Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DuckTapeSunroof who wrote (42825)	4/20/2010 7:34:59 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

are phased in over a considerable period of time Irrelevant, they are still tax increases, or penalties with the payment going to the government. And designed specifically to incent people to modify their behaviors Which is an argument against them not for them. With the secondary goal being to remove the artificial government subsidy - the tax exempt status of this one form of compensation Except it isn't removed. And if it was without other taxes being decreased it would be a major tax increase. And, what does THIS particular charge refer to? "Payroll taxes on investment". <?i> "In addition, high-income households would also be subject to a new 3.8% Medicare tax on investment income starting in 2013." money.cnn.com Re: "These lost wages, largely out of the pockets of low- and middle-income families...." That is HILARIOUSLY bogus double-speak Not at all. Increase taxes, esp. taxes on investment, and you harm economic growth, over time reducing compensation for employment.