cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Re: The Mittster

And accepted in principle by the administration and most democrats. Truth is that every single loophole has a lobby behind it.

Veteran Advisor

Re: The Mittster

He's a politician.  My rule of thumb with a politician, is when they aren't answering a straightforward question, they have a 'reason' for tiptoeing around it.

Senior Advisor

Re: The Mittster

Plus he paid his taxes, unlike Tim Geithner and Charley Rangle.

Veteran Advisor

Re: The Mittster


@hardnox604008 wrote:

Sure, makes sense.

 

Also if all marginal rates were reduced along with most loopholes and deductions, the bite on investment income would be reduced also.  That would be some relief to the muckymucks although not the selective relief that they've come to expect from their servants in government.

 

Exactly!  Treat everyone equally, not some 'more equally' than others, based on who they know, or how they are connected, or even what they do.

 

Also should lower the corporate rate accordingly and cut loopholes there also. I don't see much wisdom in setting the top rate below the top personal rate but anyway.

 

I think if the corporate tax were about equal to the personal tax (once you get above a certain income level), it would cut down on the incentive to do 'creative accounting' that is done, to fudge certain things to the corporation, and other things to the personal side.  Would simplify everything, IMO

 

I also think you can counter the "killing job creation" meme by putting in a 0 corporate bracket to, say, $100K and maybe a 10% rate to 300K, 20 to 500k.

 

That will have essentially no impact on GE or Microsoft but would mean that small businesses that are serious about retaining capital for growth can really go at it.

 

Since I'm always surprised at how little many people understand about business organization and accounting, the way that would work is that the prop(s) would pay themselves salaries and pay at the personal tax rate on that.

 

Salary and benefits to owners would be expenses to the corp and therefore come off the bottom line. Retained earnings could stay in to grow the business at a very attractive rate. 

 

There would need to be a few regulations surrounding that to keep people from gaming it but it would be pretty straightforward.


IMO, keep it as simple as you can, just so it still works.  You can always add stuff later, if needed.  Killing a dumb regulation seems harder to get done.

Veteran Advisor

Re: Really Good Reporting there, Bruce

Does anyone NOT think that anytime money changes hands it is subject to taxation?  If I have a business and earn money it is taxed.  If I pay my employee part of that money, he is taxed on what I pay him.  I get to deduct that as a business expense but it is taxed none the less.

Advisor

Re: Really Good Reporting there, Bruce

Conversation not too long ago with an aquaintance from way back too long ago in college.  He's been involved in a small business that does construction landscaping.   Lots of upscale work in the TC metro.  Residential and commercial.  Been very successful but recently hitting a real deamnd slowdown.

He said that in his line, small businesses are becoming dinosuars.  Everything is being done in "sub" mode and only the soft palmed project managers make any money.  No available margins on high transparency priced and easily discounted materials (suppliers need cash flow ) and contracted short hours labor.  Says that there will be no small businesses in the all not too distant future, outside of the service sector.   ALL of the profit creating vehicles have been derailed.

 

I mentioned to him that the most prominent small businesses in some if not many areas may wind up being some of these spectacularly expanded farming operations, chartered in various ways, with many of them doing 10s of millions in gross business annually. 

 

His response to me was that would be tragic if it were indeed true  for "communities" because his tax accountant tells him that farmers have become political zombies who are interested in one and one thing only and that would be tax avoidance.  The accountant went on to tell him it had become a religion with them and that they were essentially  "all Republicans who would crawl in bed with anybody over a dime in taxes".

 

Upon which he in turn asked me how that could be becasue he'd grown up believing that nearly all farmers were Democrats.

 

All that aside, I can see how this current stage play of portraying a defunct, useless, wasteful and eternally meddlesome government and historically exhorbitant (check the record on that one) taxes of all sorts has become the rallying cry of the most prosperous couple of percent of 1 1/2 % of the population.  The real beauty is how they get the rest to march in their parades and carry the water.  It's not like there is a reliable promise in there somewhere.

Veteran Advisor

Fantasyland

"why not just build the factory in Fantasyland?" Rodney Dangerfield to the professor in the movie Back to School

 

lmfao at the idea of you, Bart , either having a business...paying employees, or paying employees enough that they did not rely on food stamps and the earned income credit.

 

Fantasyland, the place where Demcrats dream and their visions make sense.

 

Mitt is a smart man, though, maybe his capital gains came from selling shares of stock and thus he avoided the double tax issues. He may have invested in stock or was granted options in those companies he turned around and profited handsomely for his efforts when they became solvent again.

 

If he can turn the USA around, we should pay him Billions.....Tax free.

 

God Knows the Zero ain't going to do it.

Advisor

Re: What you say

I wasn't aware that  your and red's instincts would pick up quite so much Pavlovian codification in it.   Arf. Arf.

 

Had to be for you guys like a Friday moring pop quiz back in secondary school.  One  that you were danged well good and ready for.

Veteran Advisor

Re: Really Good Reporting there, Bruce

Taxes are NOT excessive currently on income....its the spending, Bruce.

 

Personally I accelerated a tremendous amount of income into 2011 to pay more taxes. I think the taxes I pay in 2011 will actually be higher than the taxable income of any other year on record.

 

So don't point the finger at me on tax avoidance.

 

Aint true.

 

I am smart enough to know that paying taxes at todays rates is like buying 99 cent diesel fuel.

Advisor

Re: Fantasyland

It ain't Mitt Red.  Nothing really about him.  Just don't count on his beautiful, handsome carfeully bred and cataloqued countenance not somehow looking ugly to considerably more Americans and workers and wannabee workers around the world than you can imagine.

 

Easy pickin', actually, if the band gets to stay on stage long enough to get into the jazz portion of the program.