zoogs Posted September 12, 2017 Share Posted September 12, 2017 I don't know if that works. Generally speaking I'm not for punishing people for the sake of helping out corporations. Now, perhaps if the highest-paid people were the ones to take a hit...but at that point, isn't it a lot muddier? These are people whose net worth comes from their stake in the company, etc, not from salary. Meanwhile, suppose you do put the screws to them, flushing corporations with more wealth (or security). Doesn't that not trickle down to the next levels of employees who need it? Don't these burgeoning margins inevitably get seen as benefits primarily by the top execs, etc, anyway? I don't think there's a real way "around" it. At least, I think this summarizes the argument against on this topic. I'm a bit ignorant in this area, so pardon that and correct me where I'm wrong, too. Link to comment
deedsker Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 1. End all corporate loopholes. 2. Pay 22.5% taxes for all net income in business incentivizing money be spent on talent retention, wages, property, etc. 3. All personal income is taxed without regard to source with only the regular exemption, personal tax credit, child credit, and savings credit. 4.? 5. Profit! Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 I wonder if he will allow them to have two scoops of ice cream. Link to comment
zoogs Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 14 hours ago, deedsker said: 1. End all corporate loopholes. 2. Pay 22.5% taxes for all net income in business incentivizing money be spent on talent retention, wages, property, etc. 3. All personal income is taxed without regard to source with only the regular exemption, personal tax credit, child credit, and savings credit. 4.? 5. Profit! Are investments (for example) income? Link to comment
TGHusker Posted September 13, 2017 Author Share Posted September 13, 2017 On 9/12/2017 at 0:16 PM, zoogs said: On budget-cutting, etc: Fair point. Put the budget-cutting mantra in perspective. It's not about outlandish and leftist, it's about red meat. What are the right kinds and amounts of it to dangle out there so that, supported by your voting base, you can achieve the top percentile wealth security that has always been the honest primary aim. I use to think NPR and Public TV should be on the cutting board but I don't anymore. I feel they give more stories, more variety, and are less prone to camp in or on one topic as the cable news networks. One could argue that they may lean more left but if you are a more right leaner, you should be smart enough to figure it out and hopefully be 'enlightened' with another perspective. Hearing a different perspective is good - doesn't mean you have to be tossed around by every perspective but it helps with understanding which is important. I've enjoyed listening to NPR on my commute and sometimes I end up shifting my ideas on a topic due to the new understanding. 2 Link to comment
deedsker Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 1 hour ago, zoogs said: Are investments (for example) income? Yes. All income is income* with no need to know where it came from. This increase available income toward SS* and Medicare*, eliminates loopholes where individuals with large investment income have lower marginal rates than working class people, and greatly reduces workload on enforcement and paperwork related to sourcing income. *SS and Medicare recipients may have their income counted differently depending on what these changes would do to those individuals and how their benefits would be effected. Link to comment
QMany Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 Before advocating for slashing corporate tax rates, I implore you to read up on Brownback's experiment here in Kansas. This was a Heritage Foundation/Koch family wet dream that has failed miserably for 99.9% of the state. 2 Link to comment
zoogs Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 @deedsker, if I own 10% stock in a company for example, when and how is that taxed? To whom does the taxed portion go, and in what form? Maybe I'm not understanding correctly. Link to comment
BigRedBuster Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 31 minutes ago, QMany said: Before advocating for slashing corporate tax rates, I implore you to read up on Brownback's experiment here in Kansas. This was a Heritage Foundation/Koch family wet dream that has failed miserably for 99.9% of the state. That would be needed if a) I didn't already know what a miserable experiment that was....and b) I wasn't proposing increasing other taxes to pay for the cut. I am NOT for cutting corporate taxes and leaving everything else the same....or....God forbid cutting everything else too. Link to comment
QMany Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 Just now, BigRedBuster said: That would be needed if a) I didn't already know what a miserable experiment that was....and b) I wasn't proposing increasing other taxes to pay for the cut. I saw your post about raising the rate on higher incomes in the corporation. That does seem great in theory. But this is Donald Trump and a GOP House & Senate we are talking about; they will attempt to cut the corporate rate and vehemently refuse to increase taxes on their high-income pocket-liners. Those will not be tied together under this Administration, no matter how many lies Trump tells. I just want others to be educated what happens when that experiment is implemented without other ways to pay for it. Link to comment
RedDenver Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 (edited) 23 minutes ago, zoogs said: @deedsker, if I own 10% stock in a company for example, when and how is that taxed? To whom does the taxed portion go, and in what form? Maybe I'm not understanding correctly. I'm not deedsker, but IMO would be the same as now with the capital gains tax except it would be at the income tax rate. So you'd pay when you sold the stock, and the amount you'd pay on would be the profit (sell price - buy price) times the marginal tax rate for that part of your income. EDIT: So if you sold the stock at a loss or no profit, you wouldn't owe any tax. Edited September 13, 2017 by RedDenver clarifying Link to comment
deedsker Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 4 hours ago, RedDenver said: I'm not deedsker, but IMO would be the same as now with the capital gains tax except it would be at the income tax rate. So you'd pay when you sold the stock, and the amount you'd pay on would be the profit (sell price - buy price) times the marginal tax rate for that part of your income. EDIT: So if you sold the stock at a loss or no profit, you wouldn't owe any tax. Beat me to it. Thanks RD. You could/would be liable for SS or Medicare taxes in my new method as well. Link to comment
NM11046 Posted September 14, 2017 Share Posted September 14, 2017 On 9/12/2017 at 10:58 AM, RedDenver said: I'm reading along, TG, just haven't commented I'm here too - it's just not an area I know much about or have a strong opinion on yet ... have a feeling watching this thread that I will though! Thanks for doing the heavy lifting! Link to comment
Recommended Posts