The Red Scare continues.

[MassLiberal]

Bercause you are rewarded for it.

You make it sound like the government is taking away all of the gains one makes on investments, when nothing can be farther from the truth. There are so many ways to get around capital gains (which is smaller than most people think), that smart investors usually wind up paying NOTHING AT ALL in CGT. Why do you think people have trust funds?? To help their children? HA!! NO to hide from CGT.

[Cyber Cop]

Fool. Just look at the Middle East, Northern Ireland, France/Algeria, India/Pakistan, China/Tibet/Taiwan. Clearly the world is a Tabla Rasa.

Hey foolio, learn to read, I was making a comment in reference to Meatpuppets comment about the current market system bieng perfect despite large wealth being aquired from slave labor. Yes history does matter. Sometimes for the worst, sometimes for the better.

[Cono Este]

Nice straw man argument there, try something a little more relevent.

Dividends are income that an investor has done NO LABOR to recieve. yes, ivestors take risks (as I am an investor, I know), but more often than not those are pretty safe bets.

People saving money they earned to take risk in business is a little more important in the business cycle than you give it credit for. What about retired people? Their dividends are a large part of their income? It should be taxed twice? How are we to levy income taxes based on your theory of a merit system? In addition we should encourage business to pay dividends. The current advantage is not too, and instead to borrow money for tax write offs, that is why we have so many over levegaed companies that are on the brink of collapse. Not eaxctly stabilizing the economy or the millions of jobs they provide.

If you read my previous posts you would know that i think it is distgusting that we tax earned income more than inheirited income. i have been at dinners with people who will all inheirit 20 million plus and had the balls to openly tell them and their parents,that income tax shoudl be 0 and inhierited tax should be 100%. Then men would all be truely created equal.(its an extreme example) I know what earning your money means.

But you are wrong about double taxing dividends. These countries you all praise while bashing ours do not do the same. The fact is America is one of the most aggressive tax system in the world. I will give you an example.

I am a Canadien, British, and American citizen. If I never set foot again in any of these countries, moved to Nepal for the rest of my life, the only country that would demand a % of my Nepalese income is the USA. No taxation without representation? Thats a joke.

[CUBUCK]

Bercause you are rewarded for it.

You make it sound like the government is taking away all of the gains one makes on investments, when nothing can be farther from the truth. There are so many ways to get around capital gains (which is smaller than most people think), that smart investors usually wind up paying NOTHING AT ALL in CGT. Why do you think people have trust funds?? To help their children? HA!! NO to hide from CGT.

They are taking too much. There shouldn't be any tax on dividends considering it was already taxed once at the corporate level. As for CGT the higher the rate the lower the level of investment. Without an incentive to invest business won't take chances on new innovative ideas and become stuck in the status quo

[Cono Este]

The bottom line is, constanly using your extreme examples, "everyone one with money was born with it", everyone who has made money, cheats to keep it", only gives the politicians more reason to fuck the middle class and the working man. That has been the effects of arguements like yours. My concern is not the rich, it is the middle class. Thats what this country was built on. People who rise from lower income to a higher one. The guy who pawns his life for med school or law school and makes a couple of hundred a yr. No one should be taxed at a hiigher % rate than anyone else, it is simply un american. Yes Tipster, please fix the fucking loopholes. Somebody please start enforcing our laws instead of just pursuing high profile offenders to make an example. Build more God damn jails for them.

[MassLiberal]

Where did I say this? you are putting words into my mouth in order to suit your argument. Plus, the middle class are not the people making risky investments in the stock market, they put their money into tax free mutual funds or other safe investments for retirement.

But the problem is, how can we possibly lower taxes now with the insane fiscal situation that the current administration has put us in?? We are now so in debt to the chinese and saudis, that if we do ANYTHING to restructure our tax code, we risk jeapordizing the finincial future of the country.

[CUBUCK]

Where did I say this? you are putting words into my mouth in order to suit your argument. Plus, the middle class are not the people making risky investments in the stock market, they put their money into tax free mutual funds or other safe investments for retirement.

But the problem is, how can we possibly lower taxes now with the insane fiscal situation that the current administration has put us in?? We are now so in debt to the chinese and saudis, that if we do ANYTHING to restructure our tax code, we risk jeapordizing the finincial future of the country.

Not all dividends and Cap gains come from the stock market. Many come from small businesses. When the owners decide to sell their business whether it be a grocery store, ski shop etc they will have to pay cap gains tax on their investment in the store. The amount of tax can act as a deterrent to even get into this situation.

And the answer to how can you cut federal taxes is you slice and dice the federal government and give the power back to the states where it belongs.

[MassLiberal]

That's bullshit, I have never met an Entrepreneur who has not started a business because of the taxes he/she would incur when selling. Nice try.

[Cono Este]

[QUOTE=MassLiberal]Where did I say this? you are putting words into my mouth in order to suit your argument. Plus, the middle class are not the people making risky investments in the stock market, they put their money into tax free mutual funds or other safe investments for retirement.

But the problem is, how can we possibly lower taxes now with the insane fiscal situation that the current administration has put us in?? We are now so in debt to the chinese and saudis, that if we do ANYTHING to restructure our tax code, we risk jeapordizing the finincial future of the country.[/QUOTE




That is a ridiculous generalization. The only explanation for how people financially rise in this country is to take risk. I can tell you, as someone in the financial industry, that the oppositite is true. People who has little savings are much more likely to be 100% invsted in stocks until they have a nest egg worth protecting.

i agree, we are too indebted to the Chinese, but the answer is not give politicians the leverage to tax the working more. Because that is the easiest way to get out of their mistakes. LIke borrowing against social security.

This whole debate is about working people. That is the mistake you make. Wether they make 50 or 500k they still work. Someone who has 500k in taxable income usually earned it, because as Tipster pointed out, the mega rich have loopholes. But a Doctor or small business owner does not.

Having a sliding tax braket that begins rising at 32k is fucking joke. Why should someone who makes 40k paya higher % than someone who make 20k? Because with these brackets far many more people who are simply working hard are paying for this. If you must have a braket, it should not start until six figures.

That is the effect of the latitude you give your politicians, just screw millions of people who are making less than 100k.

[MassLiberal]

That is the effect of the latitude you give your politicians, just screw millions of people who are making less than 100k.

Crazy, I think that we have been talking past each other this entire time. I totally agree with you on most of your points. Just goes to show you that squabbling about the situation does nothing.

Cono Este- so let's move this discussion out of the this situation sucks, blah blah blah, into what are the solutions to the current tax paradigm?

[CUBUCK]

Crazy, I think that we have been talking past each other this entire time. I totally agree with you on most of your points. Just goes to show you that squabbling about the situation does nothing.

Cono Este- so let's move this discussion out of the this situation sucks, blah blah blah, into what are the solutions to the current tax paradigm?

Flat tax 18% across the board

[Cono Este]

Crazy, I think that we have been talking past each other this entire time. I totally agree with you on most of your points. Just goes to show you that squabbling about the situation does nothing.

Cono Este- so let's move this discussion out of the this situation sucks, blah blah blah, into what are the solutions to the current tax paradigm?

The reason i get so pissed is that I do not think that people like yourself realize how your efforts are distorted and wrongly implemented by democrat politicians. I will give you an example.

Prop 13 was a california measure brought by Jerry Brown D, california Govenor in 1978. Property prices were rising too fast at the time so they more or less fixed property taxes at the pruchase price of homes. Plus a 5% hike every yr. So now we have people who paid 200k for a hous in 1978 that in the Bay Area could be worth as much as 5 mil now. And they are paying less property tax than someone who buys a 500k house today. Its a joke, and a good reason why no one ever moves, and property jouse remain so high.

It was a knee jerk reaction to something, that at the time seemed to benefit lower income people but now protects people sitting on millions in property.

repeal it.

[MassLiberal]

I agree, but don't make generalizations about what my beliefs are. You have no idea what my ideals are and to call me misguided is ignorant and patronizing.

[MassLiberal]

I would say that it is no worse on than cutting taxes across the board and then drastically increasing government spending. Destabilizing the value of the dollar, putting our economy at the mercy of foreign powers, and fighting wars without the ability to properly protect our troops.

Now which is worse? People not moving, or the possibility of throwing our economy away?

[Cono Este]

You are right, i should not generalize, i do not know you. But a call sign like MassLiberal generally sparks a knee jerk reaction from me. My bad.

I just think people are so quick to nail all things bad on Bush and republicans, they do not realize the error in their own politics. Their is bad logic made on too many stereotypes on both sides.

I think the rich democrats are as bad as the rich republicans in this country, but they pander to the poor and the minorities, when the truth is they do little for them if not less. That to me is the worse of two evils.

[MassLiberal]

Well, I agree, I chose the name so that people would be thrown off to my political beliefs. In general, I am pretty middle of the road. But lean pretty hard to the left on environmental issues. Fiscally, I'm pretty conservative, I grew up as a republican, until I did some traveling in Latin America and saw first hand the effects of reagan's foreign policy, I realized the fault in a jingoistic world view and swung to the other side.

[CUBUCK]

Well, I agree, I chose the name so that people would be thrown off to my political beliefs.

That's the first thing I think of when registering for a skiing related message board too......

[MassLiberal]

well, I also worked in politics, and at the time, I thought it was clever (it was the election, after all)

[Cono Este]

I am hard right on taxes, economy, and foreigh releations. Middle left on socials and enviormental issues.

Im curious where in SA? I lived in Chile from 81 to 88, thus Cono Este, my favorite Ski run. This is a whole new thread. But while in Chile during those years, i saw most people go from a horse and cart to car, from a dirt floor to proper home. Chile had a double digit growth rate for 12 yrs under Pinochet. I know I will get hammered for this one, and we dont have time for all of it. But being there for so long, and knowing the poor and the rich, and can tell you an overwhelming amount of people consider him to be the George Washington of that Country. And the demcracy and thriving middle class they enjoy today is a direct result of Pinochet.

Go ahead hammer me I expect it, but beware, I am highly informed on this subject.

[MassLiberal]

I am highly informed on that one as well, but I will definitely leave that one to another thread. I lived in Cuernavaca, MX for a year, I was in Chile (Punta Arenas), and my Mother is from Puerto Rico (a skiing Puerto Rican! I know, crazy!) but I have also spent a summer in Peru (Ayacucho, studying Sendero Luminoso, those crazy fucks who almost topled a country).

[Tippster]

Kumbayah, my loooord, KUMBAYAAAAAHHHHH....

The flat tax gets mentioned every now and then, and promptly shot down not because of the middle and lower classes, but because the top 1% actually will have to PAY.

[Cono Este]

I agree tipster. But why is it basically just a propsal by the conservatives then, Steve Forbes for example. Do the democrats really want to shift the tax burden off the middle class? Or is that just smoke and mirrors? That is certainly not an arguemnet that i hear them making.

Funny, a flat tax system is more popular in lliberal european countries, but not here. And in those european countries, mostly eastern and sweden, their flat tax completely removes touble taxation like the dividend tax.

[MassLiberal]

a flat tax over $40k in income might be interesting. But it gets no support because it also does away with all sorts of popular deductions.

[Cyber Cop]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...022801450.html

First-of-Its-Kind Study Cites Impact On Teenage Girls and Poor Women

By Ceci Connolly
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, March 1, 2006; Page A06

At a time when policymakers have made reducing unintended pregnancies a national priority, 33 states have made it more difficult or more expensive for poor women and teenagers to obtain contraceptives and related medical services, according to an analysis released yesterday by the nonpartisan Guttmacher Institute.

From 1994 to 2001, many states cut funds for family planning, enacted laws restricting access to birth control and placed tight controls on sex education, said the institute, a privately funded research group that focuses on sexual health and family issues.

The statewide trends help explain why more than half of the 6 million pregnancies in the United States each year are unintended and offer clues for tackling problems associated with teenage pregnancy and abortion, said researchers who specialize in the field.

"The most powerful and least divisive way to decrease abortion is to reduce unintended pregnancy," said Sarah Brown, director of the nonpartisan National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy. "If we can make progress reducing unintended pregnancy, we can make enormous progress reducing abortion."

The report, the first to measure the impact of state actions on reproductive health care, is based on a comprehensive census by the institute using the most recent available data. Advocates involved in the intense political debate over abortion were reluctant to comment on the findings, but experts on women's health and family planning praised Guttmacher for offering an agenda both sides could support.

"Whether you're pro-choice or pro-life, everyone ought to agree that preventing unintended pregnancies is a good thing to do," said Isabel Sawhill, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. Sawhill, whose research is cited by both conservative and liberal groups, said other factors contribute to unintended pregnancies, including miscommunication between partners, insufficient knowledge about contraceptives and an "it will never happen to me" attitude.

Despite some gains, the United States still lags far behind most industrialized nations in reducing abortion and teenage pregnancy. In 2002, 21 in 1,000 American women age 15 to 44 had an abortion. Although that is the lowest abortion rate since 1974, the decline has stalled, prompting fears that individuals and policymakers have lost focus on the underlying problem of unintended pregnancies, said Guttmacher President Sharon L. Camp.

"Unintended pregnancy in the United States is twice as high as in most of Western Europe," she said in an interview. "As a direct result, abortion rates are twice or three times as high as European countries. There is no reason why abortion rates need to be as high as they are."

The problem is particularly acute for the nation's estimated 17 million adolescent girls and low-income women, because a lack of education and money are often barriers to practicing abstinence or effective birth control.

In 2000, federal health officials set a goal of reducing unintended pregnancies by 40 percent within 10 years. States, through legislative and budgetary decisions, can be major players in that effort, Camp said. California and a few other states have leveraged federal Medicaid money to extend family-planning services to more poor women. For every dime the state puts in, the federal government pays 90 cents.

"This is really a smart move for states to make," Camp said. Yet for every state that has invested in reproductive health care or passed laws permitting pharmacists to dispense emergency contraception without a prescription, Guttmacher found at least another state that moved in the opposite direction.

"It's not only that at least half of the states are not doing many things they could do to reduce unintended pregnancy -- some are making contraception less easy for women and men," Camp said.

The Guttmacher rankings belie conventional political wisdom. California, New York, South Carolina and Alabama have made the greatest strides in helping low-income women receive health care and contraception, despite the fact that the two coastal states are considered "blue" states that lean to the left politically, while the two southern states are deemed "red" for their conservative tilt.

At the same time, states as different as Nebraska, Ohio and Utah were among the worst when it came to providing access to contraceptives for needy women and teenagers, as well as gynecological exams and information on preventing pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases.

States have an incentive for investing in reproductive services, Camp said. Every $1 spent on family planning saves $3 in health care costs related to a pregnancy.

The Guttmacher Institute was founded in 1968 as a "semiautonomous division of Planned Parenthood Federation of America" but now operates independently, according to its Web site. The report and state data can be read at http://www.agi-usa.org/ .

[Cyber Cop]

A 20-year-old legal fight over protests outside abortion clinics ended Tuesday with the Supreme Court ruling that federal extortion and racketeering laws cannot be used against demonstrators.

the full story... http://www.forbes.com/business/busin...ap2559931.html