irvinebullhousing
Well-known member
test said:
Exactly. So are they fixing the problems or speeding up the inferno?
Dow?
- Thread starter irvinehomeowner
- Start date
NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
Exactly. So are they fixing the problems or speeding up the inferno?
Only one problem, no one knows how long they can keep kicking the can down the road. It may be longer than we are alive.
I think the issue is once you start kicking you can?t stop. And once they stop everything begins to crumble.
This is why like USC, I have always felt we are like japan and will have low rates in perpetuity. Anything else creates self destruction. The government isn?t run like a normal person/company; although I think the pandemic showed us people/companies don?t have any disciple either.
In good times we should save more. In good tile the government just gets bigger and bigger. Then when there is no money to pay for things they become entitled and want to raise taxes to maintain the status quo. Then when there is no money the social safety nets need more expansion at the worst possible time. And the cycle just repeats itself.
One big ill effect off the top of my head is income inequality. I wouldn't even call it hidden because it's pretty obvious when the choice was to bailout the banks not homeowners. This affected black household the most. African-Americans still haven?t recovered from the financial crisis if you dig into the numbers.
The gov't picks and chooses which companies are "too big" to fail and in this crisis the airlines and Boeing were the first on the list. The can kicking can go on a lot longer than any of us think and yes at a certain point the crap will hit the fan but that could take a long, long time. Not fighting the Fed has proved to be true once again and don't think they'll be taking their foot off the money printing pedal anytime soon.
The one big negative that is coming soon is that state taxes will be going up (income tax, sales, and other fees) to plug the hole state budget deficits. As you stated, there is no accountability at the gov't level in terms of managing their budget and pension obligations and we will be on the hook for trying to fill those shortfalls unfortunately.
You are likely confusing non-qualified stock options (NQSOs) and incentive stock options (ISOs)
Bezos and most top tier executive likely got ISOs.
NQSOs do have to pay income tax.
But ISOs, you won?t have to pay income tax when you exercise the stock option.
Bigger point being CEO / executive pay structure aren't the problem.
My response to Qwerty wasn't clear. I meant to say that even if we rack up the "progressive income tax" rate to something ridiculous like 90%. We likely won't get much tax revenue from Bezos. Because he can shift Amazon profits offshore to tax heavens like Ireland.
The priority needs to be fixing corporate tax loopholes.
Exactly. So are they fixing the problems or speeding up the inferno?
usctrojancpa
Well-known member
zubs said:
Compressed-Village said:
Only one problem, no one knows how long they can keep kicking the can down the road. It may be longer than we are alive.
irvinehomeowner
Well-known member
I'm not an economist but doesn't can kicking have some merits?
Like the last housing crisis... if it wasn't for the Fed, things would have been worse and prior to this year... it was looking like we were doing well (and no... I am not giving credit to any Pres for that).
Maybe there are some hidden ill effects I don't see but unemployment went down, house prices did not fall into a black hole, interest rates were low and the Dow kept getting higher.
Like the last housing crisis... if it wasn't for the Fed, things would have been worse and prior to this year... it was looking like we were doing well (and no... I am not giving credit to any Pres for that).
Maybe there are some hidden ill effects I don't see but unemployment went down, house prices did not fall into a black hole, interest rates were low and the Dow kept getting higher.
irvinebullhousing
Well-known member
The barricade and the barbwires resurrected around the White House and the armies of secret service with real troops live ammo is the first sign of the people about to turn it up side down.
It might be closer than we think.
It might be closer than we think.
qwerty
Well-known member
irvinehomeowner said:
I think the issue is once you start kicking you can?t stop. And once they stop everything begins to crumble.
This is why like USC, I have always felt we are like japan and will have low rates in perpetuity. Anything else creates self destruction. The government isn?t run like a normal person/company; although I think the pandemic showed us people/companies don?t have any disciple either.
In good times we should save more. In good tile the government just gets bigger and bigger. Then when there is no money to pay for things they become entitled and want to raise taxes to maintain the status quo. Then when there is no money the social safety nets need more expansion at the worst possible time. And the cycle just repeats itself.
irvinehomeowner said:
One big ill effect off the top of my head is income inequality. I wouldn't even call it hidden because it's pretty obvious when the choice was to bailout the banks not homeowners. This affected black household the most. African-Americans still haven?t recovered from the financial crisis if you dig into the numbers.
adventurous
New member
When one makes an investment, stocks or real estate, the risks are very well explained and should be clearly understood. Then again, if someone makes a risk investment, it would be unreasonable to beg the government for a bailout.Kenkoko said:
adventurous
New member
That should equally apply to both corporate and individual gamblersKenkoko said:
adventurous
New member
That was back in Obama's 2010 era. This time both direct pays and PPP were launched.Kenkoko said:
784 billions went to individuals.
1045 billions went to big corporations and business.
That's inequality.
https://www.npr.org/2020/05/15/8547...r-coronavirus-relief-so-far-heres-a-breakdown
Even president Trump's tax cut exacerbated wealth inequality
the top 1 percent got 20.5 percent of the tax cuts & the top quintile got 65.3 percent.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ax-cut-give-percent-benefits-top-one-percent/
1045 billions went to big corporations and business.
That's inequality.
https://www.npr.org/2020/05/15/8547...r-coronavirus-relief-so-far-heres-a-breakdown
Even president Trump's tax cut exacerbated wealth inequality
the top 1 percent got 20.5 percent of the tax cuts & the top quintile got 65.3 percent.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ax-cut-give-percent-benefits-top-one-percent/
usctrojancpa
Well-known member
Kenkoko said:
The gov't picks and chooses which companies are "too big" to fail and in this crisis the airlines and Boeing were the first on the list. The can kicking can go on a lot longer than any of us think and yes at a certain point the crap will hit the fan but that could take a long, long time. Not fighting the Fed has proved to be true once again and don't think they'll be taking their foot off the money printing pedal anytime soon.
qwerty
Well-known member
We pay more in taxes than a lot of people make. I?m sure that is the case with many others here. Is the progressive tax system inequality?
One could view the tax cuts as to those with money as actually trying to be fair. It?s only unfair coming from initial position that a progressive tax system is fair.
Perhaps we should consider a national sales tax and reduce income taxes.
I hate the pay your fair share slogan. Not sure if Obama coined that or if it?s just a democratic saying. I don?t care about politics but at somepoint everyone needs to pay fair their fair share not just those making the money. I think it would help with accountability as well if everyone contributed something and had to pay for something on an ongoing basis. Skin in the game as they say.
Right now there is an inverted pyramid with income taxes. At some point those paying taxes will get overwhelmed by those not paying tax and the system will collapse (hopefully not in my lifetime).
It?s very easy to keep asking for more when you aren?t asked to pick up the tab.
One could view the tax cuts as to those with money as actually trying to be fair. It?s only unfair coming from initial position that a progressive tax system is fair.
Perhaps we should consider a national sales tax and reduce income taxes.
I hate the pay your fair share slogan. Not sure if Obama coined that or if it?s just a democratic saying. I don?t care about politics but at somepoint everyone needs to pay fair their fair share not just those making the money. I think it would help with accountability as well if everyone contributed something and had to pay for something on an ongoing basis. Skin in the game as they say.
Right now there is an inverted pyramid with income taxes. At some point those paying taxes will get overwhelmed by those not paying tax and the system will collapse (hopefully not in my lifetime).
It?s very easy to keep asking for more when you aren?t asked to pick up the tab.
usctrojancpa
Well-known member
qwerty said:
The one big negative that is coming soon is that state taxes will be going up (income tax, sales, and other fees) to plug the hole state budget deficits. As you stated, there is no accountability at the gov't level in terms of managing their budget and pension obligations and we will be on the hook for trying to fill those shortfalls unfortunately.
3 Richest Americans Hold More Wealth Than Bottom 50% Of The Country
https://www.forbes.com/sites/noahki...ottom-50-of-country-study-finds/#23a2597f3cf8
As of Q3 2019, the bottom 50% of households had $1.67 trillion or 1.6% of the net worth. You're asking the bottom 50% to pay their fair share instead of asking 3 ?
The real problem isn't the "progressive income tax". It's the corporate tax system.
Take Jeff Bezos for example. How much federal income tax did he pay last year? probably very little because he is not dumb enough to pay himself a huge salary. Vast majority of his wealth is in Amazon stock. Amazon paid 0 in federal income tax half the time. They paid approx 3% federal income tax over their entire existence.
The priority should be to fix the corporate tax system loopholes.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/noahki...ottom-50-of-country-study-finds/#23a2597f3cf8
As of Q3 2019, the bottom 50% of households had $1.67 trillion or 1.6% of the net worth. You're asking the bottom 50% to pay their fair share instead of asking 3 ?
The real problem isn't the "progressive income tax". It's the corporate tax system.
Take Jeff Bezos for example. How much federal income tax did he pay last year? probably very little because he is not dumb enough to pay himself a huge salary. Vast majority of his wealth is in Amazon stock. Amazon paid 0 in federal income tax half the time. They paid approx 3% federal income tax over their entire existence.
The priority should be to fix the corporate tax system loopholes.
qwerty
Well-known member
The corporate tax system is extremely complicated. It does need to get simplified and loop holes need to get closed. CEO salary is an personal income tax issue not a corporate tax issue.
One way to increase taxes on US companies is to just tax all worldwide income at the US rates and get a credit for any foreign taxes paid. That would probably result in more business coming back to the US. Not all as labor and raw material are still lower in other countries. Although a consequence of this would be to just move the company out of the US. So everything has a consequence.
Right now companies can make a ?permanent reinvestment? election where they are saying they are going to reinvest foreign profits outside of the US permanently and that income is not subject to US income taxes.
One way to increase taxes on US companies is to just tax all worldwide income at the US rates and get a credit for any foreign taxes paid. That would probably result in more business coming back to the US. Not all as labor and raw material are still lower in other countries. Although a consequence of this would be to just move the company out of the US. So everything has a consequence.
Right now companies can make a ?permanent reinvestment? election where they are saying they are going to reinvest foreign profits outside of the US permanently and that income is not subject to US income taxes.
adventurous
New member
Even if Bezon gets a minimum wage on his payroll, no cash bonuses, and gets compensated with the stock options, he still gets the tax bill when he exercises those stock options. Next, he pays long term gain tax when he sells those.
Now, do you want to get compensated this way? The stock market goes up and down. By the time you have to exercise your stock option , you can well be in the red zone. You probably pay less taxes in the long-term, but it's riskier approach, especially if you are not a decision maker in your company
Now, do you want to get compensated this way? The stock market goes up and down. By the time you have to exercise your stock option , you can well be in the red zone. You probably pay less taxes in the long-term, but it's riskier approach, especially if you are not a decision maker in your company
adventurous said:
You are likely confusing non-qualified stock options (NQSOs) and incentive stock options (ISOs)
Bezos and most top tier executive likely got ISOs.
NQSOs do have to pay income tax.
But ISOs, you won?t have to pay income tax when you exercise the stock option.
Bigger point being CEO / executive pay structure aren't the problem.
My response to Qwerty wasn't clear. I meant to say that even if we rack up the "progressive income tax" rate to something ridiculous like 90%. We likely won't get much tax revenue from Bezos. Because he can shift Amazon profits offshore to tax heavens like Ireland.
The priority needs to be fixing corporate tax loopholes.