Welcome Guest
Log In | Register )
The time is now 4:26 am
You last visited October 2, 2014, 4:22 am
All times shown are
Eastern Time (GMT-5:00)

Proposed Buffett Rule and How It Would Apply to Some Lottery Winners Who Invest

Topic closed. 122 replies. Last post 2 years ago by haymaker.

Page 4 of 9
52
PrintE-mailLink

Should there be a minimum of 30% tax on long term capital gains?

Yes, the wealthy should pay their fair share. [ 15 ]  [28.85%]
No, things are just fine the way they are. [ 9 ]  [17.31%]
Neither, put in a flat tax for all types of income [ 18 ]  [34.62%]
Neither, I will explain below. [ 10 ]  [19.23%]
Total Valid Votes [ 52 ]  
Discarded Votes [ 5 ]  
Bigheadnick's avatar - badluck
Taunton, Ma
United States
Member #123010
February 11, 2012
136 Posts
Offline
Posted: February 16, 2012, 12:32 pm - IP Logged

Dana, I could't even read your post, I started to and all that bright bold blue gave me a tension headache.

    NightStalker's avatar - IMG00073 20100720-1609_2.jpg
    Nothing Good Happens After Midnight
    East of Columbus, OH
    United States
    Member #120848
    December 28, 2011
    416 Posts
    Offline
    Posted: February 16, 2012, 2:26 pm - IP Logged

     Of course you're going to cherry pick that example, FROM A RIGHT WING FORUM!!. A selection of 31,000, 3,000 of which aren't even scientists rather doctors and 13,000 of them only have BA's compared to the vast majority of the scientific community. You believe what you want to believe. You want to belive that we're fine, that we can do whatever we want on this planet and no consequences shall arise.  How can you be so blind? It is crap like that that leaves me tempted to vote for the libs. You can't pump billions of tons of chemicals into the air and expect nothing to happen from it. The thought that we can't affect climate is lunacy.

     I also understand that we can't just break from fossil fuels cold turkey, but we need to hurry the F up because I fear we are approaching a tipping point if we haven't already. I could list for you a barrage of non-political scientific site links but for some reason copy-paste doesn't work in mozilla. But heres a thought, google climate change itself and don't just read what American republicans say about it. Read what the scientific cummunity as a whole says about it. Even the tobacco companies had scientists years ago who said cigarettes don't cause cancer.

     You speak of conspiracy theories, that it's just about control. This is laughable. I don't even like Obama but that's a joke. The politicians are controlled by they're contributors, the polititions themselves control nothing. The money behind them controls everything. Look at all they're voting records compared to who gives they're campaigns the most money. Left, Right, they're all the same when it comes to this (with few exceptions). Try looking at the evidence OBJECTIVELY without preconceptions that Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity drilled into your head.

    It is still not a consensus.  There were over 650 dissenting climatology scientists at the UN Global Conference on Global Warming.  http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=2158072e-802a-23ad-45f0-274616db87e6

    Since 1998 the avg temp has actually been falling.  My point is, is that it is not a consensus.

     

    It is about control.  Why would President Empty Suit deny jobs to workers in the Gulf Coast?  Jobs that would be created by the Keystone Pipeline?  Jobs that would be created by lowering corporate taxes?  He wants you dependent on the government. 

    I'm not going to change your mind, nor you mine.  And that's okay. 

     

    Good luck in the numbers, Nick.

     

    Type

    Life's Too Short To Be Unhappy Cool

      Bigheadnick's avatar - badluck
      Taunton, Ma
      United States
      Member #123010
      February 11, 2012
      136 Posts
      Offline
      Posted: February 16, 2012, 3:19 pm - IP Logged

       I guess we disagree on the definition of concensus then. Concesus by definition is the prevailing thought, opinion or agreement about something. Prevailing thought and concensus can defined as the overwhelming majority opinion. Estimates put this at somewhere between 90-97% of the worldwide scientific community. And even if we assume that percentage is far less as I assume you do. Say it's 50%, Isn't that enough to make it a legitimate threat. Something to be taken seriously and not written off as a hoax.  I'll concede to a large number of people who call it BS If you concede to a large number who see global warming as a legitimate threat to our existence. Think about it like this; I sincerely hope you're right and I'm wrong but what if I'm right? What if all these scientists foreign and demestic are right? If they're wrong and we sacrifice short term convenience, What have we lost? a few jobs? muscle cars? some infrastructure rendered obselete? If they're right and we continue on as status quo, What will we lose? the human race.

       Obama doesn't control the prevailing thought of the worldwide scientific community. I understand lefty principles and policies as a whole are geared toward government dependence, this we can agree however in this instance, there needs to be that control and oversight. This isn't a lefty scam or hoax geared at gaining control. The rest of the world has been beating this drum long before American Democrats. We are so engrossed in fossil fuels. Our entire infrastructure and economy are built around it. I'm not advocating the complete elimination of fossil fuels immediately as I'm aware the economic catastrophe it would create. But we have to start moving away from them. A large portion of these scientists that are global warming nay sayers are paid for. You can google "scientists paid to debunk global warming" and see a littany of people paid by oil companies. Eerily similar to what the tobacco companies did.

       But I digress, the mere possibility of this threat is enough for me. I fear for my children and they're children. I implore you to look at the actual reports, satallite images and raw data and not just the stories with quotes. Ice caps are melting-this is a fact backed by satallite images. This results in less light surface Ice/snow)to reflect sunlight and more dark surface(water) which absorbs heat. You can perform a simple experiment to prove this using a thermometer and two poster boards. I'm not a scientist, but I've done my share of individual research and the results are scary.

       I wish you the best of luck as well Smile

        rdgrnr's avatar - walt
        -Ridge Runner- Oracle of the Appalachians
        Way back up in them dadgum hills, son!
        United States
        Member #73904
        April 28, 2009
        14903 Posts
        Offline
        Posted: February 16, 2012, 3:51 pm - IP Logged

         I guess we disagree on the definition of concensus then. Concesus by definition is the prevailing thought, opinion or agreement about something. Prevailing thought and concensus can defined as the overwhelming majority opinion. Estimates put this at somewhere between 90-97% of the worldwide scientific community. And even if we assume that percentage is far less as I assume you do. Say it's 50%, Isn't that enough to make it a legitimate threat. Something to be taken seriously and not written off as a hoax.  I'll concede to a large number of people who call it BS If you concede to a large number who see global warming as a legitimate threat to our existence. Think about it like this; I sincerely hope you're right and I'm wrong but what if I'm right? What if all these scientists foreign and demestic are right? If they're wrong and we sacrifice short term convenience, What have we lost? a few jobs? muscle cars? some infrastructure rendered obselete? If they're right and we continue on as status quo, What will we lose? the human race.

         Obama doesn't control the prevailing thought of the worldwide scientific community. I understand lefty principles and policies as a whole are geared toward government dependence, this we can agree however in this instance, there needs to be that control and oversight. This isn't a lefty scam or hoax geared at gaining control. The rest of the world has been beating this drum long before American Democrats. We are so engrossed in fossil fuels. Our entire infrastructure and economy are built around it. I'm not advocating the complete elimination of fossil fuels immediately as I'm aware the economic catastrophe it would create. But we have to start moving away from them. A large portion of these scientists that are global warming nay sayers are paid for. You can google "scientists paid to debunk global warming" and see a littany of people paid by oil companies. Eerily similar to what the tobacco companies did.

         But I digress, the mere possibility of this threat is enough for me. I fear for my children and they're children. I implore you to look at the actual reports, satallite images and raw data and not just the stories with quotes. Ice caps are melting-this is a fact backed by satallite images. This results in less light surface Ice/snow)to reflect sunlight and more dark surface(water) which absorbs heat. You can perform a simple experiment to prove this using a thermometer and two poster boards. I'm not a scientist, but I've done my share of individual research and the results are scary.

         I wish you the best of luck as well Smile

        I think you might be overlooking the most important thing to the left - their agenda. It comes before everything and anything. It comes waaaay before truth.

        The left are people who want a nanny-state directing every moment of their lives. They want government to control everything and they will stop at nothing to achieve that. They have this one-dimensional, single focus and they want to see it come to fruition now.

        If you believe liberal scientists don't apply their own personal bias and outright lie to achieve their goals then you probably don't believe the mainstream news media does either.

        Truth, honor, dignity and self-respect are unknown values in today's liberal community.

        My parents were Democrats but they wouldn't recognize the party today. The Democrat Party has been hijacked by the scum of the earth and that is what they have become - the scum of the earth. Defecating on our flag, mocking God, masturbating in public, etc. etc. etc. If you think anything good ever comes out of aligning yourself with evil, you're destined to learn some hard lessons.


                                                     
                             
                                                 

         

         

         

         

                                                                                                           

        "The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing"

                                                                                                    --Edmund Burke

         

         

          Bigheadnick's avatar - badluck
          Taunton, Ma
          United States
          Member #123010
          February 11, 2012
          136 Posts
          Offline
          Posted: February 16, 2012, 5:13 pm - IP Logged

           I want to make this clear: I don't align myself with either left or right. I believe both parties have drifted away from their respective ideologies. I believe both parties have successfuly convinced they're constituants that thay are the good guys and the other side is evil and that there is no middle ground nor a third option. That you are either "with us or against us". The truth is there is there is good and bad in both parties and just to show you just how hard it is for me to vote for either party, I'll bullet point my views.

          pro green movement

          anti abortion

          anti death penalty

          anti gun control

          pro "safety nets" but with strict reforms

          pro flat tax or better yet a flat sales tax

          pro deregulation of most business liscenses, permits and regulations in general (except environmental ones)

          pro immigration reform (closing borders and deporting illegals)

          pro religious freedom (the attack on Christmas and other displays of christian and catholic belief are disgusting (and I don't even have a religion)

          anti gay marriage as marriage is a religious institution (gays should however be able to have the same legal benifits.

          pro war on Iraq, Afghanistan and any other threat including Iran and N.Korea

          I belive Islam is a disease to be eradicated.

          pro legalization of marijuanna and I haven't smoked the stuff in 15years nor do I plan to even if it's legal.

           I think you guys are assuming I'm liberal because of my thoughts on the environment. As you can see, I'm clearly not. So please don't lump me in the same boat as Liberal's. It's an insult to my intelligence. One more thing rdgrnr, not every scientist that agrees with me is a liberal, that's a big leap to make. And I'm well aware the media's bias on both sides. I watch the mainstream news for weather, sports and numbers, nothing else.


            United States
            Member #111446
            May 25, 2011
            6323 Posts
            Offline
            Posted: February 16, 2012, 5:25 pm - IP Logged

             I want to make this clear: I don't align myself with either left or right. I believe both parties have drifted away from their respective ideologies. I believe both parties have successfuly convinced they're constituants that thay are the good guys and the other side is evil and that there is no middle ground nor a third option. That you are either "with us or against us". The truth is there is there is good and bad in both parties and just to show you just how hard it is for me to vote for either party, I'll bullet point my views.

            pro green movement

            anti abortion

            anti death penalty

            anti gun control

            pro "safety nets" but with strict reforms

            pro flat tax or better yet a flat sales tax

            pro deregulation of most business liscenses, permits and regulations in general (except environmental ones)

            pro immigration reform (closing borders and deporting illegals)

            pro religious freedom (the attack on Christmas and other displays of christian and catholic belief are disgusting (and I don't even have a religion)

            anti gay marriage as marriage is a religious institution (gays should however be able to have the same legal benifits.

            pro war on Iraq, Afghanistan and any other threat including Iran and N.Korea

            I belive Islam is a disease to be eradicated.

            pro legalization of marijuanna and I haven't smoked the stuff in 15years nor do I plan to even if it's legal.

             I think you guys are assuming I'm liberal because of my thoughts on the environment. As you can see, I'm clearly not. So please don't lump me in the same boat as Liberal's. It's an insult to my intelligence. One more thing rdgrnr, not every scientist that agrees with me is a liberal, that's a big leap to make. And I'm well aware the media's bias on both sides. I watch the mainstream news for weather, sports and numbers, nothing else.

            Ahhhhh................any more input on how this would apply to some lottery winners who invest, to Proposed Buffet Rule? (Original Forum Topic).    Roll Eyes

              Bigheadnick's avatar - badluck
              Taunton, Ma
              United States
              Member #123010
              February 11, 2012
              136 Posts
              Offline
              Posted: February 16, 2012, 5:47 pm - IP Logged

              Yeah we've completely gone off topic on this one Embarassed I guess the part about the flat tax would apply. My apologies for dragging out the off topic discussion. When I see certain statements, I can't resist stating my opinions. I'm extremely passionate in all my beliefs.


                United States
                Member #111446
                May 25, 2011
                6323 Posts
                Offline
                Posted: February 16, 2012, 5:56 pm - IP Logged

                Yeah we've completely gone off topic on this one Embarassed I guess the part about the flat tax would apply. My apologies for dragging out the off topic discussion. When I see certain statements, I can't resist stating my opinions. I'm extremely passionate in all my beliefs.

                That's quite alright............your passion for politics deserves a AAA+.

                Commendable that we have such informed, well educated LP members looking out for us!   Cheers

                  Avatar
                  Fantasy Land
                  United States
                  Member #7297
                  September 29, 2004
                  79 Posts
                  Offline
                  Posted: February 16, 2012, 11:05 pm - IP Logged

                  I would do it like Ronald Reagan did and tax cap gains under the same scale as ordinary income. It's simply unfair, whatever the tax scale is, for investment income to be given such a tax preference over income earned through labor.

                    Boney526's avatar - NjlpLogo
                    New Jersey
                    United States
                    Member #99034
                    October 18, 2010
                    1439 Posts
                    Offline
                    Posted: February 17, 2012, 10:06 am - IP Logged

                    Honestly, Global Warming is (according to almost all of scientists) is a real threat.  The question, IMO, is whether we want to pu the government in charge of preventing it.  Of course we don't, they screw everything up.

                     

                    Best option - get the government out of oil subsidies, along with (stopping) Green Energy subsidies.  If they stop subsidizing both sides, then Green Companies will have to compete by making better products instead of competing for Tax Payers money, and maybe we'd have some good clean energy - that costs nothing to tax payers.

                      NightStalker's avatar - IMG00073 20100720-1609_2.jpg
                      Nothing Good Happens After Midnight
                      East of Columbus, OH
                      United States
                      Member #120848
                      December 28, 2011
                      416 Posts
                      Offline
                      Posted: February 17, 2012, 11:05 am - IP Logged

                      The government needs to get out of a lot of things.  We could have alternatives.  The US is the Saudia Arabia of natural gas, but the government has put so many restrictions on fracking, which has been done safely for decades, that it makes it cost prohibitive to do.  We could have cars running on compressed natural gas.

                       

                      The government doesn't like coal fire electric plants or nuclear power plants, but wants us to drive electric cars.

                       

                      What about hydrogen?  Honda built a hydrogen powered car that it's by-product is water.  Hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe.  But we aren't looking into that.

                      Life's Too Short To Be Unhappy Cool

                        NightStalker's avatar - IMG00073 20100720-1609_2.jpg
                        Nothing Good Happens After Midnight
                        East of Columbus, OH
                        United States
                        Member #120848
                        December 28, 2011
                        416 Posts
                        Offline
                        Posted: February 17, 2012, 11:06 am - IP Logged

                        I would do it like Ronald Reagan did and tax cap gains under the same scale as ordinary income. It's simply unfair, whatever the tax scale is, for investment income to be given such a tax preference over income earned through labor.

                        But that's how you get people to invest their money is by taxing it less.  Because people who are investing want the highest rate of return and the lowest taxes on their capital gains.  If you continually raise the capital gains taxes, those people will find a different way for their money to work for them.

                        What I really don't like is the estate tax.  Its a tax on money that has already been taxed at least one time.

                        Life's Too Short To Be Unhappy Cool

                          tiggs95's avatar - Lottery-036.jpg

                          United States
                          Member #47420
                          November 4, 2006
                          3930 Posts
                          Offline
                          Posted: February 17, 2012, 11:38 am - IP Logged

                          Everybody pay 15% tax rate...Problem solved by yours truely tiggs...

                                                                                    Pure luck

                            Bigheadnick's avatar - badluck
                            Taunton, Ma
                            United States
                            Member #123010
                            February 11, 2012
                            136 Posts
                            Offline
                            Posted: February 17, 2012, 11:45 am - IP Logged

                             I still say remove all income taxes period, whether it be money earned through lottery, labor, business profit or stocks. A flat sales tax would balance everything accross the board. I say this full aware that I am poor and my tax burden would likely rise as a percentage of my income. The rich would likely remain the same and the middle class would get a much needed break. The current system as it is is destroying the middle class. I have been in the middle class when work was good and my living situation was not much better than it is now. There is no incentive for many poor to try to make it to middle class income as the tax code will only make them "working poor". The thing that keeps me going is personal pride and integrity. A flat sales tax accross the board will not break the poor but it will help to keep the middle class from joining them. Taxing the rich and or lotto winners any further is punishment for prosperity. This flys in the face of the American dream and the hope we all share to one day become rich.

                              Avatar
                              Fantasy Land
                              United States
                              Member #7297
                              September 29, 2004
                              79 Posts
                              Offline
                              Posted: February 17, 2012, 1:22 pm - IP Logged

                              Uh, no. You get people to invest their money by approaching people that have money to invest with a good investment. Investment didn't crater when Reagan tied cap gains to the ordinary income tax rate and it didn't soar when Clinton put the special tax rate on long term gains back. Everyone wants the lowest taxes possible, investors and working stiffs alike, people would also like to loose weight by eating ice cream.

                              A good investment remains a good investment, regardless of the tax rate, and capital gains applies to just about everything you could do to put your money to work. I suppose not tax free bonds, but those are only going to return what, 2-5%? A decent investment can return 10 or 15 or even 20%+. Even at the current top tax rate of 35% an investment returning 10% is going to bring in 6.5% after taxes, much better then the tax free bond rate of return. An investor that says, "Bah don't bother me with that 6.5% after taxes, I hate taxes, I'm going to stick with this 3% muni," is a foolish investor indeed.