General Discussion

ProSense

(116,464 posts)

8. Oh,

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:31 AM

Jan 2013

First, short-term capital gains were taxed at regular income tax rates before the deal, & still
are. All that's changed is that the top rate for regular taxes went up to 39.6% -- thus, so did the short-term capital gains rate. Note: the rate is *not* 43.4%. You added the medicare tax in: naughty naughty.

...you want to ignore reality to fit your perspective? The tax is on capital gains, which is why the long-term rate is 23.8 percent.

You're arguing nonsense.

Clinton taxed incomes up to $22,000 at 15 percent. Incomes up to $50,000 were taxed at 28 percent. Under Obama, incomes up to about $9,000 are taxed at 10 percent, $9,000 to $36,000 at 15 percent and $36,000 to 53,000 at $25 percent. Lower income Americans make out much better under Obama's plan. The top one percent see a tax increase to Clinton rates, and capital gains rate higher than the Clinton years, especially the short-term rate of 43.4 percent.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

39 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Fiscal cliff deal = most progressive tax code since 1980 = propaganda. [View all] HiPointDem Jan 2013 OP

Is naked capitalism your new wsws?...nt SidDithers Jan 2013 #1

No, what you posted is propaganda. ProSense Jan 2013 #2

First, short-term capital gains were taxed at regular income tax rates before the deal, & still HiPointDem Jan 2013 #4

Oh, ProSense Jan 2013 #8

medicare tax is a surcharge on *most* capital income over a cap, not just on S-T cap gains. HiPointDem Jan 2013 #10

Yes, it is. ProSense Jan 2013 #11

You'd better read what i wrote again, & the source material i posted, because you're flat wrong. HiPointDem Jan 2013 #12

No, ProSense Jan 2013 #13

your link doesn't say what you're claiming. HiPointDem Jan 2013 #15

It says exactly that, but ProSense Jan 2013 #16

where does it say 'exactly that'? HiPointDem Jan 2013 #17

It says ProSense Jan 2013 #18

i take that as an admission that it doesn't say what you just claimed. HiPointDem Jan 2013 #19

yeah sure hfojvt Jan 2013 #21

Wow is this article wrong jeff47 Jan 2013 #3

not sure what you're claiming here, but: HiPointDem Jan 2013 #5

You really should read the article jeff47 Jan 2013 #6

you didn't hear me. no sense talking to you. HiPointDem Jan 2013 #14

Again, your blogger is wrong. jeff47 Jan 2013 #25

the 'blogger' (a tax lawyer) is not the only person saying so. HiPointDem Jan 2013 #27

You just contradicted your first blogger jeff47 Jan 2013 #28

the first source doesn't claim the rate reverts to an expired law. you're blowing smoke, goodbye. HiPointDem Jan 2013 #29

Go look up 4 posts. jeff47 Jan 2013 #31

and the new legislation doesn't mention qualified dividends & does remain tied to capital gains HiPointDem Jan 2013 #32

You're almost there. jeff47 Jan 2013 #33

the links say otherwise. you're blowing smoke. HiPointDem Jan 2013 #34

please provide me with a source that supports your claim that qualified dividends no longer HiPointDem Jan 2013 #35

I already did. Look up the thread for the Wikipedia link. jeff47 Jan 2013 #36

i've provided 5 links, all saying the same thing. i'm not going to search this thread for a HiPointDem Jan 2013 #38

You can't find post #3? jeff47 Jan 2013 #39

rec cthulu2016 Jan 2013 #7

It's nonsense. n/t ProSense Jan 2013 #9

while I agree with the title hfojvt Jan 2013 #20

In at least one important area the article UNDERSTATES the situation. Faryn Balyncd Jan 2013 #22

+1 HiPointDem Jan 2013 #30

Most progressive tax code since Reagan isn't saying much anyway gollygee Jan 2013 #23

ironic though; top rate was higher during most of reagan admin. HiPointDem Jan 2013 #26

For Obama, a Victory That Also Holds Risks ProSense Jan 2013 #24

There is nothing progressive about any tax code... kentuck Jan 2013 #37