2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!

[theprofromdover]

Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!

Dont you think its a little crazy to not only max the amount we can invest annually but also limit the maximum value? It seems a bit difficult to expect my company to do the work of telling the government I have too much in my 401k despite following their annual investment limits, not to mention I assume this is total of all 401k type investments so if I switch jobs, someone has to know how much my roll-over elsewhere is worth. This just seems to be creating needless expense in managing my 401k even if its nowhere near the $3.4 mil cap which in the long run will cost me money in additional management fees, which is not good for me but is good for wall street. It just seems stupid to put this cap on things if there is already a cap on investment limits.

Call it the "Mitt Romney Rule". He, apparently, put some of his Bain Investments into his IRA at, what seems to be, very low valuations. They went through the roof and brought unwanted attention.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!

It wouldn't be my first policy choice, mostly because I'm not sure how much of a benefit the govt would get from it, presumably in the form of less tax exemptions for people to take advantage of. For that goal a cap on annual deductions would achieve the same result. However, I don't find it to be crazy. The govt can define that terms of a tax shelter that it allows however it wants. Were it 401K's were the only investment vehicle out there, a change like this might be burdensome. However, there are plenty of other ways to save for retirement.

Given the limit is actually an average of around 2.7 mil (at least according to the two referenced articles), not much. Basically they're going after the rich, but once you get past the 2.7 mil, where's the rest of the money going? Is it actually going into post-tax accounts, or is it headed offshore? Then put the late Margaret Thatcher's rule about socialism into play. How low is that number going to go?

One thing that always remains true is the famous Dutch proverb: "When the door closes, a window opens." I do a decent amount of investing post-tax, but have another way of tax shelter for the time being (oil royalties, long-term dividends). Once those run out, I'll find another place to invest.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!

Given the limit is actually an average of around 2.7 mil (at least according to the two referenced articles), not much. Basically they're going after the rich, but once you get past the 2.7 mil, where's the rest of the money going? Is it actually going into post-tax accounts, or is it headed offshore? Then put the late Margaret Thatcher's rule about socialism into play. How low is that number going to go?

One thing that always remains true is the famous Dutch proverb: "When the door closes, a window opens." I do a decent amount of investing post-tax, but have another way of tax shelter for the time being (oil royalties, long-term dividends). Once those run out, I'll find another place to invest.

And therein lies the problem. The tax code should be so simple and so ironclad that you can't hide the money you are supposed to be taxed on. But, yet again, here is more proof how the tax code is heavily slanted to the rich. And the gap widens and widens and widens.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!

And therein lies the problem. The tax code should be so simple and so ironclad that you can't hide the money you are supposed to be taxed on. But, yet again, here is more proof how the tax code is heavily slanted to the rich. And the gap widens and widens and widens.

I'm probably poorer than you, or at least started out as such, yet I'm still able to take advantage. The code is in favour of those who pay attention and have a plan of attack. Sure, plans of attack can backfire (they certainly did to those who were in the game in 2008), but instead of whining and complaining about something where you actually have some control, adjust what you do in order to profit.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!

I'm probably poorer than you, or at least started out as such, yet I'm still able to take advantage. The code is in favour of those who pay attention and have a plan of attack. Sure, plans of attack can backfire (they certainly did to those who were in the game in 2008), but instead of whining and complaining about something where you actually have some control, adjust what you do in order to profit.

Whoooooooooooooosh.

 

[Bill]

Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!

And therein lies the problem. The tax code should be so simple and so ironclad that you can't hide the money you are supposed to be taxed on. But, yet again, here is more proof how the tax code is heavily slanted to the rich. And the gap widens and widens and widens.

So you're in favor of a Flat Tax or Fair tax then?

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!

Do you or Bob know how 401K's work? They're tax deferred. Which means that the government has always controlled how much you can put in them and they have a vested interest in how much goes in there. Don't like it use a ROTH. Government has zero control over that.

Just because the government treats Roth accounts as post-tax accounts now, doesn't mean they are going to grow tax-free forever.

Also, pet peeves:
1. It's Roth, not "ROTH"
2. It's 401(k)s, not 401k's, 401K's, etc. I get leaving the parentheses off, but the apostrophe and capital 'K' drives me nuts.

 

[Rover]

Just because the government treats Roth accounts as post-tax accounts now, doesn't mean they are going to grow tax-free forever.

Also, pet peeves:
1. It's Roth, not "ROTH"
2. It's 401(k)s, not 401k's, 401K's, etc. I get leaving the parentheses off, but the apostrophe and capital 'K' drives me nuts.

If that's all you have to worry about in life, consider yourself lucky.

So to sum up my feelings on this, I'm not endorsing lifetime limits on 401(k) . What I'm saying is I don't find this to be an "assault on our freedoms" as our right friends so eloquently put it about...oh, 50 times a day.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!

If that's all you have to worry about in life, consider yourself lucky.

So to sum up my feelings on this, I'm not endorsing lifetime limits on 401(k) . What I'm saying is I don't find this to be an "assault on our freedoms" as our right friends so eloquently put it about...oh, 50 times a day.

When Obama does it surely it's an attack!!!!!!!!!!

No, just more accounting gimmicks. That appears to be our existence here in the United States.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!

Awww, what's the matter? Can't control the internet news? http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-s...d-obama-hates-internet-media-and-social-media

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!

Awww, what's the matter? Can't control the internet news? http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-s...d-obama-hates-internet-media-and-social-media

Social Media isn't news.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!

Social Media isn't news.

Hello, I'm Bill Curtis. Many people believe the American government... covered it up... I'm Bill Curtis.

 

[unofan]

So you're in favor of a Flat Tax or Fair tax then?

Why is the right's solution to a complicated tax code never to simplify the existing system, but to advocate for a completely different system? The marginal brackets are not the problem.

The problem with X is Y, but rather than fixing Y, let's dump X and go to Gamma.

It's as though you say you hate extra inning baseball games because they last too long, but your solution is to watch the WNBA instead.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!

Why is the right's solution to a complicated tax code never to simplify the existing system, but to advocate for a completely different system? The marginal brackets are not the problem.

The problem with X is Y, but rather than fixing Y, let's dump X and go to Gamma.

It's as though you say you hate extra inning baseball games because they last too long, but your solution is to watch the WNBA instead.

Put your money where your mouth is. What's your definition of "simplification" in terms of the tax system?

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!

Chuck Todd is out to lunch on this. The only evidence he has to support that Obama dislikes social media was a joke at a dinner about 'buzzfeed being something he did at 2am in college.' That evidence is about as light as one can imagine.

There are some areas for criticism of BO. But if there's one area of countless case studies attempting to learn from Obama...its on his mastery of social media.

 

[Bill]

Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!

Why is the right's solution to a complicated tax code never to simplify the existing system, but to advocate for a completely different system? The marginal brackets are not the problem.

The problem with X is Y, but rather than fixing Y, let's dump X and go to Gamma.

It's as though you say you hate extra inning baseball games because they last too long, but your solution is to watch the WNBA instead.

At over 70,00 pages, the tax code is beyond any kind of major simplification. Easier to scrap and replace.

 

[unofan]

At over 70,00 pages, the tax code is beyond any kind of major simplification. Easier to scrap and replace.

But why does it have to be scrapped in favor of a flat tax or a national sales tax that will inherently benefit the wealthy? Why not keep the progressive income brackets?

It strikes me that the complaints about the complicated code are mere pretexts. The end goal itself is the flat tax. You don't really give a crap about the current tax code except that it might help you get there.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!

But why does it have to be scrapped in favor of a flat tax or a national sales tax that will inherently benefit the wealthy? Why not keep the progressive income brackets?

It strikes me that the complaints about the complicated code are mere pretexts. The end goal itself is the flat tax. You don't really give a crap about the current tax code except that it might help you get there.

Regressive tax systems benefit the wealthy. What I find funny, is that you're all for scrapping a chuck of the 70,000 pages, but the second they start to scrap a page where you see benefit, the kicking and screaming begins. This is why the country can't get anywhere.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!

Regressive tax systems benefit the wealthy. What I find funny, is that you're all for scrapping a chuck of the 70,000 pages, but the second they start to scrap a page where you see benefit, the kicking and screaming begins. This is why the country can't get anywhere.

No, the country doesn't get anywhere because scrapping one give away to the wealthy for another one is ridiculous. And that's what the right wants to do and has always wanted to do. There's ways to make the tax system fair for everyone but no one is really interested in that.

 

[Shirtless Guy]

Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!

No, the country doesn't get anywhere because scrapping one give away to the wealthy for another one is ridiculous. And that's what the right wants to do and has always wanted to do. There's ways to make the tax system fair for everyone but no one is really interested in that.

And how is that?