quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: UniqueRaven

He made quite a bit more than 100K.  He's in a different tax bracket.  i was just using the 100k number as an example.  Perhaps that's what's confusing people.

So you lied and made up figures and now you wonder why people are confused at your lies???

quote:

ORIGINAL: eyesopened

Why shouldn't an individual get paid for their work?  There's nothing wrong with earning a billion dollars.  Do you think everyone should have a cap on what they can earn?  Everywhere in the world or just people in the United States? 

Let's say someone invents a device that plays MP3's in a cute little package and come up with a catchy name and fabulous marketing and advertising.  Should that person only be able to earn X per year on that device no matter how many were sold?  Should such devices be limited to how many can be sold so that no one can make too much money on their invention? 

The story wasn't about how much money one makes but how that income is treated and the tax liabilities for those earnings.  Personally I'm do not care that some earnings are treated as capital gains and a lesser tax is paid.  My problem with the US tax code is the number of loopholes that allow people or corporations to earn a billions of dollars and pay no tax at all.  ExxonMobile paid no tax to the US at all in 2009. 

http://abcnews.go.com/Business/Tax/ge-exxon-paid-us-income-taxes-09/story?id=10300167
The most egregious example is General Electric. Last year the conglomerate generated $10.3 billion in pretax income, but ended up owing nothing to Uncle Sam. In fact, it recorded a tax benefit of $1.1 billion.
Avoiding taxes is nothing new for General Electric. In 2008 its effective tax rate was 5.3%; in 2007 it was 15%. The marginal U.S. corporate rate is 35%.
 
Wall Street is the villian we love to hate.  But rather than pick on what is capital gains and what is income, we should be looking at closing the loopholes that allow corporations to pay no tax at all.

quote:

ORIGINAL: UniqueRaven

My ex was a Wall Street Banker (he's a consultant now).

He paid 62% of his income in Federal, State, and City taxes - and that was after any "loopholes" people think are so unfair.

Imagine earning $100,000 and only taking home $38,000 of it.  How fair is that to you? 

His income went to pay for schools, hospitals, retirement homes, garbage collection, city services, etc. - all for people who often had very little, or even nothing.

i'm not one for debate.  Just saying that the perception that those that earn a high income are somehow "unfair" to those that don't isn't valid.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Thats not the confusion. Even a higher tax bracket wont add up that kind of liability. 62%? on only taxes???

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sanity


In Brianistan the rich can never pay enough. They will be taxed to the point that everyone is dirt poor, at which point everyone is finally equal.

Imagine.

quote:

ORIGINAL: UniqueRaven

My ex was a Wall Street Banker (he's a consultant now).

He paid 62% of his income in Federal, State, and City taxes - and that was after any "loopholes" people think are so unfair.

Imagine earning $100,000 and only taking home $38,000 of it.  How fair is that to you? 

His income went to pay for schools, hospitals, retirement homes, garbage collection, city services, etc. - all for people who often had very little, or even nothing.

i'm not one for debate.  Just saying that the perception that those that earn a high income are somehow "unfair" to those that don't isn't valid.

quote:

ORIGINAL: eyesopened

quote:

ORIGINAL: domiguy
Sanity, I think the President of Brianistan was just mentioning that everyone should pay their fair share.

I would like my income to be treated as a capital gain. I would like to know why they have their income treated as a capital gain?

I think the President of Branistan said

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brain
Call me old fashioned but I just think it's wrong that a single hedge fund manager earns a billion dollars, when a billion dollars would pay the salaries of about 20,000 teachers.

Robert Reich was saying that everyone should pay their fair share.  My issue is that there is a difference between tax liability and what after creative accounting one actually pays.  If one's tax liability is 15% and they pay 15% that makes me happier than one whose liability is 35% and they pay 5% or nothing at all. 

But Brain said he thinks it's wrong that someone earns a billion dollars.

quote:

ORIGINAL: cuckoldmepls

Why don't we make it fair for single people too, and not penalize them for not having dependents. When people decide to raise a family, that's their choice. Why should they get a break to make up for the cost of their dependents. That's another form of subsidizing, which is what socialism is all about. making others pay for their lifestyle or standard of living.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: cuckoldmepls

Why don't we make it fair for single people too, and not penalize them for not having dependents. When people decide to raise a family, that's their choice. Why should they get a break to make up for the cost of their dependents. That's another form of subsidizing, which is what socialism is all about. making others pay for their lifestyle or standard of living.

Are you saying that you want to cut the "entitlements" of the rich???

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brain
These guys don't do anything that provides value to society. At least in the example you gave me somebody made something and people had the choice to buy it or not. They make way too much money for doing nothing.

I think everybody needs to pay their fair share. There needs to be a law to a minimum amount no matter how many holes there are.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: eyesopened

Why shouldn't an individual get paid for their work?  There's nothing wrong with earning a billion dollars.  Do you think everyone should have a cap on what they can earn?  Everywhere in the world or just people in the United States? 

Let's say someone invents a device that plays MP3's in a cute little package and come up with a catchy name and fabulous marketing and advertising.  Should that person only be able to earn X per year on that device no matter how many were sold?  Should such devices be limited to how many can be sold so that no one can make too much money on their invention? 

The story wasn't about how much money one makes but how that income is treated and the tax liabilities for those earnings.  Personally I'm do not care that some earnings are treated as capital gains and a lesser tax is paid.  My problem with the US tax code is the number of loopholes that allow people or corporations to earn a billions of dollars and pay no tax at all.  ExxonMobile paid no tax to the US at all in 2009. 

Wall Street is the villian we love to hate.  But rather than pick on what is capital gains and what is income, we should be looking at closing the loopholes that allow corporations to pay no tax at all.

Tell you what, I'll hire you to run my office and you'll do a great bang up job, deeply ensconced in the American dream bust'n you butt 60-70 hours week no family life, no time for friends and I'll pay you $100,000/yr.

Meanwhile the work you are doing for me, managing my $5 billion fund, you do the work. I'll be on the golf course, or on the islands or finding some BDSM orgie of coeds. I'll spend all kinds of time after I sleep in, with family and friends

But after your splendid work and all of that income you pay 35%-40% including state, earn $100,000 take home $60,000 or about $5,000 a month. My fund made 20% so I made $1 Billion in capital gains (carried interest in this case) and because of all of that risk [sic]. I pay 15%. Isn't capitalism fun ?

Oh and for some cherry and chocolate on top, if me and my other 15 percenters blow it all out our ass and we are just too big to fail, your eyes will really be open...all day because govt. will force you to feel our pain and take that second job to make sure I remain...a billionaire.

Thanx babe. Thanx for doing all of the work, paying taxes at more than twice my rate and bailing me out when the world finds out I really am greedy capitalist scum...and practically celebrate it.

The difference in the top rate in 1040 income tax (35%)  VS ONE year old long term [sic] capital gains or carried interest, 15% is immoral...prima facie and is most revealing about western economic values...a very sad one.

quote:

ORIGINAL: eyesopened

But if I agree to work for $100k then that's what I agree to.  It's my choice.  And you missed my point. 

Capital gains works in the favor of the folks like me who earn considerably less than $100k.  It means I get to keep more of the money I earned in the equity of my home when I sell it. 

I never claimed to be smart.  I'm not.  But some people ARE smart enough to take their $100k and move that money around so that they end up paying a whole lot less than the 35%.  My point is... until we change the tax codes so that people pay the same percentage, then there are going to be people who pay little or no tax at all.  The folks who end up paying the higher percentage of their earnings are ususally not the folks at the 35% bracket, that tends to be the people at the lower end of the 1040.  I don't earn enough to file a long form.  I pay my full liability.  See?  Told you I'm not smart.

My point was this.... would it be better for someone to owe at a rate of 15% and actually pay that 15%  or better to be in the 35% bracket and pay 5% after finding the loopholes, credits and deductions.

I would love to see a flat tax.  Most people on this message board would like that to be a consumer tax but I personally think an earnings tax would be better.  A flat percentage.  And do away with property tax altogether. 

I understand your point and your anger but it's not immoral to earn a billion dollars.  It's not immoral to earn that billion without actually lifting a finger.  It is immoral that I have to pay income tax on a $25 gift card I got from my boss for doing a good job and I can't call it capital gains.   I think this is the point that everyone is in agreement of.

quote:

ORIGINAL: eyesopened


Capital gains works in the favor of the folks like me who earn considerably less than $100k.  It means I get to keep more of the money I earned in the equity of my home when I sell it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: UniqueRaven

And i know you guys just love to debate.  So i really have nothing else to add.  But thank you and have fun with the ongoing discussion.  [;)]