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.
No they didnt.. they couldnt provide one single example as to how someone who is rich, and wants to make more money, can do so without putting money into the economy.
maybe you can list me one.. I'll wait..
Buying Bitcoins
Buying Gold
Using Hedges and other financial spreads to make the "crumbs"- from the math and super-computers. Crumbs that, in the end, come from you and I.
It's all a matter of degree. I own a lot of Apple Stock yet they just hold "my" money in accounts at zero or small interest rates. They issue bonds for money they need....so my money in Apple isn't "in the economy" except on a balance sheet.
Speculation - of all sorts, including a lot of development, fools us into thinking we are putting money into "the economy" whereas the real truth is that the person who invests makes more money and the poor sap taxpayers (schools, etc. future debt) end up on the negative side of the equation.
You make it sound like all money made is "good money". In that case, the opiate biz is perhaps the ultimate example. Millions of people are turning their money into "more" money. But do you really suggest that the money "put into the economy" in deaths, suffering, lost productivity, etc. is a "benefit"??
There is good money and bad money. That is, there are efficient investments and things of value - and there are many things which are not. I'd even argue that much of our War machine is really "spending money to make things...and major profits...and then dumping those things over a cliff (blowing them up, etc.) so we can make more".
It doesn't take an economist to understand that - in the end - economies based on many of these things have little chance of being successful in the longer term.
Using Hedges and other financial spreads to make the "crumbs"- from the math and super-computers. Crumbs that, in the end, come from you and I.
It's all a matter of degree. I own a lot of Apple Stock yet they just hold "my" money in accounts at zero or small interest rates. They issue bonds for money they need....so my money in Apple isn't "in the economy" except on a balance sheet.
Speculation - of all sorts, including a lot of development, fools us into thinking we are putting money into "the economy" whereas the real truth is that the person who invests makes more money and the poor sap taxpayers (schools, etc. future debt) end up on the negative side of the equation.
You make it sound like all money made is "good money". In that case, the opiate biz is perhaps the ultimate example. Millions of people are turning their money into "more" money. But do you really suggest that the money "put into the economy" in deaths, suffering, lost productivity, etc. is a "benefit"??
There is good money and bad money. That is, there are efficient investments and things of value - and there are many things which are not. I'd even argue that much of our War machine is really "spending money to make things...and major profits...and then dumping those things over a cliff (blowing them up, etc.) so we can make more".
It doesn't take an economist to understand that - in the end - economies based on many of these things have little chance of being successful in the longer term.
Every single one of your examples requires a seller to be selling in order for them to be buying, therefore the money enters the economy.
The over 65 crowd is really taking it in the A$$..........I got a double exemption for being over 65....Standard deduction of 12,700 plus 3 exemptions for me and wife was 12,075.........so I'm losing.
so a retired married couple would have had 16,200 plus standard of 12700 that equals 28,900....... now its replaced with just 24,000.
I'm retired too, and I figure it will cost us around $2,000 but it's going to be even worse for a lady who lives near me, she's retired and has custody of three of her grandchildren, in this tax plan she will lose the $4050 exemption for each of those kids and she won't get the child tax credit either because she doesn't have earned income, just a pension and SS.
Location: Live:Downtown Phoenix, AZ/Work:Greater Los Angeles, CA
27,606 posts, read 14,619,501 times
Reputation: 9169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultrarunner
California is a big State... now if you zero in on areas with high cost real estate it will almost always have one of two factors... high paying jobs or unparalleled natural beauty like coastal area.
I was not old enough to have voted for Prop 13 but and thankful each and every day for those that did...
Prop 13 interferes with the free market, and gives people a perverse incentive to not sell, keeping turnover property off the market indefinitely
lines 7-36 are all your incomes...wages...alimony etc
line 37 end side one of the form...it is you total adjusted gross income
lines 40-43 are the:
ln40 std or itemized deduction
line 41 ..line 38 minus line 40
line 42...your personal exemptions (4k x total in household)
line 43...line 41 minus line 42...this is your taxable income
line 44 see tax table ..... this is the tax owed (based on the taxable income) not based on what you already paid into the system
Yeah, that's all good (and very simple).
Question: did you acknowledge your error about the rates - there is no 0% bracket on taxable income in the current proposal.
Current law: $180 on the first $18k (10% bracket); 8550 on the second $57k (15% bracket);...2525 on the remaining $10k (25% bracket)----$11255 in federal taxes
there is NO 0% currently... for a married jointly the FIRST 18k...10%...next income over 18k through 75,900.............15%....the next income OVER 75.9k through 153k...25%
current brackets
\married
income 0-18,650..........10%
18,650-75,900.............15%
75,900-153,100...........25%
153,100-233,350.........28%
233,350- 416,700......33%
416,700-470,700.......35%
470,700+..................39.6%
now the line up there is based on just doing the percentage numbers...lets see what the ACTUAL IRS and the instructions for the 1040 say........
1040 line 43 TAXABLE INCOME...line 43 is AFTER deductions
If line 43 (taxable income) is—85,100....married jointly TAX IS 12,824
that is CURRENT (2016 year we just did 7 months ago)
under the bill in congress
Proposed law: 90,000 taxable income....yep they will have 5k more in '''taxable income"'...but it will be taxed at a lower rate Proposed law: first 24k(of taxable income) not taxed....24k through 90k 12%...so 66k taxed at 12%.....7920.....total tax owed....7920
a SAVINGS of 4800...4800 dollars less in taxes for the new proposal
its real PROVABLE MATH
That is total nonsense, I did the math for you, I used $85,000 as total income and as taxable income just for simplicity, go take another look at the link that I provided for you. No one will save $4800 period. That's not even what Trump is actually claiming his position is that because of this huuuge stimulus to the economy wages will increase, as far as I know even he isn't stupid enough to claim that middle class taxes will be lowered by $4,000. Married couples who currently take the standard deduction will save at most $1500. People who now itemize and deduct student loan interest or medical expenses AND have 3 or more kids will take it in the shorts.
So what happens when in three years, the middle class are no better off and some are worse off, corporations are paying little to no taxes and our deficit BALLOONS? Ny prediction is Republicans will once again scream about the deficit and say we need to cut back entitlements like Medicare and Social Security. We have gone in this circle multiple times and it always turns out the same. The rich get a huge tax cut, the rest get nothing and the GOP only cares about the deficit when they aren't in the White House.
So what happens when in three years, the middle class are no better off and some are worse off, corporations are paying little to no taxes and our deficit BALLOONS? Ny prediction is Republicans will once again scream about the deficit and say we need to cut back entitlements like Medicare and Social Security. We have gone in this circle multiple times and it always turns out the same. The rich get a huge tax cut, the rest get nothing and the GOP only cares about the deficit when they aren't in the White House.
doom gloom, the world will end, the seas will flood the cities, fire will be out of control, waters will become so contaminated that it'll be undrinkable..
oooh no.. what are we gonna do now.. run, run for your lives!!!!
doom gloom, the world will end, the seas will flood the cities, fire will be out of control, waters will become so contaminated that it'll be undrinkable..
oooh no.. what are we gonna do now.. run, run for your lives!!!!
No, it's simply very predictable. How many times did we hear the absolute SCREAMING of the GOP regarding the deficit. Now they want a tax plan that grows the deficit over a trillion dollars and they are all just fine with it. Will jobs comes flooding back? No. It's like tort reform. Most states already have tort reform. Did insurance costs decrease? No. They kept the money as profit. This will turn out exactly the same.
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.
