Hooray for the tax cut…

[Coronita]

[quote=deadzone][quote=flu][quote=deadzone]I’m tired of all the right wing rhetoric about “risk taking” and how taxes are unfair because people should be rewarded for “Taking risks”. All this talk about risk taking sounds a lot to me like gambling. Is gambling something we should encourage? And as with any form of gambling, there are winners and losers. What do the right-wing no-tax people suppose should happen to the losers? Is all the money they made “risk taking” so sacred that some of it can’t be taxed in part to help provide a social safety net for those less fortunate? And one more thing the right-wingers don’t comprehend, being more fortunate doesn’t necessarily mean you worked any harder.[/quote]

Folks who take risk by starting businesses is hardly what I would consider gambling. I don’t think you understand the concept of no risk no reward. Until recent times, it’s always been the case, since the it was far easier to to do what most everyone else is doing and just take a “safer” route….Well, that’s until government and unions got totally out of hand and started to get ridiculous compensation packages…

Deadzone, furthermore, why do you insist on this being a right-winger thing? If there’s anything to have been proven the past two years is that “left-leaning” government spends just as out of control and fatten their own wallets and/or grow the big fat government tape..How did any of this really benefit your sacred cow of the “less fortunate”? If at all any “leftist” government proved is they don’t give a shit about the “less fortunate” people anymore than the “rightist” government, except to fatten pensions and their own retirement benefits. But anyway, feel free to rail all you want on about our government, while they keep regular people squabling about political ideology that has long escaped both parties. Ha ha left-ist government helping the less fortunate…Ha ha ha.. That’s a good one….Just get use to the next 2 years…Otherwise it’s going to be a long 2 years, possibly 4 the way some things are going…

If everyone wants this country to get out of the mess it’s in, everyone needs to pay higher taxes…And if no one wants to pay, well fine by me too…

[briansd1]

[quote=UCGal] That being said, I do have a problem with stepping-up the cost basis for certain inherited assets. You should either have to use the original cost basis, or pay estate taxes. One or the other, you shouldn’t have both.[/quote]

Interesting concept. But how would people keep track of the cost basis accross generations?

[briansd1]

[quote=UCGal] That being said, I do have a problem with stepping-up the cost basis for certain inherited assets. You should either have to use the original cost basis, or pay estate taxes. One or the other, you shouldn’t have both.[/quote]

Interesting concept. But how would people keep track of the cost basis accross generations?

[briansd1]

[quote=UCGal] That being said, I do have a problem with stepping-up the cost basis for certain inherited assets. You should either have to use the original cost basis, or pay estate taxes. One or the other, you shouldn’t have both.[/quote]

Interesting concept. But how would people keep track of the cost basis accross generations?

[briansd1]

[quote=UCGal] That being said, I do have a problem with stepping-up the cost basis for certain inherited assets. You should either have to use the original cost basis, or pay estate taxes. One or the other, you shouldn’t have both.[/quote]

Interesting concept. But how would people keep track of the cost basis accross generations?

[briansd1]

[quote=UCGal] That being said, I do have a problem with stepping-up the cost basis for certain inherited assets. You should either have to use the original cost basis, or pay estate taxes. One or the other, you shouldn’t have both.[/quote]

Interesting concept. But how would people keep track of the cost basis accross generations?

[briansd1]

[quote=flu]

In that case, I retract my opinion about how I think this tax cut is a bad idea…….I think it’s a great idea for me personally, since now I have two more years to figure out how to reduce my tax liabilities on dividends/capital/etc….I’ve …The bigger tax cuts for me, the better off I’m am..And that’s all that really matters….[/quote]

That’s a very Republican ideal.

[briansd1]

[quote=flu]

In that case, I retract my opinion about how I think this tax cut is a bad idea…….I think it’s a great idea for me personally, since now I have two more years to figure out how to reduce my tax liabilities on dividends/capital/etc….I’ve …The bigger tax cuts for me, the better off I’m am..And that’s all that really matters….[/quote]

That’s a very Republican ideal.

[briansd1]

[quote=flu]

In that case, I retract my opinion about how I think this tax cut is a bad idea…….I think it’s a great idea for me personally, since now I have two more years to figure out how to reduce my tax liabilities on dividends/capital/etc….I’ve …The bigger tax cuts for me, the better off I’m am..And that’s all that really matters….[/quote]

That’s a very Republican ideal.

[briansd1]

[quote=flu]

In that case, I retract my opinion about how I think this tax cut is a bad idea…….I think it’s a great idea for me personally, since now I have two more years to figure out how to reduce my tax liabilities on dividends/capital/etc….I’ve …The bigger tax cuts for me, the better off I’m am..And that’s all that really matters….[/quote]

That’s a very Republican ideal.

[briansd1]

[quote=flu]

In that case, I retract my opinion about how I think this tax cut is a bad idea…….I think it’s a great idea for me personally, since now I have two more years to figure out how to reduce my tax liabilities on dividends/capital/etc….I’ve …The bigger tax cuts for me, the better off I’m am..And that’s all that really matters….[/quote]

That’s a very Republican ideal.

[CA renter]

[quote=surveyor][quote=CA renter]
For one thing, private entities are even less accountable to “We the People” than the govt is. Personally, I fear a powerful, unaccountable group of private capitalists far more than a wealthy government that is run “by the people and for the people.”

The problem arises when a select few essentially take over the govt via corruption and bribery — and when “We the People” have our rights and power stripped from us — so that the elite can do whatever benefits them, to the detriment of everyone else.[/quote]

A powerful government that is unaccountable to no one, is far worse than a secret cabal of robber barons who are at least subject to the laws and government of the United States. There is no check on government except for itself. This is a principle from the founding fathers.

However powerful today’s robber barons are, they are still vulnerable to an essential fact: they are only able to make their money by persuading people to willingly entertain their businesses. If people are not willing to use their service or product, they are finished. Today’s businesses are also vulnerable to the government. They can be broken up or laws can be passed against their practices.

You can assail all you want against businesses, but they cannot forcibly take your money. People have to willingly give it. There is no such restriction on government. If the government wishes to take it, it will.

When businesses succeed, they often bring everyone else with them, not just the head of the company.

No, businesses are not perfect. But they are not in a position of absolute power, like the government. Between those two evils, I would rather choose the businesses, limited by the government and by the power of persuasion, rather than a powerful government, which can only take by force. That’s what the founding fathers knew.[/quote]

But the government is supposed to be accountable to “We the People.” That’s what the founding fathers wanted.

The “robber barons” are NOT accountable to the people, and they are only subject to the laws that they create for themselves! Who do you think is behind all the bills submitted to Congress that determine where money will go? Do you think it’s the empty-headed suits on Capitol Hill? I can assure you, the robber barons are behind the great majority of laws that control the flow of money, either in the form of taxation, or the regulations that FORCE us to use certain services in order to transact business (all under the guise of “protecting the consumer” when creating laws that require us to use “licensed” people/entities — who are almost always associated with a group of powerful lobbyists).

What about intellectual property? We are FORCED, by law, to purchase goods and services that might be more expensive and less effective, because our govt protects the rights of certain businesses/people to exclusively market a good or service.

What about limited liability that protects gamblers and speculators from responsibility when they cause great harm to innocent people?

Are you honestly going to tell me that we had a choice when all the bailouts (trillions of dollars, and we have yet to see all the damage!) were passed to protect — and grow! — the wealth of the robber barons who decimated our society?

No, we do not have a choice, and the elite are NOT held responsible for the damage they inflict on our society.

If “free-market” capitalism is such a Panacea, can you show us a single example of a “free market, capitalist” nation (without any social safety nets or public regulation/control over it’s natural resources and infrastructure, or any other form of “socialism”) that has performed better than its more “socialist” peers?

[CA renter]

[quote=surveyor][quote=CA renter]
For one thing, private entities are even less accountable to “We the People” than the govt is. Personally, I fear a powerful, unaccountable group of private capitalists far more than a wealthy government that is run “by the people and for the people.”

The problem arises when a select few essentially take over the govt via corruption and bribery — and when “We the People” have our rights and power stripped from us — so that the elite can do whatever benefits them, to the detriment of everyone else.[/quote]

A powerful government that is unaccountable to no one, is far worse than a secret cabal of robber barons who are at least subject to the laws and government of the United States. There is no check on government except for itself. This is a principle from the founding fathers.

However powerful today’s robber barons are, they are still vulnerable to an essential fact: they are only able to make their money by persuading people to willingly entertain their businesses. If people are not willing to use their service or product, they are finished. Today’s businesses are also vulnerable to the government. They can be broken up or laws can be passed against their practices.

You can assail all you want against businesses, but they cannot forcibly take your money. People have to willingly give it. There is no such restriction on government. If the government wishes to take it, it will.

When businesses succeed, they often bring everyone else with them, not just the head of the company.

No, businesses are not perfect. But they are not in a position of absolute power, like the government. Between those two evils, I would rather choose the businesses, limited by the government and by the power of persuasion, rather than a powerful government, which can only take by force. That’s what the founding fathers knew.[/quote]

But the government is supposed to be accountable to “We the People.” That’s what the founding fathers wanted.

The “robber barons” are NOT accountable to the people, and they are only subject to the laws that they create for themselves! Who do you think is behind all the bills submitted to Congress that determine where money will go? Do you think it’s the empty-headed suits on Capitol Hill? I can assure you, the robber barons are behind the great majority of laws that control the flow of money, either in the form of taxation, or the regulations that FORCE us to use certain services in order to transact business (all under the guise of “protecting the consumer” when creating laws that require us to use “licensed” people/entities — who are almost always associated with a group of powerful lobbyists).

What about intellectual property? We are FORCED, by law, to purchase goods and services that might be more expensive and less effective, because our govt protects the rights of certain businesses/people to exclusively market a good or service.

What about limited liability that protects gamblers and speculators from responsibility when they cause great harm to innocent people?

Are you honestly going to tell me that we had a choice when all the bailouts (trillions of dollars, and we have yet to see all the damage!) were passed to protect — and grow! — the wealth of the robber barons who decimated our society?

No, we do not have a choice, and the elite are NOT held responsible for the damage they inflict on our society.

If “free-market” capitalism is such a Panacea, can you show us a single example of a “free market, capitalist” nation (without any social safety nets or public regulation/control over it’s natural resources and infrastructure, or any other form of “socialism”) that has performed better than its more “socialist” peers?

[CA renter]

[quote=surveyor][quote=CA renter]
For one thing, private entities are even less accountable to “We the People” than the govt is. Personally, I fear a powerful, unaccountable group of private capitalists far more than a wealthy government that is run “by the people and for the people.”

The problem arises when a select few essentially take over the govt via corruption and bribery — and when “We the People” have our rights and power stripped from us — so that the elite can do whatever benefits them, to the detriment of everyone else.[/quote]

A powerful government that is unaccountable to no one, is far worse than a secret cabal of robber barons who are at least subject to the laws and government of the United States. There is no check on government except for itself. This is a principle from the founding fathers.

However powerful today’s robber barons are, they are still vulnerable to an essential fact: they are only able to make their money by persuading people to willingly entertain their businesses. If people are not willing to use their service or product, they are finished. Today’s businesses are also vulnerable to the government. They can be broken up or laws can be passed against their practices.

You can assail all you want against businesses, but they cannot forcibly take your money. People have to willingly give it. There is no such restriction on government. If the government wishes to take it, it will.

When businesses succeed, they often bring everyone else with them, not just the head of the company.

No, businesses are not perfect. But they are not in a position of absolute power, like the government. Between those two evils, I would rather choose the businesses, limited by the government and by the power of persuasion, rather than a powerful government, which can only take by force. That’s what the founding fathers knew.[/quote]

But the government is supposed to be accountable to “We the People.” That’s what the founding fathers wanted.

The “robber barons” are NOT accountable to the people, and they are only subject to the laws that they create for themselves! Who do you think is behind all the bills submitted to Congress that determine where money will go? Do you think it’s the empty-headed suits on Capitol Hill? I can assure you, the robber barons are behind the great majority of laws that control the flow of money, either in the form of taxation, or the regulations that FORCE us to use certain services in order to transact business (all under the guise of “protecting the consumer” when creating laws that require us to use “licensed” people/entities — who are almost always associated with a group of powerful lobbyists).

What about intellectual property? We are FORCED, by law, to purchase goods and services that might be more expensive and less effective, because our govt protects the rights of certain businesses/people to exclusively market a good or service.

What about limited liability that protects gamblers and speculators from responsibility when they cause great harm to innocent people?

Are you honestly going to tell me that we had a choice when all the bailouts (trillions of dollars, and we have yet to see all the damage!) were passed to protect — and grow! — the wealth of the robber barons who decimated our society?

No, we do not have a choice, and the elite are NOT held responsible for the damage they inflict on our society.

If “free-market” capitalism is such a Panacea, can you show us a single example of a “free market, capitalist” nation (without any social safety nets or public regulation/control over it’s natural resources and infrastructure, or any other form of “socialism”) that has performed better than its more “socialist” peers?

[CA renter]

[quote=surveyor][quote=CA renter]
For one thing, private entities are even less accountable to “We the People” than the govt is. Personally, I fear a powerful, unaccountable group of private capitalists far more than a wealthy government that is run “by the people and for the people.”

The problem arises when a select few essentially take over the govt via corruption and bribery — and when “We the People” have our rights and power stripped from us — so that the elite can do whatever benefits them, to the detriment of everyone else.[/quote]

A powerful government that is unaccountable to no one, is far worse than a secret cabal of robber barons who are at least subject to the laws and government of the United States. There is no check on government except for itself. This is a principle from the founding fathers.

However powerful today’s robber barons are, they are still vulnerable to an essential fact: they are only able to make their money by persuading people to willingly entertain their businesses. If people are not willing to use their service or product, they are finished. Today’s businesses are also vulnerable to the government. They can be broken up or laws can be passed against their practices.

You can assail all you want against businesses, but they cannot forcibly take your money. People have to willingly give it. There is no such restriction on government. If the government wishes to take it, it will.

When businesses succeed, they often bring everyone else with them, not just the head of the company.

No, businesses are not perfect. But they are not in a position of absolute power, like the government. Between those two evils, I would rather choose the businesses, limited by the government and by the power of persuasion, rather than a powerful government, which can only take by force. That’s what the founding fathers knew.[/quote]

But the government is supposed to be accountable to “We the People.” That’s what the founding fathers wanted.

The “robber barons” are NOT accountable to the people, and they are only subject to the laws that they create for themselves! Who do you think is behind all the bills submitted to Congress that determine where money will go? Do you think it’s the empty-headed suits on Capitol Hill? I can assure you, the robber barons are behind the great majority of laws that control the flow of money, either in the form of taxation, or the regulations that FORCE us to use certain services in order to transact business (all under the guise of “protecting the consumer” when creating laws that require us to use “licensed” people/entities — who are almost always associated with a group of powerful lobbyists).

What about intellectual property? We are FORCED, by law, to purchase goods and services that might be more expensive and less effective, because our govt protects the rights of certain businesses/people to exclusively market a good or service.

What about limited liability that protects gamblers and speculators from responsibility when they cause great harm to innocent people?

Are you honestly going to tell me that we had a choice when all the bailouts (trillions of dollars, and we have yet to see all the damage!) were passed to protect — and grow! — the wealth of the robber barons who decimated our society?

No, we do not have a choice, and the elite are NOT held responsible for the damage they inflict on our society.

If “free-market” capitalism is such a Panacea, can you show us a single example of a “free market, capitalist” nation (without any social safety nets or public regulation/control over it’s natural resources and infrastructure, or any other form of “socialism”) that has performed better than its more “socialist” peers?

[Author]

Posts