OT – Inside Obama’s “Tax Cut” Can you say Redistribution!

[meadandale]

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/13/obama-plumber-plan-spread-wealth/

Wealth redistribution at its finest…

[TheBreeze]

[quote=fat_lazy_union_worker]

Except the bulk of the taxes come from W-2 earnings. How many CEO’s have $0 salaries but are compensated with equities and deferred compensation?[/quote]

If a CEO is paid in stock, he still has to pay tax on that stock. That is, a CEO can’t get out of paying tax just because he is paid in something that is not “cash”. For example, if a CEO is paid in cows, he still has to pay taxes on the fair value of those cows. So this is a straw man.

[quote=fat_lazy_union_worker]
For example, do you pay social security taxes on capital gains?
[/quote]

Nope.

[quote=fat_lazy_union_worker]
Also, if we were to remove the cap on social security taxes on income, who is this really hurting?
[/quote]

Under Obama’s plan, the social security tax will apply to income up to something like $95K, then there would be no social security tax on income between $95K and $250K, and then the social security tax would apply to income over $250K. Another straw man.

[quote=fat_lazy_union_worker]
I can see this already. Across the nation, CEO’s are going to (for the interest of the company) starting taking a $0 salary…(Of course the equity will be doubled, and especially at these market prices, that’s even more reward for the future).

Think about it.
[/quote]

As I stated above, the CEOs will be taxed on that equity when they receive it. Then, they will be taxed at a higher capital gains rate when they sell that equity. Another straw man.

[quote=fat_lazy_union_worker]
Also, while there are a lot of CEO’s that are crooks, not all of them don’t deserve what they have.

Would you be looking at your iphone, or macbooks if it were not for steve jobs? You think anyone else can really do his job (no pun intended)?
[/quote]

I would still gladly trade my income for Steve Jobs even under Obama’s “draconian” tax plan. Jobs’ income tax will go up a couple of percent, but I bet he will continue to run Apple and continue to make gobs of money as opposed to going and standing in a welfare line. But I get your point, under Obama the rich will pay income tax at a similar rate as the working, middle class. This will likely come as quite a shock to the super-rich who are used to getting non-stop BJs from Bush.

For a fat lazy union worker, you sure are concerned about the plight of the super-rich. Maybe you should start a charity Web site to help them pay their taxes.

[TheBreeze]

[quote=fat_lazy_union_worker]

Except the bulk of the taxes come from W-2 earnings. How many CEO’s have $0 salaries but are compensated with equities and deferred compensation?[/quote]

If a CEO is paid in stock, he still has to pay tax on that stock. That is, a CEO can’t get out of paying tax just because he is paid in something that is not “cash”. For example, if a CEO is paid in cows, he still has to pay taxes on the fair value of those cows. So this is a straw man.

[quote=fat_lazy_union_worker]
For example, do you pay social security taxes on capital gains?
[/quote]

Nope.

[quote=fat_lazy_union_worker]
Also, if we were to remove the cap on social security taxes on income, who is this really hurting?
[/quote]

Under Obama’s plan, the social security tax will apply to income up to something like $95K, then there would be no social security tax on income between $95K and $250K, and then the social security tax would apply to income over $250K. Another straw man.

[quote=fat_lazy_union_worker]
I can see this already. Across the nation, CEO’s are going to (for the interest of the company) starting taking a $0 salary…(Of course the equity will be doubled, and especially at these market prices, that’s even more reward for the future).

Think about it.
[/quote]

As I stated above, the CEOs will be taxed on that equity when they receive it. Then, they will be taxed at a higher capital gains rate when they sell that equity. Another straw man.

[quote=fat_lazy_union_worker]
Also, while there are a lot of CEO’s that are crooks, not all of them don’t deserve what they have.

Would you be looking at your iphone, or macbooks if it were not for steve jobs? You think anyone else can really do his job (no pun intended)?
[/quote]

I would still gladly trade my income for Steve Jobs even under Obama’s “draconian” tax plan. Jobs’ income tax will go up a couple of percent, but I bet he will continue to run Apple and continue to make gobs of money as opposed to going and standing in a welfare line. But I get your point, under Obama the rich will pay income tax at a similar rate as the working, middle class. This will likely come as quite a shock to the super-rich who are used to getting non-stop BJs from Bush.

For a fat lazy union worker, you sure are concerned about the plight of the super-rich. Maybe you should start a charity Web site to help them pay their taxes.

[TheBreeze]

[quote=fat_lazy_union_worker]

Except the bulk of the taxes come from W-2 earnings. How many CEO’s have $0 salaries but are compensated with equities and deferred compensation?[/quote]

If a CEO is paid in stock, he still has to pay tax on that stock. That is, a CEO can’t get out of paying tax just because he is paid in something that is not “cash”. For example, if a CEO is paid in cows, he still has to pay taxes on the fair value of those cows. So this is a straw man.

[quote=fat_lazy_union_worker]
For example, do you pay social security taxes on capital gains?
[/quote]

Nope.

[quote=fat_lazy_union_worker]
Also, if we were to remove the cap on social security taxes on income, who is this really hurting?
[/quote]

Under Obama’s plan, the social security tax will apply to income up to something like $95K, then there would be no social security tax on income between $95K and $250K, and then the social security tax would apply to income over $250K. Another straw man.

[quote=fat_lazy_union_worker]
I can see this already. Across the nation, CEO’s are going to (for the interest of the company) starting taking a $0 salary…(Of course the equity will be doubled, and especially at these market prices, that’s even more reward for the future).

Think about it.
[/quote]

As I stated above, the CEOs will be taxed on that equity when they receive it. Then, they will be taxed at a higher capital gains rate when they sell that equity. Another straw man.

[quote=fat_lazy_union_worker]
Also, while there are a lot of CEO’s that are crooks, not all of them don’t deserve what they have.

Would you be looking at your iphone, or macbooks if it were not for steve jobs? You think anyone else can really do his job (no pun intended)?
[/quote]

I would still gladly trade my income for Steve Jobs even under Obama’s “draconian” tax plan. Jobs’ income tax will go up a couple of percent, but I bet he will continue to run Apple and continue to make gobs of money as opposed to going and standing in a welfare line. But I get your point, under Obama the rich will pay income tax at a similar rate as the working, middle class. This will likely come as quite a shock to the super-rich who are used to getting non-stop BJs from Bush.

For a fat lazy union worker, you sure are concerned about the plight of the super-rich. Maybe you should start a charity Web site to help them pay their taxes.

[TheBreeze]

[quote=fat_lazy_union_worker]

Except the bulk of the taxes come from W-2 earnings. How many CEO’s have $0 salaries but are compensated with equities and deferred compensation?[/quote]

If a CEO is paid in stock, he still has to pay tax on that stock. That is, a CEO can’t get out of paying tax just because he is paid in something that is not “cash”. For example, if a CEO is paid in cows, he still has to pay taxes on the fair value of those cows. So this is a straw man.

[quote=fat_lazy_union_worker]
For example, do you pay social security taxes on capital gains?
[/quote]

Nope.

[quote=fat_lazy_union_worker]
Also, if we were to remove the cap on social security taxes on income, who is this really hurting?
[/quote]

Under Obama’s plan, the social security tax will apply to income up to something like $95K, then there would be no social security tax on income between $95K and $250K, and then the social security tax would apply to income over $250K. Another straw man.

[quote=fat_lazy_union_worker]
I can see this already. Across the nation, CEO’s are going to (for the interest of the company) starting taking a $0 salary…(Of course the equity will be doubled, and especially at these market prices, that’s even more reward for the future).

Think about it.
[/quote]

As I stated above, the CEOs will be taxed on that equity when they receive it. Then, they will be taxed at a higher capital gains rate when they sell that equity. Another straw man.

[quote=fat_lazy_union_worker]
Also, while there are a lot of CEO’s that are crooks, not all of them don’t deserve what they have.

Would you be looking at your iphone, or macbooks if it were not for steve jobs? You think anyone else can really do his job (no pun intended)?
[/quote]

I would still gladly trade my income for Steve Jobs even under Obama’s “draconian” tax plan. Jobs’ income tax will go up a couple of percent, but I bet he will continue to run Apple and continue to make gobs of money as opposed to going and standing in a welfare line. But I get your point, under Obama the rich will pay income tax at a similar rate as the working, middle class. This will likely come as quite a shock to the super-rich who are used to getting non-stop BJs from Bush.

For a fat lazy union worker, you sure are concerned about the plight of the super-rich. Maybe you should start a charity Web site to help them pay their taxes.

[TheBreeze]

[quote=fat_lazy_union_worker]

Except the bulk of the taxes come from W-2 earnings. How many CEO’s have $0 salaries but are compensated with equities and deferred compensation?[/quote]

If a CEO is paid in stock, he still has to pay tax on that stock. That is, a CEO can’t get out of paying tax just because he is paid in something that is not “cash”. For example, if a CEO is paid in cows, he still has to pay taxes on the fair value of those cows. So this is a straw man.

[quote=fat_lazy_union_worker]
For example, do you pay social security taxes on capital gains?
[/quote]

Nope.

[quote=fat_lazy_union_worker]
Also, if we were to remove the cap on social security taxes on income, who is this really hurting?
[/quote]

Under Obama’s plan, the social security tax will apply to income up to something like $95K, then there would be no social security tax on income between $95K and $250K, and then the social security tax would apply to income over $250K. Another straw man.

[quote=fat_lazy_union_worker]
I can see this already. Across the nation, CEO’s are going to (for the interest of the company) starting taking a $0 salary…(Of course the equity will be doubled, and especially at these market prices, that’s even more reward for the future).

Think about it.
[/quote]

As I stated above, the CEOs will be taxed on that equity when they receive it. Then, they will be taxed at a higher capital gains rate when they sell that equity. Another straw man.

[quote=fat_lazy_union_worker]
Also, while there are a lot of CEO’s that are crooks, not all of them don’t deserve what they have.

Would you be looking at your iphone, or macbooks if it were not for steve jobs? You think anyone else can really do his job (no pun intended)?
[/quote]

I would still gladly trade my income for Steve Jobs even under Obama’s “draconian” tax plan. Jobs’ income tax will go up a couple of percent, but I bet he will continue to run Apple and continue to make gobs of money as opposed to going and standing in a welfare line. But I get your point, under Obama the rich will pay income tax at a similar rate as the working, middle class. This will likely come as quite a shock to the super-rich who are used to getting non-stop BJs from Bush.

For a fat lazy union worker, you sure are concerned about the plight of the super-rich. Maybe you should start a charity Web site to help them pay their taxes.

[TheBreeze]

[quote=EconProf]A statistical quirk gives all of us who follow income distribution patterns a misleading picture of “the rich”. Obama and other politicians artfully take advantage of it.
Think of the life cycle of many small businesses (btw, this also applies to long-term real estate investments): The entrepreneur builds the business over several decades, struggling at first (often earning less than his workers), but eventually learning, growing, building a valuable and saleable asset. The struggle is worth it because the goal all along is to sell the business before retirement & reap a big capital gain.
Assuming it works and the business did not fail during the lean years, a big capital gain is the real reward for all that effort. What do the government’s statitics say about this individual in the year he sells out? He’s rich! Maybe makes a million, maybe makes Obama’s threshold quarter-million, and is taxed accordingly. His lifetime income may be quite modest. But government figures, every year, portray these entrepreneurs & RE investors as fat cats because of an accident of the calendar. Gullible voters fall for a populist message as a result.[/quote]

OMG! ENTREPRENEURS ARE GOING TO STOP STARTING BUSINESSES BECAUSE THE CAPITAL GAINS TAX RATE IS GOING UP A FEW PERCENT. WE’RE ALL DOOMED!

Give me a break. Entrepreneurs start businesses because they don’t want to work for the man. Obama’s tax plan will not hinder entrepreneurship in the slightest.

[TheBreeze]

[quote=EconProf]A statistical quirk gives all of us who follow income distribution patterns a misleading picture of “the rich”. Obama and other politicians artfully take advantage of it.
Think of the life cycle of many small businesses (btw, this also applies to long-term real estate investments): The entrepreneur builds the business over several decades, struggling at first (often earning less than his workers), but eventually learning, growing, building a valuable and saleable asset. The struggle is worth it because the goal all along is to sell the business before retirement & reap a big capital gain.
Assuming it works and the business did not fail during the lean years, a big capital gain is the real reward for all that effort. What do the government’s statitics say about this individual in the year he sells out? He’s rich! Maybe makes a million, maybe makes Obama’s threshold quarter-million, and is taxed accordingly. His lifetime income may be quite modest. But government figures, every year, portray these entrepreneurs & RE investors as fat cats because of an accident of the calendar. Gullible voters fall for a populist message as a result.[/quote]

OMG! ENTREPRENEURS ARE GOING TO STOP STARTING BUSINESSES BECAUSE THE CAPITAL GAINS TAX RATE IS GOING UP A FEW PERCENT. WE’RE ALL DOOMED!

Give me a break. Entrepreneurs start businesses because they don’t want to work for the man. Obama’s tax plan will not hinder entrepreneurship in the slightest.

[TheBreeze]

[quote=EconProf]A statistical quirk gives all of us who follow income distribution patterns a misleading picture of “the rich”. Obama and other politicians artfully take advantage of it.
Think of the life cycle of many small businesses (btw, this also applies to long-term real estate investments): The entrepreneur builds the business over several decades, struggling at first (often earning less than his workers), but eventually learning, growing, building a valuable and saleable asset. The struggle is worth it because the goal all along is to sell the business before retirement & reap a big capital gain.
Assuming it works and the business did not fail during the lean years, a big capital gain is the real reward for all that effort. What do the government’s statitics say about this individual in the year he sells out? He’s rich! Maybe makes a million, maybe makes Obama’s threshold quarter-million, and is taxed accordingly. His lifetime income may be quite modest. But government figures, every year, portray these entrepreneurs & RE investors as fat cats because of an accident of the calendar. Gullible voters fall for a populist message as a result.[/quote]

OMG! ENTREPRENEURS ARE GOING TO STOP STARTING BUSINESSES BECAUSE THE CAPITAL GAINS TAX RATE IS GOING UP A FEW PERCENT. WE’RE ALL DOOMED!

Give me a break. Entrepreneurs start businesses because they don’t want to work for the man. Obama’s tax plan will not hinder entrepreneurship in the slightest.

[TheBreeze]

[quote=EconProf]A statistical quirk gives all of us who follow income distribution patterns a misleading picture of “the rich”. Obama and other politicians artfully take advantage of it.
Think of the life cycle of many small businesses (btw, this also applies to long-term real estate investments): The entrepreneur builds the business over several decades, struggling at first (often earning less than his workers), but eventually learning, growing, building a valuable and saleable asset. The struggle is worth it because the goal all along is to sell the business before retirement & reap a big capital gain.
Assuming it works and the business did not fail during the lean years, a big capital gain is the real reward for all that effort. What do the government’s statitics say about this individual in the year he sells out? He’s rich! Maybe makes a million, maybe makes Obama’s threshold quarter-million, and is taxed accordingly. His lifetime income may be quite modest. But government figures, every year, portray these entrepreneurs & RE investors as fat cats because of an accident of the calendar. Gullible voters fall for a populist message as a result.[/quote]

OMG! ENTREPRENEURS ARE GOING TO STOP STARTING BUSINESSES BECAUSE THE CAPITAL GAINS TAX RATE IS GOING UP A FEW PERCENT. WE’RE ALL DOOMED!

Give me a break. Entrepreneurs start businesses because they don’t want to work for the man. Obama’s tax plan will not hinder entrepreneurship in the slightest.

[TheBreeze]

[quote=EconProf]A statistical quirk gives all of us who follow income distribution patterns a misleading picture of “the rich”. Obama and other politicians artfully take advantage of it.
Think of the life cycle of many small businesses (btw, this also applies to long-term real estate investments): The entrepreneur builds the business over several decades, struggling at first (often earning less than his workers), but eventually learning, growing, building a valuable and saleable asset. The struggle is worth it because the goal all along is to sell the business before retirement & reap a big capital gain.
Assuming it works and the business did not fail during the lean years, a big capital gain is the real reward for all that effort. What do the government’s statitics say about this individual in the year he sells out? He’s rich! Maybe makes a million, maybe makes Obama’s threshold quarter-million, and is taxed accordingly. His lifetime income may be quite modest. But government figures, every year, portray these entrepreneurs & RE investors as fat cats because of an accident of the calendar. Gullible voters fall for a populist message as a result.[/quote]

OMG! ENTREPRENEURS ARE GOING TO STOP STARTING BUSINESSES BECAUSE THE CAPITAL GAINS TAX RATE IS GOING UP A FEW PERCENT. WE’RE ALL DOOMED!

Give me a break. Entrepreneurs start businesses because they don’t want to work for the man. Obama’s tax plan will not hinder entrepreneurship in the slightest.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

[quote=TheBreeze][quote=fat_lazy_union_worker]

Except the bulk of the taxes come from W-2 earnings. How many CEO’s have $0 salaries but are compensated with equities and deferred compensation?[/quote]

If a CEO is paid in stock, he still has to pay tax on that stock. That is, a CEO can’t get out of paying tax just because he is paid in something that is not “cash”. For example, if a CEO is paid in cows, he still has to pay taxes on the fair value of those cows. So this is a straw man.

[quote=fat_lazy_union_worker]
Also, if we were to remove the cap on social security taxes on income, who is this really hurting?
[/quote]

Under Obama’s plan, the social security tax will apply to income up to something like $95K, then there would be no social security tax on income between $95K and $250K, and then the social security tax would apply to income over $250K. Another straw man.

[quote=fat_lazy_union_worker]
I can see this already. Across the nation, CEO’s are going to (for the interest of the company) starting taking a $0 salary…(Of course the equity will be doubled, and especially at these market prices, that’s even more reward for the future).

Think about it.
[/quote]

As I stated above, the CEOs will be taxed on that equity when they receive it. Then, they will be taxed at a higher capital gains rate when they sell that equity. Another straw man.
[/quote]

So, stock gains are not taxed at income tax rates. Capital gains rates are lower. No Social security tax is taken from these gains.

So, if you consider these three items labelled as “straw man” arguments it becomes obvious that taking stock options rather than salary above 250K, becomes a way to avoid BOTH the increase in social security taxes on payroll aver 250K and any other federal income tax rate increases in this category.

Calling each of these things individually straw men, without considering their combined effect is itself a straw man.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

[quote=TheBreeze][quote=fat_lazy_union_worker]

Except the bulk of the taxes come from W-2 earnings. How many CEO’s have $0 salaries but are compensated with equities and deferred compensation?[/quote]

If a CEO is paid in stock, he still has to pay tax on that stock. That is, a CEO can’t get out of paying tax just because he is paid in something that is not “cash”. For example, if a CEO is paid in cows, he still has to pay taxes on the fair value of those cows. So this is a straw man.

[quote=fat_lazy_union_worker]
Also, if we were to remove the cap on social security taxes on income, who is this really hurting?
[/quote]

Under Obama’s plan, the social security tax will apply to income up to something like $95K, then there would be no social security tax on income between $95K and $250K, and then the social security tax would apply to income over $250K. Another straw man.

[quote=fat_lazy_union_worker]
I can see this already. Across the nation, CEO’s are going to (for the interest of the company) starting taking a $0 salary…(Of course the equity will be doubled, and especially at these market prices, that’s even more reward for the future).

Think about it.
[/quote]

As I stated above, the CEOs will be taxed on that equity when they receive it. Then, they will be taxed at a higher capital gains rate when they sell that equity. Another straw man.
[/quote]

So, stock gains are not taxed at income tax rates. Capital gains rates are lower. No Social security tax is taken from these gains.

So, if you consider these three items labelled as “straw man” arguments it becomes obvious that taking stock options rather than salary above 250K, becomes a way to avoid BOTH the increase in social security taxes on payroll aver 250K and any other federal income tax rate increases in this category.

Calling each of these things individually straw men, without considering their combined effect is itself a straw man.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

[quote=TheBreeze][quote=fat_lazy_union_worker]

Except the bulk of the taxes come from W-2 earnings. How many CEO’s have $0 salaries but are compensated with equities and deferred compensation?[/quote]

If a CEO is paid in stock, he still has to pay tax on that stock. That is, a CEO can’t get out of paying tax just because he is paid in something that is not “cash”. For example, if a CEO is paid in cows, he still has to pay taxes on the fair value of those cows. So this is a straw man.

[quote=fat_lazy_union_worker]
Also, if we were to remove the cap on social security taxes on income, who is this really hurting?
[/quote]

Under Obama’s plan, the social security tax will apply to income up to something like $95K, then there would be no social security tax on income between $95K and $250K, and then the social security tax would apply to income over $250K. Another straw man.

[quote=fat_lazy_union_worker]
I can see this already. Across the nation, CEO’s are going to (for the interest of the company) starting taking a $0 salary…(Of course the equity will be doubled, and especially at these market prices, that’s even more reward for the future).

Think about it.
[/quote]

As I stated above, the CEOs will be taxed on that equity when they receive it. Then, they will be taxed at a higher capital gains rate when they sell that equity. Another straw man.
[/quote]

So, stock gains are not taxed at income tax rates. Capital gains rates are lower. No Social security tax is taken from these gains.

So, if you consider these three items labelled as “straw man” arguments it becomes obvious that taking stock options rather than salary above 250K, becomes a way to avoid BOTH the increase in social security taxes on payroll aver 250K and any other federal income tax rate increases in this category.

Calling each of these things individually straw men, without considering their combined effect is itself a straw man.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

[quote=TheBreeze][quote=fat_lazy_union_worker]

Except the bulk of the taxes come from W-2 earnings. How many CEO’s have $0 salaries but are compensated with equities and deferred compensation?[/quote]

If a CEO is paid in stock, he still has to pay tax on that stock. That is, a CEO can’t get out of paying tax just because he is paid in something that is not “cash”. For example, if a CEO is paid in cows, he still has to pay taxes on the fair value of those cows. So this is a straw man.

[quote=fat_lazy_union_worker]
Also, if we were to remove the cap on social security taxes on income, who is this really hurting?
[/quote]

Under Obama’s plan, the social security tax will apply to income up to something like $95K, then there would be no social security tax on income between $95K and $250K, and then the social security tax would apply to income over $250K. Another straw man.

[quote=fat_lazy_union_worker]
I can see this already. Across the nation, CEO’s are going to (for the interest of the company) starting taking a $0 salary…(Of course the equity will be doubled, and especially at these market prices, that’s even more reward for the future).

Think about it.
[/quote]

As I stated above, the CEOs will be taxed on that equity when they receive it. Then, they will be taxed at a higher capital gains rate when they sell that equity. Another straw man.
[/quote]

So, stock gains are not taxed at income tax rates. Capital gains rates are lower. No Social security tax is taken from these gains.

So, if you consider these three items labelled as “straw man” arguments it becomes obvious that taking stock options rather than salary above 250K, becomes a way to avoid BOTH the increase in social security taxes on payroll aver 250K and any other federal income tax rate increases in this category.

Calling each of these things individually straw men, without considering their combined effect is itself a straw man.

[Author]

Posts