Obama will increase taxes on everyone!

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by Gord, Oct 27, 2008.

  1. Gord

    Gord

  2. Brandonf

    Brandonf ET Sponsor

    You know I really don't see how anyone thinks that the current economic situation we find ourselves in can be solved without both increasing tax and decreased spending. That's fine on the individual level, it's not going to hurt too many of us very bad. I'm not rich, but I've made about $300,000 this year, and since I plan on pretty much taking the rest of the year off its fair to guesstimate that will be what I earn. The extra 3% I'd pay in going from 36% to 39% (all of $1500) is not going to put me, or anyone else, out into the streets. I have no problem with income taxes going up on a temporary basis to help solve the fix we find ourselves in. I'm not too happy about it though if it also does not come with a reduction in spending, which it appears neither man has the balls to push for. I think that corp and business tax levels are fine where they are. I'm also of the opinion that a clear distiction should be made between professional investors such as ourselves and IRA, Mutual Fund, mom and pop's grocery store etc type investments. I don't think it would be the end of the world if we as traders had to pay income tax on our gains instead of capital gains tax. However, the overall capital gains tax on investment in retirement accounts, in business expansion and the like should be reduced to a level that is as close to zero as possible. This is all of course my opinion, and I reserve the right to be wrong.
     
  3. Gord

    Gord

    JFK, Reagan and Bush 43 all drastically reduced taxes and each time government revenues increased due to the stimulous to the economy.
     
  4. Allow me to respectfully point out that you're an idiot.

    Reagan only reduced income taxes -- in reality he signed TEFRA in 1982 -- the largest tax increase in history up to that point -- a tax increase of a staggering 1% of the entire nation's GDP -- the largest peacetime tax increase in the nation's history.

    So any "increase in revenues" you regurgitate from some imbecile's blog is not related to Reagan's tax "cut" but his tax increase.
     
  5. Brandonf

    Brandonf ET Sponsor

    I read someplace that whatever the tax rate is that a govt generally collects something like 16 or 18% of GDP as revenue. I can't recall the source though or if its been refuted.
     
  6. McCain is proposing the biggest tax increase of all with his plan to tax the health care premiums paid by employers.

    In reality, neither candidate is able to raise taxes as that is up to Congress.

    Seneca
     
  7. Congress doesn't need to "pass" the Obama tax increase. They merely will allow the Bush tax cuts to expire.

    While I'm not a fan of the McCain health care proposal he actually does take the high ground, philosophically speaking. No matter how you cut it comped anything should be taxable. It's always pissed me off that businesses give employees "free" lunches or tickets to events. Those perks are de facto income. Now one could argue like Ron Paul-who believes tips and gratuities are tax exempt "gifts"-but given that Congress and the IRS don't agree the whole thing is duplicitous.
     
  8. Yannis

    Yannis

    I'm in a very similar boat with you, Brandon, only even worse, because my wife earns a good salary too. The decision I had to make last year and this year again is whether to join a friend and expand my activities to develop and sell trading tools, perhaps even open a trading chatroom, etc etc, you know the drill, I was a member of your TFMS room for a while.

    As an alternative, another friend suggested that we partner, incorporate in the Cayman Islands and join two European traders we know to trade part of their hedge fund that has been growing. Two very different possibilities.

    Of course, both of these approaches would entail doubling my workweek, taking on more risk, hire people who may or may not want to work, etc etc, like Joe the Plumber, deja vu all over again. Especially, the first approach above.

    Undestandably, I'm very hesitant. I can do it, but I keep asking myself - why? I have a good enough capital base and income right now and could keep on working on my trades, a few hours per day, no pressure. Why push the envelope? What for?

    Frankly, if this whole election discussion had centered a bit more on the contributions, needs and concerns of the Entrepreneur, I may feel different. But I sense that the time when Americans respected those who created wealth around them (the ones who paid more taxes, hired employees, built factories, etc) is passing rapidly. As we can all see , we are entering a "wealth redistribution" period that may last for a generation or two. Oh well.

    So, the smart people now may be the ones who hold off, lay back, see how the economy develops. In other words, it may be better to play tax defense, export some or all of my income, than being aggressive about creating new businesses in this country. This of course argues for keeping the status quo (independent trader) or following the second approach above, but I'm not sure yet. We'll see.
     
  9. Agree with the taxing everything bit. I remember when I had a company car and did not pay any taxes on it or the free gas and maintenance. That eventually changed and I had to pay for the "value" of the benefit which was still much less than the benefit I got out of it.

    No matter who gets elected, I think there is a tax increase in our futures, but it won't happen while the economy is in the ditch and when it does it will likely a stealth increase like when IRS stopped allowing all interest payments from being tax deductible except for mortgage interest.

    Seneca
     
  10. That's why I don't poo-poo (is that a word, lol) stuff like transaction taxes on stocks ect. Tax receipts are going to suck-it'll be impossible for Congress to enact some of these increases-so as you say "stealth" will be the operative, disingenuous method.....
     
    #10     Oct 28, 2008