It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Liberals, You just don't get it!

page: 6
10
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 22 2018 @ 10:52 AM
link   

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: MRinder
a reply to: SepticScot

How is it missing the point? How should we look at taxation as a whole? How are we not looking at taxation as a whole?


Because the argument being made was that income tax doesn't effect the wealthy as most of their actual money comes capital gains. Hence taxation as a whole needs to be considered.


In other words, you advocate for wealth confiscation...


Read my post above.




posted on Sep, 22 2018 @ 10:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: MRinder
a reply to: Edumakated

Also people like Bezos, Gates, Buffet could fund their lifestyles through loans using their stock as collateral. Even a 10pct interest rate would be far cheaper than what they would pay in tax. Of course, they wouldn't be charged anything near 10pct.


Loans just defer tax not avoid it.

Great answer.



posted on Sep, 22 2018 @ 10:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: Edumakated

Personally I would consider the idiots to be people who can't have a discussion about tax policy without resorting to personal insults...

I understand the difference between income and wealth perfectly well. Dividends and interest on cash holdings are also income as well and can be taxed so not sure the point of your example?

It's perfectly possible to set tax policy to pay for greater social provision or reduce inequality. There are large parts of the developed world that do just that. The ones arguing against actual reality are those saying it's not possible.


Your previous post indicates otherwise if you are questioning how Bezo's funds his lifestyle.

You can't reduce inequality as we are not all equal. Never have been. If anything, there is less inequality now than ever before as people are not constrained to classes by their birth. You can go from ashy to classy regardless of your family background if you have a talent, luck, hustle, or smarts. There are not rigid caste systems keeping people stuck in lower classes.

The western world is so rich that even our "poor" are part of the global 1%. The standard of living of the poor in the US exceeds the mega wealthy a generation ago. 80% of US homes have air conditions. 99.9% of homes have refrigeration. 99.9% clean drinking water. Public schools. Clothing. Cars. TVs. Cell Phones. Microwaves.

You won't see kids walking around even in the poorest communities with distended bellies and naked living in a corrugated hut.

You cannot just tax everyone to solve all the world's problems. Billionaires are billionaires because they have created Trillions in wealth. Amazon employs hundreds of thousands of people. We haven't even gotten into all the millions created by Amazon. Grandma's pension is doing well because of Amazon. People's 401ks. The local economies. The companies that have Amazon as a client - lawyers, advertisers, manufacturers, construction, etc. Why do you think so many cities are bending over backward to get their new headquarters?


Because lifestyle is funded by income not wealth. You can have a billion dollars in shares but unless turn some of that into income you have nothing to live on.

Your claim of less inequality is simply untrue as both wealth and income inequality are growing and gave been for years. Of course people are still constrained by the class of their birth. Opportunity in life is massively tilted in favour of those born to wealth.

Neither I nor anyone I have read on here are arguing for complelte economic equality. What is being argued for is a fairer distribution of the wealth created.




Lifestyle is NOT funded by income for the truly wealthy. This is why they don't give a sh*t about liberal tax policy. People who are sitting on hundreds of millions and billions do not need "income" to do anything. This is why most of these guys don't even bother to pay themselves as they don't need to.

Again, if you have $100 million that has already been taxed at cap gains sitting in the bank, you can report ZERO income and still live like a king. The money has ALREADY BEEN TAXED. You don't have to work a day in your life even again. This is WEALTH, not income. You simply draw down what you need tax free. Writing a check to yourself.

Income is some schlub who is a surgeon or attorney making say $1 million/yr. Yeah, he is making good bank, but he is getting raped 40-50% of his income every year. He may only have a million or two saved in cash. HE HAS TO WORK. These are the people getting screwed by tax policy. If he loses his job or can't work, he will soon go broke.


You have to look at taxation as whole. Saying that income tax won't raise enough because much of wealth is generated by capital gains is fairly obviously missing the point.



When you look at the income tax as a whole, there simply isn't enough money by taxing the uber rich on income. THIS IS THE POINT YOU KEEP MISSING. You have to tax the middle class and upper classes.

This is why anytime politicians talk about taxing the rich, if you read how they define "rich" it is people making a measly $250k/yr. That is literally like two high school principals in my community. The working upper middle class gets absolutely raped by tax policy, not the truly wealthy.

People advocating for taxing wealth are basically saying confiscate someone's assets.


Which is why capital gains is important.

I don't agree with taxation on existing wealth as that us effectively moving the goal posts retrospectively.



Technically, capital gains is double taxation. Now you can argue the cap gains rate should be higher, but the reason it is lower is that govt recognizes it is double taxation and they don't want to discourage people from investing post-tax funds.



posted on Sep, 22 2018 @ 10:56 AM
link   
a reply to: MRinder

Not everyone can or will start a successful business, that is obviously impossible. Intelligence is also only one , fairly small part, of being successful.

You also missed the part where I said I wasn't arguing for wealth equality.

If you are actually going to adress anything I have actually posted please let me know.



posted on Sep, 22 2018 @ 10:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Edumakated

I would argue it's not double taxation as it's only taxed on the value being converted to money.

It's just another form of income tax.



posted on Sep, 22 2018 @ 11:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: MRinder

Not everyone can or will start a successful business, that is obviously impossible. Intelligence is also only one , fairly small part, of being successful.

You also missed the part where I said I wasn't arguing for wealth equality.

If you are actually going to adress anything I have actually posted please let me know.


I apologise if I haven't addressed something. What would you like me to address in particular.. it can be a list and not just limited to one question or concern.



posted on Sep, 22 2018 @ 11:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: MRinder

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: MRinder

Not everyone can or will start a successful business, that is obviously impossible. Intelligence is also only one , fairly small part, of being successful.

You also missed the part where I said I wasn't arguing for wealth equality.

If you are actually going to adress anything I have actually posted please let me know.


I apologise if I haven't addressed something. What would you like me to address in particular.. it can be a list and not just limited to one question or concern.


Reply to any point you want. Just make it a point I have actually made.



posted on Sep, 22 2018 @ 11:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot

originally posted by: MRinder

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: MRinder

Not everyone can or will start a successful business, that is obviously impossible. Intelligence is also only one , fairly small part, of being successful.

You also missed the part where I said I wasn't arguing for wealth equality.

If you are actually going to adress anything I have actually posted please let me know.


I apologise if I haven't addressed something. What would you like me to address in particular.. it can be a list and not just limited to one question or concern.


Reply to any point you want. Just make it a point I have actually made.


I have replied to many of your posts. I am not going to play a mind reading game of trying to find what it is you think I am missing. If you would like to ask specific questions feel free. I will make a point to address them.



posted on Sep, 22 2018 @ 01:41 PM
link   
a reply to: MRinder




I am pretty sure you Australians would be speaking Chinese in pretty short order. If it wasn't the United States who would be able to defend you from the inevitable Chinese invasion?


Yeah well JFK was murdered, Johnston ramped up Vietnam and Communism still prevailed. Billions wasted.

But the Domino Effect was debunked.

If you care to look China is invading 9/10's of the planet with Capital investment and loans.

How about you answer my rebuttal of your OP on the points i mentioned

I'll keep it simple - what does this even mean in plain English?


So if they each sold 100 million in stock a year you would get another $45 million. But they could control that by selling less stock.



posted on Sep, 22 2018 @ 01:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: ScepticScot
a reply to: Edumakated

I would argue it's not double taxation as it's only taxed on the value being converted to money.

It's just another form of income tax.





It is double taxation because the money being taxed has already been taxed previously.

You get taxed on your income. You saved say $100/month from each paycheck after you've already paid taxes on your gross wages. You then RISK that money by investing it only to have the government tax your gains again.

The issue is that money being invested is at risk. You could lose it all. Government only allows you to write off like $3,000 even if you lost say $100,000. So to keep people motivated to invest which helps everyone, government lowers capital gains to make up for the double taxation and the risk of loss.



posted on Sep, 22 2018 @ 01:46 PM
link   
a reply to: MRinder




This idiot just happens to be named Uncle Sam.


And you propagate that mindset by calling him your benevolent "Uncle"



posted on Sep, 22 2018 @ 01:47 PM
link   
a reply to: TheConstruKctionofLight

If you look back to the previous page, I answered that in detail.



posted on Sep, 22 2018 @ 01:53 PM
link   
a reply to: MteWamp




, they were called "slaves". Big war. Bunch of dead folks. You probably read about it.


Well you obviously haven't read enough about as your condescending rhetoric claims.

It was a Bankers war, the "slaves" excuse was to garner moral indignation for the easily led. Just like the Vietnam War, the War on Terror, the War on Drugs......blah blah

hint: google "the Civil war was a bankers war"



posted on Sep, 22 2018 @ 02:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Jilara




Taxes are the price we pay for civilization.


Civilization means when we left hunter gatherer status and dwelt in towns and.




I rather like police


No, the modern police force were originally created in London to protect the wealthy. Couldn't have another storming of the Bastille moment. People were starving and they would be sent to Australia as slaves for stealing a loaf of bread.

Income Taxes were a creation of the Bankers to pay for the US involvement in WW1

Income Tax established in the US....Wiki


State and federal inheritance taxes began after 1900, while the states (but not the federal government) began collecting sales taxes in the 1930s. The United States imposed income taxes briefly during the Civil War and the 1890s. In 1913, the 16th Amendment was ratified, permanently legalizing an income tax.


Surprise surprise

WW1 begins....Wiki


Britain, France, Ireland and Russia were part of an alliance called the Triple Entente, while Germany aligned itself with Austria-Hungary – known as the Central Powers. The assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo on 28th June 1914, it triggered a chain of events that resulted in World War 1.



posted on Sep, 22 2018 @ 02:24 PM
link   
a reply to: MteWamp

Go back and read your own posts. Discussing matters with you often results in you not addressing the facts but using ridicule.

Do you honestly live in a world where you believe that a person with a net worth of say 10 million would have the same power of influence over Politicians as a person worth even 1 Billion, let alone 100 billion.

Wiki


Apple avoids paying taxes

Apple currently holds about $252 billion in profits offshore, where it can avoid paying U.S. taxes. That's over 90% of the company's total cash on hand. This profit is subject to the corporate income tax as soon as it's “repatriated” back to the U.S.


And they use Chinese slave labour so you can get an expensive Iphone to play -



posted on Sep, 22 2018 @ 02:26 PM
link   
a reply to: ScepticScot




I think you would get owned in any schoolyard.


hahaha

Pwn in geek speech




posted on Sep, 22 2018 @ 02:42 PM
link   
a reply to: MteWamp

more derailing clap trap.

What next?

Heres a hint

A Bell
J L Baird
J Watt

Without these you wouldn't be typing on the net or have a TV or the industrial revolution.

You'd still be using Indian smoke signal's between your mates in the South signaling the results of your game and drinking warm beer.

Look it up, Google is kind of a thing, we Aussies like to help out you Yanks, or Rebels if you prefer. We had your back in Afghanistan, Iraq, Vietnam.



posted on Sep, 22 2018 @ 02:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: MRinder

Ah, so more "trickle down economics"?

Why do those trickles-down always smell like pee?



posted on Sep, 22 2018 @ 02:54 PM
link   
a reply to: ScepticScot

I dont get that either - they cant invent in the great USA protective gear that doesn't make them look unbalanced?


Even there own people are complaning


www.espn.com.au...


And then there are the uniforms.

Pro Bowl uniforms have become such a joke -- or maybe the punchline to a joke -- that it almost feels like the NFL must have some sort of rule requiring that the game be played in something akin to clown costumes.

Why are Pro Bowl uniforms so bad? For one thing, the Pro Bowl is a one-and-done event, and that doesn't lend itself to a design filled with subtlety, nuance or grace. The thinking has probably been, "People are only going to be seeing this uniform for a few hours and then that's it, so we need to make a strong impression!" Also, it's often been hard to get fans to pay attention to the Pro Bowl, so eye-catching uniforms are one way to get people's attention, even if the designs are often regrettable.



posted on Sep, 22 2018 @ 03:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Ahabstar




But history has shown time and time again that when you have too many peasants and the lords cannot feed them, then wars must happen to thin the herd a bit and gain some resources as booty. What should really be disturbing is that America doesn’t really go to war for gains such much as it seems to war just for fun. Maybe slight population control. But usually under the guise of putting uppity countries in their place for the most part.




gain some resources as booty


Way to ignore the billions spent in fighting the wars paid for by the taxpayer and the billions given to the US companies rebuilding the destruction.

Whats disturbing about your post, if I may, is that you forgot to mention "spreading democracy". or have the people woken up to that?




Flimsy because socialism only works until the money runs out and/or people get tired of sacrificing for others


Funny how LLC's namely the Banks were not too proud to beg the US taxpayer to bail them out?

But that wasn't Socialism of course not - new term invented for Business - TOO BIG TO FAIL. LOL

They were of course great pillars of society lending money for productive purposes like betting against each other instead of lending to employment generating business.

Limited Liability LOL -

In a Dickens Oliver Twist voice "Please American taxpayer I'm hungry, may I have some more"

But when the people get too unruly again there is now the Prison Industrial Complex.




en.wikipedia.org...–industrial_complex




top topics



 
10
<< 3  4  5    7 >>

log in

join