General Discussion

Jeff In Milwaukee

(13,992 posts)

55. As a start...

Wed Dec 4, 2013, 02:31 PM

Dec 2013

I think the OP is basically saying that we should stop making a distinction between income from wages and income from capital gains.

If you're in the 39.6% tax bracket and sell an asset that you've held long-term, you're going to pay only 20% in capital gains taxes, which can be an enormous windfall for someone who is already pretty wealthy. For a married couple, the top tax rate doesn't kick in until after $450k in Taxable Income (that income - deductions, so your Adjust Gross Income would be even higher).

Your definition of income ("anything that improves one's well-being&quot is ridiculously broad, as any number of non-monetary "events" in one's life can improve one's well-being. A night of passionate sex with Sophia Vergara would do wonders for my well-being, but I'm not sure how you'd tax that.

But you are right that there's a veritable can of worms that would have to be hashed out.

And there's no fucking way you're going to tax my rhubarb patch. So forget it.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

84 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Income is income, tax it all the same. [View all] edhopper Dec 2013 OP

I think that's a good slogan. last1standing Dec 2013 #1

The problem comes in how do you assess and tax wealth? Blanket Statements Dec 2013 #2

I would tax just about everything in this system. last1standing Dec 2013 #4

How about starting with the standard of a living wage truebluegreen Dec 2013 #11

I'm all for a guaranteed living wage but in itself that would not lead to fair taxation. last1standing Dec 2013 #17

Hear, hear! Laelth Dec 2013 #30

I don't disagree edhopper Dec 2013 #3

Sorry, it really is a great idea to use "income is income." last1standing Dec 2013 #5

Property taxes are wealth taxes. Laelth Dec 2013 #29

No, not entirely unprecedented but few will get the connection. last1standing Dec 2013 #35

My wife and I choose to save for our future joeglow3 Dec 2013 #33

Because you are provided services to protect and guarantee those savings year after year. last1standing Dec 2013 #34

How is the military protecting my wealth? joeglow3 Dec 2013 #36

the military protects your wealth from seizure due to invasion. last1standing Dec 2013 #37

You're suggesting that they were protecting your *life* in Iraq and Afghanistan? lumberjack_jeff Dec 2013 #50

The Fed does not guarantee your savings in the bank ....... oldhippie Dec 2013 #38

As I understand it, the FDIC guarantees up to $100,000 should a bank fail. last1standing Dec 2013 #41

The FDIC is not The Fed ....... oldhippie Dec 2013 #44

No, I think my definition is pretty standard and you've met it twice now. last1standing Dec 2013 #45

Can't take a little discussion and ..... oldhippie Dec 2013 #46

Wow. You are really condescending, for a "hippie". closeupready Dec 2013 #51

Some people, when they can't defeend their positions, ... oldhippie Dec 2013 #53

Why should you not? lumberjack_jeff Dec 2013 #49

I'd like to see TheFarseer Dec 2013 #6

exactly edhopper Dec 2013 #7

They've already had a tax credit for investiong overseas... Just sayin' n/t freshwest Dec 2013 #10

Yes. In essence we paid to move their factories and our jobs overseas. nt truebluegreen Dec 2013 #12

HERE is the place where BOTH parties are guilty and should be swept clean VIA Term Limits. cherokeeprogressive Dec 2013 #8

Term limits generally create a government more beholden to lobbyists' money, not less. last1standing Dec 2013 #18

Tax It All For Sure colsohlibgal Dec 2013 #9

what about retirement income and social security payments? hfojvt Dec 2013 #13

I'm torn on taxing the 401k Glassunion Dec 2013 #21

My social security payment is already taxed ..... oldhippie Dec 2013 #40

"Income is income" customerserviceguy Dec 2013 #61

actually McCain hinted at it hfojvt Dec 2013 #62

If McCain is your idea of a progressive customerserviceguy Dec 2013 #63

I am not talking about changing all the tax code. edhopper Dec 2013 #76

Generally speaking, I'm fine with that customerserviceguy Dec 2013 #83

I meant tax rate edhopper Dec 2013 #84

Should we do away with the 250k capital gain exemption for selling a home? taught_me_patience Dec 2013 #14

No edhopper Dec 2013 #25

So you are just refining your definition of "taxable income" ... oldhippie Dec 2013 #42

No edhopper Dec 2013 #47

Then why should capital gain from the sale of a house ..... oldhippie Dec 2013 #52

Again edhopper Dec 2013 #58

but that $250,000 exemption from home sales hfojvt Dec 2013 #66

And again ..... oldhippie Dec 2013 #69

He has already said that capital gains on a house after the first $250K should continue being ... ieoeja Dec 2013 #70

So he wants to tax them differently ...... oldhippie Dec 2013 #71

Yes edhopper Dec 2013 #75

There would be no different rate for Cap Gains. edhopper Dec 2013 #77

That's what I thought .... oldhippie Dec 2013 #81

The way things are now, yes. edhopper Dec 2013 #82

How dare you ask the person to actually think it thru..... FogerRox Dec 2013 #72

I know, I know ..... oldhippie Dec 2013 #73

I am not changing any definition edhopper Dec 2013 #79

I'd prefer a PROGRESSIVE Tax system. adirondacker Dec 2013 #15

+ struggle4progress Dec 2013 #24

I am not calling for a flat tax edhopper Dec 2013 #26

What - And Ruin The Sweet Deal That The 1% Has Arranged For Themselves cantbeserious Dec 2013 #16

K&R abelenkpe Dec 2013 #19

I'm going to guess that if we taxed all income SheilaT Dec 2013 #20

Be careful of what you wish for bbgrunt Dec 2013 #22

I am not calling for edhopper Dec 2013 #28

you are correct to hope that bbgrunt Dec 2013 #65

As a start... Jeff In Milwaukee Dec 2013 #55

haha--free rhubarb and Vergara for all. bbgrunt Dec 2013 #64

I don't have enough rhubarb to go around... Jeff In Milwaukee Dec 2013 #67

Wages are mostly easy to track. Other income isn't. Recursion Dec 2013 #23

I think there's some merit to this el_bryanto Dec 2013 #27

Which has been shown by edhopper Dec 2013 #31

In prinicple, I agree with the strategic goals of the OP. Laelth Dec 2013 #32

86TRA IIRC, IT altered the domestic investment field forever. FogerRox Dec 2013 #74

Don't stop there! Puzzledtraveller Dec 2013 #39

I notice people are trying to confuse the issue n2doc Dec 2013 #43

Thank you. edhopper Dec 2013 #48

Yes! hedgehog Dec 2013 #54

You only have to look at historical tax rates to see why things are so screwed up now indie9197 Dec 2013 #56

Democrats (not investment bankers) have to keep hammering at this, closeupready Dec 2013 #57

So do you think edhopper Dec 2013 #59

No; it has to be something jingo-istic, like - to use an example, closeupready Dec 2013 #60

Give it a go. BKH70041 Dec 2013 #68

Because savings are simply already-taxed income. Way to mess up the Middle-Class even more, OP! WinkyDink Dec 2013 #78

What are you talking about? edhopper Dec 2013 #80