Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

xtraxritical

(3,576 posts)
5. Me too, I disagree. Maybe dividends for the big players, like Romney, should be taxed at 40%
Sat Jul 14, 2012, 04:21 PM
Jul 2012

but for small time people with low incomes, like retirees, the current rate is imminently fair. There is nowhere to earn interest on small amounts of money so people are forced into high risk stock market investments to try and keep up with inflation. It's just another example of bank fraud, they charge over 20% on their credit cards but barley pay .25% (1/4 of one percent) on savings accounts. The President should think about this more.

Recommendations

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

.... DJ13 Jul 2012 #1
IMO Bloomberg's headline is false. How is the Senate bill a "split" ProgressiveEconomist Jul 2012 #16
I think the "split" is on taxation of the top earners progree Jul 2012 #19
But the President clearly said, Leave taxation on the top 2 percent (and implicitly on ProgressiveEconomist Jul 2012 #22
I'm just going by what the article said and what I've seen and heard in the news over and over progree Jul 2012 #23
Again, here's why a public option was NEVER going to happen! Liberal_Stalwart71 Jul 2012 #2
Thinking as someone who's nearing retirement, I have to disagree with our President. DCKit Jul 2012 #3
Me too, I disagree. Maybe dividends for the big players, like Romney, should be taxed at 40% xtraxritical Jul 2012 #5
The current rate... ensemble Jul 2012 #12
70 K$ taxable income = 89 K$ adjusted gross income progree Jul 2012 #20
You know I used the word dividends when I really meant capital gains, sorry for the confusion. xtraxritical Jul 2012 #21
Both the qualified dividend rate and the LT capital gains rate remain where they are for bottom 98% progree Jul 2012 #24
As Dick Durbin said pscot Jul 2012 #4
...and "Dick The Dick", should know. russspeakeasy Jul 2012 #10
Simplify things. All income regardless of source taxed at the rate for that income level. on point Jul 2012 #6
I believe.... ensemble Jul 2012 #11
Where the strange number (23.8%) comes from progree Jul 2012 #7
How many wealthy Senators.... Capt.Rocky300 Jul 2012 #8
exactly heaven05 Jul 2012 #18
Dividends are earned income and should be taxed as such.... WCGreen Jul 2012 #9
Seems more like unearned income to me. eallen Jul 2012 #17
One thing I've noticed... ensemble Jul 2012 #13
Exactly brutus smith Jul 2012 #27
The DINOs strike again DonCoquixote Jul 2012 #14
On that 3.8% surtax to help pay for health care and the high dividend rates - that's on top earners progree Jul 2012 #15
Taxes must go up rks306 Jul 2012 #25
I see the RW talking point about Obama controlling the Senate is still valid ... zbdent Jul 2012 #26
Tax the hell out of it... I'll never have to worry about dividends... nt Comrade_McKenzie Jul 2012 #28
Politicians tend to over-complicate dividends. Just exempt the 1st $50,000 and tax he rest as 24601 Jul 2012 #29
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Senate Democrats Split Fr...»Reply #5