http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2010/02/17/a-look-at-the-tax-returns-of-the-top-400-taxpayers/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Nothing like a billionaire paying 16.6% tax when I pay far more than that. Seems fair to me... Just more proof that the tax system was set up by the rich for the rich.

2/21/2010 1:45:30 PM

lmfao

2/21/2010 1:48:59 PM

But I thought this is what you wanted? Lower taxes on the rich so they'll create jobs.

2/21/2010 1:55:49 PM

really? you are in favour of a regressive tax system?

2/21/2010 1:56:50 PM

You're not in favor of lower taxes on the rich?

2/21/2010 1:59:11 PM

I'm not in favour of the rich paying a LOWER PERCENTAGE of their income than the average american, no. However, that's not what you are asking. You are purposefully asking a loaded question. I don't think people should pay 50% of their income to the gov't for ANY reason. So, in that respect, yes, I'm for lower taxes "on the rich." But not "lower taxes than any one else pays." Quit being a douchebag

2/21/2010 2:02:26 PM

You telling anyone to quit being a douchebag is fucking hilarious. HI LARRY US

Quote :

"I'm not in favour of the rich paying a LOWER PERCENTAGE of their income than the average american, no"

Why not? They are the ones that go out and take the risk and create jobs for the rest of us. Why do you have a problem with this? We should consider their lower tax rate a benefit for taking risk. Since the rest of us don't do that, we have to pay more...though not this absurd 50% level you're talking about.

2/21/2010 2:06:44 PM

Quote :

"Who says we need tax reform"

Well I'm sure Obama would say it, but then you would respond with "MORE TAXES RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE"

2/21/2010 2:20:34 PM

Quote :

"But I thought this is what you wanted? Lower taxes on the rich so they'll create jobs. "

2/21/2010 2:31:30 PM

Yeah, aaronburro making this thread is a bit off.

How are these guys not paying the % that they ideally should? I thought capital gains was somewhere near 35%?

2/21/2010 2:40:58 PM

yes. clearly what I want is for people who make billions of dollars a year to pay less than every one else. you got me

yes. capital gains is at 35%. and these guys are paying 16.6%. how is that "a bit off"

[Edited on February 21, 2010 at 2:41 PM. Reason : ]

2/21/2010 2:41:05 PM

Quote :

"capital gains is at 35%. "

wat?

2/21/2010 4:27:07 PM

taxing income is retarded. Property taxes are the way to go.

2/21/2010 4:53:22 PM

very few investments would garner a 35% capital gains tax.

[Edited on February 21, 2010 at 5:01 PM. Reason : .]

2/21/2010 4:58:10 PM

Quote :

"taxing income is retarded. Property taxes are the way to go."

My problem with this would be taxing to death non-profit organizations that buy land for conservation purposes to protect it from development. If there was something in place to make them tax exempt, however, then I could get on board.

2/21/2010 5:06:57 PM

Then non-profits would just become tax dodges (not that they aren't now). Everyone would be affected equally, but as land is developed it becomes more valuable. That means people who buy it for conservation would pay less than developers would pay, and at the same time it discourages development without clear benefit.

2/21/2010 5:27:29 PM

Quote :

"yes. clearly what I want is for people who make billions of dollars a year to pay less than every one else. you got me "

I love how burro’s argument in this thread is 180-degrees from his argument in this thread:
http://www.thewolfweb.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=546642&page=1#12235122

Quote :

"If a guy can impose the financial responsibility on himself in order to live off of the capital gains, then good for him! But you know that won't happen enough to matter."

Quote :

"About 81.3% of the income of the top 400 households came in the form of capital gains, dividends or interest, the IRS data show."

2/21/2010 5:27:30 PM

two different arguments. nice try, though, moron

2/21/2010 5:51:26 PM

Quote :

"Property taxes are the way to go."

Property is a great way to extend money supply, taxing it further would just push it's value below fair market price. Not to mention the fact that property taxes tend to be regressive.

2/21/2010 5:54:44 PM

Quote :

"My problem with this would be taxing to death non-profit organizations that buy land for conservation purposes to protect it from development. If there was something in place to make them tax exempt, however, then I could get on board."

Shaggy already made the point that non-profits exist only to dodge taxes, but there's more to it than that. Why should someone that's going to buy land and just let it sit there pay less (in terms of property tax) than the guy that will run a business on that land, employing dozens or hundreds of people? Why do we punish the activities that allow the economy to grow in a meaningful way?

2/21/2010 5:57:26 PM

Undeveloped land doesn't "just sit there". It often provides legitimate and crucial habitat to other inhabitants of the earth that are already being marginalized by humans.

2/21/2010 6:09:50 PM

oh, here we go again... THAT POOR RANDOM BEETLE

2/21/2010 6:11:45 PM

Quote :

"Undeveloped land doesn't "just sit there". It often provides legitimate and crucial habitat to other inhabitants of the earth that are already being marginalized by humans."

Fine, then don't tax it. I'd be alright with that. I understand the value of buying up land with the intention of not developing it. My question is why, when you start using the land in a productive manner, the government becomes entitled to a huge cut of the value.

2/21/2010 6:23:19 PM

I agree.

Quote :

"oh, here we go again... THAT POOR RANDOM BEETLE"

Your attempt to trivialize the issue is not amusing.

2/21/2010 6:49:41 PM

your attempt to make a fucking beetle important is not amusing

2/21/2010 6:56:34 PM

Who first mentioned beetles? Oh that's right, you did. Do you have a thing against beetles?

2/21/2010 7:01:17 PM

you mentioned the poor inhabitants that have nowhere to live. I just mentioned a random species

2/21/2010 7:05:50 PM

And native species not having a place to live isn't a problem to you?

2/21/2010 7:09:14 PM

Quote :

"How are these guys not paying the % that they ideally should? I thought capital gains was somewhere near 35%?"

Dividends and long-term (held >1 year) capital gains are 15%. Short term capital gains are taxed at your nominal tax rate (i.e., the same amount that any other additional income would be taxed at...25%, 28%, more if you have a bigger income).

Once you're a billionaire, earned income is generally a comparatively small portion of your total income. Money made from investments (interest, dividends, capital gains) is a much greater percentage, and if you play your cards right (dividends, long-term holdings, tax-free bonds, etc), you can keep the tax impact lower.

Warren Buffett has remarked that he pays less in taxes (by percentage) than his secretary does.

2/21/2010 7:09:39 PM

^^ if it already has plenty of space to live, no, it's not a concern to me. more often than not, though, some whiney bitch like you comes in and tries to claim that this is the rare 5403 Ropley Drive Beetle, which is absolute bullshit. If an animal has become so limited that it only lives at one address, chances are it was already on the out, and humans probably had nothing to do with it.

[Edited on February 21, 2010 at 7:26 PM. Reason : ]

2/21/2010 7:24:55 PM

I love when idiots with no awareness of how the world works occasionally have a moment of clarity or insight and realize their worldview makes no sense. 2009 may have been a shitty year otherwise but I'm not sure it could be beat in terms of the masses of faux-news watching "conservative" voters realizing that the club-for-growth GOP establishment may not have their best interests in mind.

"We need more tax cuts for the rich!"
"Wait a minute I'm not rich..."
"I've been unemployed for 2 years..."
"ummmm....."

Then we get threads like this. Hey burro, the long term capital gains tax rate was recently reduced to 15%, do you want to take a guess who did that? I'll give you a hint, his name begins with B and ends with ush.

2/21/2010 7:26:28 PM

whoever said that I love dubya?

2/21/2010 7:28:31 PM

I'll take your response as an acknowledgment that your economic policy views may lie on the liberal end of the political spectrum.

2/21/2010 7:40:41 PM

I love these kind of threads. Nothing like a little self pwnt on a Sunday afternoon.

2/21/2010 8:55:11 PM

Wow, are so many people really so blinded by partisan hate that they can't possibly conceive of someone being upset that a rich person pays less in taxes than they do, yet at the same time doesn't think the solution is raising the tax rates on the rich? Really is it so hard to imagine that someone could want taxes lower across the board?

2/21/2010 9:07:15 PM

Clearly, this is what he meant when he posted this

Quote :

"was set up by the rich for the rich"

Sounds like some populist rhetoric to me.

2/21/2010 9:27:10 PM

not at all populist. probably coming more from the far-right than anything else.

2/21/2010 9:39:28 PM

Those on the far right don't like the rich either?

2/21/2010 9:53:27 PM

Quote :

"I'll take your response as an acknowledgment that your economic policy views may lie on the liberal end of the political spectrum."

uhh, what? GWB was hardly a fiscal conservative.



and income tax rates on the "rich" wouldn't do much to a billionaire who largely derives his income from sources other than a salary.

on the other hand, raising the long-term capital gains tax rate would impact him, but it would also screw everyone.

[Edited on February 21, 2010 at 10:00 PM. Reason : and America certainly doesn't need any disincentives to save/invest]

2/21/2010 10:00:19 PM

Just a guess as to why this number may be so strangely low, the market crash probably caused capital gains to be very low.

2/21/2010 10:06:30 PM

^^ no, those on the far right don't like people with power, in general.
^ top 400, Kris. If somebody was killed by the market crash, he probably wouldn't be in the top 400. and even if he were, it wouldn't affect his tax rate.

2/21/2010 11:46:31 PM

Quote :

"I love when idiots with no awareness of how the world works occasionally have a moment of clarity or insight and realize their worldview makes no sense. 2009 may have been a shitty year otherwise but I'm not sure it could be beat in terms of the masses of faux-news watching "conservative" voters realizing that the club-for-growth GOP establishment may not have their best interests in mind. "We need more tax cuts for the rich!" "Wait a minute I'm not rich..." "I've been unemployed for 2 years..." "ummmm....." Then we get threads like this. Hey burro, the long term capital gains tax rate was recently reduced to 15%, do you want to take a guess who did that? I'll give you a hint, his name begins with B and ends with ush. "

It's funny when people trip over reality.

If only it happened more often...

Quote :

"Wow, are so many people really so blinded by partisan hate that they can't possibly conceive of someone being upset that a rich person pays less in taxes than they do, yet at the same time doesn't think the solution is raising the tax rates on the rich? Really is it so hard to imagine that someone could want taxes lower across the board? "

If he truly understood what his position was, he shouldn't be upset.

In the thread i linked to from awhile ago, burro was saying that he didn't care if a rich person paid less taxes if they could figure out how, which is the logical extension of his overall position.

And now he is bitching about what he previously advocated.

[Edited on February 21, 2010 at 11:57 PM. Reason : ]

2/21/2010 11:52:30 PM

wow, way to build a fantastic strawman. good work

2/22/2010 12:04:23 AM

Quote :

"If somebody was killed by the market crash, he probably wouldn't be in the top 400. and even if he were, it wouldn't affect his tax rate."

1. It wasn't just stocks, properties suffered as well as businesses.
2. The crash hurt everyone.
3. You don't have to be "killed", if you didn't make any capital gains then you don't have to pay taxes on them.

2/22/2010 12:30:32 AM

Quote :

"Nothing like a billionaire paying 16.6% tax when I pay far more than that. Seems fair to me... Just more proof that the tax system was set up by the rich for the rich."

Not exactly. It was set up for the politically connected, which in most cases turn out to be rich people. But we have millionaires we are paying quite a bit more than 35%. What we need is equality in the tax code, not just lower taxes on the non-rich. Eliminate most forms of tax deduction, such as tax-free government bonds, and people's adherence to their tax bracket will improve remarkably. We could probably reduce tax rates while collecting a similar amount in taxes.

[Edited on February 22, 2010 at 4:24 AM. Reason : .,.]

2/22/2010 4:24:20 AM

or a consumption tax

then it doesn't matter where the income is coming from

2/22/2010 9:08:51 AM

Quote :

"Property is a great way to extend money supply, taxing it further would just push it's value below fair market price. Not to mention the fact that property taxes tend to be regressive. "

Property values are currently inflated way over where they should be thanks to piss poor management of the fed. Its why we ended up in a recession. Replacing the income tax with a property tax puts more income in people's pockets, which they will then have to spend on their property taxes. If their property has actual value (its somewhere someone actually would want to live/run a business), then their property taxes would be about the same as what they paid in income. Anyone who overpaid will still be paying the same relative ammount in property taxes that they paid in income, the only difference is over time their property will decrease in value until someone is willing to buy it. It eliminates the evil speculators everyone was whining about, and at the same time provides a real out for someone who made a bad purchase. Right now with income tax, if you overpaid for your house you're still paying local property taxes for more than its worth, and no one wants to buy it anyway. Property taxes would reveal real property values, instead of the overinflated prices from the boom we still have today.

Property taxes are by far the most progressive, this is not a sales tax, nor does it have to be a flat tax. Poor people who dont pay income taxes now dont own property of any taxable value. At the same time, rich folks who find it real easy to hide their income, will have no way to hide what they spend it on.

2/22/2010 10:23:01 AM

What sorts of property would we tax?

2/22/2010 10:25:24 AM

fair tax is fair.

2/22/2010 10:27:04 AM

Well then let me introduce my new plan, called the Totally Awesome Tax.

2/22/2010 10:28:37 AM