UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (14) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Next Thread
Author: intercst Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Top Recommended Fools Feste Award Nominee! Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: of 76237  
Subject: John Bogle wants to raise your taxes Date: 12/23/2011 6:00 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 8
Interesting article. He wants to raise taxes on Wall Street Bankers even more.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/perfi/funds/story/2011-12-23/b...

A: I believe the rich should pay more, but that's not a good platform for tax policy. What has gone wrong is that we've failed to recognize the difference between earned income and unearned income. Is it really fair for gamblers on Wall Street to pay a 15% rate when they make a winning investment, and an honest working person — a bricklayer for example — may pay an equal or higher tax on their wages than a gambler? That's absolute absurdity.

Rates may have to be changed, but we also need to look at what is taxed, and how. Dividend income should be taxed at the same rate as ordinary income. As for capital gains, there ought to be some distinction between capital made by people who start businesses, and contribute value to society, and capital made by gamblers on Wall Street, some of whom win. Earned capital income should carry the regular dividend rate, but capital income gains by trading, and particularly short-term trading, should pay a higher tax, even than the present ordinary income rate.

</snip>


intercst
Print the post Back To Top
Author: FCorelli Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 69914 of 76237
Subject: Re: John Bogle wants to raise your taxes Date: 12/23/2011 9:10 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 4
BS.

If he wants lower taxes on gains om actual investment capital, OK But I don't see why we need to keep this regime of "THIS" income is good and"That" income is bad. wages vs cap gains/dividends like we gave now.

Tax all income as income. But don't tax "this" income differently than "that" income. And raise the standard deduction up to $50,000 to $100,000 and give people a real incentive to make money instead of the way it is now: Their incentive to work is increasing desperation

Print the post Back To Top
Author: JLC Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 69915 of 76237
Subject: Re: John Bogle wants to raise your taxes Date: 12/24/2011 4:45 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
Earned capital income should carry the regular dividend rate, but capital income gains by trading, and particularly short-term trading, should pay a higher tax, even than the present ordinary income rate.

So he wants to further suppress investment capital, further depressing the business environment and economy. Again, another fine example of someone with good/great investment smarts but dumb as a rock on tax issues. Almost as bad as listening to an actor/singer on issues other than acting/singing.

IMHO, flat tax for everything.

JLC

Print the post Back To Top
Author: intercst Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Top Recommended Fools Feste Award Nominee! Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 69916 of 76237
Subject: Re: John Bogle wants to raise your taxes Date: 12/24/2011 5:59 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 25
JLC analyzes,

So he wants to further suppress investment capital, further depressing the business environment and economy.

I hardly call Goldman Sachs trading synthetic swaps as having anything to do with "investment capital".

intercst

Print the post Back To Top
Author: AcmeFool Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 69917 of 76237
Subject: Re: John Bogle wants to raise your taxes Date: 12/24/2011 3:06 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 9
Again, another fine example of someone with good/great investment smarts but dumb as a rock on tax issues. Almost as bad as listening to an actor/singer on issues other than acting/singing.

Or an anesthesiologist on issues other than anesthesia.

Acme

Print the post Back To Top
Author: JLC Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 69918 of 76237
Subject: Re: John Bogle wants to raise your taxes Date: 12/25/2011 5:34 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
So he wants to further suppress investment capital, further depressing the business environment and economy.

I hardly call Goldman Sachs trading synthetic swaps as having anything to do with "investment capital".


And synthetic swaps are related to taxes exactly how? If you think synthetic swaps are a bad idea, then outlaw them. Why should my investments (my risk) be taxed higher?

JLC

Print the post Back To Top
Author: JLC Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 69919 of 76237
Subject: Re: John Bogle wants to raise your taxes Date: 12/25/2011 5:59 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 4
Or an anesthesiologist on issues other than anesthesia.

Acme


Actually thats funny. As soon as I posted I knew that was coming.

To me its just too funny/strange that supposedly someone so smart on investing/economic issues could be so dumb on investment/ecnomic issues at the same time.

The problem with many of these "filthy rich", is that they live off their investments. So they say tax me more. What they fail to realize is that it hurts people like you and me (way more) who are trying to accumulate to become filthy rich. Or maybe they do realize it and are just trying to keep their filthy rich club exclusive.

JLC

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Hawkwin Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 69920 of 76237
Subject: Re: John Bogle wants to raise your taxes Date: 12/28/2011 10:06 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
I hardly call Goldman Sachs trading synthetic swaps as having anything to do with "investment capital".

Why pick the most inane example to illustrate your point?

How about the proverbial little ole lady that has AT&T stock from her husband that worked for the company for years. Do we really want to raise taxes on her dividend income? It is not just the so-called Wall Street bankers that get a portion of their income from dividends.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: ziggy29 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 69921 of 76237
Subject: Re: John Bogle wants to raise your taxes Date: 12/28/2011 1:57 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 8
I totally agree with taxing dividends as ordinary income if the corporations didn't pay taxes on the money they distribute as dividends.

REITs already do this; they are taxed as ordinary income (not at preferred rates) because they can pass dividends through without paying taxes on the distribution (i.e. if there was no "double taxation" of dividends. The shareholder (who owns the company) already gets taxed on their share of the profit, and if they want to receive some of that profit in a cash payout, it is taxed again.

I tend to think dividends are a stabilizing force in the market; dividend stocks tend to have less volatility than those that don't pay dividends and I think that's a good thing. Discouraging dividend payouts, therefore, is not a good idea -- and fully "double taxing" them is a good way to discourage it.

As far as capital gains go, longer term holdings need to have some sort of inflation indexing component to be fair. If I buy an asset for $10,000 today and sell it for $20,000 in 20 years BUT prices have doubled in those 20 years, I have gained *zero* in real dollars but half the sale price is taxed as a "gain".

Address those two issues and I would 100% support treating dividends and capital gains as ordinary income.

#29

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Hawkwin Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 69922 of 76237
Subject: Re: John Bogle wants to raise your taxes Date: 12/28/2011 5:01 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
The easiest, and the least convoluted method to fix this so-called problem would be to simply amend the AMT to have it impact anyone at say, $250,000 in total joint compensation, with a higher income tax - regardless of where the income comes from (including tax free munis and treasuries).

People would still be allowed to get good dividend income, people could still be involved in short-term trading, and people like Bogle would most definately pay a higher tax rate. Problem solved.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Hawkwin Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 69923 of 76237
Subject: Re: John Bogle wants to raise your taxes Date: 12/28/2011 5:05 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 5
And this line from the article:

Q: What's your take on the Occupy movement?

A: I'm happy to say that my current income puts me in the 99% group. So maybe I'm not so happy, I don't know.

BS. His INCOME might put him in the 99% but his total compensation (including tax free income) is most definately in the 1, if not the .l%. The first line of the article even mentions this fact.

His desire to indentify with the 99% is laughable.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: JLC Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 69924 of 76237
Subject: Re: John Bogle wants to raise your taxes Date: 12/29/2011 9:32 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
The easiest, and the least convoluted method to fix this so-called problem would be to simply amend the AMT to have it impact anyone at say, $250,000 in total joint compensation, with a higher income tax - regardless of where the income comes from (including tax free munis and treasuries).

Why $250,000? Is that your definition of rich? Why not a simpler flat tax that kicks in at $20,000? Problem solved easier.

JLC

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Hawkwin Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 69925 of 76237
Subject: Re: John Bogle wants to raise your taxes Date: 12/29/2011 10:58 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
JLC, I stated, "at say." It was a number I just picked out of the air as an example. Geesh.

And a flat tax? Ya, I will believe in the possibility of that fairy tale when we have a government that is willing to put hundreds of thousands of personal tax preparers out of business. Don't hold your breathe waiting on that one! :)

Print the post Back To Top
Author: sunrayman Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 69926 of 76237
Subject: Re: John Bogle wants to raise your taxes Date: 12/30/2011 5:28 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
. . . we have a government that is willing to put hundreds of thousands of personal tax preparers out of business.


+++
+++


What we actually have is an IRS Dept with more than 100,000 employees!

old cite:

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071208114707AA...



sunrayman
taxpayer

Print the post Back To Top
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (14) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Next Thread
Advertisement