|
|
Post by MO on Sept 30, 2004 15:17:29 GMT -5
What is with starting every sentence with Robrains? Who is that? My first name is Rob as per listed in my post if you had bothered to read them -- which you apparently didn't. Also, my userID is Robains not Robrains. Car sales profits can and do happen all the time (especially classic/collector cars), but the point was sales of property/assets go on all the time (and are taxed with the exception of homes), whether you choose to report it or not to the IRS is NOT the issue. If you want to risk an audit (and/or fraud) that is up to you and really has no significance in this thread (which apparently you haven't read from the beginning). The only joke I see is your response. The purpose (once again) of this thread is the INCONSISTANT application of tax laws that are fundamentally unfair. They are inconsistent but I don't believe they are unfair. I have heard the libertarian types whine and moan about the child tax credit as well. The only way they would be unfair is if they rewarded behaviors that were not good for society. Singles are taxed at a higher rate and not using public education system and resources for children. Is it really not fair? Most people have kids at some point and so collect the tax benefits. Home ownership is at an all time high in this country, and it produces better, less transient neighborhoods with less crime and more pride. I believe the government has a responsibility to make value judgments on the behaviors that seem to be the best for the culture, past, present and future. That being said, there is no way to avoid value judgments. Like the Rush song says, "If you choose not to decide you still have made a choice." There is really no way to be value neutral. |
|
|
|
Post by robains on Sept 30, 2004 15:50:00 GMT -5
Ok so lets explore your logic. If those folks that currently do NOT have kids decide to follow your logic -- cause this is "good for society". What do you think would happen to a very huge tax revenue stream being extorted out of those folks that did NOT have kids?
I have a pretty good idea and I'm sure you do, the government will be in serious trouble and the tax benefits will have to be changed because the government can't operate without that tax revenue.
So, we now have a government not offering those tax benefits any more because they can't afford to. How does your "Good for society" statement stand now?
The government is banking on the numbers -- these numbers come from the taxes we all file every year. That data is used to help the government adjust and if these numbers suddenly change and a revenue sources decreases significantly then bingo, tax law changes.
So point being, unfair tax benefits are being created/removed all the time and the Home sales is just yet another example of a tax benefits that should be made consistant and fair. It currently is NOT.
|
|
|
|
Post by MO on Sept 30, 2004 17:19:58 GMT -5
Are you nuts? Most people have kids at some point. They don't do it for the tax deduction which has been around for decades.
Rest your pretty little head. The government is getting plenty of our money without destrying the real estate industry.
|
|
|
|
Post by americanfirst on Sept 30, 2004 21:49:08 GMT -5
I apologize Rob for mispelling your user ID I did not do it on purpose but once I got it wrong it just multiplied. Their are plenty of ways the different streams of income are taxed. Capitol gains is not taxed at the same rate as income. Income from dividends is now not taxed at all. Income received from an life insurance policy is not taxed. Disability income is not taxed, and I think that you will find that if you sell a house and do not re-invest the income in another house of equal or higher value and you are under some age let's say 55 for sake of argument that you will have to pay capitol gains tax on the investment. The same is true on most investments. If you let's say moved investments in a 401K from one fund to another you don't have to pay the tax on the profits you made in that fund immediately when you in fact you actually cashed out of one fund and invested in another. Now if you took the cash and lets say bought a boat or took a vacation to Iraq you would have to pay the tax.
Equity in a home is without a doubt the largest single item of positive net worth for over 75% of the American Public. In fact it is the largest single item in my portfolio and will finance a significant portion of the adjustment I will make from being a hard working member of the American workforce to a pampered, lazy, kicked back member of the beach bums, relaxing on the white sands of a South Pacific island in a matter of about 3 years. It is also probably the single item that many Americans have left when they are close to the end of their lives that they can trade for care in a nurseing home for their remaining days. Many organizations such as the Masons exchange life time care in their private nursing homes for their members and are able to partially fund them through the sale of the recipiants home. If that source of income was severly curtailed think what it would to the cost of medicaid for the elderly in this country. We don't just put them out on the street corner if they are destitute at least not yet!.
|
|
|
|
Post by TNRighty on Oct 1, 2004 17:03:28 GMT -5
Rob,
You don't need a Trojan Horse to get in here. If you want to talk about religion, spoiled kids, or the poor poor pitiful poor, just do it. Don't pose a question about the specifics of a particular tax code if what you really want to do is discuss more general political topics. That's why I was a little put off by your posts. What started as a tax debate turned on a dime into class warfare. If parents taking an interest in their kids' education is considered "spoiling" their kids, I hope every kid is spoiled. You implied that because my folks planned for my education that I was somehow born with a silver spoon in my mouth. I had parental support, but I've also worked my ass off to get where I am.
You said, "To move up in life you work harder and smarter and find out how to earn more money, this is what permits you to move to a larger home and certainly should NOT be because of some very unfair taxation practice."
I agree partly with that. For the most part, the people in this country who are successful have indeed worked harder and smarter than everyone else. That is what capitalism is all about. If, instead of buying a new car or taking expensive vacations, I choose rather to make extra payments on my home, I'll make more money off the sale of my home in terms of sale price versus unpaid mortgage. The more I put on the principle, the less I pay in interest each month. SMART people know that money invested in their homes will be recovered with interest when they sell their homes. I think that's just being smart, as you say.
"Unfair taxation practices"? What do you mean by that. If I've worked and sacrificed to increase the value of my home and the personal equity I have in it, how is taxing me to death on the profit "fair"? Take a large portion of the money I've made on my house and use it to fund social programs, that my friend, is the communist/socialist ideal you speak of.
|
|
|
|
Post by americanfirst on Oct 1, 2004 21:31:10 GMT -5
TN I agree with some of what you said but read what some of those that truly have made it say about the true source of their wealth.
And as for wealthy earning their way onto the Forbes 400 39% of them including numbers 4,5,6,7,8,12,13,14,17,19 inherited themselves onto the list which is 10 of the top 20.
Now for some quotes from some of the self made rich about being self made millionaires and billionaires.
Jim Sherblom, a venture capitalist and former chief financial officer of the biotech firm, Genzyme, says, "The opportunities to create wealth are all taking advantage of public goods — like roads, transportation, markets — and public investments. None of us can claim it was all personal initiative. A piece of it was built upon this infrastructure that we all have this inherent moral obligation to keep intact.
Warren Buffett, No. 2 on the Forbes 400, attended a publicly supported state school, the University of Nebraska in Lincoln, and is quite clear that his investment wealth depends on America's social and economic infrastructure. "I personally think that society is responsible for a very significant percentage of what I've earned," said Buffett. "I happen to work in a market system that happens to reward what I do very well -- disproportionately well."
Larry Page, No. 43 on the Forbes 400, co-founded Google, which went public this year. Page graduated from a state school, the University of Michigan, and then attended Stanford University for graduate work, where Google was born. Government grants underpin the lucrative research in Silicon Valley and at Stanford University. The Internet platform, without which Google would not exist, is built on a foundation of taxpayer-funded research and development.
H. Ross Perot, Jr, No. 40 on the Forbes 400, grew his company Electronic Data Systems (later sold to General Motors) by focusing on computer systems and services for Medicare, a government program. The company's growth -- and windfall profits -- really took off when it began reselling the Medicare claims processing system it had developed for Texas Blue Cross under a research and development contract paid for by federal funds.
"My wealth is not only a product of my own hard work. It also resulted from a strong economy and lots of public investment, both in others and in me. I received a good public school education and used free libraries and museums paid for by others. I went to college under the GI Bill. I went to graduate school to study computers and language on a complete government scholarship... While teaching at Syracuse University for 25 years, my research was supported by numerous government grants... My university research provided the basis for Syracuse Language Systems..."
— Martin Rothenberg, founder of Syracuse Language Systems and Glottal Enterprises
"Lots of people who are smart and work hard and play by the rules don't have a fraction of what I have. I realize I don't have my wealth because I'm so brilliant. Luck has a lot to do with it."
— Eric Schmidt, CEO of Google, Inc.
"The opportunities to create wealth are all taking advantage of public goods--like roads, transportation, markets--and public investments... We are all standing on the shoulders of all that came before us, and creating a society for our children and those that come after us. We have obligations as part of that."
— Jim Sherblom, venture capitalist and former chief financial officer of Genzyme
"I feel like there's no way I've done this by myself... Every single person we worked with has contributed to making Hanna what it is today... People in Sweden don't like paying taxes either, but nobody would ever suggest that you would close schools because you didn't have enough money to keep them open."
— Gun Denhart, co-founder of Hanna Andersson clothing company
"I know a lot of people who believe their success is only due to their hard work, their ingenuity... They say, 'I made it, it's mine and I'm going to hold onto it.'... My response it that a lot of factors go into building a successful business. For instance, did they go to a public high school or a tax-supported college? A lot of folks forget the help they got... The support of our legal and financial system...is unique in the world in assisting business enterprise. We take it for granted."
— David Lewis, founder of AirGas
Gee Whiz I don't hear them whining about their taxes. It seems that they appriciate all the help they've had in their lives. Please don't tell me they are stupid!
|
|
