- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: This unrealized capital gains thing
Posted on 8/22/24 at 7:51 am to Dawgfanman
Posted on 8/22/24 at 7:51 am to Dawgfanman
quote:
And many voters are okay with this.
quote:
They don’t own anything!
Exactly why I don't want people who pay no federal income tax having a say in tax policy.
“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years. These nations have progressed through this sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to selfishness; From selfishness to apathy; From apathy to dependence; From dependence back into bondage.”
- Alexander Fraser Tytler
0
Posted on 8/22/24 at 7:58 am to aTmTexas Dillo
quote:
This unrealized capital gains thing
Is an awful idea.
Posted on 8/22/24 at 8:00 am to Green Chili Tiger
Are you still pretending to be a libertarian?
Posted on 8/22/24 at 9:36 am to Notrub14
huh not what i was saying at all but whatever ddumb frick
Posted on 8/22/24 at 10:42 am to Notrub14
quote:Thanks for proving your concept of right/wrong is means-tested.
Thanks for proving this guy’s point by comparing it to the Holocaust.
Although, i’ve never had cancer, I can recognize it’s a bad idea. (perhaps you like that analogy better).
But yours seems to be dependent on if your own selfish interests are impacted. It is what it is—regardless of what analogy you choose.
This post was edited on 8/22/24 at 10:45 am
Posted on 8/22/24 at 10:44 am to aTmTexas Dillo
Many voters are unaware of this. The ones that are aware of this are your typical liberals (Single white wine drinking females, trans people, white soy boy males, etc)
Posted on 8/22/24 at 11:24 am to CleverUserName
quote:
Look at see what was promised at the advent of the income tax.
The income taxes imposed by the Revenue Act of 1913 applied to the middle class. For married filers, income above $4,000, approximately $125,000 in 2024 Dollars, was taxed.
Posted on 8/22/24 at 11:33 am to Notrub14
quote:That's a top 12% income today. Adn would have been significanly higher percentile in 1913.
The income taxes imposed by the Revenue Act of 1913 applied to the middle class. For married filers, income above $4,000, approximately $125,000 in 2024 Dollars, was taxed.
This post was edited on 8/22/24 at 11:54 am
Posted on 8/22/24 at 11:37 am to aTmTexas Dillo
quote:If you knew much of anything you’d know how easy it is to comply with US tax law and have an office in St. Croix to funnel funds through to minimize taxes.
Ohhh, gotcha, so this mega Dem fundraiser/mover and shaker/millionaire/bundler with multiple homes pays no US income tax? Must be nice to be him. You got me, you got me!
I did.
Posted on 8/22/24 at 12:20 pm to Notrub14
Notrub14,
We complain about this and how many voters would be ok with this because they don't own anything. But if it only applies to those over $100,000,000, how many of us would be ok with this?
That makes them no better than the poor that were ok sticking it to us.
Politicians preying on the lower income and low info voters to gain power and control and milk the rich.
We complain about this and how many voters would be ok with this because they don't own anything. But if it only applies to those over $100,000,000, how many of us would be ok with this?
That makes them no better than the poor that were ok sticking it to us.
Politicians preying on the lower income and low info voters to gain power and control and milk the rich.
Posted on 8/22/24 at 12:28 pm to jp4lsu
quote:Funny isn’t it how those rich never get milked isn’t it?
Politicians preying on the lower income and low info voters to gain power and control and milk the rich.
Other than political donations of course
Posted on 8/22/24 at 12:33 pm to llfshoals
quote:You mean like how the top 5% pays 66% of the taxes?
Funny isn’t it how those rich never get milked isn’t it?
Posted on 8/22/24 at 12:33 pm to Notrub14
quote:
It only applies to households with net wealth in excess of $100,000,000.
So what? You think they can't change the rules on us?
Limiting this to the "wealthy" is how they test waters. Don't be fooled.
Posted on 8/22/24 at 12:58 pm to LordSaintly
Sorry, haven't read this long thread so someone may have already mentioned this.
This idea will NEVER pass. It's because members of Congress would all lose money. Bill Clinton tried a tax on 'possible' rent. IE, if a rich person owned a second home in Fla or a house on the lake for vacations and did not rent it, then he would be taxed on the income he'd get from rent he could have gotten.
It never made it to the floor because it hit almost every member of Congress in the pocket book. Their first loyalty is too themselves.
This idea will NEVER pass. It's because members of Congress would all lose money. Bill Clinton tried a tax on 'possible' rent. IE, if a rich person owned a second home in Fla or a house on the lake for vacations and did not rent it, then he would be taxed on the income he'd get from rent he could have gotten.
It never made it to the floor because it hit almost every member of Congress in the pocket book. Their first loyalty is too themselves.
Posted on 8/22/24 at 1:00 pm to Zach
quote:
Bill Clinton tried a tax on 'possible' rent. IE, if a rich person owned a second home in Fla or a house on the lake for vacations and did not rent it, then he would be taxed on the income he'd get from rent he could have gotten.
Good lord that's insanity
This post was edited on 8/22/24 at 1:01 pm
Posted on 8/22/24 at 1:05 pm to Notrub14
quote:
It only applies to households with net wealth in excess of $100,000,000.
Heard this before when discussing $400k or something. They hired 80k new IRS agents and they are armed.
Posted on 8/22/24 at 1:30 pm to aTmTexas Dillo
quote:
But what about George Clooney? Stephen Spielberg and George Lucas?
They are in the club and it’s (D)ifferent for them.
Posted on 8/22/24 at 2:54 pm to Dawgfanman
quote:
I'm not in favor of the tax on unrealized capital gains, but to be clear: you would only pay it if you are very wealthy. It only applies to households with net wealth in excess of $100,000,000.
So tired of hearing democrats say it won't happen to you unless you're xxx amount over this dollar figure. And then it creeps back down to the middle class. fricking piece of shite frauds. We are insanely taxed at this point.
Page 6 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News