patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,249,449 comments by 14,901 users - DemocratsAreTotallyFucked online now
Republicans are delusional about US spending and deficits
invite response
2013 Oct 16, 1:22am 56,558 views 201 comments
« First « Previous Comments 32 - 71 of 201 Next » Last » Search these comments
Homeboy
2013 Oct 17, 3:50pm
the rich like everyone else earned their income once.. and it was taxed once.. the residual after
taxes are savings which can be reinvested back into purchases of newer assets.
therefore replacement of Machinery and other Assets if sold may leave a gain or loss..
so why not encourage early disposal / sale and purchases of newer modern assets
without triggering higher taxes.. therefore business (the rich!) provide demand from
factories and thus higher employment of labor.
DO YOU UNDERSTAND THIS ?
Understand? It's complete gibberish. The problem is that the elite in the financial sector earn their money through investment, not payroll. What part of that don't you understand? When you say they "earned their income once and it was taxed once", that has nothing to do with anything. Yes, capital gains are taxed once, and that one time they are taxed, it is at a LOWER rate than that person would pay on employment income. Therefore, Richie Rich, who makes his money through complex investment schemes that the working class doesn't even understand, pays a lower tax rate than Joe Middle Class, who works a 9-5 job. This is not right, and this is what's killing our economy. Your trickle down nonsense was tried and it FAILED. Trickle down doesn't work. Period.
DO YOU UNDERSTAND THIS?
Homeboy
2013 Oct 17, 4:03pm
Even the farmer, doctor, small business owner understand the tax code better since they are encouraged to purchase new capital equipment from factories which maximizes production and employment.
I AM a small business owner. The majority of my income is not derived from capital gains. What you are saying is complete bullshit.
80% of the population derives virtually no benefit from lower capital gains taxes.
I AM a small business owner. The majority of my income is not derived from capital gains. What you are saying is complete bullshit.
you misunderstand the tax laws here.. its not for for the benefit of 1% but 100% of the people.
26 USC § 1221 - Capital asset defined26 USC § 1221 - Capital asset defined
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/1221
As a small business owner you already paid TAX for your past net earnings,
Retained Earnings can be reinvested in non-inventory asset purchases..
capital equipment.. and what else to motivate new capital orders..hire more workers..
Maybe you want to sell that business or buy a new one.. be it Corporate
or Partnership.. that too is also based on valuations of your tax basis..
Some is ordinary income and some at lower capital gains from original capital
contributed. Lower capital gains, are created to incentive investments into
business/industries.. if you suffer a loss, there are deductions to provide
relief...
yep... the 1% got taxed lower rate, and here you are doing this fucking internet thing..
cause some rich jackass put his after tax money at risk..... Aint Life Grand !
You think he should of bought 1,000,000 lotto tickets instead ?
If your a small business owner, then your Accountant (CPA) will spell it out once again.
If your some Occupier.. sorry, your a lost cause...
80% of the population derives virtually no benefit from lower capital gains taxes.
too busy chasing housing bubbles.. they never save a single dime to call their own.
had 99 % said no to higher housing prices and simply walked away from the commissioned
realtors... dont you think everything would have turned different ? Yes.. you would have had
a lower priced house and some savings earning a divided and long term capital gains.
Homeboy
2013 Oct 17, 6:30pm
As a small business owner you already paid TAX for your past net earnings,
Retained Earnings can be reinvested in non-inventory asset purchases..
capital equipment.. and what else to motivate new capital orders..hire more workers..
Trickle down bullshit. The evidence shows that the rich HOARD their money; they don't reinvest it into the economy.
thomaswong.1986 says
Lower capital gains, are created to incentive investments into
business/industries.. if you suffer a loss, there are deductions to provide
relief...
Nope. Created to keep the 1% in the 1%. The rich get richer; the middle class gets fucked in the ass.
and here you are doing this fucking internet thing..
cause some rich jackass put his after tax money at risk..... Aint Life Grand !
You think he should of bought 1,000,000 lotto tickets instead ?
Blah, blah, blah. "Should HAVE", jackass. Learn English for Christ's sake.
Trickle down doesn't work. Never has, never will. Deal with it.
sorry, your a lost cause...
Your, you're. Are you fucking retarded? It's hard to believe you know anything about economics when you can't even spell. You probably inherited some money and think you're the fucking chosen one. Nope, you're just lucky.
Homeboy
2013 Oct 17, 6:37pm
too busy chasing housing bubbles.. they never save a single dime to call their own.
They weren't born with a silver spoon in their mouth. They want to live in a house, but the game is rigged by the god damn 1 percenter assholes with their favorable tax treatment.
I waited out the bubble and managed to buy a house by the skin of my teeth, right at the exact bottom of the market, before the new fake bubble started inflating. This is bullshit. It shouldn't be like this. In the 1950s, a family could buy a house off of ONE income. Now with husband and wife BOTH working, they're lucky if they can afford anything at all. And you fucking LIKE it. FUCK YOU.
Homeboy
2013 Oct 17, 6:39pm
a lower priced house and some savings earning a divided and long term capital gains.
A savings account doesn't even earn half of a percent right now. What planet do you live on?
the rich like everyone else earned their income once.. and it was taxed once.. the residual after
taxes are savings which can be reinvested back into purchases of newer assets.
therefore replacement of Machinery and other Assets if sold may leave a gain or loss..
so why not encourage early disposal / sale and purchases of newer modern assets
without triggering higher taxes.. therefore business (the rich!) provide demand from
factories and thus higher employment of labor.
DO YOU UNDERSTAND THIS ?
Even by Twrong standards this makes no sense. Demand from factories? Replace machines? Manufacturing is 11% of GDP. All the rich are in the FIRE sector. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THIS?
freak80
2013 Oct 17, 9:59pm
Therefore, Richie Rich, who makes his money through complex investment schemes that the working class doesn't even understand, pays a lower tax rate than Joe
Middle Class, who works a 9-5 job. This is not right, and this is what's killing our economy. Your trickle down nonsense was tried and it FAILED. Trickle down doesn't work. Period.
WHY DO YOU HATE FREEDOM??!!! WHY DO YOU HATE AMERICA??!!!
freak80
2013 Oct 17, 10:06pm
Homeboy,
Tom Wong is a Foxbot or a Rushbot. He is incapable of independent thought. He's a lost cause. You're not going to change his mind. He's been programmed.
The "ignore" feature is a wonderful thing. :-)
APOCALYPSEFUCK is Comptroller says
I always thought Tom Wong was a brilliant parodist, satirizing the demented ravings of a glue-addicted teabagger or something in a hybridized persona, crossing Norm Crosby with Sarah Palin.
I wondered about that too. Let all hope that this is true since the other option would be that he actually is a glue addicted teabagger who believes in what he says, truly a disturbing thought. Either way he's fun to bat around, sort of like shrek without all the histrionics.
What's a shame is for all the whining the republicans do about regulations and how it distorts/punishes parts of the economy, they don't feel the same way about how subsidies distort/reward other parts of the economy.
It's really hard to take their arguments serious when they won't apply the same theory/logic to the whole economy.
It's really hard to take their arguments serious when they won't apply the same theory/logic to the whole economy.
To misquote Mae West "logic has nothing to do with it".
To misquote Mae West "logic has nothing to do with it".
Mae West(you ever notice how Christina Aguilara emulates her looks) ? I remember seeing her on the Sunday morning Comedy Classics, but Jennifer Aniston is my gal.
Jennifer Aniston is my gal.
about as bland a woman you can get... you ever wonder why other guys
like Brad Pitt dumped her and never looked back.
What's a shame is for all the whining the republicans do about regulations and how it distorts/punishes parts of the economy, they don't feel the same way about how subsidies distort/reward other parts of the economy.
that depends on what do you call a subsidy and what is actual normal accounting treatment like
deferring costs associated oil drillers. Not all that different for Software companies FAS 86
or R&D costs FAS 2. As such shouldnt be considered tax subsidies.
that depends on what do you call a subsidy and what is actual normal
accounting treatment like
deferring costs associated oil drillers. Not all
that different for Software companies FAS 86
or R&D costs FAS 2. As such
shouldnt be considered tax subsidies.
Not tax treatment, outright government payments or rewards because of lobbyist efforts.
And you knew that, or you should if you're the second coming of "The Donald", like you've claimed before.
APOCALYPSEFUCK is Comptroller says
I always thought Tom Wong was a brilliant parodist, satirizing the demented ravings of a glue-addicted teabagger or something in a hybridized persona, crossing Norm Crosby with Sarah Palin.
glue sniffing Liberals .. but since when did even Liberals would elect a former coke sniffer.
Barack Obama "I inhaled frequently" "That was the point"
Not tax treatment, outright government payments or rewards because of lobbyist efforts.
And you knew that, or you should if you're the second coming of "The Donald", like you've claimed before.
oh yes.. there are certainly "gov payments" but as has been said many times endessly it is blurred and confused by the left with Accounting treatment which isnt a lobbist effort or subsidy.
You of course can list all the Lobbist efforts for so called Govt Payments...
real Govt Payments ....
Even by Twrong standards this makes no sense. Demand from factories? Replace machines? Manufacturing is 11% of GDP. All the rich are in the FIRE sector. DO YOU UNDERSTAND THIS?
it makes plenty of sense and has worked given extra funds to small business to purchase capital goods for business.
the so called 1% many talk of are not in the FIRE sector as you proclaim.
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/newsgraphics/2012/0115-one-percent-occupations/
a lower priced house and some savings earning a divided and long term capital gains.
A savings account doesn't even earn half of a percent right now. What planet do you live on?
there are plenty of funds that paid a healthy 5% pre-bubble.. had people not created the housing bubble and continued with rational pricing as was the case in the 90s , many would
have had a much higher savings rate with some invested in stocks and bonds.. we can only
wish it was rational thinking by the public... this did not happen. Those of use who bought in the 90s and been plowing it back into investments did well.. We worked at it.
Trickle down bullshit. The evidence shows that the rich HOARD their money; they don't reinvest it into the economy.
and yet how do you explain the billions flowing into new managed ventures every quarter?
its no wonder money has created new industries and jobs... where did it come from
but the rich... heck even Paul Allen started several companies by himself with his
Vulcan Fund.. One being stated in my town of Los Gatos called Ricochet which
was leading into the WiFi Wireless networks.
Below is a chart showing Venture Capital funding for the past 20 years.
https://www.pwcmoneytree.com/MTPublic/ns/nav.jsp?page=historical
oh yes.. there are certainly "gov payments" but as has been said many times
endessly it is blurred and confused by the left with Accounting treatment which
isnt a lobbist effort or subsidy.
You of course can list all the Lobbist efforts for so called Govt Payments...
Oh, I could go on endlessly about one subsidy in particular, but you are clueless to the real world, and the fantasy one in general. There's way TOOOOOOOOOOO many examples and proof of it, and if you were quite the 'mogul' that you claim to be, you would name it before I did. But you won't, not now, or ever.
Nope. Created to keep the 1% in the 1%. The rich get richer; the middle class gets fucked in the ass.
and here you are doing this fucking internet thing..
cause some rich jackass put his after tax money at risk..... Aint Life Grand !
You think he should of bought 1,000,000 lotto tickets instead ?
Blah, blah, blah. "Should HAVE", jackass. Learn English for Christ's sake.
Trickle down doesn't work. Never has, never will. Deal with it.
And yet history shows it has worked.. worked well as Kennedy Cut Taxes as did Reagan.
If the answer is no as you claim.. what do you have as an example of Taxing policies
.. and dont bother with the 1950s high taxes decade which was used to pay
down the WWII war debt and to keep inflation in check as the economy was red hot with full
US Factory capacity rebuilding global economies..
All you have left was the 1970s which saw no growth, high unemployment, and high inflation...
Oh, I could go on endlessly about one subsidy in particular, but you are clueless to the real world, and the fantasy one in general. There's way TOOOOOOOOOOO many examples and proof of it, and if you were quite the 'mogul' that you claim to be, you would name it before I did. But you won't, not now, or ever.
being a Controller of A tech company with 30 years experience is by no means a Mogol...
and I never claimed to be one...
Which may mean I started my career before you were even born... so much for the REAL world.
i am just a mild mannered Accountant... nothing special.. no silver spoon no big family
name.. no East Coast Ivy League degree... just like many who spent his Friday nites after
work hitting the books studying for next weeks exams.. didnt spend my time with so called
social causes and protests... passing the Bud around with my hommies .. I had dreams!
By all means tell us about that subsidy ... lets all share in your wisdom...
Homeboy,
Tom Wong is a Foxbot or a Rushbot. He is incapable of independent thought. He's a lost cause. You're not going to change his mind. He's been programmed.
The "ignore" feature is a wonderful thing. :-)
sorry never heard a single Rush radio program..watched Fox as I have watched CNN, MSNBC. and other... have you ever tried or heard of the "National Review".. yes i have since I was 17....
So much for being a Bot of any kind... nice try...
Which may mean I started my career before you were even born... so much for
the REAL world.
LOL, yeah, being the CEO of a Barbie collection..........isn't real world.
They weren't born with a silver spoon in their mouth. They want to live in a house, but the game is rigged by the god damn 1 percenter assholes with their favorable tax treatment.
I waited out the bubble and managed to buy a house by the skin of my teeth, right at the exact bottom of the market, before the new fake bubble started inflating. This is bullshit. It shouldn't be like this. In the 1950s, a family could buy a house off of ONE income. Now with husband and wife BOTH working, they're lucky if they can afford anything at all. And you fucking LIKE it. FUCK YOU.
Well.. how many times have you seen people acting stupid over bidding over paying over
borrowing because.. "home prices never go down".. we all knew from the late 80s early 90s
that prices do go down ad correct to long term trends and even today its all ignored by the public.
the game isnt rigged... people got greedy and stupid.. no need to have something rigged..
freak80
2013 Oct 19, 12:50pm
To misquote Mae West "logic has nothing to do with it".
Correct. The far-right runs on gullibility, fear and hatred...not logic.
Because the companies don't want to do that. They are afraid to expand because the last time they did credit was cut off. It could happen again. It is all about the banks, Wong.
who said you need the bank to expand.. capital markers are open to all...
you can issue your own debt securities.. and many actually have.
Apple Raises $17 Billion in Record Corporate Bond Sale
Correct. The far-right runs on gullibility, fear and hatred...not logic.
how much fear, gullibility and hatred and Not the Issues (Logic) did we hear from the Progressives-Democrats during the Election... Obama and his Crew only talked about Romney's tax returns.. And of course Reids comments that Romney paid any taxes as Governor.. (ignoring Romney skipped being paid a salary and paid his own expenses).
If anything.. it was pure Chicago politics.. the only thing missing was Al Capones Thugs..
lets not even talk about experience working with the people in Congress
Homeboy
2013 Oct 19, 1:46pm
there are plenty of funds that paid a healthy 5% pre-bubble.. had people not created the housing bubble and continued with rational pricing as was the case in the 90s , many would
have had a much higher savings rate with some invested in stocks and bonds.. we can only
wish it was rational thinking by the public... this did not happen. Those of use who bought in the 90s and been plowing it back into investments did well.. We worked at it.
Interesting you should bring this up. Yes, things were better in the 90s. Hmmm.... what happened in the 90s? Oh, yeah - the long term capital gains tax rate went up. And we had prosperity - not just for the elite in the financial sector, but for everyone. Hmmm... What happened after the 90s? Oh yeah - the long term capital gains tax rate was lowered. So did those "job creators" invest in equipment and create more jobs? Nope, the financial sector became immensely wealthy, over-leveraged themselves, and destroyed the economy. And that's where we are today. Trickle-down doesn't work, dude. I know Rush told you it does, but he's wrong.
tts
2013 Oct 19, 5:55pm
So, what does the "blue" team run on???
The D's are essentially neoliberal light at the moment, willing to do some social reform but economically are very pro business/Wall St/banks, not all that far in policy from early/mid 90's R's in terms of economic or foreign policy really. Which is why they passed Obamacare which was Gingrich's health care reform alternative to Hillarycare in the 90's.
tts
2013 Oct 19, 6:04pm
the game isnt rigged
When nearly all the wealth is held by a teeeeny tiny percentage who do little or nothing to earn that wealth then yes it is. Also:
Homeboy
2013 Oct 19, 6:44pm
The D's are essentially neoliberal light at the moment, willing to do some social reform but economically are very pro business/Wall St/banks, not all that far in policy from early/mid 90's R's in terms of economic or foreign policy really. Which is why they passed Obamacare which was Gingrich's health care reform alternative to Hillarycare in the 90's.
I think that's a very accurate assessment.
marcus
2013 Oct 19, 11:49pm
When nearly all the wealth is held by a teeeeny tiny percentage who do little or nothing to earn that wealth then yes it is. Also:
But they're the job creators.
there are plenty of funds that paid a healthy 5% pre-bubble.. had people not created the housing bubble and continued with rational pricing as was the case in the 90s , many would
have had a much higher savings rate with some invested in stocks and bonds.. we can only
wish it was rational thinking by the public... this did not happen. Those of use who bought in the 90s and been plowing it back into investments did well.. We worked at it.Interesting you should bring this up. Yes, things were better in the 90s. Hmmm.... what happened in the 90s? Oh, yeah - the long term capital gains tax rate went up. And we had prosperity - not just for the elite in the financial sector, but for everyone. Hmmm...
The tax increases in first term did nothing to promote business activity. Perhaps you have forgotten how Capital Gains tax was cut after 1997 by Clinton which provided much needed capital to hire many workers.. "In 1997, Clinton signed a reduction in the (audible liberal gasp) capital gains tax rate to 20% from 28%." . It was after the 1997 tax cut did the
economy boom and capital spending skyrocketed.
https://www.pwcmoneytree.com/MTPublic/ns/nav.jsp?page=historical
"Probably there are people in this room still mad at me at that budget because you think I raised your taxes too much. It might surprise you to know that I think I raised them too much, too."
- Bill Clinton 1995
The Dangerous Myth About The Bill Clinton Tax Increase
While this myth is now a central part of liberal Democratic folklore, it is contradicted by the political disaster and poor economic results that followed the tax increase. The real lesson of the Clinton Presidency is the way back to prosperity lies not through increased taxes on “the rich,†but through tax and regulatory reform and a return to a rules based monetary policy that produces a strong and stable dollar.
If these tax increases were good for the middle class, then they should have been popular. Yet, in the 1994 elections, the Democratic Party suffered historic losses. Even though Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell had declared the unpopular HillaryCare dead in September of that year, the Republican Party gained 54 seats in the House and 8 seats in the Senate to win control of both the House and the Senate for the first time since 1952.
During the first four years of his Presidency, real GDP growth average 3.2%, respectable relative to today’s economy, but disappointing coming as it did following just one year of recovery from the 1991 recession, the end of the Cold War and the reduction in consumer price inflation below 3% for the first time (with the single exception of 1986) since 1965.
Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, the New York Democrat who helped steer Mr. Clinton's proposal through the Senate Finance Committee, was just as harsh, saying that the 1993 budget's deficit reduction had improved the economy and was something to be proud of.
"It just knocked us over when we saw that report this morning," Mr. Moynihan said. "He keeps conceding these things. He doesn't understand that he's conceding the principles." Asked why he thought the President had made the remarks, Mr. Moynihan said: "He's running for re-election, he's raising money in Houston. What he should have said was, 'Is there a man in this room who's not richer than he was two years ago?' "
http://www.nytimes.com/1995/10/19/us/clinton-angers-friend-and-foe-in-tax-remark.html
« First « Previous Comments 32 - 71 of 201 Next » Last » Search these comments
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/oct/14/shutdown-republicans-government-spending-delusions
#politics