2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

[joecct]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

Let me clarify. Ryan budget failed to live up to ANY of the GOP's mantra about how we spend too much money and we tax way too much.

Well we do spend way too much and take in too little, but if anyone thinks that raising rates on the "rich" ($250K married is "rich" - that's rich) is going to solve the problem is an idiot.

And all these numbers are OVER A TEN YEAR PERIOD!! We need an immediate fix, now!

 

[LynahFan]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

Well we do spend way too much and take in too little, but if anyone thinks that raising rates on the "rich" ($250K married is "rich" - that's rich) is going to solve the problem is an idiot.

And all these numbers are OVER A TEN YEAR PERIOD!! We need an immediate fix, now!

Who cares about fixing anything? As long as the broken system is "fair," mission accomplished.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

Well we do spend way too much and take in too little, but if anyone thinks that raising rates on the "rich" ($250K married is "rich" - that's rich) is going to solve the problem is an idiot.

And all these numbers are OVER A TEN YEAR PERIOD!! We need an immediate fix, now!

Never said it would. But if Mitt Romney is going to continue paying a smaller rate than I do that's the first place we should be going for any tax increases.

Who cares about fixing anything? As long as the broken system is "fair," mission accomplished.

Fixing it is easy.

Abolish Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid right now. Use the regressive taxes collected to pay for those programs to pay off the national debt. Once the debt is paid eliminate payroll taxes altogether. Problem solved.

 

[unofan]

And all these numbers are OVER A TEN YEAR PERIOD!! We need an immediate fix, now!

Why do we need an immediate fix? Interest rates are essentially zero after accounting for inflation. That would tend to say weve got time to implement a fix, and can do so gradually

 

[FreshFish]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

As for your question of number of dividends paid, I don't think it'll change. Companies aren't going to all of a sudden stop paying dividends because of a tax that doesn't apply to them.

I guess you haven't been reading the paper lately? A lot will depend upon the actual terms of whatever patch gets passed. We can just wait and see. If the tax on dividends does go to 43.4%, you can bet that any board of directors that is responsive to shareholder wishes will definitely adjust their payout. Let's set an over-under and bet on it and re-visit in January 2014. You are saying that if the rate goes from 15% to 43.4% companies won't change their payouts; I'd be a sure winner right away because Costco is making a one-time only dividend payout of $7 per share this year, and from that payout alone dividends will be lower in 2013 than in 2012. In addition, Walmart is accelerating their Jan 2013 dividend payout into 2012.

Companies will not stop paying dividends altogether, I never said that anyway. I'll say that, depending upon the actual final result, if the dividend tax does go from 15% to 43.4%, then 2013 dividend payouts will be 7.5% lower than 2012 dividend payouts. You've already said you'll take the "over" since you just said the change would be 0%.

We've seen this story before. Microsoft never once paid a dividend until after the 2003 reduction in the tax rate on dividends, then they declared a special extra. Why do you think companies did so many share-buyback programs before 2003? because the long-term capital gains tax rate was lower than the dividend tax rate. you get the same money to the same people at a lower rate that way, except that the gains are not spread evenly across the board. reducing the dividend tax rate to match the long-term capital gains tax rate is the most equitable solution; those two rates should be linked going forward because that's how companies get cash to stockholders; one method shouldn't be advantaged over the other they should ideally be neutral.

Also, the large tax increase is only applied to long term gains.

either you misspoke or you are flat-out wrong on this detail.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

if [anybody else] is going to continue paying a smaller rate than I do that's the first place we should be going for any tax increases.

Shouldn't you just change your name to Johnny-One-Note, or perhaps Mr. Envious?

Why are you so obsessed with rates when what matters now is revenue ?

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

Shouldn't you just change your name to Johnny-One-Note, or perhaps Mr. Envious?

Why are you so obsessed with rates when what matters now is revenue ?

I'm obsessed with rates? Have you listened to the Speaker of the House lately?

 

[MinnFan]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

Never said it would. But if Mitt Romney is going to continue paying a smaller rate than I do that's the first place we should be going for any tax increases.

Even though it will bring in less revenue? Seems a bit backwards if you're actually trying to solve the problem.

 

[joecct]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

Why do we need an immediate fix? Interest rates are essentially zero after accounting for inflation. That would tend to say weve got time to implement a fix, and can do so gradually

How much money would you borrow @ 0.1%? What would happen if your personal debt was 10x your annual income?

I realize there's a lot of "live for today for tomorrow we die" going on, but somebody has to pay the bills.

Maybe I come from a generation that used debt to buy long term assets, not groceries.

 

[unofan]

How much money would you borrow @ 0.1%? What would happen if your personal debt was 10x your annual income?

I realize there's a lot of "live for today for tomorrow we die" going on, but somebody has to pay the bills.

Maybe I come from a generation that used debt to buy long term assets, not groceries.

Car loan plus mortgage plus student loans gives me personal debt of about six times my income. I only wish I could consolidate it all at .1%. Frankly, at that rate I'd borrow extra and invest it. You could make more than that even in this economy.

Also...the gdp to debt ratio isnt even at 100% yet, let alone the 1000% you are implying in your post. So again, why the hurry?

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

Even though it will bring in less revenue? Seems a bit backwards if you're actually trying to solve the problem.

Aaaah, yes. Warren Buffett just completely annihilated that myth so try again.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

I'm obsessed with rates? Have you listened to the Speaker of the House lately?

so someone else does it to? My mother used to say, "if your friends jumped off a bridge, you'd to it too?" So you hear a complaint that you are being myopic and you respond "so what? I'm not the only one?"

well, at least we did come to agreement here! there's that.

 

[MinnFan]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

Aaaah, yes. Warren Buffett just completely annihilated that myth so try again.

How is that? I didn't realize that Buffett has his own set of historical data seperate from the gov't. Also, how is raising rates going to be good for the economy? One would think that right now one of the last things you'd want to do is decrease investment.

 

[Rover]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

Minn Fan you said: "Even though it will bring in less revenue? "

Then you posted a graph about tax revenue as a % of GDP to prove your point. That's a false comparison so I'm throwing the flag and backing you up 15 yards.

 

[MinnFan]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

Minn Fan you said: "Even though it will bring in less revenue? "

Then you posted a graph about tax revenue as a % of GDP to prove your point. That's a false comparison so I'm throwing the flag and backing you up 15 yards.

Fair enough, the hard numbers are within this analysis on this link.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

Minn Fan you said: "Even though it will bring in less revenue? "

Then you posted a graph about tax revenue as a % of GDP to prove your point. That's a false comparison so I'm throwing the flag and backing you up 15 yards.

Upon further review, the penalty has been rescinded. Looking only at total tax revenues (adjusted for CPI) without also looking at tax revenues as % of the economy that generates them also is misleading. All else being equal, wouldn't you expect a larger economy to generate more dollars in tax merely because it is bigger?

The data in the link Minn Fan provided gives the information both in terms of gross dollars and also in terms of % of the economy that generated those gross dollars.


Touchdown to Minn Fan! The inverse correlation between rates and revenues, whether in fixed dollars or in % of GDP, is demonstrably proven. Well done!

[You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to MinnFan again.]

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

How is that? I didn't realize that Buffett has his own set of historical data seperate from the gov't. Also, how is raising rates going to be good for the economy? One would think that right now one of the last things you'd want to do is decrease investment.

Our taxes are at historical lows and they're still sitting on trillions of dollars. What part of that don't you people get?

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

Our taxes are at historical lows and they're still sitting on trillions of dollars. What part of that don't you people get?

In order for them to be at historical lows, it must be 1% for the bottom bracket and 7% for the top. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax_in_the_United_States

But thank you for revealing that you really want to steal from Buffett, you greedy pig.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

How is that? I didn't realize that Buffett has his own set of historical data seperate from the gov't. Also, how is raising rates going to be good for the economy? One would think that right now one of the last things you'd want to do is decrease investment.

It comes down to cause and effect. Tax revenue in this chart skyrockets...not due to cap tax rates changes...but when the economy boomed or busted due to other factors. When we had the recessions of 88 and the 'tech bubble', I think you'd be hard pressed to find many economists who would say 'of course, the recessions and resulting tax revenue were caused by increasing the cap gains rate'. One could say that with the cap rate in 2006-08 that we were priming the bubble. And that didn't turn out so well. In fact if this chart was extended to date, you'd see that the cap gains tax rate would hover at all time lows...and tax revenue/gdp would fall through the floor as generations of wealth was wiped out. None of this was caused by the cap gains tax rate.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: 2012 Presidential Election - The Day after the Aftermath...

It comes down to cause and effect. Tax revenue in this chart skyrockets...not due to cap tax rates changes...but when the economy boomed or busted due to other factors. When we had the recessions of 88 and the 'tech bubble', I think you'd be hard pressed to find many economists who would say 'of course, the recessions and resulting tax revenue were caused by increasing the cap gains rate'. One could say that with the cap rate in 2006-08 that we were priming the bubble. And that didn't turn out so well. In fact if this chart was extended to date, you'd see that the cap gains tax rate would hover at all time lows...and tax revenue/gdp would fall through the floor as generations of wealth was wiped out. None [sic] of this was caused by the cap gains tax rate.

People have control over whether and when they sell stocks. "none" is too strong a word here, doncha think? Haven't you noticed all the things people are doing now to take advantage of 2012 tax rates before the 2013 rates arrive? Corporations moving dividend payments from 2013 into 2012, people taking bonuses in 2012 instead of 2013, etc.?

How about "some", eh?