The Obama Administration thread

[GeorgeSteele]

Just to clarify, not all, in fact, probably most, of the money invested that is eligible for capital gains tax treatment is not the job creating / economic growth variety.  It's money used to buy securities in the secondary market.  For example, if I buy stock in GE, GE is not using that money to build a new plant in my community to employ my neighbors.  GE is not getting any of that money at all, rather it's just going to the guy selling the GE stock to me.  Nothing more than a money/property exchange.  

you're way off. the primary reason companies issue stock is access to additional capital.

Compare the volume of the primary market to the secondary market (assuming you know the difference) and then tell me who's way off.  

If preferential tax treatment for capital gains applied only to purchases of initial stock issuances, then you may have a point.

Or would you?  What do most companies do with additional capital?  Are they required to invest that capital domestically rather than overseas?  Are they prohibited from using that capital to acquire competing businesses and then effect mass layoffs when consolidating operations?

my bad. just noticed juicyswoos' post actually came after yours.

my only point is that increasing capital gains too much could be bad for the economy.

Understood, thanks.  And you might be right, it's just that I'd like to see tax incentives that are more aligned with economic growth.

[JuicySwoos]

How do we do that?  Wow, anything short of a PhD dissertation wouldn't adequately answer that.  But, one thing I always wondered was why you pay lower taxes on stock gains than on bank deposit interest.  I like the idea of having lower tax rates for bank deposit interest for deposits at "qualified" community banks that invest depositor funds in community businesses and real estate.

We both know the answer to that one. Community banks are not large donors the the RNC and DNC...

[JuicySwoos]

From what I think there is a time and place for small goverment like how the republicans want it.
That would be when everyone has a job and that the minimum wage is set at a level where people can make a living.

But these are not the current events.







Joe

Republicans want small government?   

[Drew]

Perhaps your employer bought into the "he's a socialist" garbage and just decided to preemptively take more...who knows?!?!

Since I work for the Department of Education, the socialist idealism you mentioned could be exactly right. If it's going to start anywhere, it will start will government, right? They are all about getting bigger and taking more money from the produces in this country.

[Axl4Prez2004]

Just to clarify, not all, in fact, probably most, of the money invested that is eligible for capital gains tax treatment is not the job creating / economic growth variety.  It's money used to buy securities in the secondary market.  For example, if I buy stock in GE, GE is not using that money to build a new plant in my community to employ my neighbors.  GE is not getting any of that money at all, rather it's just going to the guy selling the GE stock to me.  Nothing more than a money/property exchange.  

you're way off. the primary reason companies issue stock is access to additional capital.

Compare the volume of the primary market to the secondary market (assuming you know the difference) and then tell me who's way off.  

If preferential tax treatment for capital gains applied only to purchases of initial stock issuances, then you may have a point.

Or would you?  What do most companies do with additional capital?  Are they required to invest that capital domestically rather than overseas?  Are they prohibited from using that capital to acquire competing businesses and then effect mass layoffs when consolidating operations?

my bad. just noticed juicyswoos' post actually came after yours.

my only point is that increasing capital gains too much could be bad for the economy.

Sandman, I don't know of anybody supporting a capital gains hit of 50%. 

btw, I agree that raising the rates too much would be bad for the economy.  That said, I stand firmly behind the fact that the rich in this country are doing very well.  I also believe that if their income and wealth are growing at rates greater than the rest of the nation (which they have been), the system needs to be tweaked.   

[Smoking Guns]

Just to clarify, not all, in fact, probably most, of the money invested that is eligible for capital gains tax treatment is not the job creating / economic growth variety.  It's money used to buy securities in the secondary market.  For example, if I buy stock in GE, GE is not using that money to build a new plant in my community to employ my neighbors.  GE is not getting any of that money at all, rather it's just going to the guy selling the GE stock to me.  Nothing more than a money/property exchange.  

you're way off. the primary reason companies issue stock is access to additional capital.

Compare the volume of the primary market to the secondary market (assuming you know the difference) and then tell me who's way off.  

If preferential tax treatment for capital gains applied only to purchases of initial stock issuances, then you may have a point.

Or would you?  What do most companies do with additional capital?  Are they required to invest that capital domestically rather than overseas?  Are they prohibited from using that capital to acquire competing businesses and then effect mass layoffs when consolidating operations?

my bad. just noticed juicyswoos' post actually came after yours.

my only point is that increasing capital gains too much could be bad for the economy.

Sandman, I don't know of anybody supporting a capital gains hit of 50%. 

btw, I agree that raising the rates too much would be bad for the economy.  That said, I stand firmly behind the fact that the rich in this country are doing very well.  I also believe that if their income and wealth are growing at rates greater than the rest of the nation (which they have been), the system needs to be tweaked.   

I wish there was no stock market.  Its the biggest scam out there.  Mutual funds, 401k's...  And what pisses me off is the ability to short sell...  Or if one complany in an industry fucks up, all the companies are effect.  And there is too much pressure to "beat" the street and expectations...  So people lie, steal and cheat to get what they want.  I just think we would be better off if it didn't exist at all and people invest in companies directly and hoped they succeded...  Its just too corrumpt for me..  Fo now I will just buy C.D.'s from the bank or maybe some bonds (which too can be a trap), but the manipulation of the whole market by just a few really blows.

[freedom78]

Perhaps your employer bought into the "he's a socialist" garbage and just decided to preemptively take more...who knows?!?!

Since I work for the Department of Education, the socialist idealism you mentioned could be exactly right. If it's going to start anywhere, it will start will government, right? They are all about getting bigger and taking more money from the produces in this country.

Not exactly what you're talking about, in all honesty.  Are you suggesting that the federal government will begin over withholding its own employees to force a backdoor income tax hike?  It would still require an act of Congress and, even if this was done, you'd get all overpaid taxes back in a refund...just like everyone else.

On a tangential thought, why do people who don't believe in government choose to work for government?  Makes no sense for me.  Funny thing is, when government isn't perfect, they don't blame themselves.  For example, Republicans have controlled the Presidency a lot in the last 100 years, and have held Congress a fair amount as well...when they say government is bad and tyrannical, why doesn't that same criticism apply to themselves?  Politics, I suppose.

[Smoking Guns]

Freedom, it is true that a lot of people don't trust their government, but they still may have a passion to teach, etc.  So even though they may not agree with what our tax system is, their love for teaching over comes their hate for taxes, or whatever.

[Smoking Guns]

Geitner, and his relationship with Goldman Sachs, another reason why people don't trust our government.

[freedom78]

Freedom, it is true that a lot of people don't trust their government, but they still may have a passion to teach, etc.  So even though they may not agree with what our tax system is, their love for teaching over comes their hate for taxes, or whatever.

Most teachers don't work for the federal government.  Those are local jobs.

Geitner, and his relationship with Goldman Sachs, another reason why people don't trust our government.

Fair enough and there are plenty of criticisms to be leveled at Geithner.  But the right tends to be made of two sides, regarding this issue: (1) the anti-government types because they truly fear government and (2) the anti-government types who think government has no place in economics.  Those in group 1 see Geithner's current role as confirming their paranoid beliefs.  Those in group 2 likely think his lack of action as head of the NYFRB was the appropriate government response to the economy (though they'll still complain and try to blame Obama, via Geithner). 

That those two ideas belong to the same party makes zero sense. 

[Smoking Guns]

Freedom, I would like the markets to correct themselves in theory, but, theory doesn't take into account illegal activity, so then the goverment must step in.  The market can't correct itself if you have some people breaking the law.  In a perfect world, I too would prefer hands off economics.  A world in which supply and demand dominated, not cartels and monopolies. 

My bad on what you were saying to Drew.  I thought you were saying how could he work for a school system, yet hate our government... 

[Drew]

On a tangential thought, why do people who don't believe in government choose to work for government?  Makes no sense for me.  Funny thing is, when government isn't perfect, they don't blame themselves.  For example, Republicans have controlled the Presidency a lot in the last 100 years, and have held Congress a fair amount as well...when they say government is bad and tyrannical, why doesn't that same criticism apply to themselves?  Politics, I suppose.

I think it's pretty simple. People have some say when they place their vote for certain people in government positions. When that elected official takes the position or remains in that position and becomes reckless than something should be done so this isn't continued. Look how long Ted Kennedy stayed in office all of those years. No one ever seemed to blame themselves by how they kept that guy in office. That is a main problem with government today.

[freedom78]

Freedom, I would like the markets to correct themselves in theory, but, theory doesn't take into account illegal activity, so then the goverment must step in.  The market can't correct itself if you have some people breaking the law.  In a perfect world, I too would prefer hands off economics.  A world in which supply and demand dominated, not cartels and monopolies. 

My bad on what you were saying to Drew.  I thought you were saying how could he work for a school system, yet hate our government... 

I'm not sure that "illegal activity" (assuming it's purely economic...not a coke infused, hooker killing rampage...for example) would have any place in a pure market system.  Buyer beware, and all that.

On a tangential thought, why do people who don't believe in government choose to work for government?  Makes no sense for me.  Funny thing is, when government isn't perfect, they don't blame themselves.  For example, Republicans have controlled the Presidency a lot in the last 100 years, and have held Congress a fair amount as well...when they say government is bad and tyrannical, why doesn't that same criticism apply to themselves?  Politics, I suppose.

I think it's pretty simple. People have some say when they place their vote for certain people in government positions. When that elected official takes the position or remains in that position and becomes reckless than something should be done so this isn't continued. Look how long Ted Kennedy stayed in office all of those years. No one ever seemed to blame themselves by how they kept that guy in office. That is a main problem with government today.

So you work for DoE because Ted Kennedy drank too much?  Or, to take that to a broader level, you work in government to protect us from all the other bad people in government? 

In this work, do you work to counter policies you don't believe in, or is it just a job and you want to be good at it because you generally don't believe in gov't and think other in that job might be bad?

[sandman]

clinton was pretty smart and he lowered the capital gains tax for a reason.

GS - i agree with your comment about incentives to help our economy.


obama's tax policy has been good thus far. i just hope he does not raise taxes too much too fast on anybody. that would be bad for the economy, and i believe in history, higher tax rates have not necessarily meant higher tax revenues. so do the math.

also, i hope he does not raise taxes on the middle class via other tax increases (i.e. energy).   

[freedom78]

clinton was pretty smart and he lowered the capital gains tax for a reason.

GS - i agree with your comment about incentives to help our economy.


obama's tax policy has been good thus far. i just hope he does not raise taxes too much too fast on anybody. that would be bad for the economy, and i believe in history, higher tax rates have not necessarily meant higher tax revenues. so do the math.

also, i hope he does not raise taxes on the middle class via other tax increases (i.e. energy).   

For purely political reasons, I doubt this will happen.  This is midterm year, then we're straight into the very early part of presidential politics season. 

I believe (you'll have to check me on this) that the Bush tax cuts expire 1/1/2011.  I would expect Obama to support extending those for lower/middle classes, while (as he campaigned on) letting the top earner tax cuts expire.  But a real tax increase in the next few years seems unlikely...especially on the middle class. 

[Drew]

So you work for DoE because Ted Kennedy drank too much?  Or, to take that to a broader level, you work in government to protect us from all the other bad people in government? 

In this work, do you work to counter policies you don't believe in, or is it just a job and you want to be good at it because you generally don't believe in gov't and think other in that job might be bad?

No, I work because I like my job, I enjoy the people I work with, and have a financial responsibility so many people in this country dismiss on a daily basis. Government is growing out of control and will be raising taxes on everything and everyone. Since I have problems with certain entities of government, I should just quit and add to the chaos and mooch off the government? How asinine is that? That's right along with the idea of whoever hates the president and American policies should leave the country and live somewhere else. Just because I can't stand B.O. and all is cronies or any other bureaucrat  for that matter does not mean I'll quit my job as a form of protest.

[freedom78]

So you work for DoE because Ted Kennedy drank too much?  Or, to take that to a broader level, you work in government to protect us from all the other bad people in government? 

In this work, do you work to counter policies you don't believe in, or is it just a job and you want to be good at it because you generally don't believe in gov't and think other in that job might be bad?

No, I work because I like my job, I enjoy the people I work with, and have a financial responsibility so many people in this country dismiss on a daily basis. Government is growing out of control and will be raising taxes on everything and everyone. Since I have problems with certain entities of government, I should just quit and add to the chaos and mooch off the government? How asinine is that? That's right along with the idea of whoever hates the president and American policies should leave the country and live somewhere else. Just because I can't stand B.O. and all is cronies or any other bureaucrat  for that matter does not mean I'll quit my job as a form of protest.

That's all fine and you can work wherever you want...I just think it's odd that you find government to be "the problem" in so many cases and, at the same time, you work in government. 

[Drew]

That's all fine and you can work wherever you want...I just think it's odd that you find government to be "the problem" in so many cases and, at the same time, you work in government. 

I'm not a drone. I can enjoy an opportunity without having to agree 100% all the time with how the government operates and bow-down to them. Will I voice my outrage if I feel that my taxes are being raised to pay for more and more entitlement programs? Yes, I will. Just because they issue me a paycheck does not mean I will bow to them.

Right now, unemployment is high and continuing to get higher. I don't see anything being done to try and help this so I feel unemployment will continue to get higher. If another opportunity that is much better than the work I'm doing right now ever presents itself, than I'd most likely take it.

[Jdog0830]

From what I think there is a time and place for small goverment like how the republicans want it.
That would be when everyone has a job and that the minimum wage is set at a level where people can make a living.

But these are not the current events.







Joe

Republicans want small government?   

When it comes to programs that help people yes. There opinion is that they are lazy or some fuckin thing. Thats a big reason why they hate the health care bill. But when it comes to killing people with the biggest fuckin bombs on the planet I am sure they want us to be the biggest in the game.



Joe

[JuicySwoos]

From what I think there is a time and place for small goverment like how the republicans want it.
That would be when everyone has a job and that the minimum wage is set at a level where people can make a living.

But these are not the current events.







Joe

Republicans want small government?   

When it comes to programs that help people yes. There opinion is that they are lazy or some fuckin thing. Thats a big reason why they hate the health care bill. But when it comes to killing people with the biggest fuckin bombs on the planet I am sure they want us to be the biggest in the game.



Joe

OK. I understand they campaign on that type of rhetoric, and the talk radio circuit is ripe with it as well, but in practice it does not seem to be the case.  The Republican golden boy, Reagan, government and the deficit grew....but he had a Democratic congress was the excuse.  Then move on to Dubya, he had a Republican congress and the goverment and deficit still grew. Bailouts and stimilus packages included.  Always goes back the the Coke vs Pepsi thing for me.