2012 Elections in the USA

[QUOTE=Tiny12;425081]Walleye, I hope you don't get pissed. I actually do get a kick out of your posts and agree with you most of the time. But this was too good to pass up.[/quote]It takes a lot to get me pissed. You're not even remotely close, yet.

[quote=]I understand now. Actually I always understood, honestly, that capital gains and dividends from businesses, including public corporations, should be subject to no or low rates of tax, for reasons of fairness and so capital will be allocated efficiently. But now I understand that the work of hedge funds and private equity funds is so important that part of the fees they charge should be taxed at lower rates than landlords, utility companies, administrative assistants, computer networking companies, and all other vendors.[/quote]You seem like a decent fellow, however, you seem to have blinders on. Why should the capital gains be different (higher) for hedge fund managers than for people from other walks of life?

[quote=]This is fantastic financial engineering! I don't think even old Bernie* could have come up with something like this. It's money for nothing! Now if we can only get the chicks for free.[/quote]Are you nuts? How could the starting point for a newly formed corporation be anything else? Have you ever started a company? Essentially, you file with the state (first), then get a TIN (from the Feds) and off you go. The entity has zero value on day one, I am at risk for $450, basically my 'paid in capital' for my stock. If, after the allotted time period, that company becomes worth $10MM and I sell 100%, I owe long-term capital gains taxes on $10MM of capital gains.

[quote=]Can I do this too? If I pay off a few Congressmen, will they change the law so that part of the income generated from the sweat equity I'm putting into my new business will be treated as capital gains?[/quote]No need to pay off anyone, it is the law of the land. When I set up a new corporation (like I did recently) , I own 100% (unless I have partners). What am I supposed to do? Give the government a carried interest? They already have one.

[quote=]This is so true. Loopholes, government subsidies, different tax rates applied to different businesses, these are the sorts of things that drive the economy and help all the tax lawyers and accountants working for the large corporations that know how to take advantage of these things.

*Pick your Bernie, Madoff, Cornfield or Sanders. Assets = Liabilities + Equity. You can't create an entity with +$450 in equity and no assets. FYI, if you've been waiting 18 months for long term capital gains treatment you don't need to. You only have to hold for 12 months and one day.[/QUOTE]It costs me about $450 to set up a new LLC (I can do it cheaper, but that isn't important) out of pocket (not out of the corporate coffers, because there are none, at first). You have to incorporate before you can open a bank account (need both a TIN and a corporate resolution, typically). So on "day one" you have zero assets. Unless you count the out of pocket expense to be an IOU, which then would be offset 100% by the contra-asset (-$450) , since the money has been paid and is not available to be of benefit to the corporation. Further, you could argue that there is some de minimus value to the corporate entity, however, at this stage of development, the act of incorporating is as much a compulsory regulatory act and the $450 a cost of doing business as opposed to the purchase of a good or service with actual fungible value, therefore, it has an accounting value of zero. I don't recall seeing too many balance sheets carrying "Legal corporate entity" as an asset. So yes, you have zero assets.

Assets = Liabilities + Shareholders' equity $0 = ($450) + $450

[QUOTE=SnakeOilSales;425090]I don't know of any place called Archibald's in Buenos Aires, but you can easily find me while I'm working at the Burger King on the corner of Santa Fe and Ayacucho (usually the first shift). There is a bar a block and a half down the street called The Spot where you can buy me a drink after my shift is over. I might be a little greasy and smell of fast food but I'll be more than happy to let you tell me how wrong you were about your anticipated results of the election.[/QUOTE]I am certain that Archibald's is much closer to your proximity than Sante Fe and Ayacucho. Seeing as you're in that neighborhood, what is the color of the front door of the closest privado? Which side of the street is it on, when you are facing west? What is the name of the handbag store one block east of your Burger King? Would you go east or west, from your Burger King, to get to the big, sidewalk flower stand?

[QUOTE=Toymann;425082]I like this ticket for what it says! Romney-Ryan = the Romney crowd must figure Florida is in the bag (I also agree with this) , no need for Rubio (he's too green anyway and the latino vote is meanless anyway). Wisconsin is now in the bag. I am liking what I see. BIG TIME. Monger On All Toymann[/QUOTE]I repeat. Really like this ticket! Happy Mongering All. Toymann

[QUOTE=Toymann;425095]I repeat. Really like this ticket! Happy Mongering All. Toymann[/QUOTE]Great pick in my opinion. I always admired Ryan for actually putting on a paper an actual plan. Now we can have a thoughtful discussion. It immediately shifts the debate from Romney's 2009 tax return and Obama being born in Indonesia and onto what kind of America do we want. I have always anticipated the medicare cuts. In my retirement planning I budget $10k for medical costs and inflate it at 3% a year. I do believe that Ryan's plan will raise my taxes either by making me pay tax on my medical insurance, reducing the mortgage interest deduction, reducing the state and and local income tax reduction. However if the Ryan's deficit plan reduces the deficit after the austerity period I think I will make a shit load on money in the financial markets which is my primary income source. The capital gains and dividend reduction does not help me as much because half of my investment portfolio is in tax-deferred accounts and in ten years I will be subject to RMD.

I am definitely to the left of Ryan but I believe working on a plan is better than what we have now which is no plan. As Branch Rickey said,"Luck is the residue of design." In 1998, my company was in trouble. A new leader was hired and we put together a plan. Our assumptions and forecast turned out to be wrong but we came out smelling like a rose anyway

I will be able to adapt to the tax changes and minimize my tax burden. For example, if the mortgage interest deduction goes I have the flexibility to pay off my mortgage which will lower my income and lower my tax.

I will vote for Romney-Ryan but I do not think it will make a difference in California. I do not think Romney is even campaigning here. I have not seen one ad that I can recall. If Romney wins California the Ryan budget is a done deal and I would advise seeing your tax advisor in the next few months to get your strategies aligned. We now know the tax code is changing either way the election goes which is great piece of information.

[QUOTE=Big Boss Man;425098]Now we can have a thoughtful discussion. It immediately shifts the debate onto what kind of America do we want.[/QUOTE]Mitt's team, within minutes of the Ryan announcement, stated that Romney will NOT run supporting the Ryan's economic plan! Guess the first thoughtful discussion on what kind of America we want will be between Mitt and Paul! Too funny. Ryan may do for Romney what Palin did for McCain!

Very good Toymann. The bet is on. It's a friendly bet, but it's no fun if it doesn't have some teeth. I had to get you to agree the winner can collect whether or not we are in town at the same time. Now that you've agreed, I trust you. I don't care how / who you leave the money with.

As I said before my plan is to come down end of November. Since you are so free to travel, why don't you come down then? If not, your idea to leave the funds in BA in September is a good one, so I can use them in November.

Of all the names you called me (idiot, be*tch, socialist fool, home boy, tight-ass) , I liked the "classless jerk" one best. Yes, I am sure based on your posting history on this board you are widely regarded as a classy gentleman yourself. LMAO!

[QUOTE=Esten; 425104]Very good Toymann. The bet is on. It's a friendly bet, but it's no fun if it doesn't have some teeth. I had to get you to agree the winner can collect whether or not we are in town at the same time. Now that you've agreed, I trust you. I don't care how / who you leave the money with.

As I said before my plan is to come down end of November. Since you are so free to travel, why don't you come down then? If not, your idea to leave the funds in BA in September is a good one, so I can use them in November.

Of all the names you called me (idiot, be*tch, socialist fool, home boy, tight-ass) , I liked the "classless jerk" one best. Yes, I am sure based on your posting history on this board you are widely regarded as a classy gentleman yourself. LMAO![/QUOTE]Very Good, going forward I will refer to you on the board as "classless jerk". We are agreed. Leave your 2000 pesos with El Queso the end of November. I will enjoy them when I return in March. Can't come in novemeber as thats my college football sec vacation time. God it's great to be a 1%er! No comment on the future US VP? My cheesehead buddy? Monger on Dude. Toymann

[QUOTE=Tiny12; 425080]Good Point Esten. Federal revenues in 2009 were only 2. 1 trillion though. And the top 10% do pay payroll taxes too.

Without going into detail, the top 10% actually only paid about $830 billion to the federal government, instead of the $1. 5 trillion you calculated. The federal deficit in 2009 was 3. 5 trillion. 2.1 trillion = 1. 4 trillion, which you can confirm on the usgovernmentrevenue. Com web site.[/QUOTE]No no no. The $1.5T I calculated was how much income tax revenue would be needed (assuming it is 42% of all tax revenue) to generate a grand total of $3.5T which would match spending and balance the budget. If total revenues were only $2.1T, then I agree with your number of the top 10% paying about $830B. BTW, that's a 0.8/3.3 = 24% tax rate. That's very low, it should be more like 35-40%.

Your point about picking up the slack to balance the budget is a separate question. I have never said all the burden of balancing the budget should fall on the wealthy. My formula to balance the budget would be:

(1) Allow payroll tax deductions to expire.
(2) Go back to the Clinton tax rates (perhaps in steps).
(3) Implement the Buffet Rule.
(4) Cut Defense.
(5) Other spending cuts as needed (should be minimal after #1-4).

[QUOTE=Tiny12;425081]Walleye, I hope you don't get pissed. I actually do get a kick out of your posts and agree with you most of the time. But this was too good to pass up.[/QUOTE]If I got pissed at you for expressing your opinions, that would mean that I am a liberal.

[QUOTE=Big Boss Man;425098]I always admired Ryan for actually putting on a paper an actual plan.[/QUOTE]It's called "Leadership", something that BO has demonstrated he sorely lacks.

[QUOTE=Esten; 425108]No no no. The $1. 5T I calculated was how much income tax revenue would be needed (assuming it is 42% of all tax revenue) to generate a grand total of $3. 5T which would match spending and balance the budget. If total revenues were only $2. 1T, then I agree with your number of the top 10% paying about $830B. BTW, that's a 0. 8/3. 3 = 24% tax rate. That's very low, it should be more like 35-40.

Your point about picking up the slack to balance the budget is a separate question. I have never said all the burden of balancing the budget should fall on the wealthy. My formula to balance the budget would be:

(1) Allow payroll tax deductions to expire.[/QUOTE]So far, bleating sheep.

[quote=](2) Go back to the Clinton tax rates (perhaps in steps).[/quote]Then you should have no problem going back to the Clinton spending levels, too. We can adjust them upward for the nominal increase in the population.

[quote=](3) Implement the Buffet Rule.[/quote]Right after BO implements Simpson Bowles.

[quote=](4) Cut Defense.[/quote]Have you been keeping up with current events? Any idea what has been happening to defense spending? Considering that defending the nation is one of the few federal powers explicitly enumerated in the Constitution, I think that there are plenty of other programs to cut, prior to doing more damage to our national security.

[quote=](5) Other spending cuts as needed (should be minimal after #1-4).[/QUOTE]Why should they be minimal? Eliminate the Dept of Energy, Dept of Commerce and Dept of Eduction and every czar, and their related bureaucracies, created by Clinton, Bush & Obama. Cut EPA funding by 50. That ought to get things rolling.

He's burnishing his AP creds with generic, non-chica-specific posts. I guess he is hoping that my post, requesting specific corroborating information. Which should be extremely easy for him to obtain (given his location in Recoleta). Will fall off the first page and he can try to return without anyone noticing.

According to his own posts, he's been mongering in Bs As since '04/'05, so he shouldn't have any trouble getting the rest of us comfortable with that issue.

Maybe he just isn't big enough to admit the error in his ways in making fun of disabled people.

[QUOTE=Toymann;425105]Very Good, going forward I will refer to you on the board as "classless jerk". We are agreed. Leave your 2000 pesos with El Queso the end of November. I will enjoy them when I return in March. Can't come in novemeber as thats my college football sec vacation time. God it's great to be a 1%er! No comment on the future US VP? My cheesehead buddy? Monger on Dude. Toymann[/QUOTE]Toymann, what is your sec school? My school is the one that just fired the best coach we ever had because the AD got his panties in a wad about be lied to.

[QUOTE=Dccpa;425149]Toymann, what is your sec school? My school is the one that just fired the best coach we ever had because the AD got his panties in a wad about be lied to.[/QUOTE]The Razorback firing was a classic example of horsesh$t liberalism driven by feminazi media bitchs. Clinton didn't lose his job for lying about a trist (IN THE OVAL OFFICE NO LESS). That said, as a cocks fan I couldn't help a rye smile as your program has given us fits the last couple of years. It's a shame your teams' administration bowed to liberal media pressure. Since when does being a bad husband, mean you should be fired from your job (that he was doing an amazing job at, I might add). The whole incident fell under the "no harm no foul" approach as far as I was concerned. Us cocks fans will take it any way we can in the hyper-competitive SEC though. I do send my condolences out to RazerBack fans. I just HATe feminazis and the ***** driven culture they have instilled in the US over the past 30 years. GO SEC DUDE. Toymann

[QUOTE=Toymann;425150]Us cocks fans will take it any way we can[/QUOTE]very interesting....