Hooray for the tax cut…

[UCGal]

[quote=enron_by_the_sea]I was first be happy to not have to pay more in taxes next year. Two seconds later I realized that I would be paying that with interest one way or another in the future anyway! So I don’t what the big deal is about.

If they had done it without adding to the deficit (in the long term) then I might have been impressed….[/quote]
+10.

This just added a trillion bucks to the deficit. Much bigger than TARP 1.

One of the little things in the law – the rich (and anyone else with a spare $10Million) can now gift their kids $10M, tax free. If they do it in the next 2 years. This is in addition to the estate tax changes… ($5M tax free.)

So if your older and may die in the next 2 years – you could give $15M to your kids tax free.

Now where did I put that spare $10 million….

[Anonymous]

[quote=air_ogi]If I do this, does it mean I will not have to participate in eventual debt-paydown? Where do I sign?[/quote]

Don’t you know that’s how it works?

Whenever PatentGuy receives his credit card bill, he just sends a note to the bank explaining that he’ll pay off the balance by reducing his spending.

[Anonymous]

[quote=air_ogi]If I do this, does it mean I will not have to participate in eventual debt-paydown? Where do I sign?[/quote]

Don’t you know that’s how it works?

Whenever PatentGuy receives his credit card bill, he just sends a note to the bank explaining that he’ll pay off the balance by reducing his spending.

[Anonymous]

[quote=air_ogi]If I do this, does it mean I will not have to participate in eventual debt-paydown? Where do I sign?[/quote]

Don’t you know that’s how it works?

Whenever PatentGuy receives his credit card bill, he just sends a note to the bank explaining that he’ll pay off the balance by reducing his spending.

[Anonymous]

[quote=air_ogi]If I do this, does it mean I will not have to participate in eventual debt-paydown? Where do I sign?[/quote]

Don’t you know that’s how it works?

Whenever PatentGuy receives his credit card bill, he just sends a note to the bank explaining that he’ll pay off the balance by reducing his spending.

[Anonymous]

[quote=air_ogi]If I do this, does it mean I will not have to participate in eventual debt-paydown? Where do I sign?[/quote]

Don’t you know that’s how it works?

Whenever PatentGuy receives his credit card bill, he just sends a note to the bank explaining that he’ll pay off the balance by reducing his spending.

[PatentGuy]

Did I stir the pot?

Do any of you really believe that if taxed were raised taxes as high as possible on “the rich” (how about a marginal tax rate of 98% on all income higher than what PatentGuy makes?), the deficit will be any less five or ten years from now? Seems to me the wealth confiscation arguments are really about jealously and envy. If you don’t have it, why should they? Human nature at its finest.

As far as Warren Buffet or Bill Gates (or whomever) advocating higher income tax rates, I will care what they have to say as soon as they advocate long term capital gains rates should be at least 40%, and that at least 50% of their total estates go to the government, instead of their chosen charities. Otherwise, they should also STFU. They pay very little in income taxes because they make very little income. Big difference between being asset rich instead of “paycheck rich”.

Come on Brian, why should a “progressive” want Warren Buffet to decide how to spend his own money? Isn’t that the government’s job? We’re talking tax “cuts” around here, meaning it’s rightfully the government’s money to begin with.

Gates and Buffet play you libs for fools. They bang the drum for higher income tax rates they will never pay, even if they are implemented, and then they spend their wealth on stuff they think is important instead of what the Democratic Party thinks is important. How can you stand for this?

WWHD?

[PatentGuy]

Did I stir the pot?

Do any of you really believe that if taxed were raised taxes as high as possible on “the rich” (how about a marginal tax rate of 98% on all income higher than what PatentGuy makes?), the deficit will be any less five or ten years from now? Seems to me the wealth confiscation arguments are really about jealously and envy. If you don’t have it, why should they? Human nature at its finest.

As far as Warren Buffet or Bill Gates (or whomever) advocating higher income tax rates, I will care what they have to say as soon as they advocate long term capital gains rates should be at least 40%, and that at least 50% of their total estates go to the government, instead of their chosen charities. Otherwise, they should also STFU. They pay very little in income taxes because they make very little income. Big difference between being asset rich instead of “paycheck rich”.

Come on Brian, why should a “progressive” want Warren Buffet to decide how to spend his own money? Isn’t that the government’s job? We’re talking tax “cuts” around here, meaning it’s rightfully the government’s money to begin with.

Gates and Buffet play you libs for fools. They bang the drum for higher income tax rates they will never pay, even if they are implemented, and then they spend their wealth on stuff they think is important instead of what the Democratic Party thinks is important. How can you stand for this?

WWHD?

[PatentGuy]

Did I stir the pot?

Do any of you really believe that if taxed were raised taxes as high as possible on “the rich” (how about a marginal tax rate of 98% on all income higher than what PatentGuy makes?), the deficit will be any less five or ten years from now? Seems to me the wealth confiscation arguments are really about jealously and envy. If you don’t have it, why should they? Human nature at its finest.

As far as Warren Buffet or Bill Gates (or whomever) advocating higher income tax rates, I will care what they have to say as soon as they advocate long term capital gains rates should be at least 40%, and that at least 50% of their total estates go to the government, instead of their chosen charities. Otherwise, they should also STFU. They pay very little in income taxes because they make very little income. Big difference between being asset rich instead of “paycheck rich”.

Come on Brian, why should a “progressive” want Warren Buffet to decide how to spend his own money? Isn’t that the government’s job? We’re talking tax “cuts” around here, meaning it’s rightfully the government’s money to begin with.

Gates and Buffet play you libs for fools. They bang the drum for higher income tax rates they will never pay, even if they are implemented, and then they spend their wealth on stuff they think is important instead of what the Democratic Party thinks is important. How can you stand for this?

WWHD?

[PatentGuy]

Did I stir the pot?

Do any of you really believe that if taxed were raised taxes as high as possible on “the rich” (how about a marginal tax rate of 98% on all income higher than what PatentGuy makes?), the deficit will be any less five or ten years from now? Seems to me the wealth confiscation arguments are really about jealously and envy. If you don’t have it, why should they? Human nature at its finest.

As far as Warren Buffet or Bill Gates (or whomever) advocating higher income tax rates, I will care what they have to say as soon as they advocate long term capital gains rates should be at least 40%, and that at least 50% of their total estates go to the government, instead of their chosen charities. Otherwise, they should also STFU. They pay very little in income taxes because they make very little income. Big difference between being asset rich instead of “paycheck rich”.

Come on Brian, why should a “progressive” want Warren Buffet to decide how to spend his own money? Isn’t that the government’s job? We’re talking tax “cuts” around here, meaning it’s rightfully the government’s money to begin with.

Gates and Buffet play you libs for fools. They bang the drum for higher income tax rates they will never pay, even if they are implemented, and then they spend their wealth on stuff they think is important instead of what the Democratic Party thinks is important. How can you stand for this?

WWHD?

[PatentGuy]

Did I stir the pot?

Do any of you really believe that if taxed were raised taxes as high as possible on “the rich” (how about a marginal tax rate of 98% on all income higher than what PatentGuy makes?), the deficit will be any less five or ten years from now? Seems to me the wealth confiscation arguments are really about jealously and envy. If you don’t have it, why should they? Human nature at its finest.

As far as Warren Buffet or Bill Gates (or whomever) advocating higher income tax rates, I will care what they have to say as soon as they advocate long term capital gains rates should be at least 40%, and that at least 50% of their total estates go to the government, instead of their chosen charities. Otherwise, they should also STFU. They pay very little in income taxes because they make very little income. Big difference between being asset rich instead of “paycheck rich”.

Come on Brian, why should a “progressive” want Warren Buffet to decide how to spend his own money? Isn’t that the government’s job? We’re talking tax “cuts” around here, meaning it’s rightfully the government’s money to begin with.

Gates and Buffet play you libs for fools. They bang the drum for higher income tax rates they will never pay, even if they are implemented, and then they spend their wealth on stuff they think is important instead of what the Democratic Party thinks is important. How can you stand for this?

WWHD?

[Anonymous]

Sorry, you did not stir the pot. We just had a thread on this topic, with the same line of reasoning from another wannabe rich guy:

http://piggington.com/ot_so_the_debt_grows

[quote=PatentGuy]Do any of you really believe that if taxed were raised […] the deficit will be any less five or ten years from now?[/quote]

Yes.

I even saw it happen. It was a magical thing, we called it a “surplus.” It existed in a time we called “the late 1990s.” But alas, that was over 10 years ago, and before those mean ‘ol terrorists forced us to spend all our money (and then some) on guns and bombs and groping TSA employees.

[quote]Gates and Buffet play you libs for fools. They bang the drum for higher income tax rates they will never pay, even if they are implemented[/quote]

Anyone who disagrees with you is automatically a “lib?” – man, that one is just so worn out….

I hear this one often from the wannabe wealthy:

“Don’t raise taxes on the rich – it’s not fair!”

Followed by: “…but the rich never pay taxes anyway.”

Sound logic.

[Anonymous]

Sorry, you did not stir the pot. We just had a thread on this topic, with the same line of reasoning from another wannabe rich guy:

http://piggington.com/ot_so_the_debt_grows

[quote=PatentGuy]Do any of you really believe that if taxed were raised […] the deficit will be any less five or ten years from now?[/quote]

Yes.

I even saw it happen. It was a magical thing, we called it a “surplus.” It existed in a time we called “the late 1990s.” But alas, that was over 10 years ago, and before those mean ‘ol terrorists forced us to spend all our money (and then some) on guns and bombs and groping TSA employees.

[quote]Gates and Buffet play you libs for fools. They bang the drum for higher income tax rates they will never pay, even if they are implemented[/quote]

Anyone who disagrees with you is automatically a “lib?” – man, that one is just so worn out….

I hear this one often from the wannabe wealthy:

“Don’t raise taxes on the rich – it’s not fair!”

Followed by: “…but the rich never pay taxes anyway.”

Sound logic.

[Anonymous]

Sorry, you did not stir the pot. We just had a thread on this topic, with the same line of reasoning from another wannabe rich guy:

http://piggington.com/ot_so_the_debt_grows

[quote=PatentGuy]Do any of you really believe that if taxed were raised […] the deficit will be any less five or ten years from now?[/quote]

Yes.

I even saw it happen. It was a magical thing, we called it a “surplus.” It existed in a time we called “the late 1990s.” But alas, that was over 10 years ago, and before those mean ‘ol terrorists forced us to spend all our money (and then some) on guns and bombs and groping TSA employees.

[quote]Gates and Buffet play you libs for fools. They bang the drum for higher income tax rates they will never pay, even if they are implemented[/quote]

Anyone who disagrees with you is automatically a “lib?” – man, that one is just so worn out….

I hear this one often from the wannabe wealthy:

“Don’t raise taxes on the rich – it’s not fair!”

Followed by: “…but the rich never pay taxes anyway.”

Sound logic.

[Anonymous]

Sorry, you did not stir the pot. We just had a thread on this topic, with the same line of reasoning from another wannabe rich guy:

http://piggington.com/ot_so_the_debt_grows

[quote=PatentGuy]Do any of you really believe that if taxed were raised […] the deficit will be any less five or ten years from now?[/quote]

Yes.

I even saw it happen. It was a magical thing, we called it a “surplus.” It existed in a time we called “the late 1990s.” But alas, that was over 10 years ago, and before those mean ‘ol terrorists forced us to spend all our money (and then some) on guns and bombs and groping TSA employees.

[quote]Gates and Buffet play you libs for fools. They bang the drum for higher income tax rates they will never pay, even if they are implemented[/quote]

Anyone who disagrees with you is automatically a “lib?” – man, that one is just so worn out….

I hear this one often from the wannabe wealthy:

“Don’t raise taxes on the rich – it’s not fair!”

Followed by: “…but the rich never pay taxes anyway.”

Sound logic.

[Author]

Posts