[snakeoil]

The Tea Party is rabid about denouncing government spending. I wonder if they know that most Red States receive more money from the Federal Government than they pay in taxes. If they are so dead set against government spending we should make sure that they don't get more than they pay in taxes. Hey Obama; stop sending those tax dollars to those Red States. They don't want it.

States receiving the most federal funding per tax dollar paid:
1. New Mexico: $2.63
2. West Virginia: $2.57
3. Mississippi: $2.47
4. District of Colombia: $2.41
5. Hawaii: $2.38
6. Alabama: $2.03
7. Alaska: $1.93
8. Montana: $1.92
9. South Carolina: $1.92
10. Maine: $1.78

[BilboBagend]

The tergaggers are also against cutting spending using the tax code. They love giving money to large corporations that have no need of the money. Just a simple government give away. An entitlement care of teagaggers. Preferred tax rates for investment over earned income, a give away entitlement care of teagaggers. Taxing businesses on profits while taxing wage earners on revenues, a give away entitlement care of teagaggers.

A big controversy on the deductiblity of interest on home mortgages, while all interest paid by a business is an expense.
Business travel an expense, while travel to and from work is not deductible. etc. etc. etc.

All loaded to screw the wage earner in order to transfer more wage earner money to businesses and high income people.

Fix the tax code. Simplify the tax code. A simple 4% tax on all business and wage earner revenues. A 15% tax on all investment income. A 4% tax on all exports and imports.

[johnforbes]

Why should I pay any tax on money I've placed at risk in the market?

That money has already been taxed at least once, and investing is putting your already-saved, already-taxed money at risk in order to contribute to the operation of a business.

[Clownkicker]

"Why should I pay any tax on money I've placed at risk in the market?"-johnforbes

No one ever said you should pay tax on any money you placed at risk in the market. Stop pretending they did.
What they did say was that you should pay tax on income resulting from that investment.
The initial investment is untaxed when it is withdrawn.
Why should you be exempt from income tax if people who work for their income aren't exempt?

What is really absurd is you think it's reasonable that working for one's income should be taxed but your sitting around doing nothing for your income should not.
And you're the hypocrite always talking about how this or that guy never did manual labor.
Why should they if avoiding manual labor allows you to live tax free?


"...investing is putting your already-saved, already-taxed money at risk in order to contribute to the operation of a business."-johnforbes

No, it isn't.
Most of your so-called "investment" is simply buying stocks, trading with others while the company gets zip out of the transaction.
I'll correct your lie for you: "...investing is putting your already-saved, already-taxed money at risk in order to make a lot more money without actually working for it."

What you don't like is the 'injustice' in the fact that if you want to make a lot of money without working for it, you also run the risk of losing that money.
Well cry me a river.....or a lake like you did last time you were whining.

[johnforbes]

It is poor quality argument to say those with different views are "whining." They aren't; they merely have different opinions.

What a company gets from people like me is capital to conduct its operations.

I worked for every penny I saved up to invest. Now it is true that, once invested, I become a passive partner, but that's simply how investing functions.

As to me not liking risk, the opposite is true.

If every person in America liked risk, they would have as much money as me or much more.

[Clownkicker]

"It is poor quality argument to say those with different views are "whining." They aren't; they merely have different opinions."-johnforbes

Everyone has an opinion, but when you express that opinion while refusing to support it with reasoned argument (as you invariably do) you're simply whining. You want what you want but you can't give one good reason for why you should have it. There are millions of children out there who are just like you.
It's not the opinion that makes it whining. It's your useless, juvenile, arrogant imbecility about it that makes it whining.

"What a company gets from people like me is capital to conduct its operations."-johnforbes

If you're buying bonds directly from the company or investing in an IPO, then yes.
But you're talking mostly about trading stocks in the markets. ("Why should I pay any tax on money I've placed at risk in the market?") Companies get nothing from your trading to "conduct its operations." Some other guy gets your money, not the company.
If you think they do, you don't understand what the markets are.

"Now it is true that, once invested, I become a passive partner, but that's simply how investing functions."-johnforbes

Yes, that's exactly what I said. You need to learn that when you agree with your opponent's fundamental position in a debate, you lose the debate.
You want to gain tax free income from someone else's work at the same time you expect the poor sap doing the work to be taxed on the money he makes from the same enterprise.
In other words, you're a hypocrite.

I'll say it again, your "...investing is putting your already-saved, already-taxed money at risk in order to make a lot more money without actually working for it."
Then you don't expect to be taxed on that income the same as everyone else.

[BilboBagend]

Why should people pay tax when they make a fair exchange of labor for money. Their is absolutely no profit in that fair exchange. Yet, labor is taxed at the highest rate. Remember, the framers of the Constitution only wanted to tax profit.

Gains on investments are profits just like any other type of profit. The reasoned Constitutional argument would be to end the tax on earned income. It is after all earned, a fair exchange of value with no profit. All the faux shows is personal greed and principles or concept of fair at all. No one is compelled by law to invest in risky investments. That is a choice. People increase risk at the expectation of increased returns, profits.

The faux is just a greedy person filled with sophistry.

Tax all revenues of all businesses at 4%. Tax all investment profits at 15%, or to be fair to the faux, tax all investment revenues at 4%. That would add a great deal of stability in the financial markets, encourage investment, and stop a great deal of the destructive skimming and gambling practices. Tax all imports and exports at 4%.

[johnforbes]

It is indeed a poor argument to say those with different views are "whining." They aren't; they merely have different opinions.

I'm not a stock trader. I'm an investor.

This is a crucial difference in viewpoint and actuality.

Many people make the mistake of thinking they are smart enough to trade their way to wealth, but very few can do it.

Now it is true that, once invested, I become a passive partner, but that's simply how investing functions.

If I wanted to control my money totally, then I'd keep it myself and not invest.

Am I greedy? Sure, all humans are, including Obama's voters who dream of getting "free" things.