Derby Trail Forums

Go Back   Derby Trail Forums > The Steve Dellinger Discourse Den
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #20  
Old 09-23-2012, 11:36 AM
pmacdaddy's Avatar
pmacdaddy pmacdaddy is offline
The Curragh
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 2,867
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Danzig View Post
i don't recall saying anything negative about his charitable contributions. matter of fact, i said either a bit further back, or in another thread, that those are a good thing.
however, in mentioning his effective tax rate is lower than most-exactly how does suggesting a change mean i want to 'stick it to him'? rather, i would suggest that his rate should probably be higher than most of us, not lower-that right now, we are the ones getting stuck. he's worth 250 million, i'm worth a fraction of that. so why is my rate higher? how does that make sense? and yes, having the highest income folks paying a higher effective rate than the rest of us would absolutely have an effect on the budget. how could it not?
he paid about half his running mates effective rate, with ryan also having a fraction of romneys worth. why?


what would his effective rate have been? his income is taxed at 15%, because it's investment income instead of employment income. in other words, the govt is in effect allowing him tax breaks. you know, like the 47% he was attacking as being moochers.

serious reform is needed. but it won't happen. and why is romney taxed at 15% regardless of where he invests? money leaving the country gives him the same rate as money that stays in country. why?
Sorry point about contributions not directed at you personally. Point is, that impact should be removed when talking about effective rate.

I'm not so sure you can consider how dividends and cap gains are treated purely as a "tax break". What's the net impact of raising capital gains taxes to 35%?. Is it an overall positive for the economy? I seriously doubt it.

I would love to see tax reform addressing loopholes, that limited minimum Federal tax liability to zero, addressed the AMT in a sensible manner, committed to keep the mortgage deduction to give housing some additional confidence for now. Logically phase out the bush tax expiration, paired with some very serious committments on spending. Of course, this will never happen.
Reply With Quote
 


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:37 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.