How Low Can It Go?

A wise edit.
For sure.

Seriously, that's the best you guys got? The rich "create jobs" and "make people less rich?" I guess returning the capital gains tax to the same level as Reagan and restoring the tax bracket to the same state as Clinton is a bad idea. If the economy recovers in two years will you be for these tax hikes?

I am not ignoring your point SS33, I see your hand and I believe it's being played two years too soon. Your take is wanting and your cards leave much to be desired my friend, it's time to fold and watch the game.

Seriously, that's the best you guys got? The rich "create jobs" and "make people less rich?" I guess returning the capital gains tax to the same level as Reagan and restoring the tax bracket to the same state as Clinton is a bad idea.

I am not ignoring your point SS33, I see your hand and I believe it's being played two years too soon. Your take is wanting and your cards leave much to be desired my friend, it's time to fold and watch the game.

How does making people less rich help our economy. At any level. Taking money from consumers, be they rich or poor is bad for our econmoy. And anyways we're talking about the stock market here. People are crapping themselves right now over the market. People are pulling out, driving prices down, killing wealth because they fear what is going down in DC. Is it rational? I don't know but it is what is happening.

Please explain how top income earners escape higher taxes by taking all their income as capital gains?

Saden I'd still like you to explain this.

How does making people less rich help our economy. At any level. Taking money from consumers, be they rich or poor is bad for our econmoy. And anyways we're talking about the stock market here. People are crapping themselves right now over the market. People are pulling out, driving prices down, killing wealth because they fear what is going down in DC. Is it rational? I don't know but it is what is happening.

The premise of your argument is that taxes make people less rich which is bad for our economy. My question is at what threshold of taxation do we reach an equilibrium? Not too much taxes to be harmful to our economy and not too little to be beneficial to our economy?

Saden I'd still like you to explain this.

He's a liberal working for a liberal paper but he explains the game (http://select.nytimes.com/2007/07/13/opinion/13krugman.html?_r=1) very well. BTW the game isn't limited to just hedge fund managers either. Those CEOs paying themselves $1 a year mostly pay 15% tax rate.

He's a liberal working for a liberal paper but he explains the game (http://select.nytimes.com/2007/07/13/opinion/13krugman.html?_r=1) very well. BTW the game isn't limited to just hedge fund managers either. Those CEOs paying themselves $1 a year mostly pay 15% tax rate.

His article never mentioned CEO's and paying them self a $1 and where is that now coming from because last time it was they are paid too much. The article pointed to hedge fund mgrs. who use a loopole (spelling?) to get around paying taxes as ordinary income. Why not just close the loopole to stop that and leave the capital gains tax alone. That way both sides get what they want.

Seriously, that's the best you guys got? The rich "create jobs" and "make people less rich?" I guess returning the capital gains tax to the same level as Reagan and restoring the tax bracket to the same state as Clinton is a bad idea. If the economy recovers in two years will you be for these tax hikes?Right now it's definitely a bad idea. I've got no problem to return the tax code to the 1986 Tax Reform Act once the economy is stabilized and the markets rebound. I think President Obama should look back at Reagan's strategies and policies and how he pulled us out of the Carter debacle in the 70s. If he wants to be successful, he must buck his party line and be fiscally conservative. If he wants to be socially liberal, I couldn't care less, we must put the country back on solid financial ground not more than double the national debt in ten years.

I am not ignoring your point SS33, I see your hand and I believe it's being played two years too soon. Your take is wanting and your cards leave much to be desired my friend, it's time to fold and watch the game.I pray you're right, but historical evidence shows my cards to be a bit stronger than you believe. I know we are polar opposites politically, however I can't see how you can support budget projections from the Obama administration that will double the national debt. How, four or eight years from now, will this have a positive outcome? I can't see it.

Haha, yeah this is Obama's fault. Nevermind the fact the entire global economy is in a tailspin and every country's stock market is bottoming out. I guess that's Obama's fault too.

Interesting to see that those who bristled when the left blamed Bush for everything are turning around and doing the same thing to our current president.

His article never mentioned CEO's and paying them self a $1 and where is that now coming from because last time it was they are paid too much. The article pointed to hedge fund mgrs. who use a loopole (spelling?) to get around paying taxes as ordinary income. Why not just close the loopole to stop that and leave the capital gains tax alone. That way both sides get what they want.

He doesn't mention it but people are playing games like that. Typically CEOs pay themselves a decent salary but they turn around and get good chunk of pay via incentive based stock options (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incentive_stock_option) to pay less effective tax rate. Fortunately these cheats are impeded by AMT (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_Minimum_Tax).