Why the Hatred for Outsourcing?

[geoffry]

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: geoffry

Thank you, you were the first person to just plainly say "an American is more important therefore he should have a job".

Since you own a business, just who are your customers? If you're in America, just why should they give up their jobs. Like I said, you give up yours if you want them to have one...otherwise, for the millions of Americans who have already lost out to the rest of the world because of unfair wages, currency and so called free trade laws and especially for the CEO to pad his wallet for a few more million, "UP YOURS".

I don't have customers in the true sense of the word.

I run one of those evil small businesses that deals in evil Wall Street securities.

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: geoffry

The US govt can encourage this more by slashing the corporate tax rate and cap gains tax considerably.

Cut capital gains taxes from the 15% it already is to lower??? LOL...buwhahah! :laugh:

Why should they get cheaper rates, which they aleady are, for owning and selling stocks vs my labor? Why should I pay a higher rate than they do? Why does Buffet's secretary pay a higher rate than Buffet does when her salary is $75,000 per year and he makes billions?

Also, the ole corporate tax rate myth. Sure, the US has one of the highest RATES in the developed world, but also has the 2nd LOWEST BURDEN of taxes in the developed world. i.e. after all of the tax cuts and breaks, they pay the 2nd lowest in the world.

How about giving me, joe middle class a tax break. Give Mr. Millionaire a million dollars in tax breaks and he "might" spend some of it. Give 1,000 middle class folks a $1,000 break and we'll spend it all.

Irony is looking at the tags of all those small US flags in the ground around the neighborhood this week and reading the following "Made in China". Argh!!!

 

[geoffry]

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: geoffry

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: geoffry
Then forget the USA and try the Albertan tar sands. Or heck, go anywhere in Alberta. Companies are starved for good employees in pretty much every industry.

Are you stupid? If the people can't afford to pack up and move to Texas, why would they move to Canada? And if everyone moved there, would there still be enough jobs for them all? Seriously?

Shakes head at the OP.

With the offshoring/outsourcing thread, you're fighting a losing battle as far as I'm concerned. It's not about efficiencies, it's about CEO's making as much profit for themselves (#1) and their shareholders (which 90% is the top 5% of the country). Throw in H1-B Visa's and you've got a clusterfuck for the US worker. The only thing the US worker gets is a bonus==== 1-800-2Bone-US

Theres only one of me and atleast 5 people against it so far.

I'm doing not bad considering how out numbered I am



But then what if the H1-B Visa holder stays in the US for 10 yrs and becomes a citizen? Is he not an American at that point? And with this American employed, doesn't that make you happy?

You're outnumbered with ME alone on this one pal. As for the H1-B visa plan, just look at Chrysler. Brought in 500 H1-B visa people, trained them for about 2 years and then let the entire original staff go while retaining the H1-B visa workers to take over the former US workers jobs. Fuck that.

But if these workers stay for 10 yrs or so and become citizens, doesn't that make you feel better? After that they are TRUE AMERICANS.

I agree that being educated here and then going home to use the knowledge we taught them to better their country is not as right, but to offset this potential problem North American Universities and Colleges usually charge atleast double for foreigners, I'm not sure about European schools policies on this though.

 

[BarneyFife]

LOL@OP.

One of the worst topics ever. What next, why high oil prices are good for the average joe?

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: geoffry

But if these workers stay for 10 yrs or so and become citizens, doesn't that make you feel better? After that they are TRUE AMERICANS.

I agree that being educated here and then going home to use the knowledge we taught them to better their country is not as right, but to offset this potential problem North American Universities and Colleges usually charge atleast double for foreigners, I'm not sure about European schools policies on this though.

If a current US worker was displaced by someone with an H1-B visa, then no, I don't feel better. Fuck that too.

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: geoffry


I don't have customers in the true sense of the word.

I run one of those evil small businesses that deals in evil Wall Street securities.

#1: Small businesses are not evil
#2: I now see why you love outsourcing. Nothing to do with giving the rest of the world jobs. Simply to prop your stock dealings up, especially if you are dealing in securities from around the world in emerging markets.

 

[geoffry]

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: geoffry

The US govt can encourage this more by slashing the corporate tax rate and cap gains tax considerably.

Cut capital gains taxes from the 15% it already is to lower??? LOL...buwhahah! :laugh:

Why should they get cheaper rates, which they aleady are, for owning and selling stocks vs my labor? Why should I pay a higher rate than they do? Why does Buffet's secretary pay a higher rate than Buffet does when her salary is $75,000 per year and he makes billions?

Also, the ole corporate tax rate myth. Sure, the US has one of the highest RATES in the developed world, but also has the 2nd LOWEST BURDEN of taxes in the developed world. i.e. after all of the tax cuts and breaks, they pay the 2nd lowest in the world.

How about giving me, joe middle class a tax break. Give Mr. Millionaire a million dollars in tax breaks and he "might" spend some of it. Give 1,000 middle class folks a $1,000 break and we'll spend it all.

Ah, so we are at another dilemna. Why should someone on Wall Street pay a higher tax rate than say a worker in a GM factory? Because they don't work as hard? While it may not be physical labour the stress can be pretty wild.

Buffett's salary is actually equal to the stock price of one class A Berkshire share. So if the price is $100,000, his salary for that yr is $100,000.

His net worth is so incredibly high due to his holdings of BRK.A, and based off his lifestyle he probably doesn't sell many shares. Thus tax on his salary would be a higher rate than said secretary.

Selling his shares would be at a lower rate, but then again that secretary can buy and sell shares just like he can and pay that same low tax rate.

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: geoffry

Originally posted by: loki8481
a job for me > a job for you

Yes, for an individual them having a job is very important. And this I completely agree with and understand.

But why do some people hate it more to lose their job to someone in say China as opposed to someone a few blocks away?

it seems like there's an inherent unfairness when someone halfway across the world can do a person's job for pennies on the dollar, and the person in the western world couldn't even compete for the job if he wanted to without living out of a cardboard box.

maybe it'll all equalize out in the long run, but in the immediate future... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKJ5oJs3iNY

 

[geoffry]

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: geoffry

But if these workers stay for 10 yrs or so and become citizens, doesn't that make you feel better? After that they are TRUE AMERICANS.

I agree that being educated here and then going home to use the knowledge we taught them to better their country is not as right, but to offset this potential problem North American Universities and Colleges usually charge atleast double for foreigners, I'm not sure about European schools policies on this though.

If a current US worker was displaced by someone with an H1-B visa, then no, I don't feel better. Fuck that too.

So now with foreigners who have become American citizens still not being good enough to work in the US, who would you like to be the only people employed? Native Americans?

 

[geoffry]

Originally posted by: BarneyFife
LOL@OP.

One of the worst topics ever. What next, why high oil prices are good for the average joe?

LOL, no not for today

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: geoffry

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: geoffry

The US govt can encourage this more by slashing the corporate tax rate and cap gains tax considerably.

Cut capital gains taxes from the 15% it already is to lower??? LOL...buwhahah! :laugh:

Why should they get cheaper rates, which they aleady are, for owning and selling stocks vs my labor? Why should I pay a higher rate than they do? Why does Buffet's secretary pay a higher rate than Buffet does when her salary is $75,000 per year and he makes billions?

Also, the ole corporate tax rate myth. Sure, the US has one of the highest RATES in the developed world, but also has the 2nd LOWEST BURDEN of taxes in the developed world. i.e. after all of the tax cuts and breaks, they pay the 2nd lowest in the world.

How about giving me, joe middle class a tax break. Give Mr. Millionaire a million dollars in tax breaks and he "might" spend some of it. Give 1,000 middle class folks a $1,000 break and we'll spend it all.

Ah, so we are at another dilemna. Why should someone on Wall Street pay a higher tax rate than say a worker in a GM factory? Because they don't work as hard? While it may not be physical labour the stress can be pretty wild.

Buffett's salary is actually equal to the stock price of one class A Berkshire share. So if the price is $100,000, his salary for that yr is $100,000.

His net worth is so incredibly high due to his holdings of BRK.A, and based off his lifestyle he probably doesn't sell many shares. Thus tax on his salary would be a higher rate than said secretary.

Selling his shares would be at a lower rate, but then again that secretary can buy and sell shares just like he can and pay that same low tax rate.

I didn't say their tax rate should or should not be higher. I stated why should my tax rate be higher than theirs. Why should people who trade stocks for a living pay a lower rate than I do? Should they pay a higher rate? Only if they fall in a taxable income range higher than the next marginal tax rate.

Buffet makes his money from stocks. Sure, his secretary can buy and sell a few and pay a lower rate on what she gains, but shy should her labor be taxed at a higher rate than the income from selling stocks? Ah, just like outsourcing their jobs to fuck the, make sure that the big money makers pay less from capital because capital is more important than labor. Fuck that too.

 

[geoffry]

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: geoffry

Originally posted by: loki8481
a job for me > a job for you

Yes, for an individual them having a job is very important. And this I completely agree with and understand.

But why do some people hate it more to lose their job to someone in say China as opposed to someone a few blocks away?

it seems like there's an inherent unfairness when someone halfway across the world can do a person's job for pennies on the dollar, and the person in the western world couldn't even compete for the job if he wanted to without living out of a cardboard box.

maybe it'll all equalize out in the long run, but in the immediate future... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKJ5oJs3iNY

However, would you prefer to lose your job to someone in Vietnam or to a machine?

The Vietnamese person would do it poorer than you in many cases, but would be very cheap.

The machine on the other hand does a perfect job (most of the time), can do it many times faster than a human and never gets tired or demands a union.

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: geoffry

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: geoffry

But if these workers stay for 10 yrs or so and become citizens, doesn't that make you feel better? After that they are TRUE AMERICANS.

I agree that being educated here and then going home to use the knowledge we taught them to better their country is not as right, but to offset this potential problem North American Universities and Colleges usually charge atleast double for foreigners, I'm not sure about European schools policies on this though.

If a current US worker was displaced by someone with an H1-B visa, then no, I don't feel better. Fuck that too.

So now with foreigners who have become American citizens still not being good enough to work in the US, who would you like to be the only people employed? Native Americans?

Did I say that? I said if it "displaces" a current US worker by bringing in an H1-B visa worker, than fuck that. The only reason that those people are brought in is because they are paid less, period. The ole "we can't find qualified people" excuse is really "we can't find qualified people who we can pay half salary or less".

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: geoffry
However, would you prefer to lose your job to someone in Vietnam or to a machine?

The Vietnamese person would do it poorer than you in many cases, but would be very cheap.

The machine on the other hand does a perfect job (most of the time), can do it many times faster than a human and never gets tired or demands a union.

Ah workers vs. machines. Well, if you close a US plant down and ship it offshore, you lose EVERY job at that plant. If you replace some of the workers with machines, you have managers, quality personel, a few production workers, and MORE engineers/technicians to now support those machines as well as having a plant OPEN and running for business in the US. Don't forget, someone in the US has to design, build and set up those machines in the factory. Finally, you generally have a better product at a more efficient production pace than you had before not to mention that shipping locally from one state to the next is lower than shipping from other contries to the US and then to the state/customer. Foreign workers vs machines in the US? Machines win every single time.

 

[geoffry]

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: geoffry

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: geoffry

The US govt can encourage this more by slashing the corporate tax rate and cap gains tax considerably.

Cut capital gains taxes from the 15% it already is to lower??? LOL...buwhahah! :laugh:

Why should they get cheaper rates, which they aleady are, for owning and selling stocks vs my labor? Why should I pay a higher rate than they do? Why does Buffet's secretary pay a higher rate than Buffet does when her salary is $75,000 per year and he makes billions?

Also, the ole corporate tax rate myth. Sure, the US has one of the highest RATES in the developed world, but also has the 2nd LOWEST BURDEN of taxes in the developed world. i.e. after all of the tax cuts and breaks, they pay the 2nd lowest in the world.

How about giving me, joe middle class a tax break. Give Mr. Millionaire a million dollars in tax breaks and he "might" spend some of it. Give 1,000 middle class folks a $1,000 break and we'll spend it all.

Ah, so we are at another dilemna. Why should someone on Wall Street pay a higher tax rate than say a worker in a GM factory? Because they don't work as hard? While it may not be physical labour the stress can be pretty wild.

Buffett's salary is actually equal to the stock price of one class A Berkshire share. So if the price is $100,000, his salary for that yr is $100,000.

His net worth is so incredibly high due to his holdings of BRK.A, and based off his lifestyle he probably doesn't sell many shares. Thus tax on his salary would be a higher rate than said secretary.

Selling his shares would be at a lower rate, but then again that secretary can buy and sell shares just like he can and pay that same low tax rate.

I didn't say their tax rate should or should not be higher. I stated why should my tax rate be higher than theirs. Why should people who trade stocks for a living pay a lower rate than I do? Should they pay a higher rate? Only if they fall in a taxable income range higher than the next marginal tax rate.

Buffet makes his money from stocks. Sure, his secretary can buy and sell a few and pay a lower rate on what she gains, but shy should her labor be taxed at a higher rate than the income from selling stocks? Ah, just like outsourcing their jobs to fuck the, make sure that the big money makers pay less from capital because capital is more important than labor. Fuck that too.

I have no problem with Obama's plan to raise cap gains tax to I think 25% is where he is thinking. I would prefer it lower but the USA needs to reduce its deficits, and raising taxes a smidge and cutting out all the unnecessary spending will help in that fight.

But, if you trade stocks actively for income, it goes into the income bracket and not the cap gains bracket at the lower rate. Thus, your argument for a trader getting the lower rate isn't true. You need to hold a stock for I believe over 6 months or perhaps a year in the US to qualify for a sale to be cap gains. (I might be wrong, I don't live in the USA)

 

[geoffry]

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: geoffry

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: geoffry

But if these workers stay for 10 yrs or so and become citizens, doesn't that make you feel better? After that they are TRUE AMERICANS.

I agree that being educated here and then going home to use the knowledge we taught them to better their country is not as right, but to offset this potential problem North American Universities and Colleges usually charge atleast double for foreigners, I'm not sure about European schools policies on this though.

If a current US worker was displaced by someone with an H1-B visa, then no, I don't feel better. Fuck that too.

So now with foreigners who have become American citizens still not being good enough to work in the US, who would you like to be the only people employed? Native Americans?

Did I say that? I said if it "displaces" a current US worker by bringing in an H1-B visa worker, than fuck that. The only reason that those people are brought in is because they are paid less, period. The ole "we can't find qualified people" excuse is really "we can't find qualified people who we can pay half salary or less".

Perhaps, in some scenarios.

However in some job markets the situation is so tight the owners will hire anyone and give them quite decent pay, granted these areas are a minority in North America.

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: geoffry
But, if you trade stocks actively for income, it goes into the income bracket and not the cap gains bracket at the lower rate. Thus, your argument for a trader getting the lower rate isn't true. You need to hold a stock for I believe over 6 months or perhaps a year in the US to qualify for a sale to be cap gains. (I might be wrong, I don't live in the USA)

I know about short term vs long term capital gains rates. You have to hold for one year to get the lower rate.

That still doesn't make that "income" more special than my labor.

Also, I finally see why you don't give a rats ass about US workers losing their jobs...you don't even live here. What an asshat.

 

[geoffry]

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: geoffry
However, would you prefer to lose your job to someone in Vietnam or to a machine?

The Vietnamese person would do it poorer than you in many cases, but would be very cheap.

The machine on the other hand does a perfect job (most of the time), can do it many times faster than a human and never gets tired or demands a union.

Ah workers vs. machines. Well, if you close a US plant down and ship it offshore, you lose EVERY job at that plant. If you replace some of the workers with machines, you have managers, quality personel, a few production workers, and MORE engineers/technicians to now support those machines as well as having a plant OPEN and running for business in the US. Don't forget, someone in the US has to design, build and set up those machines in the factory. Finally, you generally have a better product at a more efficient production pace than you had before not to mention that shipping locally from one state to the next is lower than shipping from other contries to the US and then to the state/customer. Foreign workers vs machines in the US? Machines win every single time.

What is your take on an American firm buying an advanced foreign machine made in Japan or Germany? They didn't utilize Americans in the design or construction, unless of course some sneaky yank got a visa and went to Germany and took away a TRUE Germans job.

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: geoffry

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: geoffry
However, would you prefer to lose your job to someone in Vietnam or to a machine?

The Vietnamese person would do it poorer than you in many cases, but would be very cheap.

The machine on the other hand does a perfect job (most of the time), can do it many times faster than a human and never gets tired or demands a union.

Ah workers vs. machines. Well, if you close a US plant down and ship it offshore, you lose EVERY job at that plant. If you replace some of the workers with machines, you have managers, quality personel, a few production workers, and MORE engineers/technicians to now support those machines as well as having a plant OPEN and running for business in the US. Don't forget, someone in the US has to design, build and set up those machines in the factory. Finally, you generally have a better product at a more efficient production pace than you had before not to mention that shipping locally from one state to the next is lower than shipping from other contries to the US and then to the state/customer. Foreign workers vs machines in the US? Machines win every single time.

What is your take on an American firm buying an advanced foreign machine made in Japan or Germany? They didn't utilize Americans in the design or construction, unless of course some sneaky yank got a visa and went to Germany and took away a TRUE Germans job.

Not every single machine is gong to be made here, period. I would also assume that we are selling machines to them for various reasons and it somewhat balances out. However, if buying that machine means keeping a US plant open, my above argument still stands. You need managers, quality personel, production workers (fewer) and plant technical support for the machines.

I can tell you this, buying "cheaper" machines from countries like China, you get what you pay for many times. My company bought 3 presses from China last year for a price just over one press made in the US. One year later, the company was buying 3 US made presses to repace the Chinese press which was falling apart and never worked correctly. Hopefully, they learned a lesson on that one but I doubt it.

 

[geoffry]

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: geoffry
But, if you trade stocks actively for income, it goes into the income bracket and not the cap gains bracket at the lower rate. Thus, your argument for a trader getting the lower rate isn't true. You need to hold a stock for I believe over 6 months or perhaps a year in the US to qualify for a sale to be cap gains. (I might be wrong, I don't live in the USA)

I know about short term vs long term capital gains rates. You have to hold for one year to get the lower rate.

That still doesn't make that "income" more special than my labor.

Also, I finally see why you don't give a rats ass about US workers losing their jobs...you don't even live here. What an asshat.

Whoa whoa, before calling me names read my first thread, I included Canadians and Europeans as well.

And I never called that income more special than your labour, if its a long term hold its not likely to be income, as not many people can go that long without a payday, thus indeed wealthy people benefit more from lower cap gains as they are more likely to be able to hold stocks for longer periods of time without the need to sell. However, it also helps the person saving up for retirement who is investing in stocks.

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: geoffry

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: geoffry
But, if you trade stocks actively for income, it goes into the income bracket and not the cap gains bracket at the lower rate. Thus, your argument for a trader getting the lower rate isn't true. You need to hold a stock for I believe over 6 months or perhaps a year in the US to qualify for a sale to be cap gains. (I might be wrong, I don't live in the USA)

I know about short term vs long term capital gains rates. You have to hold for one year to get the lower rate.

That still doesn't make that "income" more special than my labor.

Also, I finally see why you don't give a rats ass about US workers losing their jobs...you don't even live here. What an asshat.

Whoa whoa, before calling me names read my first thread, I included Canadians and Europeans as well.

And I never called that income more special than your labour, if its a long term hold its not likely to be income, as not many people can go that long without a payday, thus indeed wealthy people benefit more from lower cap gains as they are more likely to be able to hold stocks for longer periods of time without the need to sell. However, it also helps the person saving up for retirement who is investing in stocks.

Most retirement plans in the US get no special tax rates. It was stated on CNBC that over 95% of all retirement savings for the bottom 90% of the people were in retirement accounts, not regular broker accounts. With that, unless it's a Roth, you pay FULL income tax rates on the money when taken out regardless of how long it has sat there. Even with a Roth, you pay FULL income tax rates on the money that went into the account.


Oh, and I'll be more than happy to call anybody names that thinks that US workers should lose their jobs just so the rest of the world can have one.

 

[geoffry]

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: geoffry

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: geoffry
However, would you prefer to lose your job to someone in Vietnam or to a machine?

The Vietnamese person would do it poorer than you in many cases, but would be very cheap.

The machine on the other hand does a perfect job (most of the time), can do it many times faster than a human and never gets tired or demands a union.

Ah workers vs. machines. Well, if you close a US plant down and ship it offshore, you lose EVERY job at that plant. If you replace some of the workers with machines, you have managers, quality personel, a few production workers, and MORE engineers/technicians to now support those machines as well as having a plant OPEN and running for business in the US. Don't forget, someone in the US has to design, build and set up those machines in the factory. Finally, you generally have a better product at a more efficient production pace than you had before not to mention that shipping locally from one state to the next is lower than shipping from other contries to the US and then to the state/customer. Foreign workers vs machines in the US? Machines win every single time.

What is your take on an American firm buying an advanced foreign machine made in Japan or Germany? They didn't utilize Americans in the design or construction, unless of course some sneaky yank got a visa and went to Germany and took away a TRUE Germans job.

Not every single machine is gong to be made here, period. I would also assume that we are selling machines to them for various reasons and it somewhat balances out. However, if buying that machine means keeping a US plant open, my above argument still stands. You need managers, quality personel, production workers (fewer) and plant technical support for the machines.

I can tell you this, buying "cheaper" machines from countries like China, you get what you pay for many times. My company bought 3 presses from China last year for a price just over one press made in the US. One year later, the company was buying 3 US made presses to repace the Chinese press which was falling apart and never worked correctly. Hopefully, they learned a lesson on that one but I doubt it.

I just seen the second paragraph you edited in here.

I agree, I know lots of people in the custom cabinet business around here, none of them buy machines built in China, they all prefer German and Austrian with American a close third.

 

[geoffry]

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: geoffry

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: geoffry
But, if you trade stocks actively for income, it goes into the income bracket and not the cap gains bracket at the lower rate. Thus, your argument for a trader getting the lower rate isn't true. You need to hold a stock for I believe over 6 months or perhaps a year in the US to qualify for a sale to be cap gains. (I might be wrong, I don't live in the USA)

I know about short term vs long term capital gains rates. You have to hold for one year to get the lower rate.

That still doesn't make that "income" more special than my labor.

Also, I finally see why you don't give a rats ass about US workers losing their jobs...you don't even live here. What an asshat.

Whoa whoa, before calling me names read my first thread, I included Canadians and Europeans as well.

And I never called that income more special than your labour, if its a long term hold its not likely to be income, as not many people can go that long without a payday, thus indeed wealthy people benefit more from lower cap gains as they are more likely to be able to hold stocks for longer periods of time without the need to sell. However, it also helps the person saving up for retirement who is investing in stocks.

Most retirement plans in the US get no special tax rates. It was stated on CNBC that over 95% of all retirement savings for the bottom 90% of the people were in retirement accounts, not regular broker accounts. With that, unless it's a Roth, you pay FULL income tax rates on the money when taken out regardless of how long it has sat there. Even with a Roth, you pay FULL income tax rates on the money that went into the account.


Oh, and I'll be more than happy to call anybody names that thinks that US workers should lose their jobs just so the rest of the world can have one.

Yes, but when you are retired your regular income stream has vanished, therefore the money you pull out of your RRSP or 401k is likely to be taxed at a lower rate. I guess we should raise taxes on those sneaky seniors who saved for their retirement now eh?

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: geoffry

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: geoffry

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: geoffry
But, if you trade stocks actively for income, it goes into the income bracket and not the cap gains bracket at the lower rate. Thus, your argument for a trader getting the lower rate isn't true. You need to hold a stock for I believe over 6 months or perhaps a year in the US to qualify for a sale to be cap gains. (I might be wrong, I don't live in the USA)

I know about short term vs long term capital gains rates. You have to hold for one year to get the lower rate.

That still doesn't make that "income" more special than my labor.

Also, I finally see why you don't give a rats ass about US workers losing their jobs...you don't even live here. What an asshat.

Whoa whoa, before calling me names read my first thread, I included Canadians and Europeans as well.

And I never called that income more special than your labour, if its a long term hold its not likely to be income, as not many people can go that long without a payday, thus indeed wealthy people benefit more from lower cap gains as they are more likely to be able to hold stocks for longer periods of time without the need to sell. However, it also helps the person saving up for retirement who is investing in stocks.

Most retirement plans in the US get no special tax rates. It was stated on CNBC that over 95% of all retirement savings for the bottom 90% of the people were in retirement accounts, not regular broker accounts. With that, unless it's a Roth, you pay FULL income tax rates on the money when taken out regardless of how long it has sat there. Even with a Roth, you pay FULL income tax rates on the money that went into the account.


Oh, and I'll be more than happy to call anybody names that thinks that US workers should lose their jobs just so the rest of the world can have one.

Yes, but when you are retired your regular income stream has vanished, therefore the money you pull out of your RRSP or 401k is likely to be taxed at a lower rate. I guess we should raise taxes on those sneaky seniors who saved for their retirement now eh?

Maybe it will, maybe it won't depending on your income level from pensions, etc. Long term capital gains rates in this country are either 5% or 15%, IIRC. How about making those retirement accounts have a max rate the same as those, assuming the assets have been held for the one year lower rate period?

I'm going to bed. Have too much hardwood floor to lay tomorrow and don't have any more time or energy to throw to this subject. Good luck in persuading USA workers to give up their jobs to other countries. As far as I'm concerned, the Bush one finger victory salute to you for even trying.

 

[geoffry]

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: geoffry

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: geoffry

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: geoffry
But, if you trade stocks actively for income, it goes into the income bracket and not the cap gains bracket at the lower rate. Thus, your argument for a trader getting the lower rate isn't true. You need to hold a stock for I believe over 6 months or perhaps a year in the US to qualify for a sale to be cap gains. (I might be wrong, I don't live in the USA)

I know about short term vs long term capital gains rates. You have to hold for one year to get the lower rate.

That still doesn't make that "income" more special than my labor.

Also, I finally see why you don't give a rats ass about US workers losing their jobs...you don't even live here. What an asshat.

Whoa whoa, before calling me names read my first thread, I included Canadians and Europeans as well.

And I never called that income more special than your labour, if its a long term hold its not likely to be income, as not many people can go that long without a payday, thus indeed wealthy people benefit more from lower cap gains as they are more likely to be able to hold stocks for longer periods of time without the need to sell. However, it also helps the person saving up for retirement who is investing in stocks.

Most retirement plans in the US get no special tax rates. It was stated on CNBC that over 95% of all retirement savings for the bottom 90% of the people were in retirement accounts, not regular broker accounts. With that, unless it's a Roth, you pay FULL income tax rates on the money when taken out regardless of how long it has sat there. Even with a Roth, you pay FULL income tax rates on the money that went into the account.


Oh, and I'll be more than happy to call anybody names that thinks that US workers should lose their jobs just so the rest of the world can have one.

Yes, but when you are retired your regular income stream has vanished, therefore the money you pull out of your RRSP or 401k is likely to be taxed at a lower rate. I guess we should raise taxes on those sneaky seniors who saved for their retirement now eh?

Maybe it will, maybe it won't depending on your income level from pensions, etc. Long term capital gains rates in this country are either 5% or 15%, IIRC. How about making those retirement accounts have a max rate the same as those, assuming the assets have been held for the one year lower rate period?

I would have no problem with all retirement accounts be taxed at a low rate.

If they spend the money if boosts the economy and if they die the remainder gets hit with a death tax when its passed on to children in the US right?

But anyways, back to our outsourcing discussion...