Author Topic: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)  (Read 139946 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Cire

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 19753
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #1750 on: February 05, 2019, 01:35:50 PM »
Should we be taxing income or wealth I guess is my question?

I'm not wealthy so pretty much all of my taxes are income based.

do we/how do we tax wealth?

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 37097
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #1751 on: February 05, 2019, 01:36:49 PM »
Should we be taxing income or wealth I guess is my question?

I'm not wealthy so pretty much all of my taxes are income based.

do we/how do we tax wealth?

An estate tax where every inheritance is taxed.

Offline steve dave

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 85329
  • Romantic Fist Attachment
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #1752 on: February 05, 2019, 01:38:06 PM »
Should we be taxing income or wealth I guess is my question?

I'm not wealthy so pretty much all of my taxes are income based.

do we/how do we tax wealth?

inheritance/estate tax, capital gains, other pud things. we should probably tax it more than we do. at the same time I get the family farmer (who suckles at the gov teet like none other already) being upset by the idea though.

Offline steve dave

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 85329
  • Romantic Fist Attachment
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #1753 on: February 05, 2019, 01:40:01 PM »
Should we be taxing income or wealth I guess is my question?

I'm not wealthy so pretty much all of my taxes are income based.

do we/how do we tax wealth?

inheritance/estate tax, capital gains, other pud things. we should probably tax it more than we do. at the same time I get the family farmer (who suckles at the gov teet like none other already) being upset by the idea though.

and this is IRL coming from someone who will inherit thousands of acres of crappy kansas land :D (unless I can convince my parents to sell all of it now, which I am trying very hard to do)

Offline michigancat

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 53784
  • change your stupid avatar.
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #1754 on: February 05, 2019, 01:40:32 PM »
Should we be taxing income or wealth I guess is my question?

I'm not wealthy so pretty much all of my taxes are income based.

do we/how do we tax wealth?

inheritance/estate tax, capital gains, other pud things. we should probably tax it more than we do. at the same time I get the family farmer (who suckles at the gov teet like none other already) being upset by the idea though.

I mean just make it progressive for farmers like all other taxes. billionaire farmers, errrr, people of wealth farmers can get taxed more.

Offline steve dave

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 85329
  • Romantic Fist Attachment
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #1755 on: February 05, 2019, 01:42:21 PM »
Should we be taxing income or wealth I guess is my question?

I'm not wealthy so pretty much all of my taxes are income based.

do we/how do we tax wealth?

inheritance/estate tax, capital gains, other pud things. we should probably tax it more than we do. at the same time I get the family farmer (who suckles at the gov teet like none other already) being upset by the idea though.

I mean just make it progressive for farmers like all other taxes. billionaire farmers, errrr, people of wealth farmers can get taxed more.

MY FAMILY WORKED THIS SHITTY GROUND FOR FIVE GENERATIONS RUSTY! AND YOU WANT TO CHARGE ME FOR IT!?

Offline michigancat

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 53784
  • change your stupid avatar.
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #1756 on: February 05, 2019, 01:47:20 PM »
Should we be taxing income or wealth I guess is my question?

I'm not wealthy so pretty much all of my taxes are income based.

do we/how do we tax wealth?

inheritance/estate tax, capital gains, other pud things. we should probably tax it more than we do. at the same time I get the family farmer (who suckles at the gov teet like none other already) being upset by the idea though.

I mean just make it progressive for farmers like all other taxes. billionaire farmers, errrr, people of wealth farmers can get taxed more.

MY FAMILY WORKED THIS SHITTY GROUND FOR FIVE GENERATIONS RUSTY! AND YOU WANT TO CHARGE ME FOR IT!?

it's very unfair, but think it as payback to the government for murdering all the Indians for the generations before

(NOTE: I WILL NOT INHERIT TENS OF THOUSANDS OF ACRES BUT LIKE PROBABLY A COUPLE THOUSAND)

Offline steve dave

  • Global Moderator
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 85329
  • Romantic Fist Attachment
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #1757 on: February 05, 2019, 01:50:49 PM »
I actually don't think it's unfair. It should be no different than inheriting anything else. farmers need to figure it out.

Offline michigancat

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 53784
  • change your stupid avatar.
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #1758 on: February 05, 2019, 01:52:12 PM »
I actually don't think it's unfair. It should be no different than inheriting anything else. farmers need to figure it out.

I know I just wanted to point out that the land was just another gubment handout

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 37097
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #1759 on: February 05, 2019, 02:05:05 PM »
Unless you actually want to move back and farm the land, there really isn't anything to figure out. You would just sell the land and pay the tax. I guess I would sort of feel for someone who really wants to farm his parents' land, but those people are still way ahead of someone who would have to buy the land outright.

Inheritance taxes should be progressive, but they also should start at like $100k. Maybe even $50k.

Online Cire

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 19753
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #1760 on: February 05, 2019, 02:52:03 PM »
When did Big Farm get so much pull.

I get it when like 80% of americans were farmers but now WGAF.

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 40514
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #1761 on: February 05, 2019, 03:28:00 PM »
i'm far from as literate as i'd like to be on the topic, but i think a wealth tax would be more distortive than needs to be the case and the estate tax is also more complicated than it needs be.  it would seem to me that you could accomplish most of everything either does by raising long-term cap gains rates, eliminating the step up basis on cap gains and eliminating or reducing the ability to shelter assets in trusts.

you'd probably still need or want an estate tax to get at income producing assets that can be sheltered for generations, but that could start at a very high level like 50 or 100 million or something and impact very few people.
"experienced commanders will simply be smeared and will actually go to the meat."

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 40514
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #1762 on: February 05, 2019, 03:31:31 PM »
also, as someone who drives almost as many miles/year as sd, mrs sd and their several dozen children combined.  please, america, raise the eff out of the gasoline tax.  our roads are complete crap.
"experienced commanders will simply be smeared and will actually go to the meat."

Online catastrophe

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 15221
    • View Profile
Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #1763 on: February 05, 2019, 03:33:16 PM »
We need to be taxing consumption more IMO. That’s like the only thing with no loopholes that will definitely impact rich people more than poor people.

The only problem is we have already set up the system so that poor people need to be exempt from paying taxes in order to make a living wage. So, like, make them eligible for welfare/social security benefits to offset the extra burden.

Online catastrophe

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 15221
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #1764 on: February 05, 2019, 03:39:27 PM »
Oh and also would make tax returns a heck of a lot easier.

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 40514
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #1765 on: February 05, 2019, 03:39:59 PM »
poor people need to be exempt from paying taxes in order to make a living wage.

one thing i've become about infinitely more aware of since i started working on a w9 instead of a w4 is that people pay a lot more in payroll taxes than income taxes on their first 128k or so
"experienced commanders will simply be smeared and will actually go to the meat."

Online catastrophe

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 15221
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #1766 on: February 05, 2019, 03:51:57 PM »
Even so, those taxes aren’t going away. I think payroll taxes on earnings make more sense than income taxes.

Offline Rage Against the McKee

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 37097
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #1767 on: February 05, 2019, 04:00:58 PM »
We need to be taxing consumption more IMO. That’s like the only thing with no loopholes that will definitely impact rich people more than poor people.

The only problem is we have already set up the system so that poor people need to be exempt from paying taxes in order to make a living wage. So, like, make them eligible for welfare/social security benefits to offset the extra burden.

Consumption taxes impact the poor more than the rich because they spend a much larger portion of their earnings on necessities. It's really only fair if you just tax luxuries and nothing else.

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 40514
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #1768 on: February 05, 2019, 04:05:48 PM »
Consumption taxes impact the poor more than the rich because they spend a much larger portion of their earnings on necessities. It's really only fair if you just tax luxuries and nothing else.

you have to refund back to make it progressive.  works better than exempting various classes of purchases.


a lot of smart people like consumption taxes, and i think it could it make sense as part of the mix.
"experienced commanders will simply be smeared and will actually go to the meat."

Online star seed 7

  • hyperactive on the :lol:
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 64022
  • good dog
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #1769 on: February 05, 2019, 04:09:13 PM »
Refunding consumption tax seems like a huge pita
Hyperbolic partisan duplicitous hypocrite

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 40514
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #1770 on: February 05, 2019, 04:11:43 PM »
easier than income tax stuff.  i mean you don't have refund the actual taxes paid.  you just send everyone 10k or whatever it is and you increase the tax rate to pay for that so that it zeros out at the income/wealth/consumption level you want to get nothing.
"experienced commanders will simply be smeared and will actually go to the meat."

Online star seed 7

  • hyperactive on the :lol:
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 64022
  • good dog
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #1771 on: February 05, 2019, 04:36:47 PM »
Oh ok
Hyperbolic partisan duplicitous hypocrite

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 40514
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
"experienced commanders will simply be smeared and will actually go to the meat."

Offline K-S-U-Wildcats!

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 10040
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #1773 on: February 07, 2019, 04:36:43 PM »
So update on Kansas. The state senate just passed SB22, which would decouple state and federal returns for purposes of itemizing deductions. In other words, it would allow people to claim the federal standard deduction while still itemizing on their state returns. Without this fix, people who now take the new, bigger standard deduction on their federal returns will see higher taxes in Kansas because they lose their itemized deductions there.

The vote was 26-14, which is one vote short of the 27 needed to override Kelly's promised veto. The 26 includes 2 Republicans, one of whom is a RINO and a lost cause, the other of whom may very well just be stupid and/or confused. She's saying things like how much will this "cost." If you find wallet on the street, you don't ask how much it will "cost" or whether you can "afford" to return it. It is found money. Money you wouldn't have otherwise had.

Now it heads over to the House, where the Pubs only have 84 and need exactly 84 to overide the veto. That seems pretty ulikely because I know there are still a handful of RINO's lurking in there.

So congrats Governor Kelly on getting a massive, hidden tax increase because the dumbfuck Pubs were too stupid to fix this issue when they still had Brownback/Colier.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, K-State fans could have beheaded the entire KU team at midcourt, and K-State fans would be celebrating it this morning.  They are the ISIS of Big 12 fanbases.

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 40514
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: Taxes (GOP 2017 edition)
« Reply #1774 on: February 07, 2019, 04:43:07 PM »
you have an amazing view of the world, -w.
"experienced commanders will simply be smeared and will actually go to the meat."