■ 20 August 2008 | 7:51 AM
Uncle Sam's gifts
I'm beginning to think that ex-Sen. Phil Gramm was right ('we're a nation of whiners') at least in Hampton Roads, based on all the 'poor-me' letters that The Pilot has published.
Talk about looking a gift horse in the mouth! The check for $1,200 or whatever 'just helped me pay the bills I already had for other taxes, mortgage, utilities, gas, etc., etc., etc.'
I hope that these people know that 1) it was a gift, 2) it's not taxable and 3) they can send it back to reduce the national debt, or to me. I will reply with a thank-you note and maybe even a nice card.
Barry J. Mitchel
Portsmouth
COMMENTS ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here; comments do not reflect the views of The Virginian-Pilot or its websites. Users must follow agreed-upon rules: Be civil, be clean, be on topic; don't attack private individuals, other users or classes of people. Read the full rules here.
- Comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the report violation link below it.
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Twitter
Google
Yahoo
AM...
Read this also. http://www.factcheck.org/taxes/unspinning_the_fairtax.html
Thanks Don
Let me do some reading, and I will get back to you...
AM, ever heard of sales tax?
The FairTax would be collected by the same good folks who collect your sales taxes right now. The mechanism is already in place.
See http://www.fairtax.org/PDF/Excerpts_from_response_to_tax_panel-103006.pdf
As to savings, would Lawrence (I've never voted for a Republican) Kotlikoff of Boston U do?
http://www.fairtax.org/PDF/TheFairTaxAndEconomicGrowth.pdf
CB...
I did not say that what comes back to the economy is nearly double for every dollar EIC puts into the economy-the govt said that. So you are saying the govt cannot see what is in front of its face-and that is both sides of the aisle as the program has bi-partisan support. There is no debating this with you as you are an absolutist on this and many other issues you speak to. You know what you know and that is all there is to know. I will take stock in what you say if you can quote govt sources that say different from what I quoted. So far all I see is the usual stereotypical politically biased hyperbole.
Good to see that...
Good to see that Len and PD are such good buddies that cannot see what is right in their face. No one can say that a dollar given through EIC comes back double into the economy. A dollar is a dollar plain and simple. EIC is a give away to people that DO NOT pay taxes. Although a lot of people on public assistance are on it for a short time, the fraud is astounding. Michigan state reports out of 1.3 billion in annual "bridge card" payments, 300 million is fraudulent. That is just one state. Fairly add up all of the ways that people utilize food stamps, public housing, free medical, EIC, free child care, free school lunches, free education (don't pay taxes) and you will find that welfare queen abuse is in the 100s of billions. Once again, welfare queens are people that are just living off of the government and have no intention of getting off of it.
Don, only in fantasyland
1. How would one enforce the consumption tax? 2. How on earth can you place the blame for negative savings on taxes? Are you able to produce one CREDIBLE financial authority to back your claim?
IRA's, etc.
Just to set the record straight from this home headed by a financial planner: there are still *lots* of middle class people contributing to IRA's and other investments this very year. I believe some, regrettably, have had to stop for a year or two, but I don't think we need to throw out the baby with the bathwater and start redefining people who contribute as "rich." It will *really* discourage growing our economy if we suddenly start overtaxing people who are only trying to fund their retirement (they have already paid taxes on that money when they earned it. Even inherited wealth, if it exists and I don't think it very commonly does, was already taxed when it was earned). Cheers, MGM
PD, re executive compensation
As a matter of principle, I am opposed to taxation of income and in favor of replacing all corporate and personal income taxes with a consumption tax (FairTax.)
But if income is to be taxed, your hypothetical executive should be taxed on the value of the options when he receives them and not pay capital gains taxes if he holds them for the required period before redeeming them.
BTW, the practice of using stock and options as executive compensation resulted from a Clinton executive order attempting to limit executive salaries. Just another example of the folly of using the tax code to coerce market decisions. Every distortion of the marketplace resulting from misuse of the tax code to accomplish social ends inevitably has unintended adverse consequences.
Compliments to Wm D Tabor,
My compliments to Wm D Tabor, MD. Great response.
Don...
So you say that a corporate exec who gets paid millions in stock options should pay zero taxes on the earnings from that? Those earnings were never taxed to him, so why should he pay nothing on them? I do believe in exemptions for profits on a primary home, for investments such as I suggested (up to a certain level like $50k). If the investments are long term and the funds used to acquire the investments were previously taxed then I can agree that much lower rate should apply-even zero maybe in some circumstances. But short term investments should be at the higher rates in my book.