Tax Bill

I'm a social liberal, and in general I think we should keep taxes in check on certain items. I am though, adamantly opposed to extending tax breaks on dividends and capital gains. What say you all on this?

link

[lehighguy]

Why?

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

Disagree. In the case of dividends, its an example of double-dipping by the government. First they tax the corporations, Then they tax the after-tax distributions. Either make dividends tax exempt, or eliminate the corporate income tax.

Capital gains taxes would be more palatable if they were indexed. For example, a person who bought a home in 1975 for $40,000 and who sells it today for $400,000 has not really made $360,000 in income. One 1975 dollar does not equal one 2005 dollar. In the case of stock and bond transactions, I see no reason why that income needs to be treated any differently than any other income.

I think your support of government-sponsored theft is morally reprehensible.

[ QUOTE ]
I think your support of government-sponsored theft is morally reprehensible.

[/ QUOTE ]

Stop using my roads.

[ QUOTE ]
I think your support of government-sponsored theft is morally reprehensible.

[/ QUOTE ]

I suppose given my previous snap about useless responses I owe you a bit more than that.

Let's look at this concept of distributive justice and the transfer of wealth from one angle, a similiar concept to the tournament chips being more useful in a short stack than a big stack (gold / copper).

If you have 1000 bananas and I have 0, 10 of those bananas are going to have much more use to me (fighting off starvation) than they will to you.

With money this is true as well. To a millionaire, $50 is not a lot, to someone with no money what-so-ever this is a significant amount that will bring them great happiness and has a much higher value to that person. In short, everyone should be guarenteed enough substance for a minimally flourishing life.

This costs very little for one party to provide, and gives alot to the party receiving it.

Is it "right"? For me the concept of right and wrong do not exist. What simply exists is functionality.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think your support of government-sponsored theft is morally reprehensible.

[/ QUOTE ]

Stop using my roads.

[/ QUOTE ]

He asked for my opinion and I gave it. If you disagree with it, I'm sure can do better than this for a response.

[Olof]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think your support of government-sponsored theft is morally reprehensible.

[/ QUOTE ]

Stop using my roads.

[/ QUOTE ]

If bakethejake has been freed from paying taxes by the government (which I very much doubt), and despite this still continue to use taxfunded roads you have a point. Otherwise, your argument makes no sense whatsoever.

[etgryphon]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm a social liberal, and in general I think we should keep taxes in check on certain items. I am though, adamantly opposed to extending tax breaks on dividends and capital gains. What say you all on this?

link

[/ QUOTE ]

You do know that 3/5 of the population owns stocks in some form. So you are alienating a majority of the population people.

As it has been pointed out, these taxes are double dipping. I would have no problem if you did away with the corporate tax and then just tax dividends as straight income.

We need to go to a flax tax system if we want to be fair. I hate that BS line of "The rich should pay their fair share!". Incremental tax brackets are inherently unfair. Just admit it. If you want to tax rich people extra, Fine but be honest about it.

-Gryph

[adios]

Actually if this passes you'll see less money paid in dividends FWIW as corporations have other alternatives than paying cash dividends like buying back stock. Therefore you may actually see a decline in revenue from taxes on dividends. As Kurn mentioned it's double taxation and before we get into another argument about the ethics of double taxation, just because double taxation exists in other areas doesn't legitimize it IMO. Corporations will tend to do the "tax effecient" thing.

As far as capital gains taxes, I think you'd be likely to see less investment in economic growth but I'm sure others would reply that there's no proof of that. Depends on how much you tax something would be my response. Tax investments at double the rate of anything else and see if it leads to significantly less investment in business and thus significantly less economic growth. When does the impact on the economy become "significant" i.e. when does job growth slow by 20%?

What should the distribution of income be among the tax payers? I don't support tax increases of any kind without answering this basic question.