Proposed Buffett Rule and How It Would Apply to Some Lottery Winners Who InvestPrev Topic Next Topic

New Topic New Poll

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

Yes, the wealthy should pay their fair share.

[ 15 ]

[ 28.9% ]

No, things are just fine the way they are.

[ 9 ]

[ 17.3% ]

Neither, put in a flat tax for all types of income

[ 18 ]

[ 34.6% ]

Neither, I will explain below.

[ 10 ]

[ 19.2% ]

Total valid votes

[ 52 ]

Discarded votes

[ 5 ]

Kumo

United States
Member #122,227
January 27, 2012
173 Posts
Offline

Feb 13, 2012, 9:38 am

Some of the wealthiest Americans are just only at around 14% of their annual income due to long term capital gains. While others in the Middle class and Upper Middle Class pay up to 35% in taxes. What are your thoughts about the proposed Buffett Rule?

Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same. ~Ronald Reagan

"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." ~Wolfgang von Goethe

"It's preferable to be harmlessly paranoid than fatally stupid." ~Anonymous
rdgrnr

100

The Hall Of The Mountain Kings Tennessee
United States
Member #73,901
April 28, 2009
15,378 Posts
Offline

Feb 13, 2012, 10:27 am

Quote: Originally posted by Kumo on Feb 13, 2012
Some of the wealthiest Americans are just only at around 14% of their annual income due to long term capital gains. While others in the Middle class and Upper Middle Class pay up to 35% in taxes. What are your thoughts about the proposed Buffett Rule?

Buffett is a jerk who's always trying to make himself look good. If he paid his secretary in stock, she'd be paying the same rate as him but that wouldn't make a nice touchy-feely story to deflect from his fighting tooth and nail to keep from paying taxes he already owes. He's just a fraud.

And when you say you want the rich to "pay their fair share" as obama puts it, are you saying you want them to pay less taxes?

Because factually, they already pay most of the taxes paid in this country.
CDanaT

Central TN
United States
Member #121,185
January 4, 2012
9,632 Posts
Offline

Feb 13, 2012, 10:55 am

Quote: Originally posted by rdgrnr on Feb 13, 2012
Buffett is a jerk who's always trying to make himself look good. If he paid his secretary in stock, she'd be paying the same rate as him but that wouldn't make a nice touchy-feely story to deflect from his fighting tooth and nail to keep from paying taxes he already owes. He's just a fraud.

And when you say you want the rich to "pay their fair share" as obama puts it, are you saying you want them to pay less taxes?

Because factually, they already pay most of the taxes paid in this country.

Millionaire or billionaire, doesn't make that much difference when it comes to taxes....if Bufett pays less than 35%, so what.....what deductions does he have to get him down to the alleged 14% level or whatever level hes at ? giving to charities or running non profit organizations pay medical expenses of other people through anonymous donations.... Who gives a rats "behind" if W.B pays 14% on his earnings...14% of 10 million dollars earned or whatever his earnings are at is a HECK OF ALOT than anyone will pay.... Funny, a large number of people all scream, "make the rich pay their fair share" but its the government who can't live on a what they take in....Want to really be fair to everyone equally ??? charge a flat tax and put the United States Government on a budget diet.

Pick a lane, master that lane, and stay in it. Firearms are second only to the constitution in importance, they are the people's liberty's teeth.
Stack47

Kentucky
United States
Member #32,651
February 14, 2006
10,580 Posts
Offline

Feb 13, 2012, 11:08 am

Quote: Originally posted by Kumo on Feb 13, 2012
Some of the wealthiest Americans are just only at around 14% of their annual income due to long term capital gains. While others in the Middle class and Upper Middle Class pay up to 35% in taxes. What are your thoughts about the proposed Buffett Rule?

Mitt Romney paid about $3 million in taxes from capital gains of about $21 million and someone winning $21 million from a lottery jackpot probably paid over $7 million. If the rules were changed, Romney would pay $7 million but there would be zero benefit to the lottery winner. Don't want to get into a discussion that probably belongs in a blog, but if the capital gain tax rules were changed, the "super rich" will probably invest much less or not at all so I don't see how that would benefit anyone.
Kumo

United States
Member #122,227
January 27, 2012
173 Posts
Offline

Feb 13, 2012, 11:22 am

Quote: Originally posted by rdgrnr on Feb 13, 2012
Buffett is a jerk who's always trying to make himself look good. If he paid his secretary in stock, she'd be paying the same rate as him but that wouldn't make a nice touchy-feely story to deflect from his fighting tooth and nail to keep from paying taxes he already owes. He's just a fraud.

And when you say you want the rich to "pay their fair share" as obama puts it, are you saying you want them to pay less taxes?

Because factually, they already pay most of the taxes paid in this country.

Heya rd. I'm keeping most of my own thoughts personal for a few days. I've not yet voted in my own poll.

However, the Buffett Rule definitely looks like a political move by Mr. Obama.

To answer your question, I am curious to see what other folks here think about it. Especially since it would likely apply to some current and future lottery jackpot winners.
sully16

25

Ringleader

Michigan
United States
Member #81,736
October 28, 2009
167,747 Posts
Offline

Feb 13, 2012, 11:33 am

Make the rich pay their fair share comes from the current government using class warfare.

Having a billionaire pay more does nothing for me.

We pay to much tax as a country in whole, enough is enough, government needs to curb is spending, stop the pork and the earmarks.

Get rid of entitlements period, welfare..plain and simple ,YOU DON'T GET NONE !!!!!!

The only people I hear screaming " make the rich pay more," are scuzzy polititions who want to get re-elected and people collecting entitlments.

You get rid of WIC AND WELFARE, SECTION 8, GUESS WHAT, LESS PEOPLE WILL BE GETTING KNOCKED UP JUST SO THEY GET PUT INTO THE SYSTEM.

Do you know what "mamas little money maker means? thats when people have their daughters get pregnant, they turn around and become foster parents (which pays very well ) and tada, the whole family benefits.

Then you have the dis-abilty cheats, sucking the life out of SOCIAL SECURITY, MEDICAID AND MEDICARE.

You get rid of entitlements and 4 things will happen..

1. People will pay more attention to birth control

2. more people will find that job,

3. they won't vote for <snip>s who feel they can take and take and take.

4. with more people working and a more responsible government, guess what, no more financial problems. we all benefit.

This post has been automatically changed by the Lottery Post computer system to remove inappropriate content and/or spam.
CDanaT

Central TN
United States
Member #121,185
January 4, 2012
9,632 Posts
Offline

Feb 13, 2012, 11:45 am

Quote: Originally posted by sully16 on Feb 13, 2012
Make the rich pay their fair share comes from the current government using class warfare.

Having a billionaire pay more does nothing for me.

We pay to much tax as a country in whole, enough is enough, government needs to curb is spending, stop the pork and the earmarks.

Get rid of entitlements period, welfare..plain and simple ,YOU DON'T GET NONE !!!!!!

The only people I hear screaming " make the rich pay more," are scuzzy polititions who want to get re-elected and people collecting entitlments.

You get rid of WIC AND WELFARE, SECTION 8, GUESS WHAT, LESS PEOPLE WILL BE GETTING KNOCKED UP JUST SO THEY GET PUT INTO THE SYSTEM.

Do you know what "mamas little money maker means? thats when people have their daughters get pregnant, they turn around and become foster parents (which pays very well ) and tada, the whole family benefits.

Then you have the dis-abilty cheats, sucking the life out of SOCIAL SECURITY, MEDICAID AND MEDICARE.

You get rid of entitlements and 4 things will happen..

1. People will pay more attention to birth control

2. more people will find that job,

3. they won't vote for <snip>s who feel they can take and take and take.

4. with more people working and a more responsible government, guess what, no more financial problems. we all benefit.

This post has been automatically changed by the Lottery Post computer system to remove inappropriate content and/or spam.

AAAMEN & very well put Sully ! Kudos to you on that one.......... Only issues that I can see is "you can't fix stupidity , issue common sense and stop political greed".... When we solve those issues, man what an even greater country we will have. God bless America !!!

Pick a lane, master that lane, and stay in it. Firearms are second only to the constitution in importance, they are the people's liberty's teeth.
Kumo

United States
Member #122,227
January 27, 2012
173 Posts
Offline

Feb 13, 2012, 12:15 pm

Quote: Originally posted by Kumo on Feb 13, 2012
Heya rd. I'm keeping most of my own thoughts personal for a few days. I've not yet voted in my own poll.

However, the Buffett Rule definitely looks like a political move by Mr. Obama.

To answer your question, I am curious to see what other folks here think about it. Especially since it would likely apply to some current and future lottery jackpot winners.

A bit of a follow up, illustrates what led me to this question.

I've done some old calculations in the past on CVO's after the 35% Uncle Sam share. They were fairly simple but accounted for the post 2012 Capital Gains tax of 20% as well as very conservative interest rates on investments. Each year further in the future was updated with the new totals of the principal balance as well as gained income that was reinvested.

If something like the Buffett Rule goes into effect, it completely throws of my old calculations. Granted there are many other factors that can affect an investment, but I was looking at more of the long term picture when I did the math.
sully16

25

Ringleader

Michigan
United States
Member #81,736
October 28, 2009
167,747 Posts
Offline

Feb 13, 2012, 12:20 pm

Quote: Originally posted by CDanaT on Feb 13, 2012
AAAMEN & very well put Sully ! Kudos to you on that one.......... Only issues that I can see is "you can't fix stupidity , issue common sense and stop political greed".... When we solve those issues, man what an even greater country we will have. God bless America !!!

Thanks, I should have added a number 5, watch the national obesity rate drop.
time*treat

United States
Member #13,130
March 30, 2005
2,171 Posts
Offline

Feb 13, 2012, 9:30 pm

Quote: Originally posted by Kumo on Feb 13, 2012
Some of the wealthiest Americans are just only at around 14% of their annual income due to long term capital gains. While others in the Middle class and Upper Middle Class pay up to 35% in taxes. What are your thoughts about the proposed Buffett Rule?

The question implies the gov't spends the money in a more useful manner than the people earning it. Which it doesn't.

When the wealthy buy a fancy car or yacht, or build another huge house, the construction and upkeep of those items provides work for others.

Look around your own house. From the bricks, siding, insulation, wall studs, nails, & drywall, to the fixtures (sinks, baths) and tile & carpet & hardwood flooring, to the light switches and outlets and wiring, to the windows, appliances (washer, dryer, stove, HWH and furnace) and even the furniture -- lots of people making a living putting a piece of that puzzle together and a few more involved in the transportation of all those pieces.

Now, extrapolate that to what a wealthy person orders up when they build a new house.

How could anyone suggest that it's a better idea to send that money to D.C. rather than spread it out among people who actually do something productive to earn it?

D.C. is the biggest welfare queen of all and the "Buffett Rule" is her way of collecting a bigger check.

In neo-conned Amerika, bank robs you.
Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms should be the name of a convenience store, not a govnoment agency.
Bigheadnick

Taunton, Ma
United States
Member #122,997
February 11, 2012
136 Posts
Offline

Feb 13, 2012, 10:20 pm

Income tax should be abolished and instead impose a flat 5% federal sales tax on all domestic goods and services and a 6% tax on all imports.
Piaceri

Republic of Texas
United States
Member #57,555
January 9, 2008
1,095 Posts
Offline

Feb 14, 2012, 12:27 am

Income tax needs to be simplified, but a simple flat tax may not work. Taxes can be used for incentives in the free market. A low LT capital gains tax encourages investment, which is a good thing. To expand on that, why not make the first $10k in interest income tax free? These uber-rich who are paying low taxes are not getting all their income from LP capital gains tax, but also from dividends paid on the stock they own, including their own companies. Dividend income is taxed at 15% IF the taxpayer's tax rate is 25% or more. If the taxpayer's income tax rate is less than 25%, dividend income is taxed at 0%. There's an interesting rolling story between LT capital gains and dividend income that could put your tax rate at 0%.....

A mortgage interest deduction gives incentives to people to buy homes, as does the property tax deduction. So a flat tax would not benefit the housing market, and possibly hurt the housing market if current homeowner deductions are removed.

Even as suggested, an import tax could be added to incentivize US production. However, all these one sided Free Trade Agreements we have would be violated....

Lottery and gambing winnings should not be taxed as ordinary income, but should be taxed the same as LT capital gains. Neither are ordinary income for 99.9% of taxpayers.

I do believe that beyond a few simple incentives, a flat tax should be initiated, but it would have to take so much into consideration that it would no longer be a flat tax. The tax code needs to be scrapped and simplified, not necessarily flattened.

Nor should a consumption tax be the only tax in place of income tax. Lower income tax brackets and a small 1% national sales tax with the usual exemptions (food, services, etc) would be something to look into. However, a consumption tax by itself just invites all kinds of trouble. It starts the fall into VAT (value added tax) and HST (Harmonized Sales Tax - combination of sales & VAT tax) type taxation which taxes production from raw material to finished goods. EVERYTHING is taxed, and in some cases you can reclaim VAT/HST paid, but that is not always the case. I've seen these taxes, work with them every day, and they are a PITA. Not to mention the rates are usually 20-25% at each level of production.

singlewinnersinglewinnersinglewinner
kapla

United States
Member #94,610
July 24, 2010
4,735 Posts
Offline

Feb 14, 2012, 4:51 am

Quote: Originally posted by Piaceri on Feb 14, 2012
Income tax needs to be simplified, but a simple flat tax may not work. Taxes can be used for incentives in the free market. A low LT capital gains tax encourages investment, which is a good thing. To expand on that, why not make the first $10k in interest income tax free? These uber-rich who are paying low taxes are not getting all their income from LP capital gains tax, but also from dividends paid on the stock they own, including their own companies. Dividend income is taxed at 15% IF the taxpayer's tax rate is 25% or more. If the taxpayer's income tax rate is less than 25%, dividend income is taxed at 0%. There's an interesting rolling story between LT capital gains and dividend income that could put your tax rate at 0%.....

A mortgage interest deduction gives incentives to people to buy homes, as does the property tax deduction. So a flat tax would not benefit the housing market, and possibly hurt the housing market if current homeowner deductions are removed.

Even as suggested, an import tax could be added to incentivize US production. However, all these one sided Free Trade Agreements we have would be violated....

Lottery and gambing winnings should not be taxed as ordinary income, but should be taxed the same as LT capital gains. Neither are ordinary income for 99.9% of taxpayers.

I do believe that beyond a few simple incentives, a flat tax should be initiated, but it would have to take so much into consideration that it would no longer be a flat tax. The tax code needs to be scrapped and simplified, not necessarily flattened.

Nor should a consumption tax be the only tax in place of income tax. Lower income tax brackets and a small 1% national sales tax with the usual exemptions (food, services, etc) would be something to look into. However, a consumption tax by itself just invites all kinds of trouble. It starts the fall into VAT (value added tax) and HST (Harmonized Sales Tax - combination of sales & VAT tax) type taxation which taxes production from raw material to finished goods. EVERYTHING is taxed, and in some cases you can reclaim VAT/HST paid, but that is not always the case. I've seen these taxes, work with them every day, and they are a PITA. Not to mention the rates are usually 20-25% at each level of production.

Piaceri, you make a lot of good points. I think the mortgage market would do JUST FINE with out the deduction. Very few people buy a house for the deduction anymore. You buy a house because you need/want a place to live. Remember CASH FOR CLUNKERS, they said once that stopped people would stop buying cars, now look - record profits (and by the way its nice to see)

I think it is time to at least TRY some form of a flat tax. It is nice to at least hear the candidates talking about it, that is the 1st step. The more they talk about it the better chance it has of coming true.

Its time to make some changes and that is not going to be easy for anyone, but its time.
RL-RANDOMLOGIC

United States
Member #59,352
March 13, 2008
5,626 Posts
Offline

Feb 14, 2012, 6:08 am

Quote: Originally posted by sully16 on Feb 13, 2012
Make the rich pay their fair share comes from the current government using class warfare.

Having a billionaire pay more does nothing for me.

We pay to much tax as a country in whole, enough is enough, government needs to curb is spending, stop the pork and the earmarks.

Get rid of entitlements period, welfare..plain and simple ,YOU DON'T GET NONE !!!!!!

The only people I hear screaming " make the rich pay more," are scuzzy polititions who want to get re-elected and people collecting entitlments.

You get rid of WIC AND WELFARE, SECTION 8, GUESS WHAT, LESS PEOPLE WILL BE GETTING KNOCKED UP JUST SO THEY GET PUT INTO THE SYSTEM.

Do you know what "mamas little money maker means? thats when people have their daughters get pregnant, they turn around and become foster parents (which pays very well ) and tada, the whole family benefits.

Then you have the dis-abilty cheats, sucking the life out of SOCIAL SECURITY, MEDICAID AND MEDICARE.

You get rid of entitlements and 4 things will happen..

1. People will pay more attention to birth control

2. more people will find that job,

3. they won't vote for <snip>s who feel they can take and take and take.

4. with more people working and a more responsible government, guess what, no more financial problems. we all benefit.

This post has been automatically changed by the Lottery Post computer system to remove inappropriate content and/or spam.

We need to add a few things to the above. Regulation. Some say we don't need them but

yet, they/we all depend on them every day. A few relulations in the banking industry could

have prevented the housing buble from ever starting. For those who oppose regulations I

would like to say, maybe we should not have any laws at all. Make murder legal, corporate

takeovers should be handled with guns and bombs. Knock off your competitors with a hit,

that sort of thing. The banking industry has the cake and get to eat it too. They got the

regulations removed which allowed them to take unfair advantage while leaving the ones that

protect there butts in place. To me it was like watching a illegal robbery in process and who

was protecting us, Hmmm, no one. Those who were suppose to be watching over us were

in it up to there knees with the bad guys. Greed is destroying this country and making slaves

of us all. 30% is like asking someone to work 4 months out of the year just to pay taxes.

I am tired of paying for someone elses mistakes. All prison systems should include forced

labor so that the perpertrators have to pay there depts in full, including room and board.

Enforce our borders, expel the illegals, and stop mingling in other countries affairs. Bring back

our manufacturing base. Stop or greatly reduce imports from China and kill the illegal drug trade.

Do these things and the rest will take care of it's self

PS. one more thing, it the parents arn't legal the child's not either.

RL

....
mcginnin56

United States
Member #111,435
May 25, 2011
6,323 Posts
Offline

Feb 14, 2012, 10:26 am

Quote: Originally posted by sully16 on Feb 13, 2012
Make the rich pay their fair share comes from the current government using class warfare.

Having a billionaire pay more does nothing for me.

We pay to much tax as a country in whole, enough is enough, government needs to curb is spending, stop the pork and the earmarks.

Get rid of entitlements period, welfare..plain and simple ,YOU DON'T GET NONE !!!!!!

The only people I hear screaming " make the rich pay more," are scuzzy polititions who want to get re-elected and people collecting entitlments.

You get rid of WIC AND WELFARE, SECTION 8, GUESS WHAT, LESS PEOPLE WILL BE GETTING KNOCKED UP JUST SO THEY GET PUT INTO THE SYSTEM.

Do you know what "mamas little money maker means? thats when people have their daughters get pregnant, they turn around and become foster parents (which pays very well ) and tada, the whole family benefits.

Then you have the dis-abilty cheats, sucking the life out of SOCIAL SECURITY, MEDICAID AND MEDICARE.

You get rid of entitlements and 4 things will happen..

1. People will pay more attention to birth control

2. more people will find that job,

3. they won't vote for <snip>s who feel they can take and take and take.

4. with more people working and a more responsible government, guess what, no more financial problems. we all benefit.

This post has been automatically changed by the Lottery Post computer system to remove inappropriate content and/or spam.

Alright sully!!!

Go get em", you should run for office, I'm sure most LP members would vote for you immediately!

Hail to sully!!!