The Republican budget eliminates taxes on dividends, capital gains, interest, and inheritance.

[Zynx]

Quite simply put, these are rich people's sources of income overwhelmingly. While many people have some amount of these sources on their tax returns, they certainly never constitute a majority or anything even close to it. For the very wealthy, this would exempt from taxation nearly all of their income. In conjunction with a 25% top marginal tax rate for wage income, this would push the effective tax rate for the very high income earners well below the effective taxes paid by nearly everyone else. It is staggering just what this one means and it is a perfect hammer to bludgeon the Republicans with.

[DCBob]

1. It is amazing how blatantly skewed this budget is to benefit the wealthy..

If there was any doubt the GOP was the party of the rich, there should be absolutely none now.

[dkf]

2. All of it? Link?

[Zynx]

3. Right here:

http://www.roadmap.republicans.budget.house.gov/plan/#federaltaxreform

"Elimination of Double Taxation of Savings. The current system essentially taxes savings twice: individuals pay tax on their earnings and, if they choose to invest those after-tax funds, they pay another tax on the return from their savings (i.e. interest, capital gains, or dividends). This proposal eliminates the second layer of taxation. Not only is this fair to individual taxpayers, it also is good for the economy. Greater savings leads to more investment and higher rates of productivity. Higher productivity ultimately drives increased living standards. The plan also eliminates the estate tax, another form of double taxation that is particularly harmful to small businesses."

[karynnj]

10. This idea of "double taxation" is bogus

The "second" tax is on the earnings, not the already taxed cost basis. What is amazing is that the first dollar earned by a McDonalds worker is subject to the payroll taxes.

I also can't believe that they are again eliminating the estate tax. After the example of the billionaire, who died leaving an estate of I think over $9 billion dollars, which was passed tax free to his heirs, this is unconscionable. I guess the top 1% think that a mere 40% of the wealth of the country is too little.

[dkf]

4. It's kind of sad that we assume the majority of people will never be advantaged

By no taxation on the building blocks of wealth. Just think if the average American got more excited over buying a share of apple than an apple iPod.

But we are not a society that reveres the accumulation of assets by all. Instead we flood the air with commercials urging people to buy buy buy and spend their wealth for all the toys a person can fit in their humongous house.

I would be happy if taxation on dividends interest and capital gains were waived until it hit a certain level. But you rarely see support for that idea anywhere.

[Zynx]

5. Most people do not have enough after tax income to accumulate wealth and savings for this

to be material to them. The flows simply don't work.

[dkf]

6. How many people have an iPod?

A large screen TV? A digital camera? A fancy cellphone with a hefty data plan? Too many clothes for their closet to fit? A house with square footage over 1,300? A car that costs more than a corolla? A Netflix subscription?

If an individual has none of these things then they can honestly say they don't have any excess income. But for those who do, there are choices that people make.

[Zynx]

17. Let me just point something out here. I have far more savings than about 98% of people

my age and probably far more than most people of my income level. I've done this by living like a monk, but I've also come into money due to a small inheritance and occasional generous transfers via wealthy parents. From all of the sources that Ryan is exempting, I collected approximately $2,000 last year. That's it. Capital gains could have been more, but I had loss carryforwards.

In any case, this is a tiny tiny fraction of my wage income, which is around $50,000.

For my father, who is a wealthy man, these sources exceed his wage income.

[JoePhilly]

13. The REALLT sad part is that we value WEALTH over WORK.

Let's say 2 people make 100k in income.

The first makes their 100k moving furniture 7 days a week. They'll be taxed at about 30%.

The second makes their 100k via dividends, generated by Daddy's massive wealth. They'll be taxed at about 15%.

And there you have it.

[dkf]

15. For the lower and middle class Wealth is the product of work.

It is the saving of the excess work over consumption.

But I don't think people get that. They think wealth is bad and they have no intention of joining the bad guys. I think that is sad.

[Warren Stupidity]

14. Most people have no savings, zero none nada zilch

It is not an assumption, it is a fact. You are supporting and proposing programs that put the tax burden entirely on working people with little or no actual wealth while allowing those with substantial wealth to avoid paying their share. Seriously?

[dkf]

16. Why don't they have savings?

Do you honestly want to tell me they only buy necessities and never indulge in a single luxury? Not ever?

Anything that provided enjoyment over subsistence level was a choice to spend money and not save it.

[Warren Stupidity]

19. Because most of us are living hand to mouth.

In general most working families do not earn enough to have savings of any significance. At best they have equity in a house, and that is it. For many working families who are home owners, even that has become a negative asset, thanks to the investment banksters you wish to give a free ride to.

Wages have been essentially stagnant for decades, and they only reach the level of stagnant if one accepts the official CPI.

But I find your attitude offensive. An iphone instead of two shares of apple justifies your position? Really?

[Tippy]

7. I guess I'm stupid

I just don't get it if they continue with this no tax deal, and destruction of the middle class, what will happend once all our bridges crumble? Just don't make sense to me.

[dkf]

9. Looks like a pipe dream to me.

Like I said above I support the idea of no taxation on savings for the poor and middle class but who in their right mind supports this for the mega rich? Simply batty.

[karynnj]

11. They are citizens of the world - and can live anywhere

They could live in privileged enclaves here - or elsewhere. What you describe is a transition to some third world countries, where a small percent are wealthy beyond believe and everyone else is in poverty.

I agree with you that that does not describe a place where I would like to live.

[mrcheerful]

12. That is the R plan make sure roads and bridges become so unsafe that nit wits will

cheer the R's for privatizing our roads and bridges believing they will get better roads that are run for profit.

[Tippy]

20. Think your on to something....When will they begin privitizing

forget it they are already have pay toilets

[karynnj]

8. What is amazing is that this is not one of the leads in newspapers

I never heard that this is true - and will check it out. I agree with your conclusions. As it is, capital gains get preference treatment - although the AMT takes at least some of that away.

This really is wrong.

[bucolic_frolic]

18. VOUCHERS = DEATH PANELS

Vouchers for Medicare are effectively end of life health care rationing.