Obama wants payroll tax on incomes above $250,000 - Page 2

motivez · 06-18-2008, 09:41 AM

So, why shouldn't there be payroll taxes on incomes above $250k per year?

Stylerod · 06-18-2008, 09:49 AM

Originally Posted by WickedLou9

Maybe he means capital gains and dividends which are not counted as income.

Capitol gains tax sucks. My mom retired and moved to MI about 10 years ago. She sold her house in IL for about $130k and bought a house in the UP of MI for $65k. She had to pay over 50% capitol gains tax on that money which just about killed her. The house in MI needed a lot of work and she had no income.

A few years later they took that tax away but you could only do it once. Has it changed again?

Phantom · 06-18-2008, 10:09 AM

A few years later they took that tax away but you could only do it once. Has it changed again?

A few years later they took that tax away but you could only do it once. Has it changed again?[/quote]

They made an exclusion for primary residences. I think it's the first $250k for an individual or $500k for a married couple is not taxed on the sale of the primary residence. There are a few more restrictions, like you can only use it every 2 years etc.

DosEquis · 06-18-2008, 03:43 PM

Originally Posted by Stylerod

Capitol gains tax sucks. My mom retired and moved to MI about 10 years ago. She sold her house in IL for about $130k and bought a house in the UP of MI for $65k. She had to pay over 50% capitol gains tax on that money which just about killed her. The house in MI needed a lot of work and she had no income.

A few years later they took that tax away but you could only do it once. Has it changed again?

50%? Capital gains on individuals during the clinton administration was 28%.

motivez · 06-19-2008, 12:16 AM

So no one has said why it's a bad idea yet. Anyone?

Phantom · 06-19-2008, 12:16 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

So no one has said why it's a bad idea yet. Anyone?

It's a bad idea because it excludes income between $100k and $250k.

nbiggershaft · 06-19-2008, 07:42 PM

Originally Posted by Phantom

It's a bad idea because it excludes income between $100k and $250k.

. Its a good idea, but it stinks of pandering. He's trying to buy the votes of those people in that gap by discriminating against the very rich (who have little voting power).

motivez · 06-20-2008, 12:36 AM

Originally Posted by nbiggershaft

He's trying to buy the votes of those people in that gap by discriminating against the very rich (who have little voting power).

Are you really trying to suggest the rich have little influence?

motivez · 06-20-2008, 12:37 AM

Originally Posted by Phantom

It's a bad idea because it excludes income between $100k and $250k.

Well, that doesn't make much sense to me, but that doesn't really speak to why the idea is bad itself.

WickedLou9 · 06-20-2008, 10:21 AM

It makes sense if you look at what he has been promising. He has promised to help the middle class and stop giving tax cuts to the rich. Someone earning 150 or 200K is still middle class in alot of places. If he just took the cap off without this exemption he would have been going back on his promise not to tax the middle class anymore.

nbiggershaft · 06-20-2008, 11:02 AM

Originally Posted by WickedLou9

It makes sense if you look at what he has been promising. He has promised to help the middle class and stop giving tax cuts to the rich. Someone earning 150 or 200K is still middle class in alot of places. If he just took the cap off without this exemption he would have been going back on his promise not to tax the middle class anymore.

They may be considered middle class some places, but they aren't in financial trouble. He just doesn't want to risk losing votes. So yeah it's what he promised, but it doesn't have any just backing.