Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It's not about the monetary amout, it's that he only has to pay 15 percent of his income in taxes while the rest of us have to pay almost a third of our income in taxes.
oh really? "the rest of us"? First of all, this is FEDERAL INCOME taxes and almost half pay $0 in Federal income taxes. You don't know a single person who pays 1/3 of his pay in FEDERAL INCOME taxes.
Maybe everyone would be happier if he invested in tax free munis like Kerry and his heiress and didn't even pay 15%. But then again that would make Romney a dope and a bad investor. I guess America would be happier with a stupid investor rather than a smart investor
Bullshit.........I took care of paychecks for my commands when I was serving in the Navy, and for the 20 years that I was in, federal income tax was taken out at 28 percent if you lived in a state that didn't charge income tax on the military, and it was at 32 percent (4 percent for state taxes) if your state did charge income tax on the military.
Try again stupid.
yeah, that is such a head shaker isn't it. Sadly there are too many like him/her who just don't have a clue and the MSM who have a stake in the election certainly aren't going to try and educate the public on the facts. You will instead get hit piece after hit piece from garbage journalism like Time and Newsweek and NYTimes etc pandering to the ignorant masses, Deplorable and really unethical, but that's what will happen and that's what this country is about today. Uneducated masses being mislead by educated liberal liars.
Yes, of course. How dare anyone think the workers, or the "ignorant masses", as you like to refer to them, should get the same respect as the all-holy "Job Creators"?
It's obvious that the workers are just the scum on the bottom of the "Job Creator" shoes.
How did it take me so long to realize this? Man, I need to brush up on my Ayn Rand I guess.
See, right there is your problem: you think US tax and economic policy should be based on some lamebrain notion of "respect". We don't set tax rates based on showing "respect" for someone, shitforbrains. We set it currently - which isn't the best idea, but a hell of a lot better than your kindergarten view of life - based on which activities we want to encourage or discourage. Like it or don't, investment is a lot more valuable to the nation than just being a working drone. On the other hand, being a working drone is a lot more valuable to the nation than being a welfare leech, but thanks to "fairness" snivelers like you, we are currently in a position of discouraging the first, and encouraging the second. So you'll excuse us if we don't feel like we need any more advice from the likes of you.
By the way, shameless plug time: before Newt Gingrich's original Contract With America, we were encouraging welfare leeches even more. He made great strides in turning the hammock back into a safety net.
See, right there is your problem: you think US tax and economic policy should be based on some lamebrain notion of "respect". We don't set tax rates based on showing "respect" for someone, shitforbrains. We set it currently - which isn't the best idea, but a hell of a lot better than your kindergarten view of life - based on which activities we want to encourage or discourage. Like it or don't, investment is a lot more valuable to the nation than just being a working drone. On the other hand, being a working drone is a lot more valuable to the nation than being a welfare leech, but thanks to "fairness" snivelers like you, we are currently in a position of discouraging the first, and encouraging the second. So you'll excuse us if we don't feel like we need any more advice from the likes of you.
By the way, shameless plug time: before Newt Gingrich's original Contract With America, we were encouraging welfare leeches even more. He made great strides in turning the hammock back into a safety net.
if romney is claiming his personal income tax rate is lower than mine he is lying
if he claims his cap gains tax rate is different than anyone else's he is lying.
He's claiming his effective tax rate is lower than yours.
That would include all taxes.
What is he claiming his effective tax rate is?
I'm sorry, but that statement is utterly false.
When you make the money in the first place through wages, it is taxed, yes.
However, when you invest it, it is not taxed again. Only profit from your investments is taxed.
In fact, if your investments lose money, you can then claim a loss on your taxes.
How do you do that? You said it was a false statement, and then went on to confirm what I said. Does it hurt your brain?
Wow, you really do talk in circles, don't you? Let's review, in detail:
You said:
that capital money has already been taxed as wage money once, it is a second, double, tax.
There is no "second, double tax" on the wage money itself, only on profit earned from the wage money. Therefore that statement is false.
Next you said:
there is risk associated with capital money that is not associated with wage money.
And that risk is refundable in taxes as a loss.
See, right there is your problem: you think US tax and economic policy should be based on some lamebrain notion of "respect". We don't set tax rates based on showing "respect" for someone, shitforbrains. We set it currently - which isn't the best idea, but a hell of a lot better than your kindergarten view of life - based on which activities we want to encourage or discourage. Like it or don't, investment is a lot more valuable to the nation than just being a working drone. On the other hand, being a working drone is a lot more valuable to the nation than being a welfare leech, but thanks to "fairness" snivelers like you, we are currently in a position of discouraging the first, and encouraging the second. So you'll excuse us if we don't feel like we need any more advice from the likes of you.
By the way, shameless plug time: before Newt Gingrich's original Contract With America, we were encouraging welfare leeches even more. He made great strides in turning the hammock back into a safety net.
No, I don't. I simply equate capital to man-hours.
Why should investment capital be treated as more important than man-hours?
At least the investors usually get their initial investment back, in addition to profit. Workers just get paid money equal to their investment in labor.
Again, why should the people that invest the capital be taxed any less than those who invest their labor?
...And again you show your true colors by calling the vast majority of the American people "Drones". Well done.
exactly. We could always crank up the rates on cap gains and encourage investments in munis and various other tax free investments. The net result would be less revenue, but that would make so many happy I suppose.
Really? Link?
Again, this just shows how little you understand the subject matter. Do you know how many start ups that are venture backed fail? A lot more than succeed is the answer.
So many just don't have a clue, it's actually entertaining to read this thread.
Here's a sobering bit of reality for many of you who think all investments made simply win.
Most venture capital funds lose money - The Term Sheet: Fortune's deals blog Term Sheet
oh really? "the rest of us"? First of all, this is FEDERAL INCOME taxes and almost half pay $0 in Federal income taxes. You don't know a single person who pays 1/3 of his pay in FEDERAL INCOME taxes.
Maybe everyone would be happier if he invested in tax free munis like Kerry and his heiress and didn't even pay 15%. But then again that would make Romney a dope and a bad investor. I guess America would be happier with a stupid investor rather than a smart investor
Bullshit.........I took care of paychecks for my commands when I was serving in the Navy, and for the 20 years that I was in, federal income tax was taken out at 28 percent if you lived in a state that didn't charge income tax on the military, and it was at 32 percent (4 percent for state taxes) if your state did charge income tax on the military.
Try again stupid.
You do realize that what gets taken out isn't what is ultimately reflected as income tax paid. Did your "commands" file a tax return and get their refund?
Unless their taxable income was around 400k, they weren't paying 1/3 in Federal income taxes. In fact, no income group averages 1/3 in Federal income taxes.
The Tax Foundation - Summary of Latest Federal Individual Income Tax Data
The average tax rate for all filers is 11%.
You have a 401K?
There are two differences. The first is that capital money has already been taxed as wage money once, it is a second, double, tax. The second difference is that there is risk associated with capital money that is not associated with wage money.
This stuff is not rocket science.
I'm sorry, but that statement is utterly false.
When you make the money in the first place through wages, it is taxed, yes.
However, when you invest it, it is not taxed again. Only profit from your investments is taxed.
In fact, if your investments lose money, you can then claim a loss on your taxes.
The first point is true. It is a second tax levied on the use of after income tax dollars. So is a VAT or a sales tax.
The second point is true. The risk is not refundable. It does not get taxed, but it is not refunded to the risk taker.
Are you making this stuff up as you go along, or are you arguing just to argue about something?
Why don't you be a bit more honest and specific? You only get to claim a portion of capital losses, while you must pay taxes on all gains, both real and inflationary (ie. capital gains taxes are paid not only on what you actually get for the sale, but you also pay them on any increase on the value due to inflation). I'm sure you knew that, right? Well, I'm sure you'll claim you did now that I pointed it out.
The first point is true. It is a second tax levied on the use of after income tax dollars. So is a VAT or a sales tax.
No, it is not. To be a "Double Tax", which is what you claimed, it would have to be levied on the principal. That is not the case. It is levied on the profit from the investment.
Sales Tax is different. That is a true "double tax", as you are being taxed again on the principal when you spend it.
The second point is true. The risk is not refundable. It does not get taxed, but it is not refunded to the risk taker.
Are you making this stuff up as you go along, or are you arguing just to argue about something?
The second part is true, there is a risk on investments, of course there is. However, your implication is that a paid employee does not trade or "risk" anything in trade for the pay he receives, which is false, as I explained.
Bullshit.........I took care of paychecks for my commands when I was serving in the Navy, and for the 20 years that I was in, federal income tax was taken out at 28 percent if you lived in a state that didn't charge income tax on the military, and it was at 32 percent (4 percent for state taxes) if your state did charge income tax on the military.
Try again stupid.
You do realize that what gets taken out isn't what is ultimately reflected as income tax paid. Did your "commands" file a tax return and get their refund?
Unless their taxable income was around 400k, they weren't paying 1/3 in Federal income taxes. In fact, no income group averages 1/3 in Federal income taxes.
The Tax Foundation - Summary of Latest Federal Individual Income Tax Data
The average tax rate for all filers is 11%.
Obviously you've never been in the military. When I say "command" I mean all the people attached to my unit.
Yes, probably most of the people got back a refund, I don't know, because I only did my own taxes, but the withholding rate for their checks was 28 to 32 percent.
And I'd also be willing to wager that nobody ended up getting a refund for all the money they paid in.
Like I said.......try again.
However, I DID like being in hostile fire and combat zones, because in them, the military got a tax free paycheck for the entire time they are there.
22 pages of posts, and some people still do not know the difference between wages and capital gains.
Of course people know the difference between wages and capital gains.
But some people think that somehow contributing physical or mental labor, instead of loaned capital, to a corporate effort is somehow less important, and therefore should be taxed at a higher rate.
Why should my hard labor be taxed at 28% (close to 50% for overtime, etc) while someone who just contributes capital be taxed at 15%?
I'm paid by the corporation's profits, just like the stockholders are paid by the corporation's profits. So a higher corporate tax would affect my wages, or perhaps my job, just like it affects dividends.
The only real difference is what each individual is contributing to the group effort.
People on the right side of the fence seem to believe that investment contribution is more important than labor contribution. I am stating that I do not feel that way.
You have a 401K?
There are two differences. The first is that capital money has already been taxed as wage money once, it is a second, double, tax. The second difference is that there is risk associated with capital money that is not associated with wage money.
This stuff is not rocket science.
22 pages of posts, and some people still do not know the difference between wages and capital gains.
Of course people know the difference between wages and capital gains.
But some people think that somehow contributing physical or mental labor, instead of loaned capital, to a corporate effort is somehow less important, and therefore should be taxed at a higher rate.
Why should my hard labor be taxed at 28% (close to 50% for overtime, etc) while someone who just contributes capital be taxed at 15%?
I'm paid by the corporation's profits, just like the stockholders are paid by the corporation's profits. So a higher corporate tax would affect my wages, or perhaps my job, just like it affects dividends.
The only real difference is what each individual is contributing to the group effort.
People on the right side of the fence seem to believe that investment contribution is more important than labor contribution. I am stating that I do not feel that way.
You aren't paid anything like a stockholder is paid. Many people cash paychecks every day from businesses that turn no profit.
So I shouldn't have to pay the federal gas tax because I'm doing it with money that was already taxed once?
