Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: Obama paid a lower tax rate than his secretary, White House confirms

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ventura CA
    Posts
    158

    Obama paid a lower tax rate than his secretary, White House confirms

    Obama Chief Demagogue and Mass Failure pays less than his Secretary:

    Obamas efforts to demagogue his opponents and paint them as insensitive unfeeling RICH people by espousing his "Buffet Rule" which would amount to less than 1% of the current massive spending he is responsible for are as pathetic as the apparent HYPOCRISY that was exposed when he released his tax information.

    Yes folks, the man who blames wealth for the failure of his policies and who claims rich people are the bane of the Middle Class also paid a LOWER tax rate than his Secretary!

    In a weak ineffectual effort to divert attention from his failures as a leader and President, Obama weakly proclaimed "this is why we need such a law." REALLY Obama???!!! How will this rule make a dent on the massive amounts of debt and deficits you have piled up in your weak ineffectual Presidency???!!!

    Obama paid a lower tax rate than his secretary, White House confirms

    President Barack Obama's secretary paid taxes at a higher rate than he did in 2011 despite having a "substantially lower income," the White House said Friday, casting the disparity as an argument for Congress to adopt the so-called "Buffett Rule."

    Obama paid a lower tax rate than his secretary, White House confirms | The Ticket - Yahoo! News

    November cannot get here soon enough!

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    11,660
    This is why we shouldn't tax capital gains at a different rate. It should be "All income from whatever source derived" times a tax rate. I'd even be ok with a few deductions like $80k worth of capital gains tax free, $10k off for every person in your household (aka spouse and dependents), deduction for capital loss, deduction for charity...among maybe 1 or 2 others.

    This BS of 15% for selling your shares of Apple is nuts.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ventura CA
    Posts
    158
    Quote Originally Posted by Steeeeve View Post
    This is why we shouldn't tax capital gains at a different rate. It should be "All income from whatever source derived" times a tax rate. I'd even be ok with a few deductions like $80k worth of capital gains tax free, $10k off for every person in your household (aka spouse and dependents), deduction for capital loss, deduction for charity...among maybe 1 or 2 others.

    This BS of 15% for selling your shares of Apple is nuts.
    Do you understrand the reason/logic behind taxing Capital Gains at a lower rate?

    I can understand why a XXXXX like Obama wouldn't get this, but I would think someone with some economics background would.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,178
    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    Do you understrand the reason/logic behind taxing Capital Gains at a lower rate?

    I can understand why a XXXXX like Obama wouldn't get this, but I would think someone with some economics background would.
    Yes....it allows the wealthy to pay less taxes. That is IT.

    Please dont waste our time with some kind of ridiculous tripe about "expansion capital", or creating jobs. That just isnt how our economy actually works, and hasnt been for a long time.
    If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen. —Samuel Adams

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Ventura CA
    Posts
    158
    Quote Originally Posted by daewoo View Post
    Yes....it allows the wealthy to pay less taxes. That is IT.
    Well daewoo, you would be wrong; but at least you are consistent.

    It encourages INVESTMENT which is how jobs are created daewoo. Jobs are not created by massive Government programs and theft of the hard earned wealth of US citizens. Wealth is created by encouraging investments and risk and allowing a reasonable return for those risks.

    For every success story, there are probably a hundred or more failures. Tom Monihan, founder of Domino's, didn't become one of the wealthiest people in America overnight. He struggled for decades nearly losing his business several times. But his persistence and perseverance are what made him what he is today. Through his success, many other millionaires were made and many thousands of jobs.

    You would know this if you were even slightly informed; but alas, you would rather wallow in speculative little one liners and massive denial than deal with reality or the facts.

    Quote Originally Posted by daewoo View Post
    Please dont waste our time with some kind of ridiculous tripe about "expansion capital", or creating jobs. That just isnt how our economy actually works, and hasnt been for a long time.
    You’re right, why waste your time with the facts; much like your clueless buddy Obama, you find it more convenient to spew your inane class envy rhetoric and idiot talking points than have to do any research or deal with facts

    Carry on daewoo; it is painfully apparent that you haven't the first clue about job creation, wealth accumulation and how the REAL world works.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    11,660
    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    Well daewoo, you would be wrong; but at least you are consistent.

    It encourages INVESTMENT which is how jobs are created daewoo.
    If you investment $10 million in Apple stock right now how many jobs will be created? The answer is ZERO. The VAST majority of these "investments" are nothing more than you buying an asset from someone else. If I sell you a widget (an asset) at my widget store I'll pay ordinary income on that. If I sell you my Apple stock (an asset) I'll pay capital gains at a lower rate. That makes no f*cking sense at all.

    I would also argue that dividend distributions shouldn't be taxed at the corporate level but taxed as ordinary income at the individual level. This is akin to how a partnership would be taxed (somewhat).

    For every success story, there are probably a hundred or more failures. Tom Monihan, founder of Domino's, didn't become one of the wealthiest people in America overnight. He struggled for decades nearly losing his business several times. But his persistence and perseverance are what made him what he is today. Through his success, many other millionaires were made and many thousands of jobs.
    And a 15% capital gains tax didn't help at all.

    Initial investment (venture capital only) is something like 4-5% of total "investments" in the US in a given year. I'm fine taxing that at 0% but no loss deductions would be allowed either. The rest should be ordinary income. This is even more true if over 50% of your income comes from "investments". At some point it is your job, not an investment.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    8,178
    Quote Originally Posted by Truth Detector View Post
    Well daewoo, you would be wrong; but at least you are consistent.

    It encourages INVESTMENT which is how jobs are created daewoo. Jobs are not created by massive Government programs and theft of the hard earned wealth of US citizens. Wealth is created by encouraging investments and risk and allowing a reasonable return for those risks.

    For every success story, there are probably a hundred or more failures. Tom Monihan, founder of Domino's, didn't become one of the wealthiest people in America overnight. He struggled for decades nearly losing his business several times. But his persistence and perseverance are what made him what he is today. Through his success, many other millionaires were made and many thousands of jobs.

    You would know this if you were even slightly informed; but alas, you would rather wallow in speculative little one liners and massive denial than deal with reality or the facts.
    Wrong answer, sport. Unless you are investing in an IPO or directly in a startup, your investment has exactly dick to do with creating new jobs. Expansionary investments (the ones that actually create new jobs) make up about 1.14% of all the investments that people pay capital gains taxes on. The other 98.86% of those investments have nothing do do with creating jobs or expanding our base economy. They are just money churning...selling your apple shares.

    Basing our capital gains taxing strategy on less than 1.2% of investments is silly. The politicians who bring up expansionary investment every time somebody suggests raising capital gains taxes count on their constituents being clueless nitwits to stay in office.


    You’re right, why waste your time with the facts; much like your clueless buddy Obama, you find it more convenient to spew your inane class envy rhetoric and idiot talking points than have to do any research or deal with facts
    Right...which is why I keep proving you WRONG on virtually every point we debate...and not just "difference of opinion" WRONG, you keep turning out to be wrong about base facts.
    Carry on daewoo; it is painfully apparent that you haven't the first clue about job creation, wealth accumulation and how the REAL world works.
    Class envy rhetoric? Please. Wishing for fiscal policies that would put our fiscal house in order and restore a capitalist economic system is hardly "class envy rhetoric".

    You are the nitwit wanting to base our entire capital gains taxation system on 1.14% of investments. We have actually discussed this here before, which you would know if your postings were not limited to spamming us with ignorant and useless garbage, then running away as soon as it is shown that you have ALL your facts wrong. I have often advocated heavy increases in capital gains taxes, but FULL exemptions for expansionary investments held for more than a year.

    I advocate a system that is actually reality based and provides significant incentive for expansionary investment (and all the new jobs that come with it). You are advocating and supporting a system that rewards high speed electronic trading, and actually punishes long term expansionary investment. Way to go genius.
    If ye love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen. —Samuel Adams

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •