1. #1681
    Quote Originally Posted by Mihalik View Post
    I understand you think that "double taxation" is some bogeyman. It's not. It's a misused tautology in this context.

    Now... This is an honest to God question.

    Did you know that we already have to pay a capital gains tax on real estate? As a matter of fact, you pay a capital gains tax on nearly all non liquid assets when you sell them, independently of any annual obligations you might have.

    The capital gains tax on those assets is determined whether you turned a profit on that asset or not. You might have not realized this because you haven't sold real estate valued above a certain amount, which would have given you an exemption. The values under which your capital gains taxes are exempted vary somewhere between 250k to 500k depending on whether you're married or have kids etc.

    One more time.

    The double standard is in the fact that stocks are exempt from taxes, unlike other non liquid investment assets.

    Hell, I'm pretty sure we can arrange an annual tax exemption on stocks for anyone holding less than 500k in stocks.

    You know, like we do with real estate under a certain value or as we do with progressive tax rates.

    There's an annual tax even on most commodities if you hold them as investment beyond a certain period of time.

    The double standard is that stocks are not taxed.





    https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/brie...al-gains-taxed

    It's getting really hard to take seriously now.



    The issue is not with him having collateral.

    The issue is that is that he can use his collateral and our very low rates that him and people like him spent decades lobbying to zero, to never have to pay taxes.

    The issue is with the existence of a legal tax dodge, that he gets to benefit from.

    That tax dodge needs to be eliminated.

    I'm starting to get the impression you don't actually understand the things that you are saying, but you keep doubling down on the nonsense, going deeper and deeper.
    We discussed capital gains on property, about 50 pages ago.

    if you want to eliminate the double standards, then get rid of the minimums. Make all stocks taxable, including 401k plans. Make it so ALL gains from property are capital gains. See how fast the approval for such bullshit collapses, when the average home seller has to pay 30-50k in taxes when they sell.

    or, do you want to keep that double standard?

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Elegiac View Post
    You mean the math where you assume that someone can only use 20% of their wealth to pay for the other 80% and thus generate ridiculous numbers?

    Garbage in, garbage out.
    You never even looked at the math.

  2. #1682
    Void Lord Elegiac's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Aelia Capitolina
    Posts
    59,338
    Quote Originally Posted by Machismo View Post
    if you want to eliminate the double standards, then get rid of the minimums
    In which you admit your problem isn't actually that the tax would have any demonstrable economic downsides, it's that you don't like that rich people will have to pay a tax most others won't be eligible for.

    Stop pretending it's about math. Lol.
    Quote Originally Posted by Marjane Satrapi
    The world is not divided between East and West. You are American, I am Iranian, we don't know each other, but we talk and understand each other perfectly. The difference between you and your government is much bigger than the difference between you and me. And the difference between me and my government is much bigger than the difference between me and you. And our governments are very much the same.

  3. #1683
    I’d say we all need to take a walk in Machismo’s shoes but I doubt any of us have feet that big.

    This continues to be beyond pathetic. Either close this shot so the troll stops clogging it up or get rid of the turd.

  4. #1684
    Void Lord Elegiac's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Aelia Capitolina
    Posts
    59,338
    Quote Originally Posted by UnifiedDivide View Post
    Nah, they'll probably get a fat inheritance. Do they have inheritance tax in the US? That'd be amusing.

    All he's actually doing is defending his own money. Reading what he says and how hard he argues a single thing at a time into an illogical pretzel, it seems obvious he's defending these people because he'd also have to pay more tax if they did, and people with a lot of money don't like to part with it, even if it'd help others.
    That's usually the case. The number of threads where posters argue anti-tax and anti-union policies trying to ground them in some totally objective harm to society but it really turns out either they or their family members are business owners and the poster is just upset at the suggestion that they might get taxed.

    Which is hilarious because none of said chuds or their families have a chance in hell of ever being wealthy enough to quality for the taxes being proposed. Instead it seems to be a weird parasocial attachment to billionaires.

    Quote Originally Posted by unfilteredJW View Post
    I’d say we all need to take a walk in Machismo’s shoes
    I've trod in pig shit before and don't care to do it again, tbh.
    Quote Originally Posted by Marjane Satrapi
    The world is not divided between East and West. You are American, I am Iranian, we don't know each other, but we talk and understand each other perfectly. The difference between you and your government is much bigger than the difference between you and me. And the difference between me and my government is much bigger than the difference between me and you. And our governments are very much the same.

  5. #1685
    Quote Originally Posted by UnifiedDivide View Post
    I'm more curious how many circles all these "arguments" can do before this thread finally gets the lock it has deserved for so many pages.
    It's round three. Either the mods are amused by his one man shitposting show, or they're indifferent. His post count goes up by the hundreds either way.

  6. #1686
    Quote Originally Posted by Elegiac View Post
    That's usually the case. The number of threads where posters argue anti-tax and anti-union policies trying to ground them in some totally objective harm to society but it really turns out either they or their family members are business owners and the poster is just upset at the suggestion that they might get taxed.

    Which is hilarious because none of said chuds or their families have a chance in hell of ever being wealthy enough to quality for the taxes being proposed. Instead it seems to be a weird parasocial attachment to billionaires.



    I've trod in pig shit before and don't care to do it again, tbh.
    I wouldn’t walk around in pig shit wearing clown shoes either.

  7. #1687
    Quote Originally Posted by unfilteredJW View Post
    I’d say we all need to take a walk in Machismo’s shoes but I doubt any of us have feet that big. .

  8. #1688
    Quote Originally Posted by Machismo View Post
    We discussed capital gains on property, about 50 pages ago.
    I'm sorry, it's a bit hard to keep track of the amount of complete nonsense you churn out.

    if you want to eliminate the double standards, then get rid of the minimums. Make all stocks taxable, including 401k plans. Make it so ALL gains from property are capital gains. See how fast the approval for such bullshit collapses, when the average home seller has to pay 30-50k in taxes when they sell.
    Why would we do any of that nonsense? Those exemptions at the lower end of the tax bracket exist because the people benefitting from them either already pay proportionally higher taxes via their taxable earnings or because they earn so little that taxing them would be an exercise in futility and creation of human misery.

    People sitting on millions, hundreds of millions and billions pay proportionally less in taxes and frankly losing a couple of percent of their wealth is not going to fucking kill them.

    or, do you want to keep that double standard?
    There is no double standard in the sense you think there is.

    Or do you consider progressive taxation a double standard?

    Because that's a dumbass conversation to have.

  9. #1689
    Quote Originally Posted by UnifiedDivide View Post
    Nah, they'll probably get a fat inheritance. Do they have inheritance tax in the US? That'd be amusing.

    All he's actually doing is defending his own money. Reading what he says and how hard he argues a single thing at a time into an illogical pretzel, it seems obvious he's defending these people because he'd also have to pay more tax if they did, and people with a lot of money don't like to part with it, even if it'd help others.

    Either that, or he's just thick as pig shit. /shrug

    I'm more curious how many circles all these "arguments" can do before this thread finally gets the lock it has deserved for so many pages.
    Rich or pig shit, the compulsion on display is unhealthy and disturbing. idk how this thread is still going.

  10. #1690
    Quote Originally Posted by UnifiedDivide View Post
    Nah, they'll probably get a fat inheritance. Do they have inheritance tax in the US? That'd be amusing.

    All he's actually doing is defending his own money. Reading what he says and how hard he argues a single thing at a time into an illogical pretzel, it seems obvious he's defending these people because he'd also have to pay more tax if they did, and people with a lot of money don't like to part with it, even if it'd help others.

    Either that, or he's just thick as pig shit. /shrug

    I'm more curious how many circles all these "arguments" can do before this thread finally gets the lock it has deserved for so many pages.
    There is an estate tax where if you have over $11.7 million, you are taxed on it. At least on the federal level.

    EDIT: This thread reminds of the song "This is the song that never ends."

    Last edited by gondrin; 2021-06-11 at 11:19 PM.

  11. #1691
    Quote Originally Posted by Elegiac View Post
    That's usually the case. The number of threads where posters argue anti-tax and anti-union policies trying to ground them in some totally objective harm to society but it really turns out either they or their family members are business owners and the poster is just upset at the suggestion that they might get taxed.

    Which is hilarious because none of said chuds or their families have a chance in hell of ever being wealthy enough to quality for the taxes being proposed. Instead it seems to be a weird parasocial attachment to billionaires.
    There's a realistic chance I'd end up falling into the category who might have to pay a bit more in taxes in some years if this problem is addressed seriously.

    But I don't actually mind whatsoever, cuz it would be nice to live in a society that isn't perpetually one shit day away from collapse.

  12. #1692
    Void Lord Elegiac's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Aelia Capitolina
    Posts
    59,338
    Quote Originally Posted by Mihalik View Post
    There's a realistic chance I'd end up falling into the category who might have to pay a bit more in taxes in some years if this problem is addressed seriously.

    But I don't actually mind whatsoever, cuz it would be nice to live in a society that isn't perpetually one shit day away from collapse.
    I'd also probably end up being on the hook for more per year, but yes.

    You figure that the people who insist there's no such thing as a free lunch would understand that infrastructure generally needs to be paid for with money and not thoughts and prayers.
    Quote Originally Posted by Marjane Satrapi
    The world is not divided between East and West. You are American, I am Iranian, we don't know each other, but we talk and understand each other perfectly. The difference between you and your government is much bigger than the difference between you and me. And the difference between me and my government is much bigger than the difference between me and you. And our governments are very much the same.

  13. #1693
    Quote Originally Posted by UnifiedDivide View Post
    Is it the "American Dream" where I can totally become a super millionaire if I just wish hard enough mindset?
    The term is temporarily embarrassed millionaire

  14. #1694
    Void Lord Elegiac's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Aelia Capitolina
    Posts
    59,338
    Quote Originally Posted by UnifiedDivide View Post
    Is it the "American Dream" where I can totally become a super millionaire if I just wish hard enough mindset?
    Yep, just like how John McCain's economic recovery plan was "every American, ditch your sick wife and marry a beer heiress".
    Quote Originally Posted by Marjane Satrapi
    The world is not divided between East and West. You are American, I am Iranian, we don't know each other, but we talk and understand each other perfectly. The difference between you and your government is much bigger than the difference between you and me. And the difference between me and my government is much bigger than the difference between me and you. And our governments are very much the same.

  15. #1695
    Quote Originally Posted by Elegiac View Post
    Yep, just like how John McCain's economic recovery plan was "every American, ditch your sick wife and marry a beer heiress".
    That’s how you get Tuckers. Do you want Tuckers?

  16. #1696
    Quote Originally Posted by UnifiedDivide View Post
    I'm actually surprised that exists. Thanks for the info.
    Don't worry. There's still plenty of turds to rain down on you.
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...ota-trust-laws
    "A South Dakotan trust changes all that: it protects assets from claims from ex-spouses, disgruntled business partners, creditors, litigious clients and pretty much anyone else. It won’t protect you from criminal prosecution, but it does prevent information on your assets from leaking out in a way that might spark interest from the police. And it shields your wealth from the government, since South Dakota has no income tax, no inheritance tax and no capital gains tax."

  17. #1697
    Quote Originally Posted by Elegiac View Post
    In which you admit your problem isn't actually that the tax would have any demonstrable economic downsides, it's that you don't like that rich people will have to pay a tax most others won't be eligible for.

    Stop pretending it's about math. Lol.
    Nope, I made my case quite clear.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by UnifiedDivide View Post
    Nah, they'll probably get a fat inheritance. Do they have inheritance tax in the US? That'd be amusing.

    All he's actually doing is defending his own money. Reading what he says and how hard he argues a single thing at a time into an illogical pretzel, it seems obvious he's defending these people because he'd also have to pay more tax if they did, and people with a lot of money don't like to part with it, even if it'd help others.

    Either that, or he's just thick as pig shit. /shrug

    I'm more curious how many circles all these "arguments" can do before this thread finally gets the lock it has deserved for so many pages.
    I'm not worth anywhere close to 50 milli0on, it's not my money at risk.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by unfilteredJW View Post
    I’d say we all need to take a walk in Machismo’s shoes but I doubt any of us have feet that big.

    This continues to be beyond pathetic. Either close this shot so the troll stops clogging it up or get rid of the turd.
    I provided dozens of sources, and even math and statistics to back up my claims.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Shadowferal View Post
    It's round three. Either the mods are amused by his one man shitposting show, or they're indifferent. His post count goes up by the hundreds either way.
    You admitted you couldn't refute the evidence.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Mihalik View Post
    I'm sorry, it's a bit hard to keep track of the amount of complete nonsense you churn out.



    Why would we do any of that nonsense? Those exemptions at the lower end of the tax bracket exist because the people benefitting from them either already pay proportionally higher taxes via their taxable earnings or because they earn so little that taxing them would be an exercise in futility and creation of human misery.

    People sitting on millions, hundreds of millions and billions pay proportionally less in taxes and frankly losing a couple of percent of their wealth is not going to fucking kill them.



    There is no double standard in the sense you think there is.

    Or do you consider progressive taxation a double standard?

    Because that's a dumbass conversation to have.
    Then, you are calling for the same double standards you guys are bitching about.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Mihalik View Post
    I'm sorry, it's a bit hard to keep track of the amount of complete nonsense you churn out.



    Why would we do any of that nonsense? Those exemptions at the lower end of the tax bracket exist because the people benefitting from them either already pay proportionally higher taxes via their taxable earnings or because they earn so little that taxing them would be an exercise in futility and creation of human misery.

    People sitting on millions, hundreds of millions and billions pay proportionally less in taxes and frankly losing a couple of percent of their wealth is not going to fucking kill them.



    There is no double standard in the sense you think there is.

    Or do you consider progressive taxation a double standard?

    Because that's a dumbass conversation to have.
    I pointed to Lynsi Snyder, where if Elizabeth Warren had her way, would lose majority ownership of the company she owns all by herself, in 17 years. Like it, or not, the math is there. By the nature of liquidity, and the 6% tax Warren wants to push, that means a family-owned company would have to be sold off, piece by piece, for the sole reason that it has been wildly successful over the past 60 years.

    This is simply a statistical reality, and to support it, is fucking evil.

  18. #1698
    Quote Originally Posted by Machismo View Post

    Then, you are calling for the same double standards you guys are bitching about.
    Dude.

    Are you fucking saying progressive taxation is a double standard?

    After I just fucking explained why it is not?

    Because if that's what you're doing... May God have mercy on your soul.

  19. #1699
    Quote Originally Posted by Mihalik View Post
    Dude.

    Are you fucking saying progressive taxation is a double standard?

    After I just fucking explained why it is not?

    Because if that's what you're doing... May God have mercy on your soul.
    I'm saying you're bitching that these people aren't being taxed on their stocks, then you clutch at pearls at the idea of stocks being taxed.

    Meanwhile, this plan... right here:

    https://elizabethwarren.com/plans/ultra-millionaire-tax

    Would cause the sole owner of In&Out to start to sell part of her family-owned company, just to pay for the success of that family-owned company. In 17 years, she would lose majority share of that company she owned entirely, before Warren's plan were put in place. The simple reason is, she wouldn't have enough liquid assets to keep paying for the tax that Warren, and her ghoulish zealots want to force.

    So, how do you justify that?

    How do you tell yourself that such an action is acceptable?

  20. #1700
    She could choose not to be a shitty owner of a company, choice, liberty, consistency, all that, and grow her company to even greater heights. Or be a modern day libertarian, a walking contradiction.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •