39.9% Tax on Our RV

[Francie26]

I got your back honey & your little neg to!

Thank you, my friend. I appreciate that--very much.

[dontlop]

Many of you need to educate yourselves on taxes:

"... the Republicans will end up blaming Obama for the policies they pushed in the Bush years, and the recession that began on a Republican president’s watch, and a continuation of tax cuts that they supported. They’ll have to. Because if they took all that off the debt clock, there wouldn’t be much debt there to blame him for at all.

... There is no single policy we have passed that has added as much to the debt, or that is projected to add as much to the debt in the future, as the Bush tax cuts, which Republicans passed in 2001 and 2003 and Obama and the Republicans extended in 2010. To my knowledge, all elected Republicans want to make the Bush tax cuts permanent. Democrats, by and large, want to end them for income over $250,000.

To be clear, Klein is referring to every dime of "the Bush tax cuts," which at this point really means "the federal income tax system we've had in place for nine years," from the highest to lowest taxable incomes. Solely based on eyeballing the graph (it really isn't worth digging further), the CBPP claims that the tax cuts passed in 2001 and 2003 are responsible for about 20%, or over $2.2 trillion, of the current $11.2 trillion of "debt held by the public."..."

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2012/08/30/wapos-ezra-klein-pulls-out-tired-bush-tax-cuts-cost-us-trillions-graph#ixzz2D9wyXuBx

Neg me all you want, but you need to deal in facts.

so if we can just fix the other 80% of where the debt came from things will be good . it was obama pelosi reid who passed the extensions of those taxes in december 2009.. it was what congress wanted after 911 and the stock market fell to 7 ooo .. and it made its way back to the recoed high over 14,ooo from those tax cuts ,, but pelosi reid policy after jan 2007 is what drove our country into 16 trillion in debt

[Carrello]

so if we can just fix the other 80% of where the debt came from things will be good . it was obama pelosi reid who passed the extensions of those taxes in december 2009.. it was what congress wanted after 911 and the stock market fell to 7 ooo .. and it made its way back to the recoed high over 14,ooo from those tax cuts ,, but pelosi reid policy after jan 2007 is what drove our country into 16 trillion in debt

You mean after the two wars were finally put on the books and not funded by emergency funding every year, plus the tax cuts, plus the pharmaceutical bill that was not put on the books, and all of the tax revenue that was lost due to Bush's unemployment plan, 850 billion dollars for stimulus to keep the country a float, unemployment compensation and food stamps for the unemployed.....is that it?

You guys are full of ****.

[skitealwedrop]

You mean after the two wars were finally put on the books and not funded by emergency funding every year, plus the tax cuts, plus the pharmaceutical bill that was not put on the books, and all of the tax revenue that was lost due to Bush's unemployment plan, 850 billion dollars for stimulus to keep the country a float, unemployment compensation and food stamps for the unemployed.....is that it?

You guys are full of ****.

There is no definitive answer as to how OUR COUNTRY will progress financially, based on our current economic state and the financial demands that DC requires of us. What I do know is that without American workers this country is screwed. I will preach my message, forever. The export of work and the overspending in DC has caused this countries demise. The war in Iraq didn't help either. The fat cats in DC need to understand that you cant spend what you don't have. I wish that I could sit on a civilian committee in DC. Our politicians need to listen to us, we deserve better.

[rico1]

There is no definitive answer as to how OUR COUNTRY will progress financially, based on our current economic state and the financial demands that DC requires of us. What I do know is that without American workers this country is screwed. I will preach my message, forever. The export of work and the overspending in DC has caused this countries demise. The war in Iraq didn't help either. The fat cats in DC need to understand that you cant spend what you don't have. I wish that I could sit on a civilian committee in DC. Our politicians need to listen to us, we deserve better.

I agree with you 100% Skitealwedrop. But it is hard to get this country on it feet and out of debt when you have about 49% of the people collecting more from the goverment than they pay or have paid in tax's (if they even pay tax's) and I don't want to hear that they cant afford to pay.

If the government went to a flat tax say 10% no deductions(I like my mortgage deduction to) and every one paid no mater what you earned I believe that we would be in better shape. That would mean you make $1,000,000 you pay $100,000 if you make $10,000 you pay $1,000 that is as fair as you can be and everyone has skin in the game.

We will never see this as it is fair to everyone and the people that don't pay tax's wont want to start(The 49% that don't pay now.)

But we do need to stop giving people tax refunds that have never paid tax's. I have a friend that is an account it and he tells me stories of his clients that after all the tax credits that they get they get more back that they paid in. Please tell me how is that fair? And I am not talking people that are well off. These are people the same people that are getting entitlements from the government.

So the get money from the government pay little in tax's than get more back from there tax refund than they paid in. Again how is this fair?

If you have any friends that are CPA's ask them don't just believe me.

[dontlop]

You mean after the two wars were finally put on the books and not funded by emergency funding every year, plus the tax cuts, plus the pharmaceutical bill that was not put on the books, and all of the tax revenue that was lost due to Bush's unemployment plan, 850 billion dollars for stimulus to keep the country a float, unemployment compensation and food stamps for the unemployed.....is that it?

You guys are full of ****.

i plused you .. well lets start with the 5.7 trillion clinton left on the books for bush,, then we can add the interest on that debt for 12 years along with the 6 trillion obama added to the debt on his watch .. .if you dont mind .. obama is the predident it is his watch .... 80 % of the polls showed they wanted a prescription drug plan .. unlike 70% that are against obamas health care plan

Edited November 25, 2012 by dontlop

[rightsonword]

You mean after the two wars were finally put on the books and not funded by emergency funding every year, plus the tax cuts, plus the pharmaceutical bill that was not put on the books, and all of the tax revenue that was lost due to Bush's unemployment plan, 850 billion dollars for stimulus to keep the country a float, unemployment compensation and food stamps for the unemployed.....is that it?

You guys are full of ****.

+ 1 !!!!!!!! it appears many have selective memory when it comes to blaming the country's ills on the opposing party.

[SnowGlobe7]

flat tax!!!! I an all in...helped steve forbes back in the day

[dontlop]

george bush didnt do anything wrong its all bill clintons fault what happened when bush was president , if you dont believe me just ask that jacksss in the whitehouse right now ,, he will explain everyting to ya about whos watch it is while your president . so dont go starting bushs watch in january 2001 .. its all clintons fault till bush retired in 2009..

[Chartman17]

Yeah but when these taxes pile up they will blame Bush not Obama. It will be Bush's fault for the next 40 years.

But, it's only 40 years...

Chartman17

[jv1054]

Greetings Adam,

Just read this:

"The top rate on dividends, for example, could climb to 39.6 percent from 15 percent if no action is taken. Capital gains taxes, which now top out at 15 percent, could rise above 20 percent, many financial advisers say. Most investment income will also be subject to a 3.8 percent charge to help pay for President Obama’s health care law."

Does that actually mean that President Bambam has given us the shaft?

Sincerely,

Brady C. Harness

You ain't seen nothing yet and wait till the sheep go to the slaughter house. Many O supporters are going to regret their decision. He has many different tax increases in store for those who achieve and those near achievers. As usual the slackers will get their free rides but in time they will get their reward also.

[powerpager]

Obamanos !!!

[Fleming]

Not necessarily my opinion... please don't shoot the messenger...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/26/opinion/buffett-a-minimum-tax-for-the-wealthy.html?ref=todayspaper

The New York Times

The Opinion Pages

November 25, 2012

A Minimum Tax for the Wealthy

By Warren E. Buffett

Omaha

SUPPOSE that an investor you admire and trust comes to you with an investment idea. “This is a good one,” he says enthusiastically. “I’m in it, and I think you should be, too.”

Would your reply possibly be this? “Well, it all depends on what my tax rate will be on the gain you’re saying we’re going to make. If the taxes are too high, I would rather leave the money in my savings account, earning a quarter of 1 percent.” Only in Grover Norquist’s imagination does such a response exist.

Between 1951 and 1954, when the capital gains rate was 25 percent and marginal rates on dividends reached 91 percent in extreme cases, I sold securities and did pretty well. In the years from 1956 to 1969, the top marginal rate fell modestly, but was still a lofty 70 percent — and the tax rate on capital gains inched up to 27.5 percent. I was managing funds for investors then. Never did anyone mention taxes as a reason to forgo an investment opportunity that I offered.

Under those burdensome rates, moreover, both employment and the gross domestic product (a measure of the nation’s economic output) increased at a rapid clip. The middle class and the rich alike gained ground.

So let’s forget about the rich and ultrarich going on strike and stuffing their ample funds under their mattresses if — gasp — capital gains rates and ordinary income rates are increased. The ultrarich, including me, will forever pursue investment opportunities.

And, wow, do we have plenty to invest. The Forbes 400, the wealthiest individuals in America, hit a new group record for wealth this year: $1.7 trillion. That’s more than five times the $300 billion total in 1992. In recent years, my gang has been leaving the middle class in the dust.

A huge tail wind from tax cuts has pushed us along. In 1992, the tax paid by the 400 highest incomes in the United States (a different universe from the Forbes list) averaged 26.4 percent of adjusted gross income. In 2009, the most recent year reported, the rate was 19.9 percent. It’s nice to have friends in high places.

The group’s average income in 2009 was $202 million — which works out to a “wage” of $97,000 per hour, based on a 40-hour workweek. (I’m assuming they’re paid during lunch hours.) Yet more than a quarter of these ultrawealthy paid less than 15 percent of their take in combined federal income and payroll taxes. Half of this crew paid less than 20 percent. And — brace yourself — a few actually paid nothing.

This outrage points to the necessity for more than a simple revision in upper-end tax rates, though that’s the place to start. I support President Obama’s proposal to eliminate the Bush tax cuts for high-income taxpayers. However, I prefer a cutoff point somewhat above $250,000 — maybe $500,000 or so.

Additionally, we need Congress, right now, to enact a minimum tax on high incomes. I would suggest 30 percent of taxable income between $1 million and $10 million, and 35 percent on amounts above that. A plain and simple rule like that will block the efforts of lobbyists, lawyers and contribution-hungry legislators to keep the ultrarich paying rates well below those incurred by people with income just a tiny fraction of ours. Only a minimum tax on very high incomes will prevent the stated tax rate from being eviscerated by these warriors for the wealthy.

Above all, we should not postpone these changes in the name of “reforming” the tax code. True, changes are badly needed. We need to get rid of arrangements like “carried interest” that enable income from labor to be magically converted into capital gains. And it’s sickening that a Cayman Islands mail drop can be central to tax maneuvering by wealthy individuals and corporations.

But the reform of such complexities should not promote delay in our correcting simple and expensive inequities. We can’t let those who want to protect the privileged get away with insisting that we do nothing until we can do everything.

Our government’s goal should be to bring in revenues of 18.5 percent of G.D.P. and spend about 21 percent of G.D.P. — levels that have been attained over extended periods in the past and can clearly be reached again. As the math makes clear, this won’t stem our budget deficits; in fact, it will continue them. But assuming even conservative projections about inflation and economic growth, this ratio of revenue to spending will keep America’s debt stable in relation to the country’s economic output.

In the last fiscal year, we were far away from this fiscal balance — bringing in 15.5 percent of G.D.P. in revenue and spending 22.4 percent. Correcting our course will require major concessions by both Republicans and Democrats.

All of America is waiting for Congress to offer a realistic and concrete plan for getting back to this fiscally sound path. Nothing less is acceptable.

In the meantime, maybe you’ll run into someone with a terrific investment idea, who won’t go forward with it because of the tax he would owe when it succeeds. Send him my way. Let me unburden him.

Warren E. Buffett is the chairman and chief executive of Berkshire Hathaway.

[tandy]

reminds you of Jerry Reeds song....the shaft vs the gold mine....how about now if you make more than $250,000 in a year you are really gonna pay through the nose...after all if the bird flies you now become one of the wealthy!!