Bush tax policy sucks if you work to live.

[Jhhnn]

That's not a 401K plan, charrison, it's a defined contribution plan, of which 401K's are only one possibility. Like this-

http://www.aicpa.org/ebpaqc/pens_defcon/about.htm

You're right about the administration of 401K plans, for sure, but defined contribution plans can often leave the management running the show, rather than professional investment folk as with independently administered plans, or by the employees themselves, as with 401K plans. Defined contribution plans can be fine, so long as the contributions are large enough, and the administration done by professionals who have no interest other than having the plan grow...

 

[Zebo]

These people making hundreds and thousands of dollars in total income each year just aren't paying their fair share at 15%.
-----------------------
15%? I sold and netted 313K from a house last year and paid zero tax. Long Term Capital Gains and estate taxes are slated to be eliminated. Nicole Hiltons great great grandaughter will inherit millions tax free while yours will pay at minium 15%-36% on already paltry wage income, probably working for Hilton hotels/convention center as an accountant/waitress/whatever. This is what I mean it sucks if you work to live. And is in fact regressive when taking taxes as a whole along with marginal rates.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Jhhnn
That's not a 401K plan, charrison, it's a defined contribution plan, of which 401K's are only one possibility. Like this-

http://www.aicpa.org/ebpaqc/pens_defcon/about.htm

You're right about the administration of 401K plans, for sure, but defined contribution plans can often leave the management running the show, rather than professional investment folk as with independently administered plans, or by the employees themselves, as with 401K plans. Defined contribution plans can be fine, so long as the contributions are large enough, and the administration done by professionals who have no interest other than having the plan grow...

Enron was a bad example then. Enron had a 401k plan. I have yet to see a retirment investment plan that was run by the company. These company run investment plans no doubt exist, but are not very common.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Spencer278

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
Until investment income is taxed like what it is, income, those that make their money from investment income, the rich, do not pay their fair share. I ain't rich, but I do make some money off investments, and Bush's tax cuts RAISED my taxes. I am stuck paying that flat 15% on dividends as opposed to as it was before where it was taxed as income I'd get most if not all of that back. So here I am, a college student with little to no earned income getting slapped with higher taxes while some fat cat making hundreds of thousands of dollars got the taxes he's having to pay on his dividends cut in half.

As far as i know, the only the changed about the taxation of dividends is the rate at which they are taxed(lowered).

No, they changed it from being taxed as ordinary income. Now it's taxed like capital gains, independent from your earned income.

Which means instead of being taxed at the top marginal rate of 38.6%, it now taxed at 15%. Not sure how this can come out a loser with a 61% reduction in tax load on dividends.

Just shows how out of touch with reallity charrison is most people are not in the highest tax rate, in fact it tends to be the rich that are or should be in the highest tax rate.

Except there is not a lower tax rate. 15% is the lowest tax rate on income. It seems the investing poor also caught a break here as well.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by:charrison

Except there is not a lower tax rate. 15% is the lowest tax rate on income. It seems the investing poor also caught a break here as well.

The "investing poor"? Holy spinmeister crap, CAD has taught you so well.

 

[PingSpike]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
No comment on whether this is true or not. I wouldn't be able to figure out the tax laws if my life depended on it.

But there is something else to look at here. Republicans complain about Democrats, and Democrats complain about Republicans. Yet, with either option we get the same thing: a rich old white guy. Maybe it is time for people to start looking at other options. We're in a rut, and doing the same things we always do isn't going to help. It's time to have someone shake up the dead end bureaucracy.

Unfortunately too many people have falled into the bureaucratic trap, and we will probably never see a worthwhile change.

I certainly agree with that. Unfortunately both of our options today are from the rich boys club. The way the current system is setup, its hard for anyone who doesn't have some serious cash to get off the ground in the presidential race. I wish there were some one of a more modest background running. I don't see how some one who never lacked anything represents me.

 

[stnicralisk]

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon
Bush CUT EVERYONE"S TAX RATE!!!

EVERYONE KEEPS MORE OF THEIR OWN MONEY.

i'm appalled that some of you apparently are so blinded by class envy and Bush-Hatred that your unable to grasp this simple fact.

Someone above posted that theyre paying more taxes now because their only source of income was a small amount of investment cash. I guess your statement is full of crap huh? People that dont have investment incomes are going to save nothing.. When are you going to grasp that... I love people who pop into the thread to say the same thing over and over without reading anything at all.

 

[stnicralisk]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Spencer278

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
Until investment income is taxed like what it is, income, those that make their money from investment income, the rich, do not pay their fair share. I ain't rich, but I do make some money off investments, and Bush's tax cuts RAISED my taxes. I am stuck paying that flat 15% on dividends as opposed to as it was before where it was taxed as income I'd get most if not all of that back. So here I am, a college student with little to no earned income getting slapped with higher taxes while some fat cat making hundreds of thousands of dollars got the taxes he's having to pay on his dividends cut in half.

As far as i know, the only the changed about the taxation of dividends is the rate at which they are taxed(lowered).

No, they changed it from being taxed as ordinary income. Now it's taxed like capital gains, independent from your earned income.

Which means instead of being taxed at the top marginal rate of 38.6%, it now taxed at 15%. Not sure how this can come out a loser with a 61% reduction in tax load on dividends.

Just shows how out of touch with reallity charrison is most people are not in the highest tax rate, in fact it tends to be the rich that are or should be in the highest tax rate.

Except there is not a lower tax rate. 15% is the lowest tax rate on income. It seems the investing poor also caught a break here as well.

OMG the investing poor!? While theyre in HUD housing theyre buying stocks!!? Youre a flaming troll.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Spencer278

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
Until investment income is taxed like what it is, income, those that make their money from investment income, the rich, do not pay their fair share. I ain't rich, but I do make some money off investments, and Bush's tax cuts RAISED my taxes. I am stuck paying that flat 15% on dividends as opposed to as it was before where it was taxed as income I'd get most if not all of that back. So here I am, a college student with little to no earned income getting slapped with higher taxes while some fat cat making hundreds of thousands of dollars got the taxes he's having to pay on his dividends cut in half.

As far as i know, the only the changed about the taxation of dividends is the rate at which they are taxed(lowered).

No, they changed it from being taxed as ordinary income. Now it's taxed like capital gains, independent from your earned income.

Which means instead of being taxed at the top marginal rate of 38.6%, it now taxed at 15%. Not sure how this can come out a loser with a 61% reduction in tax load on dividends.

Just shows how out of touch with reallity charrison is most people are not in the highest tax rate, in fact it tends to be the rich that are or should be in the highest tax rate.

Except there is not a lower tax rate. 15% is the lowest tax rate on income. It seems the investing poor also caught a break here as well.

Did you not read what I said? The investing poor now has to pay 15% as opposed to 0% before.

 

[stnicralisk]

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Spencer278

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
Until investment income is taxed like what it is, income, those that make their money from investment income, the rich, do not pay their fair share. I ain't rich, but I do make some money off investments, and Bush's tax cuts RAISED my taxes. I am stuck paying that flat 15% on dividends as opposed to as it was before where it was taxed as income I'd get most if not all of that back. So here I am, a college student with little to no earned income getting slapped with higher taxes while some fat cat making hundreds of thousands of dollars got the taxes he's having to pay on his dividends cut in half.

As far as i know, the only the changed about the taxation of dividends is the rate at which they are taxed(lowered).

No, they changed it from being taxed as ordinary income. Now it's taxed like capital gains, independent from your earned income.

Which means instead of being taxed at the top marginal rate of 38.6%, it now taxed at 15%. Not sure how this can come out a loser with a 61% reduction in tax load on dividends.

Just shows how out of touch with reallity charrison is most people are not in the highest tax rate, in fact it tends to be the rich that are or should be in the highest tax rate.

Except there is not a lower tax rate. 15% is the lowest tax rate on income. It seems the investing poor also caught a break here as well.

Did you not read what I said? The investing poor now has to pay 15% as opposed to 0% before.

I dont think he has read any of this thread. Same as the guy that keeps posting in all caps that everyone gets to keep more of their money.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Crimson

Originally posted by: Spencer278
Some fuzzy math. Goverment speeding increase, tax on rich people decrease, tax on poor people decrease, so that leaves the question who paid for the increase in speending.

The growth in the economy.. people making more money = people paying more taxes.. wonderful system.

Since when are people making more money?

There's a large backslide in white-collar income as jobs go overseas for positions like programmers, analysts, and even helpdesk. Those jobs that get filled by the formerly employed are typically lower-paying. In the meantime, it takes those people longer to find a job and they exhaust severance packages and/or unemployment.

Ever wonder why there's a record number of foreclosures and bankruptcies and consumer debt is skyrocketing?

 

[Jhhnn]

Get used to it, Stnicralisk, quite common. One of the other annoying features of this particular forum is the tendency to inline huge pieces of the thread as nested quotes, as you've done, too. It's a total waste of bandwidth.

Gonad the Barbarian brings up an interesting point, however. I'm just guessing, but I suspect he's the recipient of some trust or other financial arrangement that supplements his income with dividends. So he's young and strapped for cash, attending college, using that income for living expenses, and the whole arrangement is out of his hands, beyond his control. Really nothing wrong with it, and not unusual in families who have some means.

OTOH, his small income was formerly too small to be taxed at the federal level, but is now taxable at the 15% rate. In a way, however, he's just playing catch up with people who work for the same income and pay 15% SS and Medicare... not too bad a deal, really, all things considered, but it IS a tax increase for the few folks in his position...

Given the incredible deficits, representing these changes as a tax "cut" or as "relief" is exceptionally cruel and misleading- it's really a tax "loan". It seems unlikely that those receiving the most from it now will end up paying proportionately when it's time to pay up...

 

[charrison]

Until investment income is taxed like what it is, income, those that make their money from investment income, the rich, do not pay their fair share. I ain't rich, but I do make some money off investments, and Bush's tax cuts RAISED my taxes. I am stuck paying that flat 15% on dividends as opposed to as it was before where it was taxed as income I'd get most if not all of that back. So here I am, a college student with little to no earned income getting slapped with higher taxes while some fat cat making hundreds of thousands of dollars got the taxes he's having to pay on his dividends, and likely a good chunk of his actual income, cut in half.

Let me try this again.
The claim is made that dividend taxes were lower(for low income folks) than the current tax policy
But the facts dont show that.
linkage

The new law applies the capital gains tax rates to dividends. Taxpayers in the 10% or 15% bracket pay a 5% rate of tax on dividends paid between January 1, 2003, and December 31, 2007, and zero percent in 2008. Taxpayers in tax brackets above 15% pay a 15% rate of tax on dividends paid between January 1, 2003, and December 31, 2008.

Dividend taxes are currently as low as 5% for those in the 10 and 15 marginal tax brackets.

In 2000 you paid 15% on your first 26K of earnings
In 2003 you pay 10% on the your first 7k of earnings and 15% up to 28k

linkage
Linkage

Based upon all you have given, your taxes went down.

 

[heartsurgeon]

Someone above posted that theyre paying more taxes now because their only source of income was a small amount of investment cash. I guess your statement is full of crap huh? People that dont have investment incomes are going to save nothing.. When are you going to grasp that

This statement is unintelligable...

 

[LordMagnusKain]

Originally posted by: heartsurgeon

Someone above posted that theyre paying more taxes now because their only source of income was a small amount of investment cash. I guess your statement is full of crap huh? People that dont have investment incomes are going to save nothing.. When are you going to grasp that

This statement is unintelligable...

he's saying that he knows that people who invest money make more money, so it doesn't matter that his own taxes went down.

 

[SNC]

You people do realize that a poor person does not sign your pay check.
I am starting to see a large number of people spending a ton more money in the last 6 months.
I have too many jobs going on to do with the workforce I have now.
So guess what, I have to hire some one!!

Is this because of the tax cut?
Who knows? The guy I'm going to hire doesn?t know either.
Nor does he care.