Text 3282, 153 rader
Skriven 2006-07-04 13:05:00 av Robert E Starr JR (3755.babylon5)
Ärende: Re: Atheists: America's m
=================================
* * * This message was from Josh Hill to rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.m * * *
         * * * and has been forwarded to you by Lord Time * * *         
            -----------------------------------------------             

@MSGID: <mnkja297e9ahd6ro0craictrqtpugfvafh@4ax.com>
@REPLY: <kurtullman-54586A.23282630062006@news.west.earthlink.net>
On Sun, 2 Jul 2006 22:36:06 -0500, "Dennis \(Icarus\)"
<ala_dir_diver@yahoo.com> wrote:

>
>"Josh Hill" <usereplyto@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:nirga2tp1p6kdmlte99skc72948qcg1ea8@4ax.com...
>> On Sun, 2 Jul 2006 19:34:51 -0500, "Dennis \(Icarus\)"
>> <ala_dir_diver@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"Josh Hill" <usereplyto@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> >news:ffjga295ri9tl9b9rqa2f8u09hv08r4s8u@4ax.com...
>>
>> >And as I said, the financial and insurance industry opposes repeal.
>>
>> So why not eliminate the loopholes and screw them? Seems to me a good
>> starting point would be eliminating the loopholes and taxing estates
>> over $3 million at the same rate as earned income.
>
>So you want to screw the rich kids, and screw the financial planners too=
.
>
>Why exempt the first $3 million?

=93It is most desirable to encourage thrift and ambition, and a potent
source of thrift and ambition is the desire on the part of the
breadwinner to leave his children well off. This object can be
attained by making the tax very small on moderate amounts of
property.=94 - Theodore Roosevelt

To which I'd add a) why bother and b) I believe in progressive
taxation and c) who cares.

>> >So why not just make the minimum wage $100,000.00 a year?
>> >:-)
>>
>> That would be great from the point of view of trickle-down economics!
>>
>> But seriously, the way I look at it is that with a /per capita/ income
>> of something like $40,000 a year, we can afford to elevate working
>> people above the poverty line . . .
>
>So what is the minimum wage you'd like to see?
>$100,000 is apparently too much.

Actually, if it were up to me, there would be no minimum wage at all.
Rather, we would have the equivalent of a negative income tax, but it
would be practiced as a per-employee tax credit on the employer's
side, combined with a government works program, the government being
the employer of last resort. These would have the effect of setting a
de facto minimum wage, but without discouraging the employment of the
least employable workers. As an initial goal, the program would lift
the families of all willing workers out of poverty. Those who were
genuinely unable to work because of illness or disability would also
be lifted out of poverty, but under SSI. Drug addicts would receive no
income unless they enrolled in an approved residential program and
agreed to ongoing substance testing. The earned income credit program,
SSI, and Social Security would be expanded to insure that children and
dependents were elevated out of poverty even if families were large or
there were no willing or able worker in the household.

Well, you asked.

> >> > If you inherit a company (a dry cleaner, a farm, a car dealership,
>etc.)
>> >> >you may still work your rear-end off because the business means
>something
>> >to
>> >> >you and you want to pass it on to your kids.  If the average perso=
n
>> >should
>> >> >have that right, the  rich should too.
>> >>
>> >> They do: no one is suggesting confiscatory taxation. And I don't se=
e
>> >> how a comparison to the average person is valid here: the average
>> >> person gets taxed on the money he earns. Why should a rich heir not
>> >> get taxed on the money he gets but did nothing to earn? Apart from
>> >> clipping coupons, that is. I don't see even a hint of fairness here=
.
>> >
>> >Because gains in stock do not happen until they're sold.
>> >The gains in bonds do not happen until they're redeemed.
>> >Money in banks accrue interest, which is taxed.
>> >Dividends gained through stocks are taxed.
>>
>> Which is another problem: the working stiff pays money on what he
>> earns, while the rich guy has no liability until he cashes in. There
>> are economic arguments for that, but I don't think they're in play
>> right now.
>
>Actually, there are, because its not a gain (or loss) until sold.
>If I buy 100 shares of Google at $477 a share, and its currently 419 a
>share, I can't deduct the loss, right?
>If the next year its at 380 a share, do I get to deduct that loss as wel=
l?
>From 477 or 419?
>
>If I buy 100 shares in a compay at 100, it goes up to 256, then I sell w=
hen
>its dropped to 50, do I poay taxes on the unrealied gain then deduct the
>realized loss?

Why not? As you point out below, we do it with inheritance.

>> >And you know they don't work because.....?
>> >:-)
>> >If they were working in the family business, then they shoudl still b=
e
>> >taxed, even though they have jobs?
>>
>> They're taxed on their salaries, aren't they?
>
>Yes, they are.
>>
>> Inheritance is just income. I can understand, having grown up in a
>> family that owned a business, the desire to keep a business within the
>> family, but that doesn't change the fact that you're getting something
>> of worth.
>
>Not necessarily "just income" - transfer of ownership of assets.
>The cost basis for the inheritors is "stepped up" to the current market
>value. Apparently this was done to simplify bookkeeping - trying to trac=
k
>down the basis of decades-old property could be difficult.
>If the business was sold, then it'd become income - taxable based on the
>profit (or loss) of the sale value from the cost basis. At least thats m=
y
>understanding.

Seems to me a reasonable stand-in.

--=20
Josh

"I love it when I'm around the country club, and I hear people talking ab=
out the debilitating
effects of a welfare society. At the same time, they leave their kids a l=
ifetime and beyond
of food stamps. Instead of having a welfare officer, they have a trust of=
ficer. And instead
of food stamps, they have stocks and bonds."

- Warren Buffett
                             
--- SBBSecho 2.11-Win32
 * Origin: Time Warp of the Future BBS - Home of League 10 (1:14/400)