Taxing the wealthy the most isn’t about what’s fair - it’s about what is realistic

[Mac1958]

You have never studied Economics, have you? That is understandable because all you Moon Bats are just as ignorant of Economics as you are of History, Biology, Ethics, Climate Science and the Constitution.

I'm an investment advisor. CFP, ChFC, CLU, 7/65/63. This is my profession and my life.

You are just another talk radio winger. You only "know" what you are fed. Play with someone else, you're out of your league here, and I no longer have the requisite patience.

Dismissed.
.

As an investment adviser, do you shame your clients into paying more of their fair share?

I work with them to mitigate tax law as it stands at any given time.

I have very few wealthy clients who bitch and moan about taxes anywhere near as frequently as the rank & file GOP does.
.

Where do you draw the line? Who do you consider "rich" and should pay a sigificantly higher rate?

I don't use the word "rich". That's one of the many terms that have been over-used to the point of dilution. It means very little.

I'm perfectly comfy with graduated tax margins. Since the range of individual income is now so profound, I'd be in favor of adding four new margins on the top end.
.

 

[Diver Diva]

The top 10% pay 70% of total income tax revenues. The top 1% pays more than the bottom 90%. How much more do you want to tax the rich?

 

[Mac1958]

The top 10% pay 70% of total income tax revenues. The top 1% pays more than the bottom 90%. How much more do you want to tax the rich?

Well, if there is some kind of problem with this, let's see the GOP actually cut SPENDING for a change.

With ONE caveat: Income taxes go back up to where they were, and they don't come down until AFTER you have cut spending.

Let's see Trump and the Republicans run for office on big spending cuts, and of course they'd have to go after entitlements. So, let's go with 40% cuts to Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security and the various deep state departments.

Let's see if they get elected. Let's see them defend and advocate for significant cuts in benefits across the board. If they do win, they make those cuts, THEN they can drop taxes again. You win!

Fair enough? Are those cuts big enough? I had one guy here say 80%. Would that be better?
.

 

[DBA]

We have not had unprecedented prosperity.

We haven't? Are you sure about that?

• Record highs in the market (by definition, that is unprecedented prosperity)

• Record low unemployment in the African-American community (by definition, that is unprecedented prosperity)

• Record low unemployment in the Hispanic community (by definition, that is unprecedented prosperity)

Any one of those by themselves wouldn't really qualify as "unprecedented prosperity" but combined along with other data (such as 30 year high in manufacturing, wages up, etc.) unequivocally proves unprecedented prosperity under Donald Trump and the Republicans.

God I love exposing your ignorance to everyone.

So in your little world, unemployment data is the only indicator of prosperity.

Okay. I believe you. You're just too darn smart for me.
.

All I know is that I have done very, very well in this market under Trump with no assistance from a financial advisor. In fact, I am even thinking of much earlier retirement than previously predicted. Trump's policies have worked for those of us who work and have a modicum of investment expertise. If the Democrats would get out of the way, the economy would be even better, despite the poor growth in Europe and them devaluing their currency. You forgot to mention small tidbit as to what you evidently consider a bear market. Maybe you should drop the credentials and just listem to little ole me for financial advise.. Here is a little nugget for you. If one of the loonies on the left looks like they are going to win in 2020, get out while you can. They will devastate the market.

 

[Mac1958]

We have not had unprecedented prosperity.

We haven't? Are you sure about that?

• Record highs in the market (by definition, that is unprecedented prosperity)

• Record low unemployment in the African-American community (by definition, that is unprecedented prosperity)

• Record low unemployment in the Hispanic community (by definition, that is unprecedented prosperity)

Any one of those by themselves wouldn't really qualify as "unprecedented prosperity" but combined along with other data (such as 30 year high in manufacturing, wages up, etc.) unequivocally proves unprecedented prosperity under Donald Trump and the Republicans.

God I love exposing your ignorance to everyone.

So in your little world, unemployment data is the only indicator of prosperity.

Okay. I believe you. You're just too darn smart for me.
.

All I know is that I have done very, very well in this market under Trump with no assistance from a financial advisor. In fact, I am even thinking of much earlier retirement than previously predicted. Trump's policies have worked for those of us who work and have a modicum of investment expertise. If the Democrats would get out of the way, the economy would be even better, despite the poor growth in Europe and them devaluing their currency. You forgot to mention small tidbit as to what you evidently consider a bear market. Maybe you should drop the credentials and just listem to little ole me for financial advise.. Here is a little nugget for you. If one of the loonies on the left looks like they are going to win in 2020, get out while you can. They will devastate the market.

The market is up an annualized 9.7% or so since he took office. That's about average.

By all means, run your own money. I suspect I'll survive.
.

 

[BrokeLoser]

You have never studied Economics, have you? That is understandable because all you Moon Bats are just as ignorant of Economics as you are of History, Biology, Ethics, Climate Science and the Constitution.

I'm an investment advisor. CFP, ChFC, CLU, 7/65/63. This is my profession and my life.

You are just another talk radio winger. You only "know" what you are fed. Play with someone else, you're out of your league here, and I no longer have the requisite patience.

Dismissed.
.

As an investment adviser, do you shame your clients into paying more of their fair share?

I work with them to mitigate tax law as it stands at any given time.

I have very few wealthy clients who bitch and moan about taxes anywhere near as frequently as the rank & file GOP does.
.

Where do you draw the line? Who do you consider "rich" and should pay a sigificantly higher rate?

I don't use the word "rich". That's one of the many terms that have been over-used to the point of dilution. It means very little.

I'm perfectly comfy with graduated tax margins. Since the range of individual income is now so profound, I'd be in favor of adding four new margins on the top end.
.

Why?
Do you believe the increased revenue would be used to pay down debt?
Why should top earners harbor the responsibility of our debt?

 

[Mac1958]

I'm an investment advisor. CFP, ChFC, CLU, 7/65/63. This is my profession and my life.

You are just another talk radio winger. You only "know" what you are fed. Play with someone else, you're out of your league here, and I no longer have the requisite patience.

Dismissed.
.

As an investment adviser, do you shame your clients into paying more of their fair share?

I work with them to mitigate tax law as it stands at any given time.

I have very few wealthy clients who bitch and moan about taxes anywhere near as frequently as the rank & file GOP does.
.

Where do you draw the line? Who do you consider "rich" and should pay a sigificantly higher rate?

I don't use the word "rich". That's one of the many terms that have been over-used to the point of dilution. It means very little.

I'm perfectly comfy with graduated tax margins. Since the range of individual income is now so profound, I'd be in favor of adding four new margins on the top end.
.

Why?
Do you believe the increased revenue would be used to pay down debt?
Why should top earners harbor the responsibility of our debt?

If you don't like that idea, I proposed another one in post 223. Let me know which you prefer.

Bar B Que time! I'll see your response tomorrow morning.
.

 

[22lcidw]

The top 10% pay 70% of total income tax revenues. The top 1% pays more than the bottom 90%. How much more do you want to tax the rich?

Well, if there is some kind of problem with this, let's see the GOP actually cut SPENDING for a change.

With ONE caveat: Income taxes go back up to where they were, and they don't come down until AFTER you have cut spending.

Let's see Trump and the Republicans run for office on big spending cuts, and of course they'd have to go after entitlements. So, let's go with 40% cuts to Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security and the various deep state departments.

Let's see if they get elected. Let's see them defend and advocate for significant cuts in benefits across the board. If they do win, they make those cuts, THEN they can drop taxes again. You win!

Fair enough? Are those cuts big enough? I had one guy here say 80%. Would that be better?
.

Repubs dealt with Progs before on these issues. Promises of cuts by Progs that never materialized. If cuts were made back then no one would notice today. There are abuses on those programs.

 

[Flash]

You have never studied Economics, have you? That is understandable because all you Moon Bats are just as ignorant of Economics as you are of History, Biology, Ethics, Climate Science and the Constitution.

I'm an investment advisor. CFP, ChFC, CLU, 7/65/63. This is my profession and my life.

You are just another talk radio winger. You only "know" what you are fed. Play with someone else, you're out of your league here, and I no longer have the requisite patience.

Dismissed.
.

As an investment adviser, do you shame your clients into paying more of their fair share?

I work with them to mitigate tax law as it stands at any given time.

I have very few wealthy clients who bitch and moan about taxes anywhere near as frequently as the rank & file GOP does.
.

Where do you draw the line? Who do you consider "rich" and should pay a sigificantly higher rate?

With the "the rich" is anybody that makes more money than they do.

 

[Flash]

I'm an investment advisor. CFP, ChFC, CLU, 7/65/63. This is my profession and my life.

You are just another talk radio winger. You only "know" what you are fed. Play with someone else, you're out of your league here, and I no longer have the requisite patience.

Dismissed.
.

As an investment adviser, do you shame your clients into paying more of their fair share?

I work with them to mitigate tax law as it stands at any given time.

I have very few wealthy clients who bitch and moan about taxes anywhere near as frequently as the rank & file GOP does.
.

Where do you draw the line? Who do you consider "rich" and should pay a sigificantly higher rate?

I don't use the word "rich". That's one of the many terms that have been over-used to the point of dilution. It means very little.

I'm perfectly comfy with graduated tax margins. Since the range of individual income is now so profound, I'd be in favor of adding four new margins on the top end.
.

Why?
Do you believe the increased revenue would be used to pay down debt?
Why should top earners harbor the responsibility of our debt?

These Moon Bats are delusional.

They will tell you that increased taxes will be used to pay down debt but they are lying to you.

Already these Democrat clowns are all running on a platform to increase taxes but their list of free stuff is astronomical. Free medical, free college, $1000 to every household, free everything for Illegals, you name it. Billions in increased taxes and trillions in increased spending. Same old Liberal shit.

 

[pknopp]

As an investment adviser, do you shame your clients into paying more of their fair share?

I work with them to mitigate tax law as it stands at any given time.

I have very few wealthy clients who bitch and moan about taxes anywhere near as frequently as the rank & file GOP does.
.

Where do you draw the line? Who do you consider "rich" and should pay a sigificantly higher rate?

I don't use the word "rich". That's one of the many terms that have been over-used to the point of dilution. It means very little.

I'm perfectly comfy with graduated tax margins. Since the range of individual income is now so profound, I'd be in favor of adding four new margins on the top end.
.

Why?
Do you believe the increased revenue would be used to pay down debt?
Why should top earners harbor the responsibility of our debt?

These Moon Bats are delusional.

They will tell you that increased taxes will be used to pay down debt but they are lying to you.

Already these Democrat clowns are all running on a platform to increase taxes but their list of free stuff is astronomical. Free medical, free college, $1000 to every household, free everything for Illegals, you name it. Billions in increased taxes and trillions in increased spending. Same old Liberal shit.

When are you going to pony up and start paying for the wars and Trump's bail outs?

 

[P@triot]

You're too young to remember but the deomocRATs have been playing this broken record since 1965. There is no end to it, just raise taxes on everyone directly or indirectly.

Oh there is an end to it...complete and total collapse (see Venezuela)

 

[P@triot]

When are you going to pony up and start paying for the wars and Trump's bail outs?

The war’s all paid for (in full). You do realize that when the so-called “Trump tax cuts” went into affect, revenues to the federal government went up, don’t you? He simultaneously increased the money in your pocket and the money in the federal government’s pocket. That’s what true conservative policy does.

 

[pknopp]

When are you going to pony up and start paying for the wars and Trump's bail outs?

The war’s all paid for (in full). You do realize that when the so-called “Trump tax cuts” went into affect, revenues to the federal government went up, don’t you? He simultaneously increased the money in your pocket and the money in the federal government’s pocket. That’s what true conservative policy does.

The deficit went up.

The US budget deficit skyrocketed to a record $207.8 billion in May | Markets Insider

And is still going up.

 

[P@triot]

Trump's policies have worked for those of us who work and have a modicum of investment expertise. If the Democrats would get out of the way, the economy would be even better

 

[P@triot]

The deficit went up.

God you leftists are dumb as a door nail. If Trump’s policies caused revenues to increase to the federal government, then implementing the opposite policy (ie raising taxes) will have the opposite result (ie less revenues).

Your dumb ass literally just proved that we have a major spending problem. So stop fucking spending. End the unconstitutional marxist bullshit like Social Security, Obamacare, Medicaid, etc.

 

[pknopp]

The deficit went up.

God you leftists are dumb as a door nail. If Trump’s policies caused revenues to increase to the federal government, then implementing the opposite policy (ie raising taxes) will have the opposite result (ie less revenues).

Your dumb ass literally just proved that we have a major spending problem. So stop fucking spending. End the unconstitutional marxist bullshit like Social Security, Obamacare, Medicaid, etc.

Go for it. Make it the cornerstone of Trump 2020. I think that will be great.

 

[P@triot]

And is still going up.

Thanks to greedy parasites such as yourself...

 

[Flash]

I work with them to mitigate tax law as it stands at any given time.

I have very few wealthy clients who bitch and moan about taxes anywhere near as frequently as the rank & file GOP does.
.

Where do you draw the line? Who do you consider "rich" and should pay a sigificantly higher rate?

I don't use the word "rich". That's one of the many terms that have been over-used to the point of dilution. It means very little.

I'm perfectly comfy with graduated tax margins. Since the range of individual income is now so profound, I'd be in favor of adding four new margins on the top end.
.

Why?
Do you believe the increased revenue would be used to pay down debt?
Why should top earners harbor the responsibility of our debt?

These Moon Bats are delusional.

They will tell you that increased taxes will be used to pay down debt but they are lying to you.

Already these Democrat clowns are all running on a platform to increase taxes but their list of free stuff is astronomical. Free medical, free college, $1000 to every household, free everything for Illegals, you name it. Billions in increased taxes and trillions in increased spending. Same old Liberal shit.

When are you going to pony up and start paying for the wars and Trump's bail outs?

I still owe for the eight years of Obama's wars. You know, the three years of war in Iraq, the bombing of Libya and the escalation of the war in Afghanistan.

I didn't vote for Trump so you are barking up the wrong tree there Sport. I voted for a non interventionist.

I am also paying for all that welfare shit that the Democrats started to get the "neggras to vote Democrat for the next 150 years". You know, LBJ's Great Society failure. Well maybe not a total failure. The Neggras are voting for the filthy Democrats.

 

[P@triot]

Go for it. Make it the cornerstone of Trump 2020. I think that will be great.

Again...if you would actually go read the constitution like I’ve told you to half a dozen times now, you would realize that the President of the United States cannot run on that because he cannot constitutionally repeal that. Only Congress can.