Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
 
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (82) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Next Thread
Author: sano 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: of 439846  
Subject: Just stop it! Date: 9/21/2012 10:33 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 57
"In a stop near Des Moines, Ann Romney said it was time for Republicans to stop second-guessing her husband. “Stop it. This is hard,” she told Radio Iowa. “You want to try it? Get in the ring.”

Stop asking questions!

Just stop it.

You people have been told all you need to know!

Don't try and look behind the curtain.

The great and mighty Mrs. Oz has spoken
Print the post Back To Top
Author: MDGluon Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409550 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/21/2012 11:13 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
"In a stop near Des Moines, Ann Romney said it was time for Republicans to stop second-guessing her husband. “Stop it. This is hard,” she told Radio Iowa. “You want to try it? Get in the ring.”

Stop asking questions!

Just stop it.

You people have been told all you need to know!

Don't try and look behind the curtain.

The great and mighty Mrs. Oz has spoken


$100 million bucks just does not buy obedience and obeisance like it used to....sheesh what is a poor mega millionaire to do.

md (Your requests for information are rather "quaint")

Print the post Back To Top
Author: 1poorguy Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409551 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/21/2012 11:22 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57517556-503544/ann-r...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/20/ann-romney-mitt-sto...

Just had a coworker yesterday trying to tell me what a great businessman Mitt was, and how people like Peggy Noonan never did anything. My thought was (and I should have said it, but for some reason didn't) "he can't even manage his campaign, and you expect me to believe he could manage a company or a nation?".

Coworker did mention Pepsi, which I now need to go look for (just for my own edification). I know Bain killed KB and several others, and apparently did get Staples going. Never heard about them doing anything for Pepsi.

I think Maher is right and that Mitt has already lost. It would take a royal eff-up by Obama between now and November for Mitt to have a chance. I'm thinking landslide (which would be delicious!)**. Not being sexist here, but Mitt really needs to muzzle his wife. Her royal self is NOT helping him.

1poorguy

**But I will try to resist the urge to rub peoples' noses in it when it happens...especially my coworker who continues to try to sell Romney as some great manager who will solve all our problems.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: AngelMay Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409553 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/21/2012 11:28 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
The great and mighty Mrs. Oz has spoken

$100 million bucks just does not buy obedience and obeisance like it used to....sheesh what is a poor mega millionaire to do.

------------------


Ann Romney is a half-wit.
I read an article that quoted her as saying things such as, "I was like..." and "he was like...." and, at that point, I stopped reading in total disgust and relegated her to the dust-bin of morons this country has had to tolerate for far too long.

AM

Print the post Back To Top
Author: rmhj Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409555 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/21/2012 11:52 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 4
AM: Ann Romney is a half-wit.
I read an article that quoted her as saying things such as, "I was like..." and "he was like...." and, at that point, I stopped reading in total disgust and relegated her to the dust-bin of morons this country has had to tolerate for far too long.


I am just amazed at her entitlement issues. "Leave Mitt AAAALLLOOOOOOOONE!"

The irony of Mitt complaining about how the 47% see themselves as victims is astounding. It's the 0.01% that Mitt belongs to that seem to have the real "oh, poor me!" thing down pat.

"They think we should pay taxes like ordinary people! The nerve!"

I think Mitt may be a very good example of why the tax rates should go up to 90% - his wealth extraction process is hugely inefficient, and costs the taxpayers more than he receives.

rj

Print the post Back To Top
Author: 1poorguy Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409556 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/21/2012 11:58 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
...his wealth extraction process is hugely inefficient, and costs the taxpayers more than he receives.

Got any scholarly support for that? Could be interesting!

Print the post Back To Top
Author: MDGluon Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409561 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/21/2012 1:10 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
The great and mighty Mrs. Oz has spoken

$100 million bucks just does not buy obedience and obeisance like it used to....sheesh what is a poor mega millionaire to do.

------------------


Ann Romney is a half-wit.
I read an article that quoted her as saying things such as, "I was like..." and "he was like...." and, at that point, I stopped reading in total disgust and relegated her to the dust-bin of morons this country has had to tolerate for far too long.

AM


Rich morons!....remember that, rich ones.

OR as a good tea party member put on his poster telling the "others" to leave the country.....Rich Morans.

md (The Wealth and Poverty of Rich Morons..sounds like a best seller)

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Jeanwa Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409562 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/21/2012 1:39 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
Coworker did mention Pepsi, which I now need to go look for (just for my own edification).

=========================================

http://blogs.wsj.com/deals/2009/05/20/fizzy-or-flat-pepsis-s...

This time, Pepsi Bottling commissioned a new study. People close to the company say the original analysis took only general and administrative costs into account. In other words, the back-office synergies that could be taken out through a deal. By last fall, Pepsi Bottling executives believed they could save $75 million to $100 million on such costs.

The new study, completed early this year by Bain Consulting, went beyond those general expenses to include various manufacturing and supply-chain synergy calculations, according to the people close to Pepsi Bottling. Called “Blue System Transformation,” the March report explored ways to streamline how the bottlers and Pepsi interact.

Bain found that a combination of the two bottlers–or a link-up through alliances and deeper collaboration with Pepsi–could lead to savings in the range of $600 million to $800 million. Not all of the potential efficiencies outlined in the Bain study are, strictly speaking, deal synergies, however. It is unclear why Pepsi Bottling went through five years of intermittent talks with Pepsi Americas before considering such core issues in detail.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pepsi_Bottling_Group

On August 4, 2009 The Pepsi Bottling Group and another major Pepsi bottler, PepsiAmericas, were purchased by PepsiCo, headquartered in Purchase, New York.[3] The purchases were completed on February 26, 2010, forming a wholly owned PepsiCo subsidiary, the Pepsi Beverages Company (PBC).


While it might have been good for the company, I wonder the impact of employees.

Do you think the savings was passed on to the employees in higher wages?

Jean

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: AngelMay Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409564 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/21/2012 1:44 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2

Do you think the savings was passed on to the employees in higher wages?



It was passed on to the employees in lost jobs.

AM

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Jeanwa Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409566 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/21/2012 1:47 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
PS

Just for fun I googled Pepsi and plant closures.

Holy Smoke...bunches of hits.

Here's one. The $.02 per bottle tax made us do it.

http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2011/01/11/pepsi-blames-bevera...

BALTIMORE (WJZ) — There’s growing outrage over layoffs at Baltimore’s Pepsi plant. Dozens of people are losing their jobs.

Adam May reports many blame the mayor and City Council.

The decision to eliminate more than 20 percent of the workforce, or 77 workers, at the Pepsi plant has renewed calls to repeal a controversial city tax. The workers were laid off after the company decided to quit making soft drinks at its Hampden location.

“In the case of Baltimore, as you know, there was a beverage tax that was passed here and this case did not help the decision in terms of keeping the Baltimore plant open,” said Pepsi spokesman Mark Dollins.

The two-cent tax on bottled beverages went into effect last year. The mayor says Pepsi is using it as a scapegoat.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405297020351360457714...

The New York Post reported earlier Thursday that Chief Executive Indra Nooyi is considering laying off about 4,000 workers. Wall Street investment firm Sanford Bernstein recently estimated PepsiCo could shed nearly 3,900 jobs and save $500 million over the next three years by closing dozens of bottling and distribution centers in its U.S. beverage business.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: rmhj Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409569 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/21/2012 1:55 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
...his wealth extraction process is hugely inefficient, and costs the taxpayers more than he receives.

1pg: Got any scholarly support for that? Could be interesting!

Actually, I do not. I was making a SWAG given the number of employees tossed out of jobs, the costs to the PBGC (for the plundered pensions), and the bankruptcy expenses passed on to taxpayers and creditors.

I'd be surprised if the profits were much less than those expenses, but not at all surprised to see them at 2-3x. There would no doubt be a lot of fudging required to make decent estimates for the lost job expenses and concomitant tax revenue loss.

rj

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Jeanwa Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409570 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/21/2012 2:02 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
It was passed on to the employees in lost jobs.

AM

=============================
http://www.philstar.com/Article.aspx?publicationSubCategoryI...


But in the Philippines - After posting a 606-percent increase in first quarter net profits, Pepsi-Cola Products Philippines Inc. (PCPPI) is expanding its production capacity by investing roughly P1.5 billion for three more bottling lines that will be put up this year.

And yes, Pepsi-Cola Products is owned, in part, by PepsiCo.

I wonder what the employees are paid there?

Jean

Print the post Back To Top
Author: goofnoff Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409571 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/21/2012 2:04 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
The tax is a retail tax. Pepsi has nothing to do with it.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Jeanwa Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409573 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/21/2012 2:34 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
The tax is a retail tax. Pepsi has nothing to do with it.

==================================

That's why it was stupid of them to use it as a reason. It's not like it was just on Pepsi!

Sorry if I didn't make it clear that I agreed with the mayor.

They, Pepsi, is making it sound like these closures have nothing to do with the consolidation.

Maybe not specific closures, but closures were part of the plan when they combined.

Jean

Print the post Back To Top
Author: 1poorguy Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409575 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/21/2012 3:00 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
It looks like all this happened after Romney left (both after he claims to have left, and after he REALLY left). So I don't see how this is a credit to him (assuming it was a credit to anyone, which sounds highly dubious to me).

I also find it amusing the Bain needed a government bailout (FDIC) back in '94. Yeah, ol' Mitt is a really sharp businessman (evidently he and his buddies drained $200M from Bain, then went crying to Uncle Sam).

Print the post Back To Top
Author: JamesBrown Big red star, 1000 posts Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409576 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/21/2012 3:38 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 24
I also find it amusing the Bain needed a government bailout (FDIC) back in '94. Yeah, ol' Mitt is a really sharp businessman (evidently he and his buddies drained $200M from Bain, then went crying to Uncle Sam).

You'll enjoy Matt Taibbi's article on Mitt Romney and Bain Capital published in Rolling Stone. Taibbi explained in small words the sort of high-finance shenanigans that Romney's Bain would undergo to siphon wealth out of struggling companies.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/greed-and-debt-the...?

"A man makes a $250 million fortune loading up companies with debt and then extracting million-dollar fees from those same companies, in exchange for the generous service of telling them who needs to be fired in order to finance the debt payments he saddled them with in the first place. That same man then runs for president riding an image of children roasting on flames of debt, choosing as his running mate perhaps the only politician in America more pompous and self-righteous on the subject of the evils of borrowed money than the candidate himself...."

On the campaign trail, Romney relentlessly trades on his own self-perpetuated reputation as a kind of altruistic rescuer of failing enterprises, never missing an opportunity to use the word "help" or "helped" in his description of what he and Bain did for companies....The reality is that toward the middle of his career at Bain, Romney made a fateful strategic decision: He moved away from creating companies like Staples through venture capital schemes, and toward a business model that involved borrowing huge sums of money to take over existing firms, then extracting value from them by force....

Here's how Romney would go about "liberating" a company: A private equity firm like Bain typically seeks out floundering businesses with good cash flows. It then puts down a relatively small amount of its own money and runs to a big bank like Goldman Sachs or Citigroup for the rest of the financing....The takeover firm then uses that borrowed money to buy a controlling stake in the target company, either with or without its consent. When an LBO is done without the consent of the target, it's called a hostile takeover...Romney and Bain avoided the hostile approach, preferring to secure the cooperation of their takeover targets by buying off a company's management with lucrative bonuses. Once management is on board, the rest is just math. So if the target company is worth $500 million, Bain might put down $20 million of its own cash, then borrow $350 million from an investment bank to take over a controlling stake.

But here's the catch. When Bain borrows all of that money from the bank, it's the target company that ends up on the hook for all of the debt...."


What Romney's Bain would do to was not make anything, or help anyone else make anything, the way money used to be earned in this country. What they do today would be the equivalent of noticing your next-door neighbors are having financial problems. You talk to the Dad and offer him a thousand bucks to borrow his credit card. You take the credit card and get a cash advance, say, $20,000. You give the grand to the Dad that you originally offered to keep him happy, you keep ten grand as a reward for your keen financial acumen, and you buy a beater with the remaining $9000 so your neighbors can feel like they're moving up in the world with two cars in the garage. But now they're on the hook for the interest payments on the borrowed money. A year later, your neighbors declare bankruptcy, and you've moved on, looking for other families in distress, offering your services based on your experience in 'generating capital.'

Nice work if you can get it. Of course, if you really did this with your neighbor's credit cards, you'd be arrested for fraud. But private equity firms operate under different rules, and have the money to keep the powers-that-be mollified.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: Jeanwa Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409577 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/21/2012 4:32 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
It looks like all this happened after Romney left (both after he claims to have left, and after he REALLY left). So I don't see how this is a credit to him (assuming it was a credit to anyone, which sounds highly dubious to me).

==============================
It might not be what your coworker was referring to. I don't know what the Pepsi/Bain relationship was before that.

I do know that when I went to the Mormon Church (1958-1966) we were told not to drink caffeinated drinks. I see that has changed.

Jean

Print the post Back To Top
Author: sykesix Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409586 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/21/2012 8:47 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Actually, I pretty much agree with Ann here. Nobody else was willing or able to do what it took to get the nomination, so if somebody could have done a better job, they should have stepped up. But in order to win the Republican nomination, you have to eliminate every thoughtful, moderate, nuanced position you ever had in the past and embrace the teabagger idiocy.

And once you do that, people either think you are an idiot, or even if they basically agree with your political views in a broad sense, they can't trust you. At one time, Romney had reasonable credibility as a person who would at least consider moderate view points. Then he spent the next four year drowning his own health care reform ideas in the bathtub. That was good enough for the nomination, but does anyone really trust him?

John McCain had a similar problem in 2008. By the time he was done burning bridges with his past he didn't have much to run on.

I read an interesting analysis somewhere that concluded the Obama campaign wasn't going to go after Romney as a flip flopper, because it was better to challenge him on his teabagger statements. I noticed Clinton did that during his convention speech. He said "I'll take them at their word they'll do the things they say they'll do."

Bit of a problem for the Republicans. You need to be straight out of the box crazy to succeed in the primaries, but crazy doesn't work as well in the generals.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: 1poorguy Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409590 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/21/2012 11:43 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
You need to be straight out of the box crazy to succeed in the primaries, but crazy doesn't work as well in the generals.

The thing is...I don't think you really do.

The Treason Party is, what, maybe 25% of the GOP. Maybe? A candidate should say "with all due respect to that group, I am NOT seeking their votes. I don't agree with their views. I am a mainstream Republican, and these are my views...." So he loses the 25%? So what. He has 75% more he (or she) can win.

This last round the GOP was so desperate they tried to recruit Newt, fer cryin' out loud! Early success of the loon candidates scared the bajeezes out of them. Had they had someone speaking rationally, I think he/she would have won the nomination. Look who they DID pick...probably the least crazy of the bunch (except for Huntsman, but he was mostly an unknown to many).

1poorguy

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Jeanwa Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409592 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/21/2012 11:50 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
(except for Huntsman, but he was mostly an unknown to many).
===============================

Huntsman's position on lowering the corporate tax rate and eliminating taxes on capital gains and dividends wasn't something I was crazy about.

Jean

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Goofyhoofy 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: 409593 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/21/2012 11:56 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 4
This last round the GOP was so desperate they tried to recruit Newt, fer cryin' out loud! Early success of the loon candidates scared the bajeezes out of them. Had they had someone speaking rationally, I think he/she would have won the nomination. Look who they DID pick...probably the least crazy of the bunch (except for Huntsman, but he was mostly an unknown to many).

The funny thing that when he gets his as s kicked, the party will think it's because he was "too moderate" and "wasn't really a conservative", so next time they'll nominate someone even crazier.

Mark my words.

"OK, I give them a B+."

Print the post Back To Top
Author: 0x6a74 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: 409594 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/22/2012 12:14 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
The Treason Party is, what, maybe 25% of the GOP. Maybe? A candidate should say "with all due respect to that group, I am NOT seeking their votes. I don't agree with their views. I am a mainstream Republican, and these are my views...." So he loses the 25%? So what. He has 75% more he (or she) can win.



good question. i think they're 23% of the electorate, 90% of GOP.

without them, can't win primary /as you say, with them very difficult to win general


..... used to be roughly the opposite --we worst-of=the-worst libDems were about 20% of the electorate, 80% of the Dems. without us, hard for a Dem to win primary, with us, hard to win general

Print the post Back To Top
Author: 1poorguy Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409595 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/22/2012 12:18 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
But they all were saying stuff like that, Jean. Isn't that part of the Ryan/Romney plan now? I thought Huntsman had a glimmer of reason because he actually supported real science instead of mythology. It's hard to know how much of what he said was aimed at the ravening Treason Party, but clearly not the pro-science bit!

You gotta admit that he was a better choice than Newt, or Cain, or Bachman, or Perry, or Santorum...I know...not exactly a high hurdle to clear.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: 0x6a74 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: 409598 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/22/2012 12:29 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
ut they all were saying stuff like that, Jean. Isn't that part of the Ryan/Romney plan now? I thought Huntsman had a glimmer of reason because he actually supported real science instead of mythology.



not 'instead of' -- he too is a Good Mormon..

You gotta admit that he was a better choice than Newt, or Cain, or Bachman, or Perry, or Santorum...I know...not exactly a high hurdle to clear.

didn't get to know him well enough to feel certain he's better than all of those ,bit the odds are good ..



** (BTW --according to this
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070110130031AA...
there never was a rule against caffeine ...only Coffee (& Tea & Tobacco & Liquor ) so Pepsi would have been OK.
........ my recollect though is that the ones i've known didn't drink Pepsi or Ccke ...but did drink Dr.Pepper

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Jeanwa Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409600 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/22/2012 12:42 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
You gotta admit that he was a better choice than Newt, or Cain, or Bachman, or Perry, or Santorum...I know...not exactly a high hurdle to clear.
===================

Understatement of the day!

Print the post Back To Top
Author: rmhj Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409601 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/22/2012 12:52 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
0x6a74: ** (BTW --according to this
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070110130031AA......
there never was a rule against caffeine ...only Coffee (& Tea & Tobacco & Liquor ) so Pepsi would have been OK.
........ my recollect though is that the ones i've known didn't drink Pepsi or Ccke ...but did drink Dr.Pepper


There is a scriptural prohibition against 'stimulating beverages' that nominally includes tea, coffee, and all caffeinated beverages.

For what little it's worth, the Mormons I knew prior to 1980 generally did not drink any caffeinated beverages, including tea, coffee, Coke or Pepsi. Most still do not, although the cultural stigma against Coke and Pepsi seems to have diminished somewhat. (It does still exist, however.) I've known some mormons who drink Coke; I'm still not aware of any who drink tea or coffee.

In Utah, the out-of-the-closet non-mormons attach -- on the outside of their backpacks -- coffee mugs. Even those that don't drink coffee often do this, just as an identity badge.

rj
"There's SIN IN MY CLOSET!" -- my wife's [LDS] roomie, on discovering that my wife had a 12-pack of diet coke in her room (1998).

Print the post Back To Top
Author: crassfool Big funky green star, 20000 posts Feste Award Nominee! Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409602 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/22/2012 1:36 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
1poorguy says

The Treason Party is, what, maybe 25% of the GOP. Maybe? A candidate should say "with all due respect to that group, I am NOT seeking their votes. I don't agree with their views. I am a mainstream Republican, and these are my views...." So he loses the 25%? So what. He has 75% more he (or she) can win.


Yeah, but you see, these guys are Not Very Smart™. So instead, years ago, they said "We don't care about the minority vote, even though we pathetically pretend we do." Can't win without the minority vote.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: crassfool Big funky green star, 20000 posts Feste Award Nominee! Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409603 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/22/2012 1:41 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
0x6a74 says

"The Treason Party is, what, maybe 25% of the GOP. Maybe? A candidate should say 'with all due respect to that group, I am NOT seeking their votes. I don't agree with their views. I am a mainstream Republican, and these are my views....' So he loses the 25%? So what. He has 75% more he (or she) can win."



good question. i think they're 23% of the electorate, 90% of GOP.


Yep, there's that old, familiar, unchanging number, 23%. The one that's not enough to win an election.

One of my lefty friends is all upset that the Left is alienating the rural gun enthusiasts. I keep telling him, Hey, we don't need those guys. There aren't very many of them.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: AngelMay Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409606 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/22/2012 9:41 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
Huntsman's position on lowering the corporate tax rate and eliminating taxes on capital gains and dividends wasn't something I was crazy about.

Jean

------------


If corporations are people, why aren't they taxed at the same rate as people?

AM

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Jeanwa Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409610 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/22/2012 10:52 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
If corporations are people, why aren't they taxed at the same rate as people?

AM
===================================

This went way further than I thought it would...

Currently the corporate rate is higher than the personal rate.

There are a lot of corporations out there that aren't the big guys. Businesses, like mine and others in our town, that set up their small business as a corporation.

I remember the local furnace repair guy being upset because inventory increases were considered income. It was his first year in business. He bought common replacement parts to have on hand for repairs. The part is not an expense until it is sold.

He had very little actual income that first year, since he spent the money increasing his inventory. He had to pay income tax on the money he used to buy the inventory. This is true whether it's a sole proprietorship or a corporation. He ended up having to borrow money to pay the tax bill that year.

The capital gain and dividend rate is mostly the same for everyone. I understand some of the reasons for lower rates. I don't understand why lowering the rates would help hiring.

Dividend dollars have already been taxed at the corporate rate. Then when distributed they are taxable income to the individual. It's a bit like putting your income in a savings account and being taxed on it when you make a withdrawal. Currently you are only taxed on the interest.


Capital gains have changed over the years. In the beginning they were given a special rate because we wanted people to invest in businesses for the long term. It was believed that giving gains that were invested for the long term special tax rates would encourage long term investments.

For individuals capital gains were usually on the sale of their home. That has been eliminated entirely.

Capital gains only occur when a capital item is sold. Stocks were considered owning a portion of the business. If they were/are sold with in a year of purchase they are taxed like inventory. However, if they were/are held for more than a year the gain gets the lower rate. This encouraged investments in businesses.

With the times, the buying and selling of stock has become more of a business, with stocks as the inventory. Only the initial purchase is really buying part of the company. Stockholders, for the most part, don't really care about the company, they just care about what the stock price is doing.

I like the buffet rule. This WSJ article doesn't, surprise, surprise.

Think about this:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405270230375390457745...

But that ignores the vital link between tax rates and capital investment. The lower the tax, the greater the incentive to take risks.

I don't know of a single start up (1poorguy, I'm not talking about how your company was started) that said, "Hmmmm, if I start this business when I sell I can get the capital gains rate."

The investors that helped start 1poorguy's company probably did think that way.

But most capital gains are NOT from initial investments in a company, but from the trading of stocks in existing companies. The price of the stock doesn't gain or loose the actual company anything, for the most part. Often gain isn't spent on anything but a different stock.

Increasing the capital gains tax may slow down stock turnover, which could slow down the growth of the stock price. I don't see how it would impact the actual operations of the company.

Maybe someone can tell me why I'm wrong.

Jean

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: 0x6a74 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: 409618 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/22/2012 1:59 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0

Increasing the capital gains tax may slow down stock turnover, which could slow down the growth of the stock price. I don't see how it would impact the actual operations of the company.

Maybe someone can tell me why I'm wrong.


impact stock price Impacts employee 'morale'


... depending on corp & industry

Print the post Back To Top
Author: BlueGrits Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409648 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/23/2012 3:28 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Currently the corporate rate is higher than the personal rate.

As an aside, something like 60% of corporations pay no federal income tax. (It's in an IRS report that's been mentioned here and/or on PA several times.)

I remember the local furnace repair guy being upset because inventory increases were considered income. It was his first year in business. He bought common replacement parts to have on hand for repairs. The part is not an expense until it is sold.

I suspect he misspoke and meant he had to pay higher property tax for the increase in inventory. He shouldn't be paying income tax on inventory unless he did something really odd (got inventory as a gift, accepted it as bartered income for other goods/services).

As for the expense part, I'm a big foggier on that part but as I recall he's right that it's not an expense until it's sold or used.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: BlueGrits Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409649 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/23/2012 3:31 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Increasing the capital gains tax may slow down stock turnover, which could slow down the growth of the stock price. I don't see how it would impact the actual operations of the company.

The less demand for the stock, the less the stock is worth. This means that treasury stock (stock held by the company) is worth so the company's net worth is decreased. The less the company is worth, the more difficult it is to borrow for inventory, expansion, maintenance, etc.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Jeanwa Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409650 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/23/2012 4:03 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I suspect he misspoke and meant he had to pay higher property tax for the increase in inventory. He shouldn't be paying income tax on inventory unless he did something really odd (got inventory as a gift, accepted it as bartered income for other goods/services).
===================================

Inventory is not subject to property tax here in Washington State.

He was upset because I told him inventory was not deductible until sold, so increases in inventory is taxable income.

To make it simple.

He purchased $100.00 of inventory.

Let's say he had a 50% margin, selling price if he sold it all would be $200.00.

Total sales were $150.00 worth.

150 is gross income
75 is cost of goods sold

75 is net income.

He can't deduct the full $100.00 that he paid for the inventory.

What he wanted to do

150.00 gross income
100.00 inventory purchases

50.00 Net income.

But since he only sold 3/4 of his inventory he couldn't deduct the cost of the remainder.

FWIW, I was just stating the corporate rate. I realize, like the top income tax rate, few if any pay tax at that rate. Certainly, none pay all their tax at the top rate, since some of the income is taxed at lower rates.

Jean

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Jeanwa Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409652 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/23/2012 4:06 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
This means that treasury stock (stock held by the company) is worth so the company's net worth is decreased. The less the company is worth, the more difficult it is to borrow for inventory, expansion, maintenance, etc.

==============================

Okay, I didn't think of that.

Do you think capital gains should be a reduced rate?

Print the post Back To Top
Author: BlueGrits Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409658 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/23/2012 9:17 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
Before doing anything about the rate, I'd first look at deductions as something like 60% of corporations don't pay anything. The rate is pretty much irrelevant if deductions reduce the taxable amount to nothing or a relative pittance.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Jeanwa Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409660 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/23/2012 11:44 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Before doing anything about the rate, I'd first look at deductions as something like 60% of corporations don't pay anything. The rate is pretty much irrelevant if deductions reduce the taxable amount to nothing or a relative pittance.

========================================

I was thinking more of capital gains in general.

I think there is a significant amount of capital gains income on higher income individuals returns.

Jean

Print the post Back To Top
Author: AngelMay Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409662 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/24/2012 10:02 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I think there is a significant amount of capital gains income on higher income individuals returns.

Jean

-------------


Those of us who are retired also have capital gains from investments - but we live, mainly, on Social Security. In fact, cap gains and dividends (along with SS and possibly a meager little pension) is all most retirees live on.

They get by ok while both partners are living. But when one of the partners dies, a BIG part of their "income" vanishes as their SS check no longer comes. But the cost of living does not decrease proportionately for the survivor.

It's a huge concern.
Not just the filthy rich depend on capital gains.


AM

Print the post Back To Top
Author: AngelMay Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409664 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/24/2012 10:13 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I guess I believe that taxes on cap gains should be lower than ordinary income taxes. This is because the investor (sometimes a stretch to call him/her an "investor" but I will for these purposes...) takes some very iffy risks when putting that money out there to "earn" those gains. The same person doesn't really risk anything when he gets out of bed and goes to work in the mornings. He knows that if he works a certain amount of time he will be bringing home a certain amount of money. But the person who is investing dollars already earned (and taxed - if not in an IRA) is risking a lot.

The elderly/retired doesn't have the luxury of a secure income-generating job. So if Social Security doesn't pay all the bills - and I don't see how it could unless you are living in a tent somewhere - additional income has to be generated via some avenue.

I'm not saying that I know what the tax rate should be. But I think the elderly should be given a break on this. Maybe it wouldn't even have to be in the form of lower taxes on the gains and dividends. Maybe it could be just with bigger deductions.

Of course, what I think is not going to change anything. I'm just sort of rolling the idea around in my head. And I could be totally wrong on this. Or not. ;o)

AM

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Jeanwa Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409668 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/24/2012 11:05 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
We all tend to look at the tax rates as it impacts our own income tax.

I did taxes for a couple of years after I graduated. It was too depressing, so I quit doing it. Because of that I try and look at taxes as the impact on society.

You mentioned risk. Capital gains should be taxed at a lower rate because there is more risk.

The employed person is risking nothing when he goes to work. While I agree, I'm pretty sure there are a few unemployed folks out there that would disagree.

But capital gains for individuals, for the most part, come from "left over money". Some people spend that money, some save it. You're saying we should reward those who spend that money on items with more risk. That extra money could have been put in a savings account, where the return is normally less but guartanteed. They could have put it in tax free bonds.

Why should the person who chose the more risky investment pay less tax on the gain?

Not that many years ago a person had to be pretty wealthy, IMHO, to even invest in stocks, back when you had to go to a broker.

The person with the savings account has to pay the tax on their gain (interest income) every year.

Sometimes I wonder if the lower savings rate isn't partly due to the increase in people investing.

Then there is my furnace repairman. I first did his taxes in 1985. Twenty-five years later he sells his furnace repair business. He doesn't really have a choice to sell a few shares this year and a few every year after that. He has to take the entire gain in one year. That could push him into the highest bracket.

These are the folks, I think, should get a special rate. I think, and I could be wrong, but this type of sale is what brought the capital gains rate in the first place.

I wish we still had income averaging.

Yep, what you or I think isn't going to change anything. I just thought I'd give you more things to roll around in your head.

It just seems to me we use the tax laws to encourage or discourage behavior a lot more than we should.

Jean

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: 1poorguy Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409670 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/24/2012 11:18 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Not just the filthy rich depend on capital gains.

So are you suggesting that cap gains should not be taxed, or at least not taxed to the level of "ordinary" income?

I've been thinking lately they should be taxed MORE. A lot more. But I'm open to counter-arguments. :-)

1pg

Print the post Back To Top
Author: AngelMay Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409671 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/24/2012 11:23 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
It just seems to me we use the tax laws to encourage or discourage behavior a lot more than we should.

Jean

--------


That is definitely true.

AM

Print the post Back To Top
Author: AngelMay Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409673 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/24/2012 11:31 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
So are you suggesting that cap gains should not be taxed, or at least not taxed to the level of "ordinary" income?

I've been thinking lately they should be taxed MORE. A lot more. But I'm open to counter-arguments. :-)

1pg

------------


No.... not thinking they should not be taxed. After all, they ARE income. Just saying (and looking at it from my own point of view as a retired person living on savings and SS) that I don't think they should be taxed as high as ordinary income.

And I DID say that I wasn't completely sure about this. If the elderly - who mostly live on a fixed income (supplemented by whatever they can eke out of gains and dividends) can get other breaks that are truly beneficial - like very high exemptions - then a rate the same as earned income seems more appropriate.

You have to understand that I'm looking at this from the point of view of the non-wealthy. I'll never be in the fat-cat club. And I face the distinct possibility of (some day) losing my husband's Social Security - which would hurt more than I can tell you. His SS check is a lot bigger than mine. If I lose that, my expenses will eat me alive until I have nothing. I really really don't want to go there.

So what we have are different "classes" of people who invest on the market. But only one of those "classes" actually has to depend on those gains and dividends for their living.

AM

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: 1poorguy Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409674 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/24/2012 11:32 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
I guess I believe that taxes on cap gains should be lower than ordinary income taxes.

Guess I shoulda read ahead. ;-)

I think I disagree. Yes, the investor is taking a risk. Consider buying a stock (let's pick JDSU, just for fun). If I go buy JDSU I'm gambling. Really that's all it is. I'm betting the price is going to go up. The money I use to buy the stock doesn't help the company at all. The shares are already "out there", the company long ago got its revenue from them. I may be buying them from YOU or rmhj. It's like baseball cards (almost).

So why should I be taxed less on any gains from this? (And why are gambling losses deductible, by the way??)

Yes, there are IPO shares that DO benefit a company directly. Have you ever known anyone who got those? Brokerages reserve all that for their "special" clients, who often are the only ones who clean up on an IPO. Everyone else gets soaked buying the shares the "special" clients are flipping (just look at Facebook recently).

If cap gains were taxed as ordinary income that might actually benefit the elderly since their tax bracket is likely to be very low, and after deductions they owe even less. Rich folks (retired or not) with large cap gain incomes being taxed as "ordinary" would pay a lot more, as they should.

1poorguy (was long JDSU once...learned a few lessons from that one...)

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: Jeanwa Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409676 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/24/2012 11:47 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
So why should I be taxed less on any gains from this? (And why are gambling losses deductible, by the way??)

http://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc419.html

You may deduct gambling losses only if you itemize deductions. However, the amount of losses you deduct may not be more than the amount of gambling income reported on your return.

Because you have to claim winnings as income.

Why should a person be made to pay tax on the winnings and not deduct the losses?

Jean

Print the post Back To Top
Author: AngelMay Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409677 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/24/2012 11:49 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0

1poorguy (was long JDSU once...learned a few lessons from that one...)



LOL! Same here.
Let's remove "risk" from the equation.
That was a bad example on my part.

Let's look at it from another viewpoint.
The really rich - even if they never make another dime in their lives from any source (highly unlikely, but just sayin') will still have enough money to live without being a burden on society.

The average every-day Joe is young enough to work - (here, I'm assuming a society with enough sense not to out-source all the jobs to China) - so he can hold a job with a known and (probably mostly) steady income upon which he and his family can depend and live without being a burden on society.

The truly poor (and probably mostly jobless) depend on welfare from the State in order to survive so cap gains and dividends are only dreams for them. They are already "burdens" on society.

The elderly/retired have been there (in the average every-day Joe category) and have spent a lifetime working, paying their bills, and saving what they could. Once retired, they depend on the ability of those savings to "earn" some kind of income for them - in addition to the Social Security they paid into all those years (and which they could lose all - or a big portion of - in case of a death in the family). If they are unable to make it on SS and their savings, they too might end up in the truly poor "class" and become a burden on society as they enter the welfare rolls. The elderly have enough problems just dealing with everyday things that are easy for the young but difficult for themselves. To be tossed aside at an advanced age is a horror no one wants to face.

I'm just suggesting that room is made for them in our economy so that they CAN benefit from their lifetime of doing without in order to save and not become society's burden as yet more welfare recipients.

If this means they get special breaks on taxes, society is still better off than if they are forced to spend down their entire savings and enter the welfare rolls.

I guess you can tell that I'm not one of the crowd that cheers when someone suggests just "let them die!" :)

In any event, I certainly don't think cap gains and dividends should be taxed higher than ordinary earned income.

AM

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: Jeanwa Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409683 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/24/2012 12:20 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
In any event, I certainly don't think cap gains and dividends should be taxed higher than ordinary earned income.

AM

================================================

As far as I know Cap gains tax has always been lower than earned income tax. I don't think anyone is even thinking it should be taxed more than ordinary income, just hire than it is taxed today.

These are the current long term capital gains rates:

Zero percent rate if your total income (including capital gain income) places you in the ten or fifteen percent tax brackets. 15% rate if your total income (including capital gain income) places you in the twenty-five percent tax bracket or higher.

Here are the rates for married filing joint for ordinary income.

http://taxes.about.com/od/Federal-Income-Taxes/qt/Tax-Rates-...

10% on taxable income from $0 to $17,000, plus
15% on taxable income over $17,000 to $69,000, plus
25% on taxable income over $69,000 to $139,350, plus
28% on taxable income over $139,350 to $212,300, plus
33% on taxable income over $212,300 to $379,150, plus
35% on taxable income over $379,150.


So the capital gain would only be taxed if income is above $69,000.

The person who has 300,000 of ordinary taxable income has a top rate of 35%. If the entire income is capital gains the rate is 15%.

I have a problem with this.

Jean

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: 1poorguy Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409684 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/24/2012 12:39 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
Without delving into your personal finances (none of my business), someone receiving SS and dividends/cap-gains pays significant taxes? I would expect the income to be sufficiently low, and the deductions to be high (relative to income), such that they pay very little. No?

Also, I think when hubby dies you get hubby's SS. Isn't that a hold-over from when women often were SAHMs, and so had no SS (since they hadn't earned an income of any consequence, they wouldn't have enough credits built up)?

I agree that "average Joe" folks shouldn't be paying high taxes, even on gains. But the Mitt Romney's of the world absolutely should be paying more. It's absurd that someone who earns more in one year of cap gains than I have earned in my lifetime of working pays less tax than I do.

1poorguy

Print the post Back To Top
Author: 1poorguy Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409685 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/24/2012 12:42 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
The person who has 300,000 of ordinary taxable income has a top rate of 35%. If the entire income is capital gains the rate is 15%.

I have a problem with this.


Yes! Succinctly stated. I agree.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Jeanwa Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409686 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/24/2012 12:47 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
Also, I think when hubby dies you get hubby's SS. Isn't that a hold-over from when women often were SAHMs, and so had no SS (since they hadn't earned an income of any consequence, they wouldn't have enough credits built up)?

================================

The rules about spousal & individual Social Security are complicated.

It makes me dizzy just thinking about it.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/businessdesk/2012/09/ten-of-the-...

Social Security's website gives the impression that your spousal benefit is half of your partner's Primary Insurance Amount (PIA), also called the full retirement benefit. Your spouse is eligible for $2,000 a month? Then you would get $1000 a month. But this is true only if a) you don't qualify for a retirement benefit on your own, or b) you reach full retirement age but never filed for Social Security and, at that point, you apply only for your spousal benefit, not for your own.

If you have earned your own retirement benefit and have filed for it, your spousal benefit is actually something called your "excess spousal benefit." The excess spousal benefit begins as half of your partner's primary insurance amount, as the Social Security website suggests. But your own primary insurance amount, augmented by any delayed retirement credits, is deducted from it. (All this assumes, of course, that half your spouse's primary insurance amount is larger than your primary insurance amount.)

But here's another wrinkle. Let's say you applied for your retirement benefit before you reached full retirement age. Assuming your partner has already filed for his/her retirement benefit, you will then be forced to apply for your spousal benefit early as well. There is one way to avoid this: If your partner applies one month or more after you apply, you're in the clear. You don't have to take your spousal benefit early and can wait until full retirement age to collect an unreduced excess spousal benefit. Again, it's the excess that is at stake because of filing for your retirement benefit before or at the same time as for your spousal benefit.


Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: Jeanwa Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409687 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/24/2012 12:57 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
The person who has 300,000 of ordinary taxable income has a top rate of 35%. If the entire income is capital gains the rate is 15%.

I have a problem with this.
---------------------------
Yes! Succinctly stated. I agree.

======================

Then I have to think about my furnace repair guy. He's had an income of say 50,000 for years (inflation adjusted). Now he's selling the business he built up and has a 300,000 gain. Let's say he bought if from someone else 30 years ago for 20,000. Improvements and equipment purchases have been depreciated. He sells it for 320,000.

His basis is not inflation adjusted.

The same could be said for stock held for a long time. A significant portion of the gain could just be inflation.

Not all capital gains are created equal.

Jean

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Jeanwa Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409688 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/24/2012 1:04 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I should have added that the rules are always changing. For example, the rule was if you had started drawing at 62 at the lower rate you could at 72 pay all that money back and start drawing at the higher rate.

(I could be a bit off on the ages)

I had planned on taking advantage of this rule. However, they changed the rule. I don't know if they left it in place for the folks already drawing with the rule in mind or not.

Jean

Print the post Back To Top
Author: sofaking6 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: 409696 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/24/2012 2:42 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
This is because the investor (sometimes a stretch to call him/her an "investor" but I will for these purposes...) takes some very iffy risks when putting that money out there to "earn" those gains.

So? Why should someone be rewarded for taking "iffy" risks with their money?

6

Print the post Back To Top
Author: sofaking6 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: 409700 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/24/2012 2:52 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Just saying (and looking at it from my own point of view as a retired person living on savings and SS) that I don't think they should be taxed as high as ordinary income.

If ordinary income were taxed less, it could be saved more and then you wouldn't be dependent on capital gains for your income during retirement. So really, saving should be encouraged and investing discouraged in order to make ours a more stable society.

6

Print the post Back To Top
Author: AngelMay Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409701 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/24/2012 2:53 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
This is because the investor (sometimes a stretch to call him/her an "investor" but I will for these purposes...) takes some very iffy risks when putting that money out there to "earn" those gains.

So? Why should someone be rewarded for taking "iffy" risks with their money?

6

---------


Er....ahem....ah....
Read on, Sweet 6.
I withdrew my "risk" example as being rather invalid.

Duh. What was I thinking? ;o)

AM

Print the post Back To Top
Author: sofaking6 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: 409703 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/24/2012 3:01 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Duh. What was I thinking? ;o)

I'm just playing into your convo, AM...quit changing it on me ;)

6

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Jeanwa Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409705 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/24/2012 3:11 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
If ordinary income were taxed less, it could be saved more and then you wouldn't be dependent on capital gains for your income during retirement. So really, saving should be encouraged and investing discouraged in order to make ours a more stable society.

6

=======================================

While I agree that if ordinary income was taxed less there might be more available to save, but....

The choice is save money in a bank or save it in stock investment.

I think the reason we see "saving" less now than in earlier times is because people are "saving" in a stock investment account not in a bank account.

It's similar to the Estate Tax.

Two folks with exactly the same everything except one puts his savings in the bank and the other in stocks.

The one with the money in the bank pays income tax at the ordinary income rate every year on the gain (Interest) in the account.

The one with the money in stock pays no tax until it sells.

They both die with exactly the same amount of money.

The estate of one with the savings has to pay the same as the one with the stock. Seems like double taxation to me. The stock is transferred to the heirs with a new basis, so the tax on the gain will never be paid.

Our tax laws, as they are now, discourages savings if you look at savings as interest bearing accounts.

Jean

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: jgc123 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409706 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/24/2012 3:15 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 11
"If ordinary income were taxed less, it could be saved more and then you wouldn't be dependent on capital gains for your income during retirement. So really, saving should be encouraged and investing discouraged in order to make ours a more stable society.

6"

There are all kinds of compromises if you look at the numbers rather than just argue about the ideology.

One compromise is to return to the 20% long term capital gains limit, keep most of the tax cuts on earnings, and maybe raise the marginal rate on income earned above $350,000 per year to about 40%.

That way the tax rate remains relatively low for everybody who earns less than $350,000 per year, but we pay up to 20% on long term capital gains and a little bit more on earnings that exceed $350,000. I know that a 20% capital gains rate would not discourage me from investing, and a slight increase in my marginal rate would not discourage me from trying to earn more than $350,000 - and, to the extent that we have to look at spending and taxes to bring the budget into balance, we need to try not to keep increasing the load on the middle classes.

In my example, the Romney's claimed that most of their income was long term capital gains totaling about $22 million. If they were taxed at 20%, they would pay about $4 million in taxes instead of $3 million, giving them income of about $18 million for the year to makes ends meet, rather than $19 for the year. If they don't need to spend the money they can increase their net worth from $250 milllion to $268 million instead of increasing it to $269 million.

$1 million would not slow down the rate at which they got richer, and it would take the load off of about 1000 middle class households to the tune of about $1,000 per household.

When you start looking at the numbers it seems obvious to me that we have lost sight of how our tax system has been tilted to favor the richest of us at the expense of those of us who have to work for a living.

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: AngelMay Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409714 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/24/2012 3:43 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Duh. What was I thinking? ;o)

I'm just playing into your convo, AM...quit changing it on me ;)

6

----------


LOL!
I'll try to do better.
I'm very stressed right now.
Planning to move to California.
And there's all this STUFF in my house.... ;o)

AM

Print the post Back To Top
Author: rmhj Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409718 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/24/2012 4:17 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
If you have earned your own retirement benefit and have filed for it, your spousal benefit is actually something called your "excess spousal benefit."

Don't tell me: this means that if Mitt takes another wife or two before he retires, he gets yet more money from the government.

It's rough for an ordinary joe...

rj

Print the post Back To Top
Author: sofaking6 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: 409719 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/24/2012 4:20 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
The choice is save money in a bank or save it in stock investment.


If you have to put quotes around the word, then is investing really "saving"?

Two folks with exactly the same everything except one puts his savings in the bank and the other in stocks.

The one with the money in the bank pays income tax at the ordinary income rate every year on the gain (Interest) in the account.

The one with the money in stock pays no tax until it sells.

They both die with exactly the same amount of money.


Or, the one with money in stock loses it all to unregulated bankers' misdeeds and spends the rest of his life on welfare.


Our tax laws, as they are now, discourages savings if you look at savings as interest bearing accounts.

I do, and they do :)

6

Print the post Back To Top
Author: sofaking6 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: 409720 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/24/2012 4:22 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 4
When you start looking at the numbers it seems obvious to me that we have lost sight of how our tax system has been tilted to favor the richest of us at the expense of those of us who have to work for a living.

I couldn't agree more. The right has a value system that says, if you actually have to do WORK to get your money, you are not really deserving of the money.

If you have to play 18 holes with your buddy to get money, then it's yours to keep, you job creator, you.

6

Print the post Back To Top
Author: sofaking6 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: 409723 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/24/2012 4:27 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
LOL!
I'll try to do better.
I'm very stressed right now.
Planning to move to California.
And there's all this STUFF in my house.... ;o)


Oooh anywhere by me????? How cool :)

I just moved...I am certain I gave/threw away more than I kept.

Yesterday I threw out a Medium moving box full of empty hangers. I have to admit, that probably makes me a hoarder. And you may have seen the picture of my Tupperware collection on FB...not good!!!

6

Print the post Back To Top
Author: AngelMay Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409725 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/24/2012 4:53 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0

Oooh anywhere by me????? How cool :)



Afraid not - though I have to admit it would be pretty cool to live close to you. Moving to the north Bay Area up in wine country. :)




I just moved...I am certain I gave/threw away more than I kept.



Argh! Don't I know it. Goodwill has gotten truckloads from us already. Also the Friends of the Library has gotten several cartons of books. How is it possible to accumulate so much STUFF? :o\

AM

Print the post Back To Top
Author: rmhj Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409726 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/24/2012 4:58 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 16
6: I couldn't agree more. The right has a value system that says, if you actually have to do WORK to get your money, you are not really deserving of the money.

If you have to play 18 holes with your buddy to get money, then it's yours to keep, you job creator, you.


It's also structured to keep this from being too obvious: the marginal rates increase substantially as income rises until you reach around $100k. Then suddenly you hit the caps on FICA and Medicare and the effective rates drop substantially.

And if you take your income as capital gains, you get to miss out on that entirely.

And if you're Mitt Romney rich, then you may be able to live off 'carried interest' or use other schemes to avoid taxes or defer them indefinitely.

Yet, if you look at the Romney video, the (very wealthy!) people asking him (surprisingly stupid) questions seem just completely peeved that the people don't love them enough, and don't give them enough recognition and deference and the whole shmoo (now that they've "won"). It's still not enough: they're paying taxes, dadgummit! Nevermind that they're the lowest taxes in generations, and their wealth has exploded in the last 30 years; they're annoyed that government isn't paving the way for them, and giving them a ride complete with stretch limo and government driver.

It's enough to make me want to see the 90% tax rates again.

rj

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: sofaking6 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: 409727 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/24/2012 4:59 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Also the Friends of the Library has gotten several cartons of books. How is it possible to accumulate so much STUFF? :o\

It's a clear case of Failure to Throw Your Stuff Out. Possibly incurable.

6

Print the post Back To Top
Author: AngelMay Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409728 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/24/2012 4:59 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0

Oooh anywhere by me????? How cool :)



Afraid not - though I have to admit it would be pretty cool to live close to you. Moving to the north Bay Area up in wine country. :)




And by the way..... didn't you have a birthday this month already?
(I'm not on Facebook anymore - at least for now)
So anywho - HAPPY BIRTHDAY! And hope you have lots more that are happy and healthy.

AM
...We left-handed September babies have to stick together. ;o)

Print the post Back To Top
Author: sofaking6 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: 409729 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/24/2012 5:00 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
And by the way..... didn't you have a birthday this month already?
(I'm not on Facebook anymore - at least for now)
So anywho - HAPPY BIRTHDAY! And hope you have lots more that are happy and healthy.

AM
...We left-handed September babies have to stick together. ;o)


Yay! Happy slanty-writing birthdays to us!

6

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Jeanwa Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409730 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/24/2012 5:09 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Then suddenly you hit the caps on FICA and Medicare and the effective rates drop substantially.

---------------------------------------

There is no cap on medicare. It was removed in 1993, IIRC.

I don't know all the ins and outs but there are change to the medicare tax with the Affordable Care Act

http://benefitslink.com/articles/guests/washbull110404a.html...

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act as amended (PPACA) added new provisions to the Internal Revenue Code that will impose additional Medicare taxes on higher income individuals beginning in 2013. Two changes were made. First, the employee portion of the Medicare tax will increase by 0.9 percent on wages in excess of the threshold amount. The threshold is $250,000 in the case of a joint return, $125,000 in the case of a married individual filing separately, and $200,000 in any other case. Second, a 3.8 percent Medicare tax will be imposed on unearned income to the extent it causes the individual's modified adjusted gross income to exceed the threshold amount.

Jean

Print the post Back To Top
Author: 1poorguy Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409733 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/24/2012 5:16 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Planning to move to California.

And give up your view??

Print the post Back To Top
Author: feedmeNOWhuman Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409736 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/24/2012 5:27 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I just moved...I am certain I gave/threw away more than I kept.



We are having our floor replaced, and so everything is getting moved around. I'm finding stuff I'd been looking for for years. And stuff I'd forgotten I had. And lots of stuff to throw away.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: CountUpp 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: 409740 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/24/2012 6:23 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
rj: It's also structured to keep this from being too obvious: the marginal rates increase substantially as income rises until you reach around $100k. Then suddenly you hit the caps on FICA and Medicare and the effective rates drop substantially.

The solutions to our deficit, social security, and medicare are obvious, based on these numbers, no?

Count Upp

Print the post Back To Top
Author: CountUpp 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: 409741 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/24/2012 6:30 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
We are having our floor replaced, and so everything is getting moved around. I'm finding stuff I'd been looking for for years. And stuff I'd forgotten I had. And lots of stuff to throw away.

Have you people never heard of eBay or Craigs List?

The Countess has embarked on a program of selling some of her hoard of Crispness Ormanents and Wee Forest Folk on eBay. Some success, several hundred doo-dads gone, and more than $1000 in revenue. (Yes, I am delighted!)

Count Upp

Print the post Back To Top
Author: 0x6a74 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: 409742 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/24/2012 6:37 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
It just seems to me we use the tax laws to encourage or discourage behavior a lot more than we should.


my Tax Law prof said that was the dirty little secret in the IRS code -- more about affecting behaviour than raising revenue.






( the 'more than we should' depends on which 0x is being slapped )

Print the post Back To Top
Author: 0x6a74 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: 409745 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/24/2012 6:47 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
The person who has 300,000 of ordinary taxable income has a top rate of 35%. If the entire income is capital gains the rate is 15%.

I have a problem with this.



yup ... and are you forgetting that the 300k ordinary is also hit with some FICA and Medicare?

of course the all-gains income doesn't add to SS payment....


IMO -- a bit of a break for long-term gains, none for short-term (that is ,imo, same as gambling ) and long-term should be at least two yrs

Print the post Back To Top
Author: AngelMay Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409750 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/24/2012 7:15 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Planning to move to California.

And give up your view??

-----------


Can only stare at a view for so long.
:)

AM

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Frydaze1 Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409751 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/24/2012 7:19 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Planning to move to California.

?!?

Did I miss a memo?

And which half of our lovely state are you planning to grace with your presence?


Frydaze1

P.S. ?!?

Print the post Back To Top
Author: sissylue Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409752 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/24/2012 7:46 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
AM -

If you don't mind me asking - why? I surely could understand why you moved from the heart of Dixie to the state of Washington; but why are you now moving from Washington ? I guess the reason
I ask is that I read AngelBuggie's posts on FB and look at her marvelous photographs and it sure seems that she and Mollie live in a piece of paradise (not sure how close you are (were?) to Port Townsend) but the whole place just seems so wonderful ... I fantasize about living there as well (strictly a fantasy as I am pretty much stuck where I am, at least until the oldest child is finished with her early college high school program, as I am pretty sure it would be hard for me to luck into a similar educational opportunity for her if I moved) and daydream about living down the road from some neighbor who routinely leaves offerings of fresh salmon and other goodies on my doorstep ... the only other place that seems as lovely would be up in Vermont on a farm like Linda and Kirsten but I understand it gets cold in Vermont so that's a non-starter.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: AngelMay Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Favorite Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409759 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/24/2012 10:03 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
AM -

If you don't mind me asking - why?




Oh, lots of reasons.
Let's just say I'm ready for a change of scenery. :)

AM

Print the post Back To Top
Author: feedmeNOWhuman Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409784 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/25/2012 11:12 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Have you people never heard of eBay or Craigs List?



Sure, but what does that have to do with anything?

Print the post Back To Top
Author: CountUpp 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: 409800 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/25/2012 2:19 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
Sure, but what does that have to do with anything?

Those are places to get rid of stuff, and turn a small return.

Count Upp

Print the post Back To Top
Author: CCinOC Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 409812 of 439846
Subject: Re: Just stop it! Date: 9/25/2012 4:30 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
rmhj wrote: And if you're Mitt Romney rich, then you may be able to live off 'carried interest' or use other schemes to avoid taxes or defer them indefinitely.

How do you libruls keep your heads from exploding? We've had wealthy presidents from the beginning.

Net Worth of American Presidents from Washington to Obama

http://www.businessinsider.com/american-presidents-republica...

Print the post Back To Top
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (82) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Next Thread
Advertisement