Trump’s inner circle weighs push for higher taxes on millionaires

[placeholder]

54 minutes ago, NoDisplayName said:

 

Thank you.

 

Depreciation subsidies are part of policies designed to support businesses.  Factories wear out, buildings must eventually be demolished.  If depreciation not deducted, it gets applied to the price of the product or service.

 

Loans are just loans, and allegedly must be paid back.  If not, there can be penalties for tax evasion.  Otherwise we'd have to claim credit card purchases as income.

 

Why should the government get to impose death taxes.  Families should be able to build wealth.  Why don't we rescind the tax exemption on primary residences?  Fred in the suburbs should have to pay tax when he moves to a new home?

 

54 minutes ago, NoDisplayName said:

 

Thank you.

 

Depreciation subsidies are part of policies designed to support businesses.  Factories wear out, buildings must eventually be demolished.  If depreciation not deducted, it gets applied to the price of the product or service.

 

Loans are just loans, and allegedly must be paid back.  If not, there can be penalties for tax evasion.  Otherwise we'd have to claim credit card purchases as income.

 

Why should the government get to impose death taxes.  Families should be able to build wealth.  Why don't we rescind the tax exemption on primary residences?  Fred in the suburbs should have to pay tax when he moves to a new home?

Something's wear out a lot more slowly than others. Buildings wear out after 10 years 20 years these are absurd rates of depreciation 

 

Who said loan shouldn't be paid back? I just said that rich people use loans instead of  or in addition to earned income.

 

I pointed out the reason why the government should tax inherited wealth .  That was the founding father's reasoning. And you have no answer for why capital gains should be bumped up to a new basis with no tax consequences. 

 

In fact, whno less a person than Milton Friedman who pointed out that capital gains being taxed at a different rate is in effect saying that certain kinds of income are better than other kinds of income and it's a distortion of the marketplace. At this point in time it's too late to do anything about the exemptions granted for residences. But it does distort the marketplace.

 

[Lacessit]

4 hours ago, NoDisplayName said:

 

How 'bout...........ANY...........context.

 

For ezzample:

 

Bob earned $60K.  He's married with no kids.  He files jointly, and takes an IRA deduction and mortgage interest deduction.  He pays $5800 tax.

 

Fred earned $1 Billion.  He's single and owns a private jet.  He runs a casino resort...........poorly.............and lost $400 Million.  He invests in a company selling gold-colored sneakers that also did poorly.  He sold his entire holdings for a loss of $600 Million.  Fred pays no tax.

 

That, dear, is context.

Fred should be flat broke. If he still owns a private jet and a casino, he is not.

 

The solution is not obvious to most. Forget about taxing on profit and deducting on loss, there are too many ways to legally evade taxes with some jiggery-pokery.

 

Tax on revenue instead, 1-2%. Revenue can't be fiddled, it just is. 

 

Wealth inequality is created when wages are taxed at far higher levels than billionaires, who can simply take out loans against growing assets to provide the cash for their lifestyle.

 

Wages are revenue. You'll eliminate the debt in 1-2 years.

 

When I was earning six figures, I would have loved to be taxed at 2%.

 

 

[NoDisplayName]

3 hours ago, placeholder said:

 

Something's wear out a lot more slowly than others. Buildings wear out after 10 years 20 years these are absurd rates of depreciation 

 

Who said loan shouldn't be paid back? I just said that rich people use loans instead of  or in addition to earned income.

 

I pointed out the reason why the government should tax inherited wealth .  That was the founding father's reasoning. And you have no answer for why capital gains should be bumped up to a new basis with no tax consequences. 

 

In fact, whno less a person than Milton Friedman who pointed out that capital gains being taxed at a different rate is in effect saying that certain kinds of income are better than other kinds of income and it's a distortion of the marketplace. At this point in time it's too late to do anything about the exemptions granted for residences. But it does distort the marketplace.

 

 

Sorry, I'm just have trouble wrapping my libertarian brain around this communist "fair share" nonsense, and the presumption that the government has a right to 20%, 30%, 40%, 50% or more of MY income to spend on welfare, wunderwaffles, and trans-mice.

 

We could easily cut the government by thousands of programs, hundreds of agencies, 400 foreign military bases and 3 supercarrier fleets.....and voila, saved $1 Trillion.

 

Reduce the tax code to one page, and tax returns to postcard sized forms.  Flat tax at 5%, no deductions, no exemptions.  That's fair.

 

 

 

 

[placeholder]

5 minutes ago, NoDisplayName said:

 

Sorry, I'm just have trouble wrapping my libertarian brain around this communist "fair share" nonsense, and the presumption that the government has a right to 20%, 30%, 40%, 50% or more of MY income to spend on welfare, wunderwaffles, and trans-mice.

 

We could easily cut the government by thousands of programs, hundreds of agencies, 400 foreign military bases and 3 supercarrier fleets.....and voila, saved $1 Trillion.

 

Reduce the tax code to one page, and tax returns to postcard sized forms.  Flat tax at 5%, no deductions, no exemptions.  That's fair.

 

 

 

 

The kind of government you long for worked well when economies were largely agrarian and populations were sparse. Not so much anymore.

[NoDisplayName]

1 hour ago, Lacessit said:

Fred should be flat broke. If he still owns a private jet and a casino, he is not.

 

Fred is a hard worker.  He made millions in previous years, paid too much in taxes, invested the remainder wisely.  Why should he be broke?

 

This year's losses offset this year's profits.

 

But yeah, let's tax 'revenue,' which will eliminate any chance of maintaining our edge in technology and health sciences.  If it doesn't earn a profit from day one, there will be no investment.

 

Sounds like a Trump policy.