Income Inequality

[cooltigger21 0]

Corporate taxes are paid by people in one form or another. Let banks do whatever they want but also make sure that they know that whatever the result of their own decisions they will bear the consequences of those decisions, be they good or bad. Also let's stop forcing banks at essentially gunpoint to make loans to people who are not qualified. Then on top of that let's don't have the federal government compound the problem by buying up these bad loans. We had the housing collapse and now we're right back at it again.

[RunInRed 16,407]

Corporate taxes are paid by people in one form or another. Let banks do whatever they want but also make sure that they know that whatever the result of their own decisions they will bear the consequences of those decisions, be they good or bad. Also let's stop forcing banks at essentially gunpoint to make loans to people who are not qualified. Then on top of that let's don't have the federal government compound the problem by buying up these bad loans. We had the housing collapse and now we're right back at it again.

Great in theory, will never work in practice. For starters, the US banking sector has $15 Trillion in assets. Think about that for a second. And they've proven time and time again they can not operate unchecked. The literally can and will bring down the entire US economy if we let them.

Banks should be safe and boring. Separate Commercial Banks from Investment Banks and put a fair tax structure in place for all professionals, especially those tempted by this sector.

[RunInRed 16,407]

Corporate taxes are paid by people in one form or another. Let banks do whatever they want but also make sure that they know that whatever the result of their own decisions they will bear the consequences of those decisions, be they good or bad. Also let's stop forcing banks at essentially gunpoint to make loans to people who are not qualified. Then on top of that let's don't have the federal government compound the problem by buying up these bad loans. We had the housing collapse and now we're right back at it again.

They are back at what again? Have you tried to get a loan lately? Underwriting standards and products are nothing like they were then. And that includes Fannie and Freddie.

[TheBlueVue 177]

the US banking sector has $15 Trillion in assets

What are these assets? Bankers have different criteria for differentiating between assets and liabilities.

[TitanTiger 20,481]

Are you calling ME an Alinsky-ite?

Wow, that is a first.

He specializes in unique insights that other people - you know, that read and pay attention - don't get.

[TheBlueVue 177]

Are you calling ME an Alinsky-ite?

Wow, that is a first.

He specializes in unique insights that other people - you know, that read and pay attention - don't get.

I can tell the difference between chicken salad and chicken s*** too.

[cooltigger21 0]

Not all banks want to go into the securities business. If they know they won't get bailed out if they screw up they are not near as likely to go off on wild tangents. Just have everything disclosed as to what they do and let the consumer choose.

[TitanTiger 20,481]

Are you calling ME an Alinsky-ite?

Wow, that is a first.

He specializes in unique insights that other people - you know, that read and pay attention - don't get.

I can tell the difference between chicken salad and chicken s*** too.

Not unless you were told first. And even then it's a coin flip.

[DKW 86 7,419]

Rob, if we could just get an even floor it would be great, but we have so much invested in cronyism in this nation.

I really dont think anything short of an armed uprising would change it much. Some very progressive tax rates may, but then Congress would likely just take some bribes and fix some loopholes like they always do.

Or do you have a plan in mind to make the changes?

Let's start here ...

- Return to the Clinton-Era tax rates ...

- Close the tax loophole that allows hedge-fund managers to avoid taxes by routing their investments through an insurance company in low-tax countries like Bermuda

- Close the tax loophole that allows hedge-fund and private equity managers to pay capital gains tax inplace of ordinary income taxes (i.e., carried interest)

- Reinstate Glass-Steagal, separating commercial and investment banking including preventing commercial banks from trading derivatives and swaps or engaging in hedge fund and private equity activities

Run for damn President. Those should be SOUND economic thinking by anyone on either side.

These common sense points should in no way be partisan.

[TitanTiger 20,481]

Rob, if we could just get an even floor it would be great, but we have so much invested in cronyism in this nation.

I really dont think anything short of an armed uprising would change it much. Some very progressive tax rates may, but then Congress would likely just take some bribes and fix some loopholes like they always do.

Or do you have a plan in mind to make the changes?

Let's start here ...

- Return to the Clinton-Era tax rates ...

- Close the tax loophole that allows hedge-fund managers to avoid taxes by routing their investments through an insurance company in low-tax countries like Bermuda

- Close the tax loophole that allows hedge-fund and private equity managers to pay capital gains tax inplace of ordinary income taxes (i.e., carried interest)

- Reinstate Glass-Steagal, separating commercial and investment banking including preventing commercial banks from trading derivatives and swaps or engaging in hedge fund and private equity activities

Run for damn President. Those should be SOUND economic thinking by anyone on either side.

These common sense points should in no way be partisan.

That $59k-71k bracket is the one that's going to have a conniption. Those aren't rich folks. A household of four who makes $70k going to really feel a $2300 tax increase (an extra 5% on their first $17k and an extra 13% on everything they made from $59k to $70k).

[cooltigger21 0]

We don't need to raise any taxes on anybody. That isn't going to close the gap between rich and poor The tax code is not for social justice. The wealthy people can still find ways to not pay it. Raising taxes on the rich isnt an answer. That's the mindset that it's Washington's money. The government is way over sized and growing bigger all the time. It doesn't need any more money. I saw the other day where revenue in the first 5 months of this fiscal year was at a record level.

[Auburn85 432]

Rob, if we could just get an even floor it would be great, but we have so much invested in cronyism in this nation.

I really dont think anything short of an armed uprising would change it much. Some very progressive tax rates may, but then Congress would likely just take some bribes and fix some loopholes like they always do.

Or do you have a plan in mind to make the changes?

Let's start here ...

- Return to the Clinton-Era tax rates ...

- Close the tax loophole that allows hedge-fund managers to avoid taxes by routing their investments through an insurance company in low-tax countries like Bermuda

- Close the tax loophole that allows hedge-fund and private equity managers to pay capital gains tax inplace of ordinary income taxes (i.e., carried interest)

- Reinstate Glass-Steagal, separating commercial and investment banking including preventing commercial banks from trading derivatives and swaps or engaging in hedge fund and private equity activities

Run for damn President. Those should be SOUND economic thinking by anyone on either side.

These common sense points should in no way be partisan.

That $59k-71k bracket is the one that's going to have a conniption. Those aren't rich folks. A household of four who makes $70k going to really feel a $2300 tax increase (an extra 5% on their first $17k and an extra 13% on everything they made from $59k to $70k).

Yeah, I would like to now how this improves income inequality.

[DKW 86 7,419]

How about the 1%ers paying a more fair share and How about raising revenues to pay off the deficit?

[RunInRed 16,407]

Going back to 2012, Clinton tax rates applied to today's numbers would result in $2.35 trillion more in revenues over 10 years. Simply put, I think the US economy of the 90s was by far one of the fairest and most opportunity filled of any I've seen under any administration in my life time. And it led to record jobs, a balanced budget and a surging middle class. But that's just step one. More to the point of this topic, I think we need to fundamentally change the way Wall Street is able to operate and essentially, the way we subsidize/encourage them for doing such. Again, we should put a wall between Commercial and Investment Banking and force all income to be taxed at Ordinary levels. No tax shelters. No tax loop holes. No nonsense.

[RunInRed 16,407]

That $59k-71k bracket is the one that's going to have a conniption. Those aren't rich folks. A household of four who makes $70k going to really feel a $2300 tax increase (an extra 5% on their first $17k and an extra 13% on everything they made from $59k to $70k).

Maybe there is a happy medium ... but 15% Fed Rate on 70K is a bit silly when you look at the rest of the picture.

[RunInRed 16,407]

How about the 1%ers paying a more fair share and How about raising revenues to pay off the deficit?

Of note, the top 2 tax brackets are already at the Clinton levels (i.e., the Bush cuts sunset after 10 years).

[DKW 86 7,419]

How about the 1%ers paying a more fair share and How about raising revenues to pay off the deficit?

Of note, the top 2 tax brackets are already at the Clinton levels (i.e., the Bush cuts sunset after 10 years).

I would prefer a higher rate to offset the already there loopholes and the soon to be added to loopholes to come.

[RunInRed 16,407]

How about the 1%ers paying a more fair share and How about raising revenues to pay off the deficit?

Of note, the top 2 tax brackets are already at the Clinton levels (i.e., the Bush cuts sunset after 10 years).

I would prefer a higher rate to offset the already there loopholes and the soon to be added to loopholes to come.

Oh yeah? How high would you go? Would you push the cap gains rate further as well?

[DKW 86 7,419]

How about the 1%ers paying a more fair share and How about raising revenues to pay off the deficit?

Of note, the top 2 tax brackets are already at the Clinton levels (i.e., the Bush cuts sunset after 10 years).

I would prefer a higher rate to offset the already there loopholes and the soon to be added to loopholes to come.

Oh yeah? How high would you go? Would you push the cap gains rate further as well?

Rob, I could see 39.5% shift down one level and a new cap at 41.

We could debate capital gains for sometime. I have very mixed feelings about capital gains. Should it be raised, yes, but capital gains taxing is very damaging to small business. I will have to think on that. Maybe raise the capital gains threshold to over $1M but raise the % after that?

[cooltigger21 0]

How about the 1%ers paying a more fair share and How about raising revenues to pay off the deficit?

Of note, the top 2 tax brackets are already at the Clinton levels (i.e., the Bush cuts sunset after 10 years).

I would prefer a higher rate to offset the already there loopholes and the soon to be added to loopholes to come.

Oh yeah? How high would you go? Would you push the cap gains rate further as well?

Rob, I could see 39.5% shift down one level and a new cap at 41.

We could debate capital gains for sometime. I have very mixed feelings about capital gains. Should it be raised, yes, but capital gains taxing is very damaging to small business. I will have to think on that. Maybe raise the capital gains threshold to over $1M but raise the % after that?

The problem with raising capital gains is that you are taxing money that has already been taxed once. Investments are made with money that was left after paying the income tax on it the first time around. We don't need to raise any taxes period at the federal level. The government is taking in more than enough to fund the LEGITIMATE functions of government. 3 trillion a year is plenty of money for the government to do what it is supposed to do. At some point enough becomes enough. Raising taxes on the wealthy isn't going to close the income gap. The logic of that escapes me completely. The idea that it's not FAIR is absurd. The tax code isn't about fairness. It's not a tool for social engineering. Either go to a national consumption tax such as the fair tax or some other variant or drop the income tax down to 10 or 15 percent with no deductions. Raise the level at which income is taxed if you want. We'll take in more money than we are now or certainly more than enough to do what government is supposed to do and people will have more money in their pocket.

While we're at it, get the federal government out of the student loan business. It's causing tuition to skyrocket which means people going to college leave with the debt equal to a 30 year mortgage. We're headed for a massive default on these loans because college graduates can't find a job in their field and can't make enough money to pay that debt off. Just like the housing market. The government got involved with that and decided it wasn't fair that some people were not able to get a home. Never mind the fact that they didn't have a credit history that showed them worthy of a home loan and they didn't have the income to pay it back. All those extra people buying homes sent prices soaring but then eventually it caught up to us and voila the crash of 2008. Get out of the way and let people do their thing and income will rise for all people.

[TitanTiger 20,481]

I think when capital gains essentially become one's sole source of income, the claim that at one time way back in the past the initial money was taxed as income loses steam. It becomes patently unfair for someone making millions to be taxed at 15% on a six or seven figure yearly income while someone making under $100k is paying a higher percentage simply based on a man-made classification of "income" vs "capital gains."

[WarTim 3,456]

Titan, how about a Flat Tax?

[TitanTiger 20,481]

Titan, how about a Flat Tax?

I might be ok with it if there was an exemption up to a certain level of income. When a person makes $50,000, every bit of that is going to just living a decent life with very few "luxuries" (not talking diamonds and Bentleys, just anything beyond food/clothing/shelter/healthcare). To me it's hardly right to tax such a person just struggling to make ends meet and feed their family while a person making $15 million a year gets a low tax rate and still has millions to live on after.

It would depend on the percentage and whether it was flexible enough to take care of the things we need to take care of.

[RunInRed 16,407]

That $59k-71k bracket is the one that's going to have a conniption. Those aren't rich folks. A household of four who makes $70k going to really feel a $2300 tax increase (an extra 5% on their first $17k and an extra 13% on everything they made from $59k to $70k).

Maybe there is a happy medium ... but 15% Fed Rate on 70K is a bit silly when you look at the rest of the picture.

But you raise a good point; most think Obama has raised taxes but when it comes to the middle class, that couldn't be further from the truth.

[DKW 86 7,419]

That $59k-71k bracket is the one that's going to have a conniption. Those aren't rich folks. A household of four who makes $70k going to really feel a $2300 tax increase (an extra 5% on their first $17k and an extra 13% on everything they made from $59k to $70k).

Maybe there is a happy medium ... but 15% Fed Rate on 70K is a bit silly when you look at the rest of the picture.

But you raise a good point; most think Obama has raised taxes but when it comes to the middle class, that couldn't be further from the truth.

There is a real problem in America where rhetoric has taken over fact.

Obama didnt raise taxes and Bush was trying to reign in the Wall Street Crash in 2005.

The rhetoric in America has overwhelmed fact way too often in the last ten years.