What is Digg?25 Comments
- brad3378, on 10/07/2008, -1/+6When you invest in the stock market you're taking a risk. Even the great Warren Buffet is taking a risk when he invests in the stock market. His secretary is not taking any risks. The success of the stock market depends on having investors who are willing to take risks. By raising taxes, you will be taking away a portion of the potential benefit and hurt the risk to benefit ratio.
A second point:
By raising taxes on stock market investments, you're effectively taxing people's savings. By taxing savings, you're effectively taxing people twice - Once when they earn the investment money in the first place at their jobs and again when they make money investing in the stock market.
A third point:
Compared to other countries, the people of the United States already have an extremely low savings rate. Should we further discourage savings by raising taxes? Should we tax earned interest from Checking Accounts and Savings accounts at a similar rate? - brad3378, on 10/07/2008, -0/+4Don't punish the companies that played by the rules........just burn the companies looking for bailouts......
- JenniferInMO, on 10/12/2008, -0/+4Buried for inaccuracy (and for bad math -- by your numbers the increase would not be 2/3s)
- mshensley, on 10/07/2008, -0/+4Absolutely. I was a Republican up until they decided that they were going to have two wars without a thought of how to pay for them. The American public would have paid ANY amount to have Osama bin Laden's head on a stick and the government refused to do what it took to achieve that end.
- oldhick, on 10/07/2008, -1/+4In all seriousness, what does fiscal conservatism mean? As a life long conservative, we never once claimed that fiscal conservatism meant lower taxes across the board in all situations. Fiscal conservatism is about responsibility. As spending has increase dramatically through Bush's massive expansions of government, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the "bail out", how should the government cover those expenses?
Is it fiscally conservative to continue to increase the budget deficit and the national debt? As spending increases, so must tax collection. If we're not going to hit the Capital Gains, then what are we going to hit???
I want to hear from the fiscal conservatives out there. - brad3378, on 10/07/2008, -0/+3Don't you hate it when people bury you without commenting?
I swear these Obama defenders just don't like an honest debate because they never seem to stick around to leave a message. - Stevanoski, on 10/06/2008, -4/+6They won't care, will just assume it is the Republicans fault.
- avengingturnip, on 10/07/2008, -1/+3Let Wall Street burn.
- inactive, on 10/07/2008, -1/+3Not really, the mere fact that I irritated them enough to act is satisfying.
- brad3378, on 10/07/2008, -0/+2I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with you.
Keep in mind, I'm merely playing the devil's advocate for the sake of an honest debate.
If our current income tax is constitutional, then
is a 50% income tax constitutional?
is a 75% income tax constitutional?
is a 99% income tax constitutional?
Do you see where I'm coming from?
Where should we draw the line?
While I'm on the subject, is deficit spending at the expense of your grandchildren constitutional? - Coven, on 10/07/2008, -0/+1It is in plain English right there in our Constitution. The fact that Cryer did a song and dance routine around technicalities doesn't change the fact that taxes on income are Constitutional as per the 16th Amendment.
"taxes on income from WHATEVER source derived"
Simple, plain English. - Coven, on 10/07/2008, -0/+1oh, and it's Adolf. if you're going to play the Nazi card at least spell it right.
- Striker101, on 10/07/2008, -5/+6nothing new here, but helps reveal Comrade Obama. ... from each according to his ability... You can bet Obama will not contribute one dime of his own affluence to his immoral cause, but will still expect it from every producer.
- Coven, on 10/07/2008, -0/+1Unfortunately, all 3 of those tax scenarios would be Constitutional as the Constitution does not outline a limit on what those taxes would be. It is up to the people to elect representatives that would tax a fair amount. We the people draw the line by voting out tax policies we don't agree with.
As for deficit spending, in the words of Sarah Palin, I'll have to get back to you on that.
Although Congress is given the power of the purse, so my guess is yes they are allowed to spend as they see fit, unfortunately. - govsucks, on 10/07/2008, -3/+3You deserve to have your ***** taken from you and be left destitute. Afterwards you need to be told "You should take your lumps and be grateful we didn't go medieval on you."
*****, its because of people like you that people like Adolph Hitler rise to power so you can get your rocks off on revenge for your pathetic envy. - DreKor, on 10/07/2008, -1/+1Wall Street is profitable? Oh wait, this is a few months old. Amazing how time flies.
- Coven, on 10/07/2008, -1/+1"The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;"
Article 1 Section 8 of our United States Constitution.
On top of that look up Pollock v. FL&T (1895)
Then, of course, the 16th Amendment expands on the idea of income tax:
"The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on income, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration."
Brushaber v. UPR, in 1916, further clarified that income taxes ARE constitutional. - Coven, on 10/07/2008, -1/+1Godwin rears his ugly head again.
- inactive, on 10/07/2008, -1/+1Coven- dod you think the IRS was so stupid they didn't try to use that?
You must really think that the IRS lawyers are incompetent.
Let me suggest that you look up the case I cited which is now the precedent before you waste any more time on ancient decisions which have absolutely nothing to do with the fact that the IRS could not find a Constitutional basis foir the income tax.
Thank you for trying to help them. Maybe you should get a job as their lawyer? - vanguardanon, on 10/08/2008, -1/+1Double taxation does not apply to this kind of investment. Double taxation refers to when the company pays tax on a dividend then the individual pays tax on it again.
With something like a capital gain, buying a stock for $1 and selling it for $2 is not double taxation. It's no different than buying a coffee cup for $1 and selling it for $2. It's new income, not double taxation. - j.carcinogen, on 10/11/2008, -2/+2Tax capital too much and all the capital will just go overseas. (China perhaps?)
- brad3378, on 10/12/2008, -2/+12/3 of 15% = 10%
15% + 10% = 25%
Thanks for yet again pointing out your blind allegiance to your messiah.
I'm glad I added you to my friends list because I needed a good laugh.
If you have any more problems with 5th grade math, feel free to message me. - JoeParanoid, on 10/07/2008, -6/+5And it will still be a lower rate than most of us average taxpayers have to pay on our income taxes. BFD. They should take their lumps and be grateful we didn't go medieval on them.
- inactive, on 10/07/2008, -5/+30bama knows that the income tax has been found to have no Constitutional basis. In US v Cryer the IRS could not prove in court any Constitutional basis for the income tax and Cryer didn't have to pay and is in fact in the process of civil action against the agents.
0bama pretends that didn't happen.
People who believe facts are not facts should not be president.
0bama should not be president. - vanguardanon, on 10/06/2008, -8/+4This is a great idea. It's morally wrong that unearned income is taxed so much lower than income earned by working on a salary. When Warren Buffet tells us that his secretary has a lower tax rate than he does this is what he's talking about. His income comes from long term capital gains and dividends.
If I was king, income from investments would be taxed at the same rate as income earned through hard work.
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is