« previous next »
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: 0bamaite primitives discuss taxing banks  (Read 1529 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline franksolich

  • Scourge of the Primitives
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 58722
  • Reputation: +3102/-173
0bamaite primitives discuss taxing banks
« on: February 15, 2011, 07:42:47 PM »
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x612028

Oh my.

Quote
ProSense  (1000+ posts)        Tue Feb-15-11 09:28 AM
THE PRIMITIVE SKINS HANDLES WITH KID-GLOVES
Original message

Obama proposes 10-year, $30 billion bank tax

(Reuters) - The Obama administration is proposing a much smaller $30 billion tax on the largest financial institutions, in line with shrinking U.S. corporate bailout costs.

The "Financial Crisis Responsibility Fee" in the proposed fiscal 2012 budget would collect $30 billion over 10 years to recoup the costs of bailing out troubled financial institutions during the financial crisis.

This compares with the administration's proposal last year to collect $90 billion over 10 years.

<...>

Dean Baker: President Obama Proposes a Bank Fee Equal to 20 Percent of Goldman's Annual Bonus Pool

The Washington Post noted that President Obama's budget called for a $30 billion bank fee to recoup losses from the TARP. It would have been helpful to give readers some context for this number.

It would raise approximately $3 billion a year, this is less than one-fifth the size of the $17.5 billion bonus pool at Goldman Sachs in 2010.

Quote
dkf  (1000+ posts)         Tue Feb-15-11 09:37 AM
Response to Original message
 
1. Why don't they just create a new tax for bonuses period?

Taxing an entire industry to specifically hit the Goldman bonus pool seems ridiculous.

Quote
ProSense  (1000+ posts)        Tue Feb-15-11 09:42 AM
THE UNBANNABLE PRIMITIVE
Response to Reply #1

2. Well,

"Taxing an entire industry to specifically hit the Goldman bonus pool seems ridiculous."

...it's not the entire industry and the target isn't just Goldman.

From the OP: "$30 billion tax on the largest financial institutions"

In fact, it would be great to see it go back up to $90 billion.

Quote
msongs  (1000+ posts)      Tue Feb-15-11 09:49 AM
Response to Reply #2
 
3. yeah but his republican best friends would not like it

Quote
dkf  (1000+ posts)         Tue Feb-15-11 09:53 AM
Response to Reply #2
 
4. Yet the animus seems aimed specifically at Goldman.

If we want to look at who created the housing bubble the government needs to take a hard look at their own practices and what they are still doing to prop things up.

Quote
ProSense  (1000+ posts)        Tue Feb-15-11 09:58 AM
THE PRIMITIVE WHO'S A RICH GUY'S DAUGHTER
Response to Reply #4

5. Dean Baker has his opinion.

The program is aimed at the top financial institutions, not the industry.

What's the problem here? Are you against taxing big banks?

Quote
dkf  (1000+ posts)         Tue Feb-15-11 11:55 AM
Response to Reply #5
 
6. Taxing out of hate or envy or punishment or dislike seems wrong to me.

I'm interested in fairness.

I don't think we should tax the auto industry extra either.

If we want to do it to raise revenues then it shouldn't be industry specific. I can see raising fees to fund oversight or a fund to help dismantle large failing banks but that shouldnt be funds that go to the general treasury.

I also don't believe in super specific tax loopholes for particular industries.

Quote
ProSense  (1000+ posts)        Tue Feb-15-11 12:06 PM
THE UNTOUCHABLE PRIMITIVE
Response to Reply #6

7. What?

Bank of America Agrees to Pay $410 Million to Settle Overdrafts Lawsuits

"I'm interested in fairness."

I'm interested in ensuring these greedy predator bastards pay back the bailout money and stop receiving tax breaks while they rip off consumers.

Do you think that's fair?

Quote
madmom  (1000+ posts)        Tue Feb-15-11 12:40 PM
Response to Reply #1
 
8. When my hubby was working and got any kind of bonus from his company, it WAS taxed at a higher rate.

If I remember correctly it was called a bonus tax.
Logged
apres moi, le deluge

Milo Yiannopoulos "It has been obvious since 2016 that Trump carries an anointing of some kind. My American friends, are you so blind to reason, and deaf to Heaven? Can he do all this, and cannot get a crown? This man is your King. Coronate him, and watch every devil shriek, and every demon howl."

Offline true_blood

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6221
  • Reputation: +652/-817
Re: 0bamaite primitives discuss taxing banks
« Reply #1 on: February 15, 2011, 07:55:47 PM »
Quote
ProSense  (1000+ posts)        Tue Feb-15-11 09:58 AM
THE PRIMITIVE WHO'S A RICH GUY'S DAUGHTER
Response to Reply #4
5. Dean Baker has his opinion. The program is aimed at the top financial institutions, not the industry.
What's the problem here? Are you against taxing big banks?[/quote]


The stupidity is rich with this primitive. (Sometimes I really can't understand the stupidity.)
Let's see DUmmie. You keep your money in the bank, right? Well, if you happen to have your money in one of those banks that was taken over by the communist, you will either be paying more in stupid user fees or get less interest in some accounts. So, before you jump on the "tax the evil rich" bandwagon, think about what this entails for you, the person with the money in that bank.
Besides, I thought that the banks they were taken over by the communist were paying those bailouts back already? Now they're proposing a tax as well?!?!  :banghead: :banghead:
« Last Edit: February 15, 2011, 08:02:13 PM by true_blood »
Logged

Offline GOBUCKS

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 24186
  • Reputation: +1812/-339
  • All in all, not bad, not bad at all
Re: 0bamaite primitives discuss taxing banks
« Reply #2 on: February 15, 2011, 07:59:32 PM »
Quote
madmom  (1000+ posts)        Tue Feb-15-11 12:40 PM
Response to Reply #1
 
8. When my hubby was working and got any kind of bonus from his company, it WAS taxed at a higher rate.

If I remember correctly it was called a bonus tax.
DUmmy madmom still believes that. And she still doesn't know about the coke and high-class hookers he had.
Logged

Offline jukin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16257
  • Reputation: +2130/-170
Re: 0bamaite primitives discuss taxing banks
« Reply #3 on: February 15, 2011, 08:05:08 PM »
Quote
madmom  (1000+ posts)        Tue Feb-15-11 12:40 PM
Response to Reply #1
 
8. When my hubby was working and got any kind of bonus from his company, it WAS taxed at a higher rate.

If I remember correctly it was called a bonus tax.

No you idiot scrunt.

What happened was your husband was taxed on his bonus as if it was standard salary. It was taxed higher because a bonus will usually push you into a higher tax bracket. :thatsright:

If only ignorance were an energy source the DUmbasses would be billionaires...and bitching about their high taxes.
Logged
When you are the beneficiary of someone’s kindness and generosity, it produces a sense of gratitude and community.

When you are the beneficiary of a policy that steals from someone and gives it to you in return for your vote, it produces a sense of entitlement and dependency.

Offline thundley4

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 40571
  • Reputation: +2224/-127
Re: 0bamaite primitives discuss taxing banks
« Reply #4 on: February 15, 2011, 08:52:51 PM »
Quote
dkf  (1000+ posts)         Tue Feb-15-11 11:55 AM
Response to Reply #5
 
6. Taxing out of hate or envy or punishment or dislike seems wrong to me.

I'm interested in fairness.

I don't think we should tax the auto industry extra either.

If we want to do it to raise revenues then it shouldn't be industry specific. I can see raising fees to fund oversight or a fund to help dismantle large failing banks but that shouldnt be funds that go to the general treasury.

I also don't believe in super specific tax loopholes for particular industries.

Whose mole is this?  DUmmies believe taxes are meant for punishing success.
Logged

Offline JakeStyle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3146
  • Reputation: +359/-39
Re: 0bamaite primitives discuss taxing banks
« Reply #5 on: February 16, 2011, 03:18:39 AM »
Pretty sure ProSense is one of those paid posters they are always worried about, but I don't think it's getting paid by the Koch Bros or anyone on our side of the spectrum.
Logged

Offline Alpha Mare

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2009
  • Reputation: +73/-5
Re: 0bamaite primitives discuss taxing banks
« Reply #6 on: February 16, 2011, 04:48:14 AM »
Employers can withhold higher taxes from bonus checks. The employer can withhold 25% for federal taxes. There's also a flat rate for your particular state taxes.  It depends on if it's included with regular wages or paid as 'supplemental wages'.
Logged
"Political correctness is tyranny with manners."
    - Charlton Heston

Offline Karin

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 17755
  • Reputation: +1900/-81
Re: 0bamaite primitives discuss taxing banks
« Reply #7 on: February 16, 2011, 07:40:12 AM »
Of course, the CCers were right about those taxes, and the DUmmies were wrong.  Understatement of the year.  "Bonus tax."   ::)  These idiot just make stuff up. 

 :lmao: at GOBUCKS' coke and hookers. 
Logged

Offline Wineslob

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 14480
  • Reputation: +816/-193
  • Sucking the life out of Liberty
Re: 0bamaite primitives discuss taxing banks
« Reply #8 on: February 16, 2011, 10:21:34 AM »
Quote from: jukin on February 15, 2011, 08:05:08 PM
No you idiot scrunt.

What happened was your husband was taxed on his bonus as if it was standard salary. It was taxed higher because a bonus will usually push you into a higher tax bracket. :thatsright:

If only ignorance were an energy source the DUmbasses would be billionaires...and bitching about their high taxes.


Sorry Jukin, I had this happen to me last year. Because the "bonus" was not "standard" salary, I was taxed at 50%, not the normal 34%.
Logged
“The national budget must be balanced. The public debt must be reduced; the arrogance of the authorities must be moderated and controlled. Payments to foreign governments must be reduced, if the nation doesn't want to go bankrupt. People must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance.”

        -- Marcus Tullius Cicero, 55 BC (106-43 BC)

The unobtainable is unknown at Zombo.com



"Practice random violence and senseless acts of brutality"

If you want a gender neutral bathroom, go pee in the forest.

Offline AllosaursRus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11672
  • Reputation: +424/-293
  • Skip Tracing by Contract Only!
Re: 0bamaite primitives discuss taxing banks
« Reply #9 on: February 16, 2011, 01:52:04 PM »
Quote
dkf  (1000+ posts)         Tue Feb-15-11 09:53 AM
Response to Reply #2
 
4. Yet the animus seems aimed specifically at Goldman.

If we want to look at who created the housing bubble the government needs to take a hard look at their own practices and what they are still doing to prop things up.

Uh oh! This DUmmie is askin' for a pizza! If they did what he/she/it, has suggested, Bwaney Fwank would be "Ben Dover's" cell mate!
Logged
I'm the guy your mother warned you about!
 
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »