5 ms·

Well, but it also does not mean that he didn't take anything from me. Generally, the US tax code is designed in such a way that capital begets capital. Put dif

by ghouse 12y ago

Well, but it also does not mean that he didn't take anything from me. Generally, the US tax code is designed in such a way that capital begets capital. Put differently, if you make money passively from the money you already have, you pay a lower tax rate then if you haul brick on your back, or teach children. Is this taking? No, not directly, but indirectly, sure.

thecopy 12y ago
I would argue that the state is taking, not the rich (which are not the only people with money invested in the market).
- toomuchtodo 12y ago
  Feel free to head to Somalia then. I hear they have a wonderful libertarian system setup. EDIT: Seriously folks, taxes pay for civilization. If you don't like it, don't work (so you don't have to pay) or leave. Roads, schools, fire, police, infrastructure aren't built with unicorn dust.
  - icebraining 12y ago
    The context was the differences in tax rates, not taxes as a whole. You can support the concept of taxation while considering the State takes more than it should from certain groups.
    - toomuchtodo 12y ago
      Taxes in the US are at the lowest levels since 1941 [1]. OP I replied to commented that the State was taking from them. Of course the State takes. It provides the framework you operate in that allows you to make that income. If anything, taxes should be much higher for a number we should agree on (whether that's $500K/year, $1MM/year, or $10MM/year is TBD). What group is the State taking "more than it should" from? [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax_in_the_United_States#Income_tax_rates_in_history http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax_in_the_United_States...
      - burntsushi 12y ago
        > Of course the State takes. Then you're agreeing with the commenter that you initially responded to! > I would argue that the state is taking, not the rich
      - deleted 12y ago
        [deleted]
      - icebraining 12y ago
        What group is the State taking "more than it should" from? The poor, arguably (e.g. through regressive taxes).
        toomuchtodo 12y ago
        I would agree with that.
- SigmundA 12y ago
  That would be like arguing your landlord is taking your rent.
  - thecopy 12y ago
    Not at all. Your relationship with the landlord is voluntary.
- Frondo 12y ago
  That would not be a well-supported argument.
j09jfdasj2 12y ago
Apples and oranges. Ordinary income is not capital gains. If you buy your first stock, you are using money that was already taxed at the ordinary income tax rate.
- adaml_623 12y ago
  You are forgetting that trust funds step around the income tax 'problem'
- rhino369 12y ago
  I don't get why it is apples and oranges. Why is it fair to take 45% of the income I toil for, but it's OUTRAGEOUS to take 25% of someone's passive investment. >If you buy your first stock, you are using money that was already taxed at the ordinary income tax rate. Which is why we only tax the amount gained. I don't see why it should matter if the gain is an investment or working. And a lot of my salary is a return on an investment that I made into my own education and training. IMO, captial gains should be adjusted for inflation* and then taxed like any other income. *you really do a have to adjust for inflation. Right now inflated gains (which aren't real) are taxed as if they are.

by ghouse 12y ago

thecopy 12y ago

I would argue that the state is taking, not the rich (which are not the only people with money invested in the market).

toomuchtodo 12y ago
Feel free to head to Somalia then. I hear they have a wonderful libertarian system setup. EDIT: Seriously folks, taxes pay for civilization. If you don't like it, don't work (so you don't have to pay) or leave. Roads, schools, fire, police, infrastructure aren't built with unicorn dust.
- icebraining 12y ago
  The context was the differences in tax rates, not taxes as a whole. You can support the concept of taxation while considering the State takes more than it should from certain groups.
  - toomuchtodo 12y ago
    Taxes in the US are at the lowest levels since 1941 [1]. OP I replied to commented that the State was taking from them. Of course the State takes. It provides the framework you operate in that allows you to make that income. If anything, taxes should be much higher for a number we should agree on (whether that's $500K/year, $1MM/year, or $10MM/year is TBD). What group is the State taking "more than it should" from? [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax_in_the_United_States#Income_tax_rates_in_history http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax_in_the_United_States...
    - burntsushi 12y ago
      > Of course the State takes. Then you're agreeing with the commenter that you initially responded to! > I would argue that the state is taking, not the rich
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
    - icebraining 12y ago
      What group is the State taking "more than it should" from? The poor, arguably (e.g. through regressive taxes).
      - toomuchtodo 12y ago
        I would agree with that.
SigmundA 12y ago
That would be like arguing your landlord is taking your rent.
- thecopy 12y ago
  Not at all. Your relationship with the landlord is voluntary.
Frondo 12y ago
That would not be a well-supported argument.

j09jfdasj2 12y ago

Apples and oranges. Ordinary income is not capital gains. If you buy your first stock, you are using money that was already taxed at the ordinary income tax rate.

adaml_623 12y ago
You are forgetting that trust funds step around the income tax 'problem'
rhino369 12y ago
I don't get why it is apples and oranges. Why is it fair to take 45% of the income I toil for, but it's OUTRAGEOUS to take 25% of someone's passive investment. >If you buy your first stock, you are using money that was already taxed at the ordinary income tax rate. Which is why we only tax the amount gained. I don't see why it should matter if the gain is an investment or working. And a lot of my salary is a return on an investment that I made into my own education and training. IMO, captial gains should be adjusted for inflation* and then taxed like any other income. *you really do a have to adjust for inflation. Right now inflated gains (which aren't real) are taxed as if they are.