MARCELL DAREUS POWER Posted June 24, 2012 Posted June 24, 2012 (edited) Again your stupidity astounds me. You are not supporting any church. He is. With his money. Making his choice. You want to claim someone else's ****? Move to Europe. 1st point, its not his ****. its labors. we already proved that in the thread that lasted 1 month because you dont understand how profit is created through use value and market changes...... but nevermind that... assume it is capital gains and is his income. any income must be taxed. by reducing that tax through charity, thats money taken away from debt reduction and roads, etc... really? its capital gains, ( income)... this is like me taking my check, and instead of paying the normal tax, i reduce it by giving some of that tax money to the branch davidians... Edited June 24, 2012 by MARCELL DAREUS POWER
Rob's House Posted June 24, 2012 Posted June 24, 2012 1st point, its not his ****. its labors. we already proved that in the thread that lasted 1 month because you dont understand how profit is created through use value and market changes...... but nevermind that... assume it is capital gains and is his income. any income must be taxed. by reducing that tax through charity, thats money taken away from debt reduction and roads, etc... really? its capital gains, ( income)... this is like me taking my check, and instead of paying the normal tax, i reduce it by giving some of that tax money to the branch davidians... No, it's not like that. It's like you gave part of your check to the Davidians and didn't have to pay taxes on the portion of the check that you didn't keep for yourself. It's a significant difference.
MARCELL DAREUS POWER Posted June 24, 2012 Posted June 24, 2012 (edited) No, it's not like that. It's like you gave part of your check to the Davidians and didn't have to pay taxes on the portion of the check that you didn't keep for yourself. It's a significant difference. saying it over and over like some imbecile doesnt make it true... it has to do with income that is taxable. a person makes 100$ from capital gains. usually 15$ will be taxed. instead, that person gives 2$ to the branch davidians and now he is only taxed at 13$... 100-15 = 85 98-13 = 85 the 2$ went to the branch davidians instead of a !@#$ing hospital or debt reduction. :wallbash: :wallbash: as tom would say, who is obssesed with me, youre a !@#$ing idiot... Edited June 24, 2012 by MARCELL DAREUS POWER
Rob's House Posted June 24, 2012 Posted June 24, 2012 saying it over and over like some imbecile doesnt make it true... it has to do with income that is taxable. a person makes 100$ from capital gains. usually 15$ will be taxed. instead, that person gives 2$ to the branch davidians and now he is only taxed at 13$... 100-15 = 85 98-13 = 85 the 2$ went to the branch davidians instead of a !@#$ing hospital or debt reduction. :wallbash: :wallbash: as tom would say, who is obssesed with me, youre a !@#$ing idiot... Oh the irony And for the record. If the additional $2 mil was taxable as capital gains you're looking at $300k less in tax revenues (that could have gone for hospitals and debt reduction. Who's stupid now you dirty sheep !@#$er?!?!
3rdnlng Posted June 24, 2012 Posted June 24, 2012 Oh the irony And for the record. If the additional $2 mil was taxable as capital gains you're looking at $300k less in tax revenues (that could have gone for hospitals and debt reduction. Who's stupid now you dirty sheep !@#$er?!?! The math is simple. It is the difference between 100x15% or 98x15% which can easily be converted into sheep if he prefers.
MARCELL DAREUS POWER Posted June 24, 2012 Posted June 24, 2012 Oh the irony And for the record. If the additional $2 mil was taxable as capital gains you're looking at $300k less in tax revenues (that could have gone for hospitals and debt reduction. Who's stupid now you dirty sheep !@#$er?!?! umm, no. the extra 2$ out of 15$ goes to the needed taxes or the cult. you see he pays the cult instead of the full amount on taxes... The math is simple. It is the difference between 100x15% or 98x15% which can easily be converted into sheep if he prefers. the tax rate would go down because of the donation to the cult...
DC Tom Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 1st point, its not his ****. its labors. we already proved that in the thread that lasted 1 month No, we proved you're a !@#$ing nitwit in that thread. It's still his money to give away. the tax rate would go down because of the donation to the cult... No, it won't, unless he gives away $50M of $50M. Capital gains tax is basically a flat rate at that level.
Fezmid Posted June 25, 2012 Author Posted June 25, 2012 because they made a stupid market investment. we are not talking about money just sitting in a bank, rather capital gains, ie money invested. ie house bought for 500k, and then sold for 250k... the 250k should still be taxed. So if I deposit $1,000 in the bank... And then withdraw $500 of it... Should I be taxed on that $500?
3rdnlng Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 No, we proved you're a !@#$ing nitwit in that thread. It's still his money to give away. No, it won't, unless he gives away $50M of $50M. Capital gains tax is basically a flat rate at that level. You're wasting your breath. He doesn't even understand the difference between a tax credit and a tax deduction.
DC Tom Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 You're wasting your breath. No kidding, really? He doesn't even understand the difference between money and value.
MARCELL DAREUS POWER Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 So if I deposit $1,000 in the bank... And then withdraw $500 of it... Should I be taxed on that $500? this is not a capital loss. if you suffer a capital loss, because you were dumb, then the capital should still be taxed.
Jauronimo Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 this is not a capital loss. if you suffer a capital loss, because you were dumb, then the capital should still be taxed. It was taxed. When it was earned.
DC Tom Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 this is not a capital loss. if you suffer a capital loss, because you were dumb, then the capital should still be taxed. Why should a capital loss be taxed? Hell, why should capital be taxed?
Chef Jim Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 this is not a capital loss. if you suffer a capital loss, because you were dumb, then the capital should still be taxed. Look up the term cost basis and get back to us with what you've learned.
Koko78 Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 Give the guy a break. He's only trying to get laid. Of course he would then be a greedy capitalist pig-dog that was enjoying the benefits of the slave labor; exploiting that poor hooker he hired on the street corner while doing nothing himself but shuffling some fake money around.
MARCELL DAREUS POWER Posted June 25, 2012 Posted June 25, 2012 (edited) Of course he would then be a greedy capitalist pig-dog that was enjoying the benefits of the slave labor; exploiting that poor hooker he hired on the street corner while doing nothing himself but shuffling some fake money around. this literally has nothing to do with what i said and makes no sense... good job buddy! Why should a capital loss be taxed? Hell, why should capital be taxed? because if youre in business, you should be taxed. labor or owner. when a person takes a lesser job, or a paycut, can they write that off? this is like a person making 20 an hr, and goes to 15 an hr, and now pays zero taxes. same for capital. if your capital contracts, or some places go under, you should still be taxed. you shouldnt be able to carry over losses from a present net loss. a capital investment is not the same as money in a savings account. a bar with capital gains should be taxed. a bar with capital losses, relevant to what it was worth last fy or when it was originally bought, should still be taxed. Edited June 25, 2012 by MARCELL DAREUS POWER
Chef Jim Posted June 26, 2012 Posted June 26, 2012 a bar with capital gains should be taxed. a bar with capital losses, relevant to what it was worth last fy or when it was originally bought, should still be taxed. What on earth does this even mean?? You are so effing out your your element here . What is your element anyway? Playing in a sand box? You're mixing capital gains taxes with property taxes and if the owner of the bar leases the space they don't pay any property taxes either. Man you're lost.
MARCELL DAREUS POWER Posted June 26, 2012 Posted June 26, 2012 What on earth does this even mean?? You are so effing out your your element here . What is your element anyway? Playing in a sand box? You're mixing capital gains taxes with property taxes and if the owner of the bar leases the space they don't pay any property taxes either. Man you're lost. but if you are a shareholder in a company and that company is worth less, your stock is worth less. it should still be taxed. im not talking about property taxes in the sense that a house just sits there. im taking about business worth less or more, through capital loss or gain, should be taxed regardless. it is property, but in a different sense, ie capital What on earth does this even mean?? You are so effing out your your element here . What is your element anyway? Playing in a sand box? You're mixing capital gains taxes with property taxes and if the owner of the bar leases the space they don't pay any property taxes either. Man you're lost. you want to play a trick. you want to compare money in a bank compared to being a shareholder. so say im a shareholder of walmart and that share is 20%. even if my share goes down in value, that doesnt mean i dont have to pay taxes.... this is just another way for rich people to not pay taxes, because they are shareholders instead of labor...
3rdnlng Posted June 26, 2012 Posted June 26, 2012 Give the guy a break. He's only trying to get laid. Getting laid isn't always a good thing: http://www.azcentral.com/offbeat/articles/2012/06/18/20120618austria-groom-sex-with-waitress.html
Recommended Posts