Anybody but Romney

[quote]JLone wrote:

To make a long story short he used a tax attorney [/quote]

That was his first mistake, and one many people make.

Although Romney uses his atty’s office to file his returns… :wink:

[quote]JLone wrote:

[quote]angry chicken wrote:

[quote]JLone wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I believe we need BIG regulations on capital gains tax. Capital gains tax was designed for Ma and Pa , when they sell their house and move into a retirement situation . Not for investors that make all their money with other money [/quote]
Double edge sword.

My dad worked his entire life building a small company into a larger (yet still small) company. Invested every dime back into the company minus personal salary without benefits. When it came time for retirement he was able to sell his business for twice what he had paid for it and as a pat on the back for his efforts Uncle Sam took a big wet bite out of the capital gains.

I think business owners that sell their business past a certain age should qualify for the same tax shelters that IRA’s get. If your flipping businesses in your 30’s that one thing but when people sell a business at 65+ to retire the government should look at the capital gains differently. [/quote]

No disrespect to your dad, but there are PLENTY of ways to structure the sale (or transfer of control) of a business in such a way that you don’t incur a huge tax burden. TRUST ME, I’VE DONE IT. It sounds like your dad got bad legal advise.[/quote]
I should have edited my first post.

To make a long story short he used a tax attorney to help him save as much money as possible. I just think it’s a shame you have to pay a thousand dollars to tax attorneys to keep your own money. I guess you can use the analogy of driving under the speed limit to not use a lawyer but I think its a poor one. [/quote]

Well, an attorney/accountant spends YEARS and THOUSANDS of dollars to become an expert of the law in which they specialize… Unless you were prepared to spend equal time and equal money, why would you begrudge them charging for their services? I’ll GLADLY spend a few thousand bucks to save myself YEARS and HUNDREDS of thousands of bucks (not to mention limiting my personal exposure)…

But I hear what you’re saying. That’s not the reality we live in, though. If you want smaller, simpler government with LESS regulation, vote republican… Plain and simple.

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]JLone wrote:
To make a long story short he used a tax attorney [/quote]
That was his first mistake, and one many people make.
[/quote]
Could you expand on this?

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
This is as Mufasa said Anti Obama or anti Romney .

I understand Zeb’s point of view, because he works hard for his money . I do not think Zeb realizes many middle class people also work very hard.

I am not anti wealthy, I do not think they are evil .

I do think because of the tax code the wealthy are taking the wealth away from the working class.
And Romney is a exemplary example .

I know we have alot of middle class that are pro Romney and I see some flaws in their thinking "If they just stash it away in a bank account or better yet a vault under their mansion, "

I believe we need BIG regulations on capital gains tax. Capital gains tax was designed for Ma and Pa , when they sell their house and move into a retirement situation . Not for investors that make all their money with other money

And that is why when Romney’s dollar is worth $.87 and mine is worth $.72 Romney has money power to make money with his dollar. That is the disparity I am talking about. NOt that he makes 21 mil and I make 120 thousand.

Articles are claiming if Romney were to be elected , under Ryan’s tax plan that Romney would pay. %.82 not even %1[/quote]

Here’s my main issue with your statement. Why isn’t it okay for a person to make money off the money they’ve already made? Putting money in the stock market is a risky endeavor just like putting money into a business, real estate, or whatever.

I just don’t understand why you would want to penalize someone for taking a risk with the money they’ve already earned and already paid tax on? If you’re risking your own money shouldn’t you be rewarded?

lol@Starting a thread to avoid all the people that are repeating the same silly shit from their party thread in this thread anyway.

The capital gains tax law needs to be reviewed. As with any loophole someone found it, then everyone exploited it. Dumb ass media pundits simplified it across party lines and the public is regurgitating it.

Originally nobody cared if you took money you already made and invested it. The problem came when people started getting paid in stock options to get around their perspective salary rates. Some instances have college coaches getting paid millions in stock options in ways that significantly reduced their tax rate for what is really a salary or bonus.

Now that I think about it, it sounds like they need to control how salaries are paid out. I’m sure millions are lost on VP’s that have $100k Salary and $2.5 million in stock bonus’s. Maybe something along the lines of 90% of income received from employment needs to be salary for all non-trading jobs.

What do you really think Romney is going to focus on when he’s in office? and what do you think he’s could accomplish?

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I do think because of the tax code the wealthy are taking the wealth away from the working class.
And Romney is a exemplary example .[/quote]

How?

How is Romney’s tax rate, tax payment or tax filing in any way taking away from anyone?

Please be specific.

Assume what you said is true. I don’t think it is, it might be, I don’t care, but assume it is.

What about the fact other countries don’t have near the same regulation?

Assume that giving our government more power was, in some alternate universe, a good idea, what are we to do with the fact that more regulation will remove the center of the financial world away from NYC and into another country?

Why would you not have the power to make money with your money?

Whether you have 10,000 in your pocket, 7,500 in your pocket or 2,000 in our pocket, you can still make money with your money. You will get the same % return if you invest in the same things.

And there are things you can invest in, that aren’t as expensive as the things he does. You can then build on your returns by re-investing it, and in 15 year you will be making what he makes.

Any time you want to talk about phantom income we can…

[quote]angry chicken wrote:
Well, an attorney/accountant spends YEARS and THOUSANDS of dollars to become an expert of the law in which they specialize… Unless you were prepared to spend equal time and equal money, why would you begrudge them charging for their services?[/quote]
I’m new to the political section, do all the people here create straw-man arguments and randomly use caps lock?

[quote]
I’ll GLADLY spend a few thousand bucks to save myself YEARS and HUNDREDS of thousands of bucks (not to mention limiting my personal exposure)…

But I hear what you’re saying. That’s not the reality we live in, though. If you want smaller, simpler government with LESS regulation, vote republican… Plain and simple.[/quote]
^This^ is a valid point that I can agree with, don’t know what the first half of your post was about.

[quote]Airtruth wrote:
lol@Starting a thread to avoid all the people that are repeating the same silly shit from their party thread in this thread anyway.

The capital gains tax law needs to be reviewed. As with any loophole someone found it, then everyone exploited it. Dumb ass media pundits simplified it across party lines and the public is regurgitating it.

Originally nobody cared if you took money you already made and invested it. The problem came when people started getting paid in stock options to get around their perspective salary rates. Some instances have college coaches getting paid millions in stock options in ways that significantly reduced their tax rate for what is really a salary or bonus.

Now that I think about it, it sounds like they need to control how salaries are paid out. I’m sure millions are lost on VP’s that have $100k Salary and $2.5 million in stock bonus’s. Maybe something along the lines of 90% of income received from employment needs to be salary for all non-trading jobs.

What do you really think Romney is going to focus on when he’s in office? and what do you think he’s could accomplish?

[/quote]

How is the capital gains tax a loophole? Next you’re gonna tell me using a Roth instead of a traditional IRA is a loophole right?

[quote]JLone wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]JLone wrote:
To make a long story short he used a tax attorney [/quote]
That was his first mistake, and one many people make.
[/quote]
Could you expand on this?[/quote]

Attorney v a CPA.

I’m obviously biased, but the old story goes:

You get a notice from the IRS. Like most people you instantly start sweating and looking out your window for ATF to raid your house and bring you to prison. So you call your attorney. Attorney says, “Fax it over and I’ll look at it when I get back from vacation in 10 days,” hangs up, bills you for a half hour @ 385 an hour and gives it to his staff woman whom he tried to have sex with every other day. Now she spends 4 hours researching the notice and the laws behind it, all on your dime @ 185 an hour. She drafts a letter, and in 10 days all tan the attorney comes in, reads the letter, signs it, gives it to the secretary he is having sex with to process, mails it to you, on your dime and bills you 2 hours of his time. So you get the letter you have to send to the IRS and a bill for $900.

Or You call a CPA

Partner has a staff bring your file. They read the notice, spot the fuck up, write the letter and send it to the IRS within the afternoon, because the partner is going on vacation for 10 days. You already paid for this service when you paid for the return to be filed and they didn’t have to research because they already deal with it day in and day out.

I’m being a jerk here but typically a CPA will be more well versed in tax and business and more responsive to you at a lower hourly rate than an attorney.

I have delt with some good attorneys, and have also delt with some that I have frustrated to the point where they swore at me on the phone because I knew more than they did.

That isn’t to say the attorney your dad used didn’t do it right, but we are typically just as good if not better and cheaper.

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I do think because of the tax code the wealthy are taking the wealth away from the working class.
And Romney is a exemplary example .[/quote]

How?

How is Romney’s tax rate, tax payment or tax filing in any way taking away from anyone?

Please be specific.

Assume what you said is true. I don’t think it is, it might be, I don’t care, but assume it is.

What about the fact other countries don’t have near the same regulation?

Assume that giving our government more power was, in some alternate universe, a good idea, what are we to do with the fact that more regulation will remove the center of the financial world away from NYC and into another country?

Why would you not have the power to make money with your money?

Whether you have 10,000 in your pocket, 7,500 in your pocket or 2,000 in our pocket, you can still make money with your money. You will get the same % return if you invest in the same things.

And there are things you can invest in, that aren’t as expensive as the things he does. You can then build on your returns by re-investing it, and in 15 year you will be making what he makes.

Any time you want to talk about phantom income we can…

[/quote]

Beans , I have no problem admitting your understanding of the tax code better than I . You made the statement that the tax code should be simple , on that we agree but it would put CPAs out of business.

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]angry chicken wrote:

There is NO barrier to entry in business.
[/quote]

Yes there is , my dollar is worth $.70 and Mitt’s is worth $.87[/quote]

OK let us forget poor pittbulll let feel Zeb’s pain at over %60 compared to mitt’s %13 . talk about disparity.

Um no, not even close.

His dollars after investing them are worth $.87. He had to have some OI at some point ot get the money to invest…[/quote]

And mine after investing is $.70[/quote]

No, your dollar after investing is $.87

I swear you refuse to understand ;)[/quote]

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]smh23 wrote:

The solution has to balance these two forces. Any that doesn’t is inadequate. My thinking is that the capital gains tax should be kept low but something like a much more complex “Buffet Rule” should kick in to ensure that no one taking in over $500,000 is paying less than 20%. Buffet has a point when he says he shouldn’t be paying a lower rate than his secretary.[/quote]

Holy shit… I only got 2 hours of sleep last night, so this may sound rude, please bear with me, I’m not trying to single you out.

We already have what you are talking about, have for fucking years.

I am so fucking sick of election year tax experts. Right and left.

It is called Alternative Mininum Tax, AMT. The thing is, it hasn’t been updated for the 21st century. But no one wants to fix it, like everything, put a bandade on it and hope it sticks. It was in the paper a lot a couple years ago, but it wasn’t an election year so all the arm chair facebook experts didn’t read about it.

This whole tax bullshit could be fixed on one form, one simple form. But that would require all the fucking pinko’s to admit the tax code isn’t “designed to oppress the poor” and the fucking douche bags in congress wouldn’t get a press clipping because no one knows what fuck it is… The fucking pinko’s would get their way and make sure they suck more money out of the rich to feed the fucking government machine they love so much. And rich people would just continue to funnel money overseas and operate in new ways that are less tax burdensome, all while paying in way fucking more, 100x more than they get back in service from the shit show that is our government.

This is why romney release of tax return issue is fucking stupid. There might be 3 people on this board that would even begin to understand what they say, and I’m being generous and including myself. But NNNOOOOOOOOOOO every dipshit and fuck stick needs to see them, so they can still not vote for someone they wouldn’t have anyway.

fuck

Sorry for swearing so much.[/quote]

I am perfectly aware of the AMT. It added about $233,000 to Romney’s bill on his 2010 tax return. You tell me in what fucking way that has a single thing to do with my statement that I’d like “to ensure that no one taking in over $500,000 is paying less than 20%.” Did the AMT force Romney to pay 20%? No. So shut the fuck up.

And while I don’t pretend to understand Romney’s tax return line by line, I don’t believe–and this is about principle–that he should pay a lower tax rate than someone who works hard an d yet will never own a fucking prize mare. As I mentioned already, Warren Buffet has a point when he says he shouldn’t be paying a lower rate than his secretary.

edited

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]UtahLama wrote:

[quote]angry chicken wrote:
Our tax system has a two-fold purpose: to collect money to fund the federal, state and local government AND to provide INCENTIVES for behavior that our policy makers believe will move the country in a positive direction.

A low capital gains tax ENCOURAGES people to invest and make money in areas that CREATE JOBS. Just like you get a lower tax rate if you are married - they do that to reward that behavior.

You railing against a low capital gains tax is like a single person saying, “I want the same tax rate as a married person! It’s not FAIR!”.

If you want a lower tax rate, then - I don’t know - INVEST! If you want to create write offs to bring your overall tax burden down - I don’t know - START A BUSINESS! It only cost a few hundred dollars to set up an LLC and you can operate in the red for THREE YEARS and write off every fucking meal you have and ever mile you drive your car. Then after three years you BK it and start another one. This isn’t rocket science… ANYONE can do this. If you aren’t smart enough to figure it out, then instead of paying H&R Block $49 to do your tax returns, pay an ACCOUNTANT $500 to help you figure out how to save $5000! Why is this out of reach of the average person?

If the speed limit is 70 MPH, and you CHOOSE to drive 40 MPH, why the hell would you complain that it takes so long to get where you’re going?

There is NO barrier to entry in business. If an uneducated El Salvadorian immigrant can come here with twenty dollars in his pocket, start a business and ten years later own three houses, have a million in the bank and drive a Hummer, what’s YOUR excuse?

[/quote]

Yep[/quote]

more intelligent conversation
[/quote]

Because you are constantly proven wrong in virtually every thread you post in.

because you come off as an entitled, whiny person who thinks that rich people are taking something that should be give to you.

Because you cannot seem to grasp when smart people like Bean’s and AC tell you how you are wrong…and how to fix it to boot.

Don’t claim the high moral ground with me Francis.

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I do think because of the tax code the wealthy are taking the wealth away from the working class.
And Romney is a exemplary example .[/quote]

How?

How is Romney’s tax rate, tax payment or tax filing in any way taking away from anyone?

Please be specific.

[/quote]

I was wondering the same thing. How do the wealthly take wealth away from the middle class because of the tax code, exactly?

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

I just don’t understand why you would want to penalize someone for taking a risk with the money they’ve already earned and already paid tax on? If you’re risking your own money shouldn’t you be rewarded?
[/quote]

I agree. It should be encouraged rather than penalized.

That said, I don’t think anyone making over $1 million should ever be paying a lower tax rate than someone making less than a tenth of that.

[quote]smh23 wrote:

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

I just don’t understand why you would want to penalize someone for taking a risk with the money they’ve already earned and already paid tax on? If you’re risking your own money shouldn’t you be rewarded?
[/quote]

I agree. It should be encouraged rather than penalized.

That said, I don’t think anyone making over $1 million should ever be paying a lower tax rate than someone making less than a tenth of that.[/quote]

I agree with you in principle…but folks who put it all on the line and start businesses…hire people…and make our country go, are kind deserving of some perks once they get there. One would think.

[quote]Airtruth wrote:
The problem came when people started getting paid in stock options to get around their perspective salary rates. [/quote]

Completely false. You don’t know what you are talking about.

Stock options are good on a lot of levels, very good. But they do not serve as an opportunity to avoid OI rates.

Not happening, I assume the journalist who reported this didn’t understand option either.

So you are in favor of the government controlling salaries?

[quote]Sweet Revenge wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I do think because of the tax code the wealthy are taking the wealth away from the working class.
And Romney is a exemplary example .[/quote]

How?

How is Romney’s tax rate, tax payment or tax filing in any way taking away from anyone?

Please be specific.

[/quote]

I was wondering the same thing. How do the wealthly take wealth away from the middle class because of the tax code, exactly?[/quote]

By cutting their taxes investing in something that will out pace inflation and promoting policy that inflates the value of the dollar

[quote]usmccds423 wrote:

[quote]Airtruth wrote:
lol@Starting a thread to avoid all the people that are repeating the same silly shit from their party thread in this thread anyway.

The capital gains tax law needs to be reviewed. As with any loophole someone found it, then everyone exploited it. Dumb ass media pundits simplified it across party lines and the public is regurgitating it.

Originally nobody cared if you took money you already made and invested it. The problem came when people started getting paid in stock options to get around their perspective salary rates. Some instances have college coaches getting paid millions in stock options in ways that significantly reduced their tax rate for what is really a salary or bonus.

Now that I think about it, it sounds like they need to control how salaries are paid out. I’m sure millions are lost on VP’s that have $100k Salary and $2.5 million in stock bonus’s. Maybe something along the lines of 90% of income received from employment needs to be salary for all non-trading jobs.

What do you really think Romney is going to focus on when he’s in office? and what do you think he’s could accomplish?

[/quote]

How is the capital gains tax a loophole[/quote]? Show me where I stated this and I will answer your questions…if you can’t find it then you may have the comprehension skills to find my reasoning below it. [quote]<> Next you’re gonna tell me using a Roth instead of a traditional IRA is a loophole right? [/quote]

[quote]smh23 wrote:

I am perfectly aware of the AMT. It added about $233,000 to Romney’s bill on his 2010 tax return. You tell me in what fucking way that has a single thing to do with my statement that I’d like “to ensure that no one taking in over $500,000 is paying less than 20%.” Did the AMT force Romney to pay 20%? No. So shut the fuck up.[/quote]

I am sorry for losing my cool in my reply to you.

But anyway…

You apparently aren’t “perfectly aware” of AMT, what it was supposed to do or why it doesn’t do just what you are asking, if you have to ask me the above.

Honest questions:

  1. Why not?
  2. Do you not think investing is hard work?

[quote] As I mentioned already, Warren Buffet has a point when he says he shouldn’t be paying a lower rate than his secretary.

edited[/quote]

Well, he could always elect to pay more. Does he?

Think about that. He is perfectly fine not doing it, yet stirring up the classwarfare and “fairness” bullshit… hmmmm… Sounds like someone has a strong Gold position.