers/land owners are getting hit with it.) and if you think that is only 15%, then you are nuts. They get hammered.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top