kelpdiver 2 #76 October 12, 2011 Quote Who cares HOW MUCH, the fact is that you DO benefit, as do the millionaires who manage to weasel out of paying any federal income tax. since you're not really responding in general, let's see if we can identify the weasels. How can they be weaseling out of income tax if they didn't make any income? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #77 October 12, 2011 QuoteQuote Who cares HOW MUCH, the fact is that you DO benefit, as do the millionaires who manage to weasel out of paying any federal income tax. since you're not really responding in general, And you are no longer disputing what you do, just haggling over price, Quote let's see if we can identify the weasels. How can they be weaseling out of income tax if they didn't make any income? You can be very rich, make actual income, and still not pay any income tax.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Austintxflight 0 #78 October 12, 2011 QuoteQuoteQuote You can be very rich, make actual income, and still not pay any income tax. This is true, but the end up paying capital gains taxes, or at least can incur them, but often times especially with the past few years, can carry over losses, depreciation to offset gains from current year and minimize or even eliminate tax payments for a current year. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Austintxflight 0 #79 October 12, 2011 An interesting book is called "This time is different 8 centuries of financial folly" by ken rogoff. He looks at data from financial crisis in the past to see patterns and effects. In terms of banking crisis, one of the most common effects from recent past is 5-7 years of decline in employment, and nearly a doubling of national debt and increases in defaults by nations which is almost exactly what is happening now. There are some larger patterns that are not going to be solved with tax policy, and historically have not either. Should wealthy pay more taxes, of course, the carry over policy should be eliminated so hedge fund mangers pay taxes at income tax rates, not capital gains rates. Social security taxes should not be capped at 108k it should be for all of your income. But at the end of the day these policies are not going to turn around and end the downturn in the economy over the next few years, eliminate the debt and get spending back to the point it was 10 years ago. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Southern_Man 0 #80 October 12, 2011 QuoteQuote Why does only income tax count as skin in the game? People who don't pay income tax commonly pay Social Security and Medicare taxes, as well as a variety of federal taxes on items like gas. Honestly just about everybody pays some sort of federal tax, even if indirectly. Those taxes are returned in the form of benefits. It seems that everyone comes out ahead on the MC side (until it breaks) and the lower income rungs come out well ahead on SS. While politicians talk about the Social Security and Medicare as discrete pots, they really are not. There is just one big pot of money that goes into the government, and all the spending comes out of that (and borrowing, way, way too much borrowing). Money is fungible and the poor also pay federal taxes. Also, I'd be hesitant about the poor or lower income folks generally coming out better than wealthier folks. The benefit tables are sort of tilted in their direction which leads many people to think they come out ahead. Lifespan, however, is significantly correlated with wealth and in terms of lifetime benefits the better off actually collect more (as a percentage of what was put in). This has been the subject of a lot of academic papers and, for example, African American males despite earning lower average wages, do particularly poorly in terms of receiving those valueable benefits because they have a high mortality rate."What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 Next Page 4 of 4 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
Austintxflight 0 #79 October 12, 2011 An interesting book is called "This time is different 8 centuries of financial folly" by ken rogoff. He looks at data from financial crisis in the past to see patterns and effects. In terms of banking crisis, one of the most common effects from recent past is 5-7 years of decline in employment, and nearly a doubling of national debt and increases in defaults by nations which is almost exactly what is happening now. There are some larger patterns that are not going to be solved with tax policy, and historically have not either. Should wealthy pay more taxes, of course, the carry over policy should be eliminated so hedge fund mangers pay taxes at income tax rates, not capital gains rates. Social security taxes should not be capped at 108k it should be for all of your income. But at the end of the day these policies are not going to turn around and end the downturn in the economy over the next few years, eliminate the debt and get spending back to the point it was 10 years ago. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Southern_Man 0 #80 October 12, 2011 QuoteQuote Why does only income tax count as skin in the game? People who don't pay income tax commonly pay Social Security and Medicare taxes, as well as a variety of federal taxes on items like gas. Honestly just about everybody pays some sort of federal tax, even if indirectly. Those taxes are returned in the form of benefits. It seems that everyone comes out ahead on the MC side (until it breaks) and the lower income rungs come out well ahead on SS. While politicians talk about the Social Security and Medicare as discrete pots, they really are not. There is just one big pot of money that goes into the government, and all the spending comes out of that (and borrowing, way, way too much borrowing). Money is fungible and the poor also pay federal taxes. Also, I'd be hesitant about the poor or lower income folks generally coming out better than wealthier folks. The benefit tables are sort of tilted in their direction which leads many people to think they come out ahead. Lifespan, however, is significantly correlated with wealth and in terms of lifetime benefits the better off actually collect more (as a percentage of what was put in). This has been the subject of a lot of academic papers and, for example, African American males despite earning lower average wages, do particularly poorly in terms of receiving those valueable benefits because they have a high mortality rate."What if there were no hypothetical questions?" Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
