LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Forum for posts that are not hockey-related.

Moderators: Three Stars, dagny, pfim, netwolf

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby columbia on Wed Apr 10, 2013 10:43 am

:pop:
columbia
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 51,888
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 12:13 am
Location: دعنا نذهب طيور البطريق

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby Pucks_and_Pols on Wed Apr 10, 2013 10:58 am

PensFanInDC wrote:http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/09/justice/texas-college-stabbing/index.html

WE NEED STRICTER KNIFE CONTROL LAWS!


so looking into this, it seems like none of the victims of this rampage have actually died yet. not to belittle the suffering here, but isn't that actually an argument for more gun control, that this psycho did much LESS damage with his knife then he would had he access and inclination to use a semi-automatic rifle for his assault?
Pucks_and_Pols
Junior 'A'
Junior 'A'
 
Posts: 293
Joined: Tue Sep 13, 2011 11:47 am

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby PensFanInDC on Wed Apr 10, 2013 11:16 am

Pucks_and_Pols wrote:
PensFanInDC wrote:http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/09/justice/texas-college-stabbing/index.html

WE NEED STRICTER KNIFE CONTROL LAWS!


so looking into this, it seems like none of the victims of this rampage have actually died yet. not to belittle the suffering here, but isn't that actually an argument for more gun control, that this psycho did much LESS damage with his knife then he would had he access and inclination to use a semi-automatic rifle for his assault?


No.
PensFanInDC
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 27,909
Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2007 3:28 pm
Location: Fredneck

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby tifosi77 on Wed Apr 10, 2013 11:31 am

In the eternal debate over which is worse, I'd much rather be shot than stabbed.

King Sid the Great 87 wrote:Your hard-on for the F-35 seems to have exceeded the recommend safety threshold. I've seen commercials on this stuff. You might want to consult a doctor. :lol:

I'm well past the 4 hour mark. :lol:

I admit it's like flogging a dead horse. But I can't help myself.
tifosi77
NHL Healthy Scratch
NHL Healthy Scratch
 
Posts: 14,085
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 3:33 pm
Location: White-Juday Warp Field Interferometer

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby shafnutz05 on Wed Apr 10, 2013 6:40 pm

http://www.daveramsey.com/blog/white-house-cap-retirement-savings

President Obama’s new budget proposal includes a cap that would limit the amount people could save in tax-preferred retirement accounts to $3 million in assets.

According to the White House, “Under current rules, some wealthy individuals are able to accumulate many millions of dollars in these accounts, substantially more than is needed to fund reasonable levels of retirement saving.”

In other words, [insert sarcastic voice] some of you Americans are saving too much money! Stop that! When you save all that money, that’s fewer dollars Washington can get its hands on.

Whether or not you think you’ll ever have $3 million dollars saved in your retirement account is not the point. The point is that Washington is attempting to dictate how much money you can save. This coming from a city that has never met a debt it didn’t like.


Pathetic
shafnutz05
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 60,557
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2009 5:10 pm
Location: Amish Country

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby redwill on Wed Apr 10, 2013 7:10 pm



What's pathetic is some people trying to suggest that this is about savings. When Mitt Romney puts $100 million into an IRA he isn't doing it to save money for his retirement. He's doing it to shield the money from taxes for a few years.

I don't really have anything against that, since the money can be used by banks to create more money, etc. But let's not pretend it's about anything other than the super-rich trying to dodge taxes.
redwill
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 7,342
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 4:04 pm
Location: Wichita, KS

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby ExPatriatePen on Wed Apr 10, 2013 7:31 pm

redwill wrote:


What's pathetic is some people trying to suggest that this is about savings. When Mitt Romney puts $100 million into an IRA he isn't doing it to save money for his retirement. He's doing it to shield the money from taxes for a few years.

I don't really have anything against that, since the money can be used by banks to create more money, etc. But let's not pretend it's about anything other than the super-rich trying to dodge taxes.

Ummmm, there are already caveats and restrictions on how much you can put in a tax-deferred IRA and there are existing laws on how that income is treated when the estate is settled. This is just Washington continuing to tighten those regulations for one purpose and one purpose only, to take those funds and use them as politicians deem fit.
ExPatriatePen
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 22,691
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 3:57 pm
Location: Source, Destination, Protocol, Port, size, sequence number, check sum... Yep, that about covers it.

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby stinky on Wed Apr 10, 2013 7:57 pm

ExPatriatePen wrote:
redwill wrote:


What's pathetic is some people trying to suggest that this is about savings. When Mitt Romney puts $100 million into an IRA he isn't doing it to save money for his retirement. He's doing it to shield the money from taxes for a few years.

I don't really have anything against that, since the money can be used by banks to create more money, etc. But let's not pretend it's about anything other than the super-rich trying to dodge taxes.

Ummmm, there are already caveats and restrictions on how much you can put in a tax-deferred IRA and there are existing laws on how that income is treated when the estate is settled. This is just Washington continuing to tighten those regulations for one purpose and one purpose only, to take those funds and use them as politicians deem fit.


Yes, heaven forbid someone SHEILD THIER HARD EARNED MONEY FROM CONFISCATION! HOW DARE THEY!!!!! THAT MONEY CAN BE USED FOR THE COLLECTIVE GOOD!
stinky
Junior 'A'
Junior 'A'
 
Posts: 180
Joined: Tue Dec 15, 2009 1:49 pm

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby KennyTheKangaroo on Wed Apr 10, 2013 8:25 pm

between an employer and employee, you can only contribute $50,000 per year.
KennyTheKangaroo
NHL Healthy Scratch
NHL Healthy Scratch
 
Posts: 12,245
Joined: Sun Nov 19, 2006 12:15 am
Location: Under the Skycoaster

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby Kaizer on Wed Apr 10, 2013 8:28 pm

if i had a large amount of money i wouldnt be keeping it in this country.
Kaizer
AHL Hall of Famer
AHL Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 9,542
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 11:02 am
Location: Crazy Town

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby redwill on Wed Apr 10, 2013 8:29 pm

ExPatriatePen wrote:Ummmm, there are already caveats and restrictions on how much you can put in a tax-deferred IRA and there are existing laws on how that income is treated when the estate is settled. This is just Washington continuing to tighten those regulations for one purpose and one purpose only, to take those funds and use them as politicians deem fit.


I'm sure the issue of tax policy on the super-rich has been thrashed about a thousand times or more in this thread. I was responding to the screed in the article shaf posted claiming that this was about a government assault on the time-honored American principle of saving for retirement. This has nothing to do with retirement savings and everything to do about tax-avoidance. For better or worse.
redwill
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 7,342
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 4:04 pm
Location: Wichita, KS

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby ExPatriatePen on Wed Apr 10, 2013 8:34 pm

redwill wrote:
ExPatriatePen wrote:Ummmm, there are already caveats and restrictions on how much you can put in a tax-deferred IRA and there are existing laws on how that income is treated when the estate is settled. This is just Washington continuing to tighten those regulations for one purpose and one purpose only, to take those funds and use them as politicians deem fit.


I'm sure the issue of tax policy on the super-rich has been thrashed about a thousand times or more in this thread. I was responding to the screed in the article shaf posted claiming that this was about a government assault on the time-honored American principle of saving for retirement. This has nothing to do with retirement savings and everything to do about tax-avoidance. For better or worse.


Redwill, with all due respect, and I mean that sincerely, it's really all about the government taking as much as feel they can from the individual. It's confiscation, the name they give it is taxes.

Now you can say that individuals get something from the government in return for their money being taken from them (by force no less), but let's not pretend its the governments money.

And by the way, I don't care if those people use it for retirement or to buy a $10 million dollar vacation home in Aspen, it's money that they earned and they have the right to spend it anyway they please.
ExPatriatePen
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 22,691
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 3:57 pm
Location: Source, Destination, Protocol, Port, size, sequence number, check sum... Yep, that about covers it.

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby Pitt87 on Wed Apr 10, 2013 8:40 pm

Pucks_and_Pols wrote:
PensFanInDC wrote:http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/09/justice/texas-college-stabbing/index.html

WE NEED STRICTER KNIFE CONTROL LAWS!


so looking into this, it seems like none of the victims of this rampage have actually died yet. not to belittle the suffering here, but isn't that actually an argument for more gun control, that this psycho did much LESS damage with his knife then he would had he access and inclination to use a semi-automatic rifle for his assault?


Not every incident -- nor every snarky comment -- is grounds to make new laws or change existing laws.
Pitt87
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 5,421
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2009 11:33 am
Location: Admin wrote:Rooting for the Flyers is not allowed here. Seriously.

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby tifosi77 on Wed Apr 10, 2013 8:52 pm

ExPatriatePen wrote:
redwill wrote:


What's pathetic is some people trying to suggest that this is about savings. When Mitt Romney puts $100 million into an IRA he isn't doing it to save money for his retirement. He's doing it to shield the money from taxes for a few years.

I don't really have anything against that, since the money can be used by banks to create more money, etc. But let's not pretend it's about anything other than the super-rich trying to dodge taxes.

Ummmm, there are already caveats and restrictions on how much you can put in a tax-deferred IRA and there are existing laws on how that income is treated when the estate is settled. This is just Washington continuing to tighten those regulations for one purpose and one purpose only, to take those funds and use them as politicians deem fit.

I'm out of my depth here, and I admit it. But I recall reading something about there being limits to the value of assets you can place in a tax-deferred account, but there aren't many (if any) limits on how much those assets can appreciate over time.

For example, carried interest. It was once common for fund managers to claim a zero value for their share for managing a fund valued at billions of dollars. This allowed them to deposit into a deferred-tax account without fear of hitting the ceiling, and 2) meant that (as it was now treated as a capital gain) it would only be taxed at 15% when withdrawn.

It was also once common practice for managers to simply 'convert' their management fees (which are supposed to be taxed as income) into carried interest for tax deferment/evasion. Such conversions were not technically legal, but I don't think the IRS was ever super diligent at prosecuting these activities.
tifosi77
NHL Healthy Scratch
NHL Healthy Scratch
 
Posts: 14,085
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 3:33 pm
Location: White-Juday Warp Field Interferometer

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby Pitt87 on Wed Apr 10, 2013 8:57 pm

redwill wrote:


What's pathetic is some people trying to suggest that this is about savings. When Mitt Romney puts $100 million into an IRA he isn't doing it to save money for his retirement. He's doing it to shield the money from taxes for a few years.

I don't really have anything against that, since the money can be used by banks to create more money, etc. But let's not pretend it's about anything other than the super-rich trying to dodge taxes.


You may have just chosen the wrong tax shelter here, but your comments are fundamentally false. You can't just jam millions into an IRA to avoid taxes. Frankly, a better tax shelter in your example is a bunch of Ferraris or an art collection.
Pitt87
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 5,421
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2009 11:33 am
Location: Admin wrote:Rooting for the Flyers is not allowed here. Seriously.

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby ExPatriatePen on Wed Apr 10, 2013 8:59 pm

tifosi77 wrote:
ExPatriatePen wrote:
redwill wrote:


What's pathetic is some people trying to suggest that this is about savings. When Mitt Romney puts $100 million into an IRA he isn't doing it to save money for his retirement. He's doing it to shield the money from taxes for a few years.

I don't really have anything against that, since the money can be used by banks to create more money, etc. But let's not pretend it's about anything other than the super-rich trying to dodge taxes.

Ummmm, there are already caveats and restrictions on how much you can put in a tax-deferred IRA and there are existing laws on how that income is treated when the estate is settled. This is just Washington continuing to tighten those regulations for one purpose and one purpose only, to take those funds and use them as politicians deem fit.

I'm out of my depth here, and I admit it. But I recall reading something about there being limits to the value of assets you can place in a tax-deferred account, but there aren't many (if any) limits on how much those assets can appreciate over time.

For example, carried interest. It was once common for fund managers to claim a zero value for their share for managing a fund valued at billions of dollars. This allowed them to deposit into a deferred-tax account without fear of hitting the ceiling, and 2) meant that (as it was now treated as a capital gain) it would only be taxed at 15% when withdrawn.

It was also once common practice for managers to simply 'convert' their management fees (which are supposed to be taxed as income) into carried interest for tax deferment/evasion. Such conversions were not technically legal, but I don't think the IRS was ever super diligent at prosecuting these activities.


Different issue altogether than the one being discussed. But I won't argue that the subject your pointing out needs a serious overhaul.
ExPatriatePen
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 22,691
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 3:57 pm
Location: Source, Destination, Protocol, Port, size, sequence number, check sum... Yep, that about covers it.

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby Pitt87 on Wed Apr 10, 2013 9:16 pm

tifosi77 wrote:
ExPatriatePen wrote:
redwill wrote:


What's pathetic is some people trying to suggest that this is about savings. When Mitt Romney puts $100 million into an IRA he isn't doing it to save money for his retirement. He's doing it to shield the money from taxes for a few years.

I don't really have anything against that, since the money can be used by banks to create more money, etc. But let's not pretend it's about anything other than the super-rich trying to dodge taxes.

Ummmm, there are already caveats and restrictions on how much you can put in a tax-deferred IRA and there are existing laws on how that income is treated when the estate is settled. This is just Washington continuing to tighten those regulations for one purpose and one purpose only, to take those funds and use them as politicians deem fit.

I'm out of my depth here, and I admit it. But I recall reading something about there being limits to the value of assets you can place in a tax-deferred account, but there aren't many (if any) limits on how much those assets can appreciate over time.

For example, carried interest. It was once common for fund managers to claim a zero value for their share for managing a fund valued at billions of dollars. This allowed them to deposit into a deferred-tax account without fear of hitting the ceiling, and 2) meant that (as it was now treated as a capital gain) it would only be taxed at 15% when withdrawn.

It was also once common practice for managers to simply 'convert' their management fees (which are supposed to be taxed as income) into carried interest for tax deferment/evasion. Such conversions were not technically legal, but I don't think the IRS was ever super diligent at prosecuting these activities.


One other item of interest to consider for taxes on investment is the government double-dip; for an investment to pay any money that isn't related to a dividend, a company has a be profitable. The first 'bite at the apple' the government takes is on corporate profits. Only after taxes does equity convery to income for investors, and only if they 'sell' or do not re-invest their share of profits. If they take a cashflow from operations as income, they are taxed a second time at the personal layer. In that way, a shareholder pays 40% (corporate rate for income) and 20% on a long-term (>1yr) investment. So, if we do that math for a million in profits:

1,000,000-(1,000,000*.4)= $600,000 CF to owner
$600,000 - ($600,000*.2) = $480,000

The effective tax rate on the income from an investment is 52% when you consider the actual income from an investment is taxed twice before an individual owes no more taxes to the government.
Pitt87
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 5,421
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2009 11:33 am
Location: Admin wrote:Rooting for the Flyers is not allowed here. Seriously.

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby redwill on Wed Apr 10, 2013 9:35 pm

Pitt87 wrote:You may have just chosen the wrong tax shelter here, but your comments are fundamentally false. You can't just jam millions into an IRA to avoid taxes. Frankly, a better tax shelter in your example is a bunch of Ferraris or an art collection.


I didn't mean to imply that it was as simple as that. Obviously there are many high-priced, high-powered accountants and lawyers involved doing things that not many people seem to understand. And so ...

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/articles/2012/08/11/mitt_romneys_ira_is_unlikely_centerpiece_of_wealth_and_tax_avoidance/

By any measure, Romney’s IRA is extraordinary. Its approximate size can be gleaned from the financial disclosure report he filed for the 2012 presidential campaign. It details the “W. Mitt Romney IRA” as holding a variety of assets worth between $20 million to $100 million.
redwill
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 7,342
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 4:04 pm
Location: Wichita, KS

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby Pitt87 on Wed Apr 10, 2013 9:57 pm

redwill wrote:
Pitt87 wrote:You may have just chosen the wrong tax shelter here, but your comments are fundamentally false. You can't just jam millions into an IRA to avoid taxes. Frankly, a better tax shelter in your example is a bunch of Ferraris or an art collection.


I didn't mean to imply that it was as simple as that. Obviously there are many high-priced, high-powered accountants and lawyers involved doing things that not many people seem to understand. And so ...

http://www.boston.com/news/politics/articles/2012/08/11/mitt_romneys_ira_is_unlikely_centerpiece_of_wealth_and_tax_avoidance/

By any measure, Romney’s IRA is extraordinary. Its approximate size can be gleaned from the financial disclosure report he filed for the 2012 presidential campaign. It details the “W. Mitt Romney IRA” as holding a variety of assets worth between $20 million to $100 million.


Traditional IRAs are funded with AFTER tax income, and are tax-deferred only on the sale of items in it; people still pay taxes on distributions. This is a bit of a witch hunt...

Also... you have the same protections from taxation under the law. You can't re-interpret the law because he's rich.
Pitt87
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 5,421
Joined: Tue Apr 28, 2009 11:33 am
Location: Admin wrote:Rooting for the Flyers is not allowed here. Seriously.

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby redwill on Wed Apr 10, 2013 10:31 pm

Pitt87 wrote:Traditional IRAs are funded with AFTER tax income, and are tax-deferred only on the sale of items in it; people still pay taxes on distributions.


I understand that. Mitt's accountants do, too.

A serious question: Why are contributions to IRAs limited?

Pitt87 wrote:Also... you have the same protections from taxation under the law. You can't re-interpret the law because he's rich.


There's no re-interpretation going on here. The proposal, as I understand it, is aiming to change the law.

I'm not saying I agree with it. All I have been saying is that it's not about government hating the idea that Americans should save money. It's about, as EPP has said, increasing regulations. "Closing loopholes," as many politicians have been calling for. Sticking it to the super-rich, who may or may not deserve it. Breaking open these tax havens which should or should not exist.
redwill
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 7,342
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 4:04 pm
Location: Wichita, KS

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby Grunthy on Wed Apr 10, 2013 11:44 pm

Why can't everyone just agree that the more money the government gets their hands on, the worst off we all are...
Grunthy
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 6,328
Joined: Sat Dec 01, 2007 9:08 pm

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby Sarcastic on Thu Apr 11, 2013 1:41 am

I would rather talk about chicks.
Sarcastic
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 16,340
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2007 3:49 pm

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby Sam's Drunk Dog on Thu Apr 11, 2013 7:10 am

Sarcastic wrote:I would rather talk about chicks.

The poultry market?
Sam's Drunk Dog
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 20,586
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2006 12:31 pm
Location: Shutter Island

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby ExPatriatePen on Thu Apr 11, 2013 7:57 am

Sarcastic wrote:I would rather talk about chicks.

You mean like Elizabeth Warren? No thanks. :)
ExPatriatePen
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 22,691
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 3:57 pm
Location: Source, Destination, Protocol, Port, size, sequence number, check sum... Yep, that about covers it.

Re: LGP Political Discussion Thread - Latest news at top

Postby King Sid the Great 87 on Thu Apr 11, 2013 8:24 am

Disregarding the absurdity of the $3M cap, have any mechanics been proposed? Is the $3M limit applied to contributions, or the value of the account as a whole? If the latter, how will this be handled? Brokerage performs automatic sales once the account breaches the limit? Is there no concern for the arbitrage this will create?
King Sid the Great 87
AHL'er
AHL'er
 
Posts: 3,032
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 7:41 am

PreviousNext

Return to NHR

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests


e-mail