Obama screws dividend investors 
I'm raging right now. There was plenty of talk about it, but now it's reality. How far is this going to go?
A plan to triple the tax rate would hurt all shareholders..
...Mr. Obama is proposing to raise the dividend tax rate to the higher personal income tax rate of 39.6% that will kick in next year. Add in the planned phase-out of deductions and exemptions, and the rate hits 41%. Then add the 3.8% investment tax surcharge in ObamaCare, and the new dividend tax rate in 2013 would be 44.8%—nearly three times today's 15% rate.
Keep in mind that dividends are paid to shareholders only after the corporation pays taxes on its profits. So assuming a maximum 35% corporate tax rate and a 44.8% dividend tax, the total tax on corporate earnings passed through as dividends would be 64.1%....
Full story from WSJ
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405297020488040457722549302553766...
I am angry also dude. Posted
I am angry also dude. Posted something including this an hour ago haha
MSF Website
MACC Website
MSF Twitter
this is ridiculous...
this is ridiculous...
This is why Democrats are
This is why Democrats are idiots...
Can someone explain to me why fucking over investors and corporations is good for the economy?
On top of that, they blow all this tax revenue on paying people who don't deserve this money.
Any Democrat to answer this question competently, I will pay 20k.
per ardua ad astra
Investors are evil. If you
Investors are evil. If you work hard and save your money you should give it to the government, not invest it. If you invest it they will just find other ways to steal it back from you.
Only good government is a small government.
MSF Website
MACC Website
MSF Twitter
Connor wrote: This is why
This is why Democrats are idiots...
Can someone explain to me why fucking over investors and corporations is good for the economy?
On top of that, they blow all this tax revenue on paying people who don't deserve this money.
Any Democrat to answer this question competently, I will pay 20k.
In the near term, of course it isn't "good" for the economy, but if it closes the budget deficit it's beneficial in the long term. Unfortunately there needs to be some pain to undo huge loads of debt. ANT will just tell you to cut all social programs and non military discretionary spend, but some people don't find that palatable and it likewise would hurt the economy in the near term. It's really a matter of ideology and foresight as to how people approach closing deficits.
PayPal?
"Social cohesion and puritanical morality place roughly on my list of concerns between whether I'll pick up jock itch at the gym this week (not likely, since I don't go the gym) and whether it'll rain in Christchurch, New Zealand next Tuesday."
-Eddie
Seriously, lower risk returns
Seriously, lower risk returns are shit. So they force everyone into the equity market to try to beat out inflation, and now they are taking away that avenue. Where are the productive members of society supposed to park their fucking capital? Not everyone is an accredited investor. Once again the middle class takes it right up the ass, while smiling. As long as Facebook and whatever bullshit is on TV can let people escape the reality of how shitty their lives are becoming...and if I even remotely have to think about unfunded liabilites and entitlements right now, I'll have a stroke.
See that's the thing. We
See that's the thing. We aren't closing any fucking deficits. They are spending like it is going out of style. Have you seen the defense cuts? Many of the big ticket "cuts" are really "delays" scheduled to ramp up in a year or two.
duffmt6 wrote: Connor
This is why Democrats are idiots...
Can someone explain to me why fucking over investors and corporations is good for the economy?
On top of that, they blow all this tax revenue on paying people who don't deserve this money.
Any Democrat to answer this question competently, I will pay 20k.
In the near term, of course it isn't "good" for the economy, but if it closes the budget deficit it's beneficial in the long term. Unfortunately there needs to be some pain to undo huge loads of debt. ANT will just tell you to cut all social programs and non military discretionary spend, but some people don't find that palatable and it likewise would hurt the economy in the near term. It's really a matter of ideology and foresight as to how people approach closing deficits.
PayPal?
So Duff, who pays corporate taxes? You think companies just tell investors they get less because of taxes? No, investors get pissed and companies increase prices, lay off workers or do something else to offset the increase. That or people save and invest less, move away from dividend paying stocks, etc.
Simply cut spending. Real easy. We need billionaires to go to Congressmen and tell them they will set them up for life once they pass these severe cuts. Just tell the people what they want to hear, pass the cuts and don't even waste time running for re-election.
The "people" always want something for nothing. They should not be given this. Cut entitlements and allow people to be free to succeed or fail on their own merits. If you fail, so be it.
MSF Website
MACC Website
MSF Twitter
ANT wrote: duffmt6
This is why Democrats are idiots...
Can someone explain to me why fucking over investors and corporations is good for the economy?
On top of that, they blow all this tax revenue on paying people who don't deserve this money.
Any Democrat to answer this question competently, I will pay 20k.
In the near term, of course it isn't "good" for the economy, but if it closes the budget deficit it's beneficial in the long term. Unfortunately there needs to be some pain to undo huge loads of debt. ANT will just tell you to cut all social programs and non military discretionary spend, but some people don't find that palatable and it likewise would hurt the economy in the near term. It's really a matter of ideology and foresight as to how people approach closing deficits.
PayPal?
So Duff, who pays corporate taxes? You think companies just tell investors they get less because of taxes? No, investors get pissed and companies increase prices, lay off workers or do something else to offset the increase. That or people save and invest less, move away from dividend paying stocks, etc.
Simply cut spending. Real easy. We need billionaires to go to Congressmen and tell them they will set them up for life once they pass these severe cuts. Just tell the people what they want to hear, pass the cuts and don't even waste time running for re-election.
The "people" always want something for nothing. They should not be given this. Cut entitlements and allow people to be free to succeed or fail on their own merits. If you fail, so be it.
So ANT, who gets government contracts? Who relies on welfare recipients to provide revenue? You think companies just tell investors they get less because of less revenue? No, investors get pissed and companies increase prices, lay off workers or do something else to offset the decrease.
It's not going to be fun either way. Looking at it as an absolutist is impractical and frankly, absolutists like yourself serve the sole purpose of creating an increasingly toxic political atmosphere (where no progress or compromise can be made). Spending needs to go way down, revenues need to go up. Not one or the other.
Also, did you just argue for the effective end of Democracy in the US? Not sure what the Framers would think of that...
"Social cohesion and puritanical morality place roughly on my list of concerns between whether I'll pick up jock itch at the gym this week (not likely, since I don't go the gym) and whether it'll rain in Christchurch, New Zealand next Tuesday."
-Eddie
This should help out the muni
This should help out the muni market... trying to figure out where else to park my money safely.
duffmt6 wrote: Connor
This is why Democrats are idiots...
Can someone explain to me why fucking over investors and corporations is good for the economy?
On top of that, they blow all this tax revenue on paying people who don't deserve this money.
Any Democrat to answer this question competently, I will pay 20k.
In the near term, of course it isn't "good" for the economy, but if it closes the budget deficit it's beneficial in the long term. Unfortunately there needs to be some pain to undo huge loads of debt. ANT will just tell you to cut all social programs and non military discretionary spend, but some people don't find that palatable and it likewise would hurt the economy in the near term. It's really a matter of ideology and foresight as to how people approach closing deficits.
PayPal?
Cutting social programs will hurt the economy?
The problem is lack of smart people. We pay social security taxes because people don't know how to invest for retirement. We pay for "projects" that hire public employees at the expense of private employees. We pay for unnecessary unemployment because people are too lazy to look for jobs. There are millions of jobs available, but people are not qualified for them. Why take away money from people who stimulate the economy to give it to people that live paycheck to paycheck. We should stop the insanity and teach the poor/uneducated a lesson.
Cut them off.
per ardua ad astra
Can someone email Obama this:
Can someone email Obama this: http://www.oaktreecapital.com/MemoTree/It's%20All%20Very%20Taxing%2011_16_11.pdf , I don't have his email address.
Wait I just read that Obama
Wait I just read that Obama plans to cut Corporate Tax rate down to 28%...why do you all not agree with this?
Hfhopeful wrote: Wait I just
Wait I just read that Obama plans to cut Corporate Tax rate down to 28%...why do you all not agree with this?
He's cutting the tax rate, but getting rid of loopholes. Corporations will end up paying more taxes.
per ardua ad astra
FFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU
FFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU Obama
Connor wrote: duffmt6
This is why Democrats are idiots...
Can someone explain to me why fucking over investors and corporations is good for the economy?
On top of that, they blow all this tax revenue on paying people who don't deserve this money.
Any Democrat to answer this question competently, I will pay 20k.
In the near term, of course it isn't "good" for the economy, but if it closes the budget deficit it's beneficial in the long term. Unfortunately there needs to be some pain to undo huge loads of debt. ANT will just tell you to cut all social programs and non military discretionary spend, but some people don't find that palatable and it likewise would hurt the economy in the near term. It's really a matter of ideology and foresight as to how people approach closing deficits.
PayPal?
Cutting social programs will hurt the economy?
The problem is lack of smart people. We pay social security taxes because people don't know how to invest for retirement. We pay for "projects" that hire public employees at the expense of private employees. We pay for unnecessary unemployment because people are too lazy to look for jobs. There are millions of jobs available, but people are not qualified for them. Why take away money from people who stimulate the economy to give it to people that live paycheck to paycheck. We should stop the insanity and teach the poor/uneducated a lesson.
Cut them off.
First of all, yes cutting social programs will hurt the economy (especially in the near term).
Second, I actually answered the question you asked and you are just rambling about lazy people. I would like my $20K now, please.
"Social cohesion and puritanical morality place roughly on my list of concerns between whether I'll pick up jock itch at the gym this week (not likely, since I don't go the gym) and whether it'll rain in Christchurch, New Zealand next Tuesday."
-Eddie
Hfhopeful wrote: Wait I just
Wait I just read that Obama plans to cut Corporate Tax rate down to 28%...why do you all not agree with this?
Corporate tax rates are bullshit to begin with. Why would I support "cutting" them when they should be at or near zero.
MSF Website
MACC Website
MSF Twitter
Oreos wrote: Can someone
Can someone email Obama this: http://www.oaktreecapital.com/MemoTree/It's%20All%20Very%20Taxing%2011_16_11.pdf , I don't have his email address.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact
"Social cohesion and puritanical morality place roughly on my list of concerns between whether I'll pick up jock itch at the gym this week (not likely, since I don't go the gym) and whether it'll rain in Christchurch, New Zealand next Tuesday."
-Eddie
How would people like to
How would people like to close our ~1T deficit?
duffmt6 wrote: ANT
This is why Democrats are idiots...
Can someone explain to me why fucking over investors and corporations is good for the economy?
On top of that, they blow all this tax revenue on paying people who don't deserve this money.
Any Democrat to answer this question competently, I will pay 20k.
In the near term, of course it isn't "good" for the economy, but if it closes the budget deficit it's beneficial in the long term. Unfortunately there needs to be some pain to undo huge loads of debt. ANT will just tell you to cut all social programs and non military discretionary spend, but some people don't find that palatable and it likewise would hurt the economy in the near term. It's really a matter of ideology and foresight as to how people approach closing deficits.
PayPal?
So Duff, who pays corporate taxes? You think companies just tell investors they get less because of taxes? No, investors get pissed and companies increase prices, lay off workers or do something else to offset the increase. That or people save and invest less, move away from dividend paying stocks, etc.
Simply cut spending. Real easy. We need billionaires to go to Congressmen and tell them they will set them up for life once they pass these severe cuts. Just tell the people what they want to hear, pass the cuts and don't even waste time running for re-election.
The "people" always want something for nothing. They should not be given this. Cut entitlements and allow people to be free to succeed or fail on their own merits. If you fail, so be it.
So ANT, who gets government contracts? Who relies on welfare recipients to provide revenue? You think companies just tell investors they get less because of less revenue? No, investors get pissed and companies increase prices, lay off workers or do something else to offset the decrease.
It's not going to be fun either way. Looking at it as an absolutist is impractical and frankly, absolutists like yourself serve the sole purpose of creating an increasingly toxic political atmosphere (where no progress or compromise can be made). Spending needs to go way down, revenues need to go up. Not one or the other.
Also, did you just argue for the effective end of Democracy in the US? Not sure what the Framers would think of that...
The government gets its money from you and I. If we cut the budget, the money doesn't disappear, it simply is less take from you and I.
If people have more money they will save it, pay down debt or spend it. This will all benefit the economy. Government is also one of the most inefficient spenders of money. They have no incentive to be frugal, efficient or spend on what is necessary. They can simply tax more or print more.
Government spending is mis-directed personal spending.
MSF Website
MACC Website
MSF Twitter
ANT wrote: duffmt6
This is why Democrats are idiots...
Can someone explain to me why fucking over investors and corporations is good for the economy?
On top of that, they blow all this tax revenue on paying people who don't deserve this money.
Any Democrat to answer this question competently, I will pay 20k.
In the near term, of course it isn't "good" for the economy, but if it closes the budget deficit it's beneficial in the long term. Unfortunately there needs to be some pain to undo huge loads of debt. ANT will just tell you to cut all social programs and non military discretionary spend, but some people don't find that palatable and it likewise would hurt the economy in the near term. It's really a matter of ideology and foresight as to how people approach closing deficits.
PayPal?
So Duff, who pays corporate taxes? You think companies just tell investors they get less because of taxes? No, investors get pissed and companies increase prices, lay off workers or do something else to offset the increase. That or people save and invest less, move away from dividend paying stocks, etc.
Simply cut spending. Real easy. We need billionaires to go to Congressmen and tell them they will set them up for life once they pass these severe cuts. Just tell the people what they want to hear, pass the cuts and don't even waste time running for re-election.
The "people" always want something for nothing. They should not be given this. Cut entitlements and allow people to be free to succeed or fail on their own merits. If you fail, so be it.
So ANT, who gets government contracts? Who relies on welfare recipients to provide revenue? You think companies just tell investors they get less because of less revenue? No, investors get pissed and companies increase prices, lay off workers or do something else to offset the decrease.
It's not going to be fun either way. Looking at it as an absolutist is impractical and frankly, absolutists like yourself serve the sole purpose of creating an increasingly toxic political atmosphere (where no progress or compromise can be made). Spending needs to go way down, revenues need to go up. Not one or the other.
Also, did you just argue for the effective end of Democracy in the US? Not sure what the Framers would think of that...
The government gets its money from you and I. If we cut the budget, the money doesn't disappear, it simply is less take from you and I.
If people have more money they will save it, pay down debt or spend it. This will all benefit the economy. Government is also one of the most inefficient spenders of money. They have no incentive to be frugal, efficient or spend on what is necessary. They can simply tax more or print more.
Government spending is mis-directed personal spending.
So cut spending and also cut taxes is what you are saying? That will never close the deficit. We have already fucked ourselves, now we need to pay for it.
"Social cohesion and puritanical morality place roughly on my list of concerns between whether I'll pick up jock itch at the gym this week (not likely, since I don't go the gym) and whether it'll rain in Christchurch, New Zealand next Tuesday."
-Eddie
PetEng wrote: How would
How would people like to close our ~1T deficit?
You close it over a 10-15 year time period. Once you fundamentally reduce the size of government you will more easily be able to do this.
Look at how much the government has grown in the past 10 years. Dept of Homeland Security is a huge example. TSA is a joke. Dept of Education is not nearly $100 Billion a year and schools still suck.
Cutting the DoE would save $1T in 10 years. Slim down the DoD. End the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Make SSI needs based which would fix it immediately. Eliminate tax deductions and move towards a simple tax. That would increase revenue and get the government more out of our lives.
Stop rewarding people for personal decisions. Why should someone benefit for having a kid, getting married, buying a house. The government has jack shit business encouraging these personal decisions.
And if people suffer, so be it. Increase the tax deduction for charitable giving and you will see a nice increase if you care about helping people.
This country is a mess and government and spending continue to grow. How do people think more government and more spending will be the answer?
MSF Website
MACC Website
MSF Twitter
duffmt6 wrote: ANT
This is why Democrats are idiots...
Can someone explain to me why fucking over investors and corporations is good for the economy?
On top of that, they blow all this tax revenue on paying people who don't deserve this money.
Any Democrat to answer this question competently, I will pay 20k.
In the near term, of course it isn't "good" for the economy, but if it closes the budget deficit it's beneficial in the long term. Unfortunately there needs to be some pain to undo huge loads of debt. ANT will just tell you to cut all social programs and non military discretionary spend, but some people don't find that palatable and it likewise would hurt the economy in the near term. It's really a matter of ideology and foresight as to how people approach closing deficits.
PayPal?
So Duff, who pays corporate taxes? You think companies just tell investors they get less because of taxes? No, investors get pissed and companies increase prices, lay off workers or do something else to offset the increase. That or people save and invest less, move away from dividend paying stocks, etc.
Simply cut spending. Real easy. We need billionaires to go to Congressmen and tell them they will set them up for life once they pass these severe cuts. Just tell the people what they want to hear, pass the cuts and don't even waste time running for re-election.
The "people" always want something for nothing. They should not be given this. Cut entitlements and allow people to be free to succeed or fail on their own merits. If you fail, so be it.
So ANT, who gets government contracts? Who relies on welfare recipients to provide revenue? You think companies just tell investors they get less because of less revenue? No, investors get pissed and companies increase prices, lay off workers or do something else to offset the decrease.
It's not going to be fun either way. Looking at it as an absolutist is impractical and frankly, absolutists like yourself serve the sole purpose of creating an increasingly toxic political atmosphere (where no progress or compromise can be made). Spending needs to go way down, revenues need to go up. Not one or the other.
Also, did you just argue for the effective end of Democracy in the US? Not sure what the Framers would think of that...
The government gets its money from you and I. If we cut the budget, the money doesn't disappear, it simply is less take from you and I.
If people have more money they will save it, pay down debt or spend it. This will all benefit the economy. Government is also one of the most inefficient spenders of money. They have no incentive to be frugal, efficient or spend on what is necessary. They can simply tax more or print more.
Government spending is mis-directed personal spending.
So cut spending and also cut taxes is what you are saying? That will never close the deficit. We have already fucked ourselves, now we need to pay for it.
Cut spending and eventually cut taxes. Taxes don't need to be increased at this point. As the economy rebounds tax receipts will increase. If you want to increase revenue, eliminate deductions. Taxes WILL increase though this. It will increase the % of Americans that pay taxes.
MSF Website
MACC Website
MSF Twitter
"Of course, the White House
"Of course, the White House wants everyone to know that this new rate would apply only to those filthy rich individuals who make $200,000 a year, or $250,000 if you're a greedy couple. We're all supposed to believe that no one would be hurt other than rich folks who can afford it."
Basically dividend income gets treated as ordinary income for people above the income threshold. Article doesn't state impact on those below the income threshold.
Oreos wrote: Can someone
Can someone email Obama this: http://www.oaktreecapital.com/MemoTree/It's%20All%20Very%20Taxing%2011_16_11.pdf , I don't have his email address.
Haha, read this a while back and thought the same thing
"One should recognize reality even when one doesn't like it, indeed, especially when one doesn't like it." - Charlie Munger
No way this gets passed. You
No way this gets passed. You can only hope he is intelligent enough to realize this and put it in as a bargaining tool.
duffmt6 wrote: Connor
This is why Democrats are idiots...
Can someone explain to me why fucking over investors and corporations is good for the economy?
On top of that, they blow all this tax revenue on paying people who don't deserve this money.
Any Democrat to answer this question competently, I will pay 20k.
In the near term, of course it isn't "good" for the economy, but if it closes the budget deficit it's beneficial in the long term. Unfortunately there needs to be some pain to undo huge loads of debt. ANT will just tell you to cut all social programs and non military discretionary spend, but some people don't find that palatable and it likewise would hurt the economy in the near term. It's really a matter of ideology and foresight as to how people approach closing deficits.
PayPal?
Cutting social programs will hurt the economy?
The problem is lack of smart people. We pay social security taxes because people don't know how to invest for retirement. We pay for "projects" that hire public employees at the expense of private employees. We pay for unnecessary unemployment because people are too lazy to look for jobs. There are millions of jobs available, but people are not qualified for them. Why take away money from people who stimulate the economy to give it to people that live paycheck to paycheck. We should stop the insanity and teach the poor/uneducated a lesson.
Cut them off.
First of all, yes cutting social programs will hurt the economy (especially in the near term).
Second, I actually answered the question you asked and you are just rambling about lazy people. I would like my $20K now, please.
Your answer was awful. Democrats have absolutely no intention of closing the deficit. They want higher taxes so that they can spend more on useless shit. Raising taxes won't put a dent in 14T of debt. They need to stop spending.
Dufft, I have another question for you...
If you have 100k in Credit Card debt, what would you do? Raise your credit limit? That seems to be what Obama would do. No, only fucking idiots would do that. At least a default would teach Democrats a lesson that you cannot spend more than you make...Surely I thought someone in finance, like you, would know that. But obviously you should learn the basics of a budget.
Analogy: 100k in cc debt, stop buying BMW's = Cutting Spending
100k in cc debt, use coupons on the BMW's = Raising taxes on the rich
There's nothing you can say that will get you my 20k, because you're blinded by socialist views.
per ardua ad astra
Connor wrote: duffmt6
This is why Democrats are idiots...
Can someone explain to me why fucking over investors and corporations is good for the economy?
On top of that, they blow all this tax revenue on paying people who don't deserve this money.
Any Democrat to answer this question competently, I will pay 20k.
In the near term, of course it isn't "good" for the economy, but if it closes the budget deficit it's beneficial in the long term. Unfortunately there needs to be some pain to undo huge loads of debt. ANT will just tell you to cut all social programs and non military discretionary spend, but some people don't find that palatable and it likewise would hurt the economy in the near term. It's really a matter of ideology and foresight as to how people approach closing deficits.
PayPal?
Cutting social programs will hurt the economy?
The problem is lack of smart people. We pay social security taxes because people don't know how to invest for retirement. We pay for "projects" that hire public employees at the expense of private employees. We pay for unnecessary unemployment because people are too lazy to look for jobs. There are millions of jobs available, but people are not qualified for them. Why take away money from people who stimulate the economy to give it to people that live paycheck to paycheck. We should stop the insanity and teach the poor/uneducated a lesson.
Cut them off.
First of all, yes cutting social programs will hurt the economy (especially in the near term).
Second, I actually answered the question you asked and you are just rambling about lazy people. I would like my $20K now, please.
Your answer was awful. Democrats have absolutely no intention of closing the deficit. They want higher taxes so that they can spend more on useless shit. Raising taxes won't put a dent in 14T of debt. They need to stop spending.
Dufft, I have another question for you...
If you have 100k in Credit Card debt, what would you do? Raise your credit limit? That seems to be what Obama would do. No, only fucking idiots would do that. At least a default would teach Democrats a lesson that you cannot spend more than you make...Surely I thought someone in finance, like you, would know that. But obviously you should learn the basics of a budget.
Analogy: 100k in cc debt, stop buying BMW's = Cutting Spending
100k in cc debt, use coupons on the BMW's = Raising taxes on the rich
There's nothing you can say that will get you my 20k, because you're blinded by socialist views.
You just created strawmen and argued against a bunch of shit I didn't say. So congrats? I'm not particularly closely aligned to the Democratic party, I simply provided the rationale for this move and gave a rather thoughtful, though simple answer to the actual question you asked. I don't care about the motivations or whether you think it right or wrong. I answered your question and want $20K, your stupid analogies be damned.
"Social cohesion and puritanical morality place roughly on my list of concerns between whether I'll pick up jock itch at the gym this week (not likely, since I don't go the gym) and whether it'll rain in Christchurch, New Zealand next Tuesday."
-Eddie
duffmt6 wrote: Connor
This is why Democrats are idiots...
Can someone explain to me why fucking over investors and corporations is good for the economy?
On top of that, they blow all this tax revenue on paying people who don't deserve this money.
Any Democrat to answer this question competently, I will pay 20k.
In the near term, of course it isn't "good" for the economy, but if it closes the budget deficit it's beneficial in the long term. Unfortunately there needs to be some pain to undo huge loads of debt. ANT will just tell you to cut all social programs and non military discretionary spend, but some people don't find that palatable and it likewise would hurt the economy in the near term. It's really a matter of ideology and foresight as to how people approach closing deficits.
PayPal?
Cutting social programs will hurt the economy?
The problem is lack of smart people. We pay social security taxes because people don't know how to invest for retirement. We pay for "projects" that hire public employees at the expense of private employees. We pay for unnecessary unemployment because people are too lazy to look for jobs. There are millions of jobs available, but people are not qualified for them. Why take away money from people who stimulate the economy to give it to people that live paycheck to paycheck. We should stop the insanity and teach the poor/uneducated a lesson.
Cut them off.
First of all, yes cutting social programs will hurt the economy (especially in the near term).
Second, I actually answered the question you asked and you are just rambling about lazy people. I would like my $20K now, please.
Your answer was awful. Democrats have absolutely no intention of closing the deficit. They want higher taxes so that they can spend more on useless shit. Raising taxes won't put a dent in 14T of debt. They need to stop spending.
Dufft, I have another question for you...
If you have 100k in Credit Card debt, what would you do? Raise your credit limit? That seems to be what Obama would do. No, only fucking idiots would do that. At least a default would teach Democrats a lesson that you cannot spend more than you make...Surely I thought someone in finance, like you, would know that. But obviously you should learn the basics of a budget.
Analogy: 100k in cc debt, stop buying BMW's = Cutting Spending
100k in cc debt, use coupons on the BMW's = Raising taxes on the rich
There's nothing you can say that will get you my 20k, because you're blinded by socialist views.
You just created strawmen and argued against a bunch of shit I didn't say. So congrats? I'm not particularly closely aligned to the Democratic party, I simply provided the rationale for this move and gave a rather thoughtful, though simple answer to the actual question you asked. I don't care about the motivations or whether you think it right or wrong. I answered your question and want $20K, your stupid analogies be damned.
I'll pay you if you vote Rep.
per ardua ad astra
Connor wrote: duffmt6
This is why Democrats are idiots...
Can someone explain to me why fucking over investors and corporations is good for the economy?
On top of that, they blow all this tax revenue on paying people who don't deserve this money.
Any Democrat to answer this question competently, I will pay 20k.
In the near term, of course it isn't "good" for the economy, but if it closes the budget deficit it's beneficial in the long term. Unfortunately there needs to be some pain to undo huge loads of debt. ANT will just tell you to cut all social programs and non military discretionary spend, but some people don't find that palatable and it likewise would hurt the economy in the near term. It's really a matter of ideology and foresight as to how people approach closing deficits.
PayPal?
Cutting social programs will hurt the economy?
The problem is lack of smart people. We pay social security taxes because people don't know how to invest for retirement. We pay for "projects" that hire public employees at the expense of private employees. We pay for unnecessary unemployment because people are too lazy to look for jobs. There are millions of jobs available, but people are not qualified for them. Why take away money from people who stimulate the economy to give it to people that live paycheck to paycheck. We should stop the insanity and teach the poor/uneducated a lesson.
Cut them off.
First of all, yes cutting social programs will hurt the economy (especially in the near term).
Second, I actually answered the question you asked and you are just rambling about lazy people. I would like my $20K now, please.
Your answer was awful. Democrats have absolutely no intention of closing the deficit. They want higher taxes so that they can spend more on useless shit. Raising taxes won't put a dent in 14T of debt. They need to stop spending.
Dufft, I have another question for you...
If you have 100k in Credit Card debt, what would you do? Raise your credit limit? That seems to be what Obama would do. No, only fucking idiots would do that. At least a default would teach Democrats a lesson that you cannot spend more than you make...Surely I thought someone in finance, like you, would know that. But obviously you should learn the basics of a budget.
Analogy: 100k in cc debt, stop buying BMW's = Cutting Spending
100k in cc debt, use coupons on the BMW's = Raising taxes on the rich
There's nothing you can say that will get you my 20k, because you're blinded by socialist views.
You just created strawmen and argued against a bunch of shit I didn't say. So congrats? I'm not particularly closely aligned to the Democratic party, I simply provided the rationale for this move and gave a rather thoughtful, though simple answer to the actual question you asked. I don't care about the motivations or whether you think it right or wrong. I answered your question and want $20K, your stupid analogies be damned.
I'll pay you if you vote Rep.
Umm, 100% yes. Do you live in New York (not that it matters, I'll travel where ever). I will meet up with you and let you watch me fill out my absentee ballot in exchange for a check.
Edit: Cash would be better since I'm sure this isn't legal/don't want to deal with gift taxes.
"Social cohesion and puritanical morality place roughly on my list of concerns between whether I'll pick up jock itch at the gym this week (not likely, since I don't go the gym) and whether it'll rain in Christchurch, New Zealand next Tuesday."
-Eddie
If the Republicans would stop
If the Republicans would stop pandering to a bunch of illiterate young Earth creationist buffoons, I'd be able to take them somewhat more seriously.
Seriously, we need to elect Santorum so we can fight Satan! That's how we'll fix our debt!
Financial Modeling Training
Guide to Finance Interviews
Banking Resume
duffmt6 wrote: Oreos
Can someone email Obama this: http://www.oaktreecapital.com/MemoTree/It's%20All%20Very%20Taxing%2011_16_11.pdf , I don't have his email address.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact
I wrote to the big BO:
"Can you please read this: http://www.oaktreecapital.com/MemoTree/It's%20All%20Very%20Taxing%2011_16_11.pdf
and then amend your tax policy accordingly.
Best regards,
Oreos"
I asked for a response too. Let's see what he has to say.
How living paycheck to
How living paycheck to paycheck =/= stimulating the economy? Consumer demand is the driver of the economy, investment simply creates supply to address demand... If every dollar of a paycheck is spent and cycled through the economy, that would typically have positive impact.
duffmt6 wrote: Connor
This is why Democrats are idiots...
Can someone explain to me why fucking over investors and corporations is good for the economy?
On top of that, they blow all this tax revenue on paying people who don't deserve this money.
Any Democrat to answer this question competently, I will pay 20k.
In the near term, of course it isn't "good" for the economy, but if it closes the budget deficit it's beneficial in the long term. Unfortunately there needs to be some pain to undo huge loads of debt. ANT will just tell you to cut all social programs and non military discretionary spend, but some people don't find that palatable and it likewise would hurt the economy in the near term. It's really a matter of ideology and foresight as to how people approach closing deficits.
PayPal?
Cutting social programs will hurt the economy?
The problem is lack of smart people. We pay social security taxes because people don't know how to invest for retirement. We pay for "projects" that hire public employees at the expense of private employees. We pay for unnecessary unemployment because people are too lazy to look for jobs. There are millions of jobs available, but people are not qualified for them. Why take away money from people who stimulate the economy to give it to people that live paycheck to paycheck. We should stop the insanity and teach the poor/uneducated a lesson.
Cut them off.
First of all, yes cutting social programs will hurt the economy (especially in the near term).
Second, I actually answered the question you asked and you are just rambling about lazy people. I would like my $20K now, please.
Your answer was awful. Democrats have absolutely no intention of closing the deficit. They want higher taxes so that they can spend more on useless shit. Raising taxes won't put a dent in 14T of debt. They need to stop spending.
Dufft, I have another question for you...
If you have 100k in Credit Card debt, what would you do? Raise your credit limit? That seems to be what Obama would do. No, only fucking idiots would do that. At least a default would teach Democrats a lesson that you cannot spend more than you make...Surely I thought someone in finance, like you, would know that. But obviously you should learn the basics of a budget.
Analogy: 100k in cc debt, stop buying BMW's = Cutting Spending
100k in cc debt, use coupons on the BMW's = Raising taxes on the rich
There's nothing you can say that will get you my 20k, because you're blinded by socialist views.
You just created strawmen and argued against a bunch of shit I didn't say. So congrats? I'm not particularly closely aligned to the Democratic party, I simply provided the rationale for this move and gave a rather thoughtful, though simple answer to the actual question you asked. I don't care about the motivations or whether you think it right or wrong. I answered your question and want $20K, your stupid analogies be damned.
I'll pay you if you vote Rep.
Umm, 100% yes. Do you live in New York (not that it matters, I'll travel where ever). I will meet up with you and let you watch me fill out my absentee ballot in exchange for a check.
Edit: Cash would be better since I'm sure this isn't legal/don't want to deal with gift taxes.
Oh, now you don't want to pay taxes? Then ill just pay you the max gift w/o taxes - 12k
per ardua ad astra
ANT wrote: Hfhopeful
Wait I just read that Obama plans to cut Corporate Tax rate down to 28%...why do you all not agree with this?
Corporate tax rates are bullshit to begin with. Why would I support "cutting" them when they should be at or near zero.
I'm not sure I understand...if they should be at or near zero wouldn't you support any policy moving them towards that end?
Connor wrote: duffmt6
This is why Democrats are idiots...
Can someone explain to me why fucking over investors and corporations is good for the economy?
On top of that, they blow all this tax revenue on paying people who don't deserve this money.
Any Democrat to answer this question competently, I will pay 20k.
In the near term, of course it isn't "good" for the economy, but if it closes the budget deficit it's beneficial in the long term. Unfortunately there needs to be some pain to undo huge loads of debt. ANT will just tell you to cut all social programs and non military discretionary spend, but some people don't find that palatable and it likewise would hurt the economy in the near term. It's really a matter of ideology and foresight as to how people approach closing deficits.
PayPal?
Cutting social programs will hurt the economy?
The problem is lack of smart people. We pay social security taxes because people don't know how to invest for retirement. We pay for "projects" that hire public employees at the expense of private employees. We pay for unnecessary unemployment because people are too lazy to look for jobs. There are millions of jobs available, but people are not qualified for them. Why take away money from people who stimulate the economy to give it to people that live paycheck to paycheck. We should stop the insanity and teach the poor/uneducated a lesson.
Cut them off.
First of all, yes cutting social programs will hurt the economy (especially in the near term).
Second, I actually answered the question you asked and you are just rambling about lazy people. I would like my $20K now, please.
Your answer was awful. Democrats have absolutely no intention of closing the deficit. They want higher taxes so that they can spend more on useless shit. Raising taxes won't put a dent in 14T of debt. They need to stop spending.
Dufft, I have another question for you...
If you have 100k in Credit Card debt, what would you do? Raise your credit limit? That seems to be what Obama would do. No, only fucking idiots would do that. At least a default would teach Democrats a lesson that you cannot spend more than you make...Surely I thought someone in finance, like you, would know that. But obviously you should learn the basics of a budget.
Analogy: 100k in cc debt, stop buying BMW's = Cutting Spending
100k in cc debt, use coupons on the BMW's = Raising taxes on the rich
There's nothing you can say that will get you my 20k, because you're blinded by socialist views.
You just created strawmen and argued against a bunch of shit I didn't say. So congrats? I'm not particularly closely aligned to the Democratic party, I simply provided the rationale for this move and gave a rather thoughtful, though simple answer to the actual question you asked. I don't care about the motivations or whether you think it right or wrong. I answered your question and want $20K, your stupid analogies be damned.
I'll pay you if you vote Rep.
Umm, 100% yes. Do you live in New York (not that it matters, I'll travel where ever). I will meet up with you and let you watch me fill out my absentee ballot in exchange for a check.
Edit: Cash would be better since I'm sure this isn't legal/don't want to deal with gift taxes.
Oh, now you don't want to pay taxes? Then ill just pay you the max gift w/o taxes - 12k
Gift taxes exist to prevent money laundering. Since we would be performing an illegal transaction (selling a vote), yes in this instance I don't want to pay taxes/don't want to go to jail. Good attempt at a zinger.
"Social cohesion and puritanical morality place roughly on my list of concerns between whether I'll pick up jock itch at the gym this week (not likely, since I don't go the gym) and whether it'll rain in Christchurch, New Zealand next Tuesday."
-Eddie
Delete some of those interior
Delete some of those interior quotes for christs sake. This is ridiculous.
We're trying to get a WSO
We're trying to get a WSO record for longest post.
Hard to prove it was money in exchange for a vote.
per ardua ad astra
Hfhopeful wrote: ANT
Wait I just read that Obama plans to cut Corporate Tax rate down to 28%...why do you all not agree with this?
Corporate tax rates are bullshit to begin with. Why would I support "cutting" them when they should be at or near zero.
I'm not sure I understand...if they should be at or near zero wouldn't you support any policy moving them towards that end?
I do support reducing corporate tax rates, but this is a ploy by Obama. He is eliminating tax deductions (loop holes insinuates that these are some secret scam business does), and providing benefits to manufacturing. Obama is not wholesale chopping tax rates.
MSF Website
MACC Website
MSF Twitter
ANT wrote: Hfhopeful
Wait I just read that Obama plans to cut Corporate Tax rate down to 28%...why do you all not agree with this?
Corporate tax rates are bullshit to begin with. Why would I support "cutting" them when they should be at or near zero.
I'm not sure I understand...if they should be at or near zero wouldn't you support any policy moving them towards that end?
I do support reducing corporate tax rates, but this is a ploy by Obama. He is eliminating tax deductions (loop holes insinuates that these are some secret scam business does), and providing benefits to manufacturing. Obama is not wholesale chopping tax rates.
Flatter tax rate for corporations = bad.
Flatter tax rate for people = good.
OK, got it.
"Social cohesion and puritanical morality place roughly on my list of concerns between whether I'll pick up jock itch at the gym this week (not likely, since I don't go the gym) and whether it'll rain in Christchurch, New Zealand next Tuesday."
-Eddie
ANT wrote: Hfhopeful
Wait I just read that Obama plans to cut Corporate Tax rate down to 28%...why do you all not agree with this?
Corporate tax rates are bullshit to begin with. Why would I support "cutting" them when they should be at or near zero.
I'm not sure I understand...if they should be at or near zero wouldn't you support any policy moving them towards that end?
I do support reducing corporate tax rates, but this is a ploy by Obama. He is eliminating tax deductions (loop holes insinuates that these are some secret scam business does), and providing benefits to manufacturing. Obama is not wholesale chopping tax rates.
Ant, a couple things in response:
1.) You have more or less advocated getting rid of a ton of tax deductions for individuals, why don't you feel the same way about corporate tax rates?
2.) Realistically, wouldn't this just ensure that monolithic transnational corporations would pay taxes at the appropriate rate (i.e. GE) while cutting taxes for smaller and mid-sized corporations? Seems like a good thing to me.
Financial Modeling Training
Guide to Finance Interviews
Banking Resume
No, flatter and lower tax
No, flatter and lower tax rates are good for both.
MSF Website
MACC Website
MSF Twitter
No, I agree with flat for
No, I agree with flat for both. If the government wants to tax income or revenue, do so, without the social engineering.
What I find funny is Obama is big with the environmental crowd, but one of the greatest destroyers of the environment is owning a home and commuting to work. Apartments and living in cities is efficient and less pouting.
MSF Website
MACC Website
MSF Twitter
What a shitstorm.
What a shitstorm.
per ardua ad astra
eeew dividends gross, lets
eeew dividends gross, lets talk about capital gains.
All jokes aside I think Obama is trying to make America more like Canada, and that is a good move for everyone involved.
dec-jun-jun wrote: All jokes
All jokes aside I think Obama is trying to make America more like Canada, and that is a good move for everyone involved.
Yeah that would be fucking awesome, eh?
dec-jun-jun wrote: eeew
eeew dividends gross, lets talk about capital gains.
All jokes aside I think Obama is trying to make America more like Canada, and that is a good move for everyone involved.
You mean get rid of the minorities? Interesting.
Canada is awesome simply
Canada is awesome simply because it has the USA.
MSF Website
MACC Website
MSF Twitter
How long before Obama or some
How long before Obama or some other leftist prez reneges on ROTH IRAs?
ANT wrote: No, I agree with
No, I agree with flat for both. If the government wants to tax income or revenue, do so, without the social engineering.
What I find funny is Obama is big with the environmental crowd, but one of the greatest destroyers of the environment is owning a home and commuting to work. Apartments and living in cities is efficient and less pouting.
Its wild that the industry he chooses to subsidize is manufacturing...GM isn't exactly carbon neutral. It is pure campaigning.
America has an absolutely terrible tax code as is. It is so complex that it is difficult to interpret and enforce...we have a tax court. Where you can argue. It should be a simple question: did you pay your taxes? The largest contributor to the debt this past decade was tax evasion...its a lot harder to dodge a flat tax or something similar.