Joel Pett by Joel Pett

Joel Pett

Comments (25) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. MortyForTyrant

    MortyForTyrant said, almost 2 years ago

    I just re-read the actual numbers they are fighting over. It’s an increase of 2% (33→35) for people making more than $200K and 3.6% (36→39.6) for those making more than $388K. That’s not a “hike”, thats merely a fluctuation in the grand scheme of things, especially given tax-rates like 90% in the 50s…

    -

    Tax rates over the years (Wikipedia)

  2. mikefive

    mikefive said, almost 2 years ago

    @MortyForTyrant

    Part of that tax increase is also on dividend payments to shareholders. Going from 15% to 39.6%. Although I’m sure it would make some in these forums happy to see Mitt pay more in taxes, the increase will also effect small share holders that are retired. It begs the question of “What’s fair” again.

  3. Clark  Kent

    Clark Kent said, almost 2 years ago

    Bring back the tax rates on the rich from the 1960’s.
    Restore the Glass Steagall act, with sharp teeth.
    Haul the thieves of wall street into federal court to be tried for their financial crimes.

  4. narrowminded

    narrowminded said, almost 2 years ago

    Cut tax rates for everyone.
    Cap spending to the last Clinton budget.
    Haul Obama into court for political graft with the Unions.

  5. mikefive

    mikefive said, almost 2 years ago

    @Mr. King

    I was aware that IRA and 401k contributions were taxed as ordinary income, but I thought that appreciation of the value of those contributions through investment of those funds and dividends from those investments were taxed as capital gains. Also, I was speaking of stocks, etc. held separately form retirement funds. If dividends from stocks, etc. held separately, won’t they be taxed at the new rates if they are enacted?

  6. sclark55

    sclark55 GoComics PRO Member said, almost 2 years ago

    Maybe I missed it, but did the Prez quit smoking?

  7. ARodney

    ARodney said, almost 2 years ago

    Ima, your rants get weirder every day. Obama living under a bridge? Obama tells us every week that he’s one of the people who will pay higher taxes. He sells a lot of books, and he knows that it’s his patriotic duty to actually support the country he loves. Why are taxes that are LOWER THAN REAGAN’S suddenly anti American? The reason you are losing the argument in the country is because your arguments literally do not make any sense, they do not stand up to even simple math. Paying taxes is doubtless the only patriotic thing you’ve actually done.

  8. Stipple

    Stipple said, almost 2 years ago

    @Tigger

    Somebody spits out the ‘retirees tax’ and it gets explained.
    It gets ignored.
    .
    Its going to hurt the retirees come back.
    .
    Reread above a few, short term tigger. Lay off the smoke and you may remember the posts better.

  9. braindead08

    braindead08 GoComics PRO Member said, almost 2 years ago

    @mikefive

    “Part of that tax increase is also on dividend payments to shareholders. Going from 15% to 39.6%. Although I’m sure it would make some in these forums happy to see Mitt pay more in taxes, the increase will also effect small share holders that are retired. It begs the question of “What’s fair” again.”
    -
    You are correct, and, capital gains would see similar increases.
    -
    But,
    It’s easy enough to apply levels to these. Say, the first 250,000 combined dividends and capital gains is taxed at 20% and the rest is taxed at earned income rates.
    -
    If you want to take a stab at ‘fairness’, you can make your own numbers. That’s where the sausage making (legislative give and take) comes into play.
    -
    While it’s difficult and clumsy at best to try to arrive at fairness, it is very east to spot gross unfairness — as in Willard paying 13% while the government gets 25% from a single person with 50K earnings. (The Buffett Rule)

  10. braindead08

    braindead08 GoComics PRO Member said, almost 2 years ago

    @Ms. Ima

    “I’m waiting for O to become a leader. I fear it isn’t going to happen”
    -
    What, exaclty, would you consider leadership on the part of the president?

  11. braindead08

    braindead08 GoComics PRO Member said, almost 2 years ago

    @Tigger

    “You are correct, this will punishe the large majoirty if Middle Class Retirees who put money in 401K’s and IRA’s, also their Pensions ate also considered investment Income, so this Large increase in the Capital Gains Taxes punishes the Middle Class Retires more, and this is what Obama said he would not do, yet this is what he wants to do.

    There is a very Lagre population of Middle Class Retirees who make less that this tax will hit hard"
    -
    Tigger, income INSIDE an IRA/401(k)/403(b) is not taxed at all no matter if it is dividend, capital gains or anything.
    -
    When incomes OUT of an IRA, it is taxed as ORDINARY INCOME regardless of how it was earned inside the IRA.
    -
    So changes to the dividend or capital gains rate has ZERO effect on income derived from and IRA or 401(k) or 403(b). It has ZERO effect on middle class retirees who get all of their income from an IRA.
    -
    Is this concept so DIFFICULT to grasp?

  12. cjr53

    cjr53 said, almost 2 years ago

    @Mr. King

    What about a ROTH IRA? Isn’t that supposed to be “after taxed” dollars? Except interest earned?

  13. braindead08

    braindead08 GoComics PRO Member said, almost 2 years ago

    @Tigger

    “40K palns are not taxed at all the Tax is deferred until the individual must start withdrawn funds from the account at age 71, then the Tax is the Capital Gains Tax Rate”
    -
    This is absolutely wrong. But don’t let that sway your opinion.

  14. mikefive

    mikefive said, almost 2 years ago

    @Tigger

    “Have you ever been Employed?”

    Snide questions are inappropriate because of someone’s trying to relieve ignorance and I really don’t see any other reason for you asking that. I am quite familiar with the contributing to a 401(k) but not its disbursement. (except in divorce where you pay 30% of the value as tax and penalty. Been there, done that).

  15. corjo2

    corjo2 said, almost 2 years ago

    @Mr. King

    That is SO not true.

  16. Load the rest of the comments (10).