2016 Presidential Primaries [ SUPER TUESDAY | 3-1-'16]

sturg33 said:
So what would that look like?

And you want to raise the capital gains tax? Even though that always leads to reduced revenues?
Click to expand...

I want to create a system that basically is net capital gains.

If you invest a 1000, and sell 1000 at the same value you have a net gain of 0. If you invest 2000 and sell at 4000 you have a net gain of 2000. You're taxed on the gain and only the gain. So say you cash in a million bucks on the market but also invest a million, you're still covered.

I would also consider including a tax penalty if you pull money out of a company really fast to try to stop the people who just manipulate the market to make money. Most likely would fail in doing so, but it should hopefulyl help. Like say include a tax penalty on gains if you sell within a year of investing or something like that.

Anyway that's something I haven't really thought out. But what I'd do is the first part mixed in with a progressive tax system. If you make 1000 or less in a year it's like 2% 10000 or less 5% 100000 or less 10% 1000000 or less 14.5% (current rate IIRC) and over 1,000,000 20%

My goal with my plan FWIW is not to necessarily increase tax revenue, but to keep money in the market so companies can take that money and keep growing their business.

My real dream would be to eliminate short trading, all investments are long term investments, 5+ years, but that won't happen.
 
zitothebrave said:
I want to create a system that basically is net capital gains.

If you invest a 1000, and sell 1000 at the same value you have a net gain of 0. If you invest 2000 and sell at 4000 you have a net gain of 2000. You're taxed on the gain and only the gain. So say you cash in a million bucks on the market but also invest a million, you're still covered.

I would also consider including a tax penalty if you pull money out of a company really fast to try to stop the people who just manipulate the market to make money. Most likely would fail in doing so, but it should hopefulyl help. Like say include a tax penalty on gains if you sell within a year of investing or something like that.

Anyway that's something I haven't really thought out. But what I'd do is the first part mixed in with a progressive tax system. If you make 1000 or less in a year it's like 2% 10000 or less 5% 100000 or less 10% 1000000 or less 14.5% (current rate IIRC) and over 1,000,000 20%

My goal with my plan FWIW is not to necessarily increase tax revenue, but to keep money in the market so companies can take that money and keep growing their business.

My real dream would be to eliminate short trading, all investments are long term investments, 5+ years, but that won't happen.
Click to expand...

Isn't that what already exists? You're only taxed on gains - not total investments. Additionally, you are taxed a higher percentage if you hold the equity less than a year (short term gains) - they are taxed at your normal income tax bracket - so like 25-35%, whereas long term gains (over a year) are taxed at 15%.

I totally disagree about a progressive system... it's the opposite of fairness.
 
sturg33 said:
I think the bigger is problem is nobody understands WHY there's income inequality.
Click to expand...

well, Rand says it's cause others don't work hard enough

Sen. Rand Paul (Ky.) said Sunday that income inequality is the result of some Americans working harder than others, rather than economic policies.
Click to expand...
 
sturg33 said:
Isn't that what already exists? You're only taxed on gains - not total investments. Additionally, you are taxed a higher percentage if you hold the equity less than a year (short term gains) - they are taxed at your normal income tax bracket - so like 25-35%, whereas long term gains (over a year) are taxed at 15%.

I totally disagree about a progressive system... it's the opposite of fairness.
Click to expand...

Life isn't fair. Fare is what you pay to ride the bus
 
sturg33 said:
it's the opposite of fairness.
Click to expand...

yes, i will listen to the people that ruin the world economy and then get bailed out and no one was arrested for complain about fairness

hold on, no, i don't give a **** if it's fair. go find a different country. see ya later. we will find someone that will enjoy the 15 million a year instead of 20 or more million and be better off in the end (these numbers were pulled from thin air. the point is that every single rich person can be replaced. if they want to play here, they have to pay and they are making a **** ton either way)
 
goldfly said:
yes, i will listen to the people that ruin the world economy and then get bailed out and no one was arrested for complain about fairness

hold on, no, i don't give a **** if it's fair. go find a different country. see ya later. we will find someone that will enjoy the 15 million a year instead of 20 or more million and be better off in the end (these numbers were pulled from thin air. the point is that every single rich person can be replaced. if they want to play here, they have to pay and they are making a **** ton either way)
Click to expand...

We get it. You want everyone to make the same amount, no matter the contribution.

What is your suggestion? Cap pay at $10M? Then do what the proceeds? distribute it equally among the employees?

My suggestion would be for the government and and the fed to stop supporting fiat currency and fractional reserve banking... but that isn't as sexy as "THE CEOS MAKE TOO MUCH MONEY!!!!"
 
sturg33 said:
We get it. You want everyone to make the same amount, no matter the contribution.

What is your suggestion? Cap pay at $10M? Then do what the proceeds? distribute it equally among the employees?

My suggestion would be for the government and and the fed to stop supporting fiat currency and fractional reserve banking... but that isn't as sexy as "THE CEOS MAKE TOO MUCH MONEY!!!!"
Click to expand...

that is in no way what i said

never said pay should be capped. no

are you saying ceo's etc aren't making too much money when compared to others? that pay distribution is a major problem in this country.
 
sturg33 said:
Well, Rand probably doesn't quite understand it either. But I'm still waiting on whether or not you're up for capping pay. You never answer
Click to expand...

no, i don't think it should be capped.

the line " i never answer" isn't based in facts but have fun with that line
 
goldfly said:
that is in no way what i said

never said pay should be capped. no

are you saying ceo's etc aren't making too much money when compared to others? that pay distribution is a major problem in this country.
Click to expand...

I think certainly some CEOs make too much money - the ones who aren't providing amazing value to their companies. But CEOs are very important to companies and make decisions that result in many millions or billions of dollars - good or bad. So who am I to say they are making too much money? Do baseball players make too much? Actors? Singers? The easy answer is "yes" but that is what the market is paying and my guess is they bring in more money then they are being paid. The bad CEO's eventually get fired, and the good ones get more money. What's the issue there?

Do I think pay distribution is a major problem? Not really. I'd like more money in the hands of more individuals but the easiest way to do that is to cut taxes - which nobody seems to want to do. I do understand though that the Federal Reserve has printed about $5 trillion dollars over the last 7 years... and that money goes to the banks - and then gets distributed to smarter/wealthier individuals who then invest that money and grow their wealth. I don't blame the rich people for getting richer, I blame the system in place that allows it. As far as I know, Bernie hasn't addressed the Fed much if at all, so i think he fails to grasp the issue.
 
sturg33 said:
I think certainly some CEOs make too much money - the ones who aren't providing amazing value to their companies. But CEOs are very important to companies and make decisions that result in many millions or billions of dollars - good or bad. So who am I to say they are making too much money? Do baseball players make too much? Actors? Singers? The easy answer is "yes" but that is what the market is paying and my guess is they bring in more money then they are being paid. The bad CEO's eventually get fired, and the good ones get more money. What's the issue there?

Do I think pay distribution is a major problem? Not really. I'd like more money in the hands of more individuals but the easiest way to do that is to cut taxes - which nobody seems to want to do. I do understand though that the Federal Reserve has printed about $5 trillion dollars over the last 7 years... and that money goes to the banks - and then gets distributed to smarter/wealthier individuals who then invest that money and grow their wealth. I don't blame the rich people for getting richer, I blame the system in place that allows it. As far as I know, Bernie hasn't addressed the Fed much if at all, so i think he fails to grasp the issue.
Click to expand...

i don't think baseball players, actors and singers are over paid. i would argue they are underpaid for their market

the bad ceo's get more money after they are fired too.

always cut more taxes :facepalm:
 
goldfly said:
i don't think baseball players, actors and singers are over paid. i would argue they are underpaid for their market

the bad ceo's get more money after they are fired too.

always cut more taxes :facepalm:
Click to expand...

So you're mad that middle class workers don't have more money, yet you're fine with the government taking a huge sum of all of their paychecks?

I was laughing the other day when yeezus said corporations are robbing their employees. I found that hilarious when the corporation is the one paying the employee, and the government is the one who is physically taking money out of their pocket.

Yet you're anger is at the corporation.
 
sturg33 said:
Ok... I'm not sure you're answering anything.

Also - I asked specifics on what your "invent businesses to pay employees more" plan would look like
Click to expand...

I never said that. I said incentivize businesses to invest in their work force. Which basically owuld involve the only possible tax credits going to companies who pay employees well and hire a good number of employees. As far as the deets,that I'm not 100% sure of. I'd guess something involving percentage of employees employed in US and their median income.
 
sturg33 said:
So you're mad that middle class workers don't have more money, yet you're fine with the government taking a huge sum of all of their paychecks?

I was laughing the other day when yeezus said corporations are robbing their employees. I found that hilarious when the corporation is the one paying the employee, and the government is the one who is physically taking money out of their pocket.

Yet you're anger is at the corporation.
Click to expand...

"Taxes are the price we pay for a civilized society." - Oliver Wendell Holmes
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top