Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
....I am not the least bit thrilled in any of our candidate choices for President. I was a strong supporter of Herman Cain, but we all know the end to that story.
However, I will vote for whomever runs against Obama for one single, solitary reason, which is the capital gains tax. If Obama is re-elected and the capital gains tax is raised from 15% to the top percentage bracket, it will simply crush our economy further.
Capital gains from stock dividends are the only income I have had for the past 4 years while trying to turn my construction company around. If the capital gains tax is raised, not only it will make it very diificult to support my family, but using those gains to keep my business open and keep people working will be impossible.
Many of you probably don't understand it, but an increase to the capital gains tax will deter investment in business, and will be a major setback to business owners everywhere who are the backbone of the economy. It will cost so many jobs it will most likely lead to a severe recession. Even if you are an Obama supporter, I urge you to study up on the capital gains tax, and at least voice your opposition to raising the capital gains tax to your Democratic Senators and Representatives. That's all I am asking.
If you supported Herman Cain you must be rich. His tax plan increased taxes on the Lower and Middle class.
I agree with you about the capital gains tax. Clinton lowered it and that helped.
You do however miss the important part and that is we need drastic spending cuts. No candidate has offered to cut government in a budget except Ron Paul.
Lowering ones taxes by lowering their taxable income is not what I consider a tax cut.
Take 2002-2006 as an example. I grossed over $2 million those years, and was paying about $100k per quarter in estimated taxes. (That's per quarter, not per year!)
Take 2009-2012 as another example. I've lost over $500,000 and paid no taxes at all, due to the economy.
So sure, I got a huge tax cut simply by becoming poor. I'd much prefer to go back to paying "my fair share" but with the current Administration there is no confidence in the private business sector at all, and growth will be stifled until they are out, whether that's 2012 or 2016.
So while their may be some who benefit from Obama's policies, I would argue that the majority of Americans will not.
In our country, the rich are demonized as evil, greedy and whatnot, which is at it's core, sending a message to our youth that success is something to be penalized, not rewarded. Hence the Occupy movement.
When does it end? When do we go back to being a country that rewards the entrepenuerial spirit and that teaches that success is not something to be despised? That is why Obama is not good for this country, he plays the class envy card, and he plays it well, but I personally find it disgusting and extremely unpatriotic.
BS...you don't seem to understand it....that money helps nobody but the guy getting the tax break...step away from your TV,turn the FOX off and go for a nice calming walk.
You sir, with all due respect, are one of the millions of clueless Americans that the government loves to have in its back pocket for elections. Unless you've ever owned a business, been responsible for employees and their welfare, and have had to deal with all the beauracracy that comes from owning a business, you have no credible basis for your statement whatsoever. I personally don't have time to watch very much, and my arguments and statements are made from my own personal life experience, and if you don't have those same experiences, too bad for you. Keep your head in the sand and buy in to the class envy thing and jump up and down for joy each year when you get your measly little refund check from the IRS.
What you and a few others on this board have failed (or denied) to understand, is that the tax breaks are simply the government letting you keep just a little more of your own money, money that you earned, not them. You're post ranks as the most ignorant on this board, as my "tax breaks" (my own money), allowed my to keep many employees on the payroll far longer than I could have, while they continued to have health, dental and all that good stuff for their spouses and kids. When it was getting really bad, I wrote them letter of recommendation and encourage them to try and find full time work and did everything I could to help them get by.
Not only that, I have already been taxed at over 35% on that money to begin with.
The financial ignorance in this country is beyond overwhelming, and you sir are a classic example of this, and a big part of the problem due to your own lack of knowledge.
If you had a better grasp of how all this worked, you'd be able to make a point of rebuttle with some clarity. As it stands, you're just another pawn in the politcal class envy war looking for a fight with someone who made wiser financial decisions in life than yourself. Don't blame the wealthy for your lack of motivation to educate yourself. Come back and debate when you have some sort of clue about, well, anything at all really.
If you supported Herman Cain you must be rich. His tax plan increased taxes on the Lower and Middle class.
I agree with you about the capital gains tax. Clinton lowered it and that helped.
You do however miss the important part and that is we need drastic spending cuts. No candidate has offered to cut government in a budget except Ron Paul.
I was rich, and I am not one bit ashamed of it. I was in the 1%, and I was not born into it, I worked my ass off for it. I also shared it, lavishly with my family, friends and employees, as well as many, many community charities.
Now I am not rich. I would consider myself lower/middle class, although my income level now is defined by the government as "poverty level." With where I am at now, it would be in my "current" best interest to vote for Obama, since he'll make things all better for me right? Wrong. I have every intention of working my way back to as close to the level I was at before. Will I get there? Maybe, maybe not, but I am not going to sit back and let Obama "take care of me."
You're a Paulbot, I get it. And don't get me wrong, Ron Paul has very great ideas, and I agree 110% that spending needs to be cut drastically. But to avoid the reality that Ron Paul has no chance of winning a Presidential election makes you appear as brain washed as the Obama supporters. I don't think about just the here and now, and what is in it for me. I think about what lies ahead for my kids and who can best take the country in that direction. Paul loses me with his wacked out foreign policy that would knock the US into becoming basically a third world country. Outside of that, he's got the best ideas of any of the candidates.
Why would you say that? He may not have had a storng organization, but look where he started? He was serious, and yes, he wanted to sell his book, is there anything wrong with either of these things?
Some women, mose probably set ups, decided to make sure he didn't go any further, so they jumped in, maybe legit, maybe not, we sill never know. End of story.
BTW, I was not a supporter of his, I still think you are off base. He did have ideas, give him credit for that and he was the first candidate to come forward with them...
Why do I get the idea you wouldn't support any Republican?
Nita
Because that are the Anti-party, anti-black, anti-muslim, anti-middleclass, anti-poor, anti-woman, anti-common sense
I was rich, and I am not one bit ashamed of it. I was in the 1%, and I was not born into it, I worked my ass off for it. I also shared it, lavishly with my family, friends and employees, as well as many, many community charities.
Now I am not rich. I would consider myself lower/middle class, although my income level now is defined by the government as "poverty level." With where I am at now, it would be in my "current" best interest to vote for Obama, since he'll make things all better for me right? Wrong. I have every intention of working my way back to as close to the level I was at before. Will I get there? Maybe, maybe not, but I am not going to sit back and let Obama "take care of me."
You're a Paulbot, I get it. And don't get me wrong, Ron Paul has very great ideas, and I agree 110% that spending needs to be cut drastically. But to avoid the reality that Ron Paul has no chance of winning a Presidential election makes you appear as brain washed as the Obama supporters. I don't think about just the here and now, and what is in it for me. I think about what lies ahead for my kids and who can best take the country in that direction. Paul loses me with his wacked out foreign policy that would knock the US into becoming basically a third world country. Outside of that, he's got the best ideas of any of the candidates.
Truthfully, the republicans won't help you either. they are only interested in CURRENT 1% not past ones.
Sorry, it IS their money to begin with, it's called TAXES. YOU are responsible for your share, just like rest of us. Get used to it. Everyone has to pay it.
If you don't use roads, don't use highways, don't use street lights, don't mail letters, don't go to parks, don't use public trash cans, don't use public restrooms, did not go to pubic schools, will not use the police, will not call the fire dept even if your house is burning down and will clean out the mess afterwards out of your own pocket; in other words, if you just hole up in your own house and never ever goes outside nor rely on anyone to bring you things, then perhaps I may consider you a unique case that don't warrant paying taxes. Until then, pay your share.
.
I do pay my share...and then some. And its that "and then some" part that I find repulsive. I find it horrifying that the government NEEDS about 30% of MY income (yes it is ALL mine because I work for it every day) to run a DEFICIT. Once they start spending it responsibly then I wont mind so much. The money ALWAYS belongs to you since you worked to earn it, and instead of just handing it over because you feel obligated, we should be doing a heck of a lot more to make sure it is being used responsibly, instead of being used as a carrot to waive over the heads of potential voters to try and sway their opinions.
Sorry, it IS their money to begin with, it's called TAXES. YOU are responsible for your share, just like rest of us. Get used to it. Everyone has to pay it.
If you don't use roads, don't use highways, don't use street lights, don't mail letters, don't go to parks, don't use public trash cans, don't use public restrooms, did not go to pubic schools, will not use the police, will not call the fire dept even if your house is burning down and will clean out the mess afterwards out of your own pocket; in other words, if you just hole up in your own house and never ever goes outside nor rely on anyone to bring you things, then perhaps I may consider you a unique case that don't warrant paying taxes. Until then, pay your share.
.
And that, my friend, is the real meat of the debate. What is anyone's "fair share?"
10%? 20% 50% 80%
At the peak I was paying 35.9% in income tax, and another 20% in in capital gains on money I'd already paid taxes on. That comes to 55.9%, so does that qualify as my fair share? It's over half of what I earned.
Maybe that should be the real debate, what is your "fair share."
Yes, everyone should pay taxes. Under the current system we have, over half the population does not pay any income taxes at all. Explain to me, anyone, where the fairness is in that? Then explain to me how a system of this nature can even continue to exist?
Truthfully, the republicans won't help you either. they are only interested in CURRENT 1% not past ones.
There may be some truth to that, but even so, I'm interested in who will allow myself, as well as anyone else with the motiviation and spirit to succeed, the best chance at reaching those goals.
If you don't have goals, motivation, no real desire to achieve any form success in life beyond what the government will allow you to have, then Obama is definitely your guy.
During Clinton the capital gains tax was at 20%, so your assertion that it would wreck the economy is a load of BS
No, it's not a "load of BS" at all. During the Clinton years, income levels were higher as a percentage of expenses, unemployment was far lower, and people weren't hanging on by a thread like they are today. Many, many business owners like myself are doing just that, hanging by a thread and they are doing so with the capital gains from their investments they made when times were better.
While a 5% increase doesn't sound like much to you, it effects millions of not only business owners, but retired people as well who are, as we know, consumers. Their only income is often capital gains from the IRA's, 401k's and other investment vehicles that they contributed to over the years.
Funny how the government will downplay the effects of a 5% increase in capital gains tax, but make a HUGE deal out of a 1/10 of a 1% increase in the unemployment numbers.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
