info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Biden and Democrats lie about wealth tax, and so much more
9 views
Skip to first unread message
Leroy N. Soetoro
Oct 29, 2021, 3:04:44 PM10/29/21
to
https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/578569-biden-and-democrats-lie-about-
wealth-tax-and-so-much-more?rl=1
If Democrats’ tax-and-spend proposals are as popular as they claim, why do
they have to lie about them?
When President Biden claims his $3.5 trillion “social infrastructure” bill
will cost “zero,” he is clearly assuming Americans are morons, since there
is no way the government can spend trillions of dollars without hiking
taxes or increasing borrowing, for both of which there is indeed a price
tag.
And when he tweets, as he did recently, “It’s simple: a teacher shouldn’t
pay a higher tax rate than an oil company,” he is again wandering off the
truth-track. Since the average teacher earns $31,000 per year, and since
the income tax rate at that level of income is 12 percent, compared to the
current corporate rate of 25 percent, this claim is another Joe Biden
whopper.
You have to wonder: Does anyone in this White House even try to get the
facts right?
This is not just a Biden phenomenon. When Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)
hawked her proposed 2 percent wealth tax on the campaign trail, claiming
it would cost the richest Americans “just 2 cents” on every dollar of
their net worth above $50 million, she must have known that any educated
person would understand that in fact levying that sort of fee on assets
year after year would end up costing well-heeled people a fortune.
Indeed, Warren blew her boast by projecting “this small new tax on the
tiny sliver of ultra-rich families will bring in $3.75 trillion over the
next 10 years.” So, actually, a lot more than two cents.
And when, most recently, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen describes
Democrats’ latest brainstorm for raising revenues — a tax only on 700 of
America’s wealthiest people — as not a wealth tax, she’s playing us for
chumps.
As Democrats toss the federal sofa cushions searching for ways to pay for
their $3.5 trillion progressive goody bag, they have become ever more
inventive, and dishonest.
Since Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) balked at raising revenues the old-
fashioned way, through conventional tax hikes, Democrats have launched a
new idea: taxing unrealized capital gains.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who apparently missed the talking
points memo, told a Sunday CNN audience: “We will probably have a wealth
tax.” Minutes later, on the same show, Yellen contradicted the Speaker,
explaining that, “it's not a wealth tax, but a tax on unrealized capital
gains of exceptionally wealthy individuals.”
Yellen wants us to believe that unrealized capital gains are income. That
is not true. If you have a stock that doubles in value, plumping up your
investment portfolio, you feel pretty chipper and indeed wealthier. But
unless you actually reap that gain by selling your shares and receiving
the proceeds from the buyer, you can’t buy a ham sandwich.
Until you sell, the gain is theoretical. Just ask people who bought
Bitcoin in 2020 at $9,000, celebrated when it surged to $45,000 a year
later by buying a Maserati and then took out a loan when it dropped back
to $31,000. You have to cash in your winnings to spend your gains, just
like at the casino.
Yellen said further: “It would help get at capital gains, which are an
extraordinarily large part of the incomes of the wealthiest individuals.”
She is right that realized investment gains indeed pump-up income for
well-off people. But the IRS already “gets at” capital gains by taxing
those winnings when the stocks or other assets are sold.
Yellen knows that, and she also must know that a wealth tax may be
unconstitutional, as well as unproductive. She is simply playing ball with
Democrats, who have not only egg but entire omelets on their faces.
Democrats have promised progressive voters the moon, since without them
their party would not be in power. The problem is that some people don’t
want the moon, while others want the entire galaxy. Sen. Bernie Sanders
(I-Vt.) was pushing a bill in June that would have cost $6 trillion, and
complained that spending $3.5 trillion would not come close to solving our
country’s needs.
Some of his more grounded colleagues have objected to massive tax hikes
and specific policies, like the clean power rules, that could jeopardize
our recovery. As a consequence, the bill has shrunk dramatically in size
and scope. Once priced at $3.5 trillion, now Democrats are looking to
spend about $1.8 trillion.
Progressives are not happy with this state of affairs. Sanders, never one
to compromise, has drawn more red lines than Mark Rothko over the past
several months. Most recently, he argued that adding hearing, dental and
vision benefits to Medicare is non-negotiable, as is including a plan to
lower prescription drug costs.
But Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) is balking at the Medicare add-ons and also
at a controversial proposal requiring that banks reveal new information to
the IRS; he claimed that he objected to the measure in a meeting with
Biden, and that the president agreed with his argument.
The truth is that Democrats are battling each other over Biden’s bill
because voters are not on board with spending trillions more, on top of
the $5 trillion already doled out on COVID-19 relief. They are worried
about inflation, and think huge government outlays contribute to the
problem.
In a recent Quinnipiac poll, 40 percent of Americans said “the federal
government should be doing more to help Americans, but shouldn't spend too
much” while 24 percent responded that “the federal government doesn't need
to do more to help Americans.” Only 33 percent thought the feds should be
“doing a lot more to help.”
That is not exactly a resounding cheer for breaking the bank on new
“social infrastructure” programs. In the same poll, though 92 percent of
Democrats back the $3.5 trillion bill, independents are roughly split on
the measure and Republicans are decidedly against it.
It appears that Joe Biden isn’t lying only about taxes and the cost of his
program; he’s also not being truthful about its popularity, either.
Liz Peek is a former partner of major bracket Wall Street firm Wertheim &
Company. Follow her on Twitter @lizpeek.
--
"LOCKDOWN", left-wing COVID fearmongering. 95% of COVID infections
recover with no after effects.
No collusion - Special Counsel Robert Swan Mueller III, March 2019.
Officially made Nancy Pelosi a two-time impeachment loser.
Donald J. Trump, cheated out of a second term by fraudulent "mail-in"
ballots. Report voter fraud: sf.n...@mail.house.gov
Thank you for cleaning up the disaster of the 2008-2017 Obama / Biden
fiasco, President Trump.
Under Barack Obama's leadership, the United States of America became the
The World According To Garp. Obama sold out heterosexuals for Hollywood
queer liberal democrat donors.
President Trump boosted the economy, reduced illegal invasions, appointed
dozens of judges and three SCOTUS justices.
wealth-tax-and-so-much-more?rl=1
If Democrats’ tax-and-spend proposals are as popular as they claim, why do
they have to lie about them?
When President Biden claims his $3.5 trillion “social infrastructure” bill
will cost “zero,” he is clearly assuming Americans are morons, since there
is no way the government can spend trillions of dollars without hiking
taxes or increasing borrowing, for both of which there is indeed a price
tag.
And when he tweets, as he did recently, “It’s simple: a teacher shouldn’t
pay a higher tax rate than an oil company,” he is again wandering off the
truth-track. Since the average teacher earns $31,000 per year, and since
the income tax rate at that level of income is 12 percent, compared to the
current corporate rate of 25 percent, this claim is another Joe Biden
whopper.
You have to wonder: Does anyone in this White House even try to get the
facts right?
This is not just a Biden phenomenon. When Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)
hawked her proposed 2 percent wealth tax on the campaign trail, claiming
it would cost the richest Americans “just 2 cents” on every dollar of
their net worth above $50 million, she must have known that any educated
person would understand that in fact levying that sort of fee on assets
year after year would end up costing well-heeled people a fortune.
Indeed, Warren blew her boast by projecting “this small new tax on the
tiny sliver of ultra-rich families will bring in $3.75 trillion over the
next 10 years.” So, actually, a lot more than two cents.
And when, most recently, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen describes
Democrats’ latest brainstorm for raising revenues — a tax only on 700 of
America’s wealthiest people — as not a wealth tax, she’s playing us for
chumps.
As Democrats toss the federal sofa cushions searching for ways to pay for
their $3.5 trillion progressive goody bag, they have become ever more
inventive, and dishonest.
Since Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) balked at raising revenues the old-
fashioned way, through conventional tax hikes, Democrats have launched a
new idea: taxing unrealized capital gains.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who apparently missed the talking
points memo, told a Sunday CNN audience: “We will probably have a wealth
tax.” Minutes later, on the same show, Yellen contradicted the Speaker,
explaining that, “it's not a wealth tax, but a tax on unrealized capital
gains of exceptionally wealthy individuals.”
Yellen wants us to believe that unrealized capital gains are income. That
is not true. If you have a stock that doubles in value, plumping up your
investment portfolio, you feel pretty chipper and indeed wealthier. But
unless you actually reap that gain by selling your shares and receiving
the proceeds from the buyer, you can’t buy a ham sandwich.
Until you sell, the gain is theoretical. Just ask people who bought
Bitcoin in 2020 at $9,000, celebrated when it surged to $45,000 a year
later by buying a Maserati and then took out a loan when it dropped back
to $31,000. You have to cash in your winnings to spend your gains, just
like at the casino.
Yellen said further: “It would help get at capital gains, which are an
extraordinarily large part of the incomes of the wealthiest individuals.”
She is right that realized investment gains indeed pump-up income for
well-off people. But the IRS already “gets at” capital gains by taxing
those winnings when the stocks or other assets are sold.
Yellen knows that, and she also must know that a wealth tax may be
unconstitutional, as well as unproductive. She is simply playing ball with
Democrats, who have not only egg but entire omelets on their faces.
Democrats have promised progressive voters the moon, since without them
their party would not be in power. The problem is that some people don’t
want the moon, while others want the entire galaxy. Sen. Bernie Sanders
(I-Vt.) was pushing a bill in June that would have cost $6 trillion, and
complained that spending $3.5 trillion would not come close to solving our
country’s needs.
Some of his more grounded colleagues have objected to massive tax hikes
and specific policies, like the clean power rules, that could jeopardize
our recovery. As a consequence, the bill has shrunk dramatically in size
and scope. Once priced at $3.5 trillion, now Democrats are looking to
spend about $1.8 trillion.
Progressives are not happy with this state of affairs. Sanders, never one
to compromise, has drawn more red lines than Mark Rothko over the past
several months. Most recently, he argued that adding hearing, dental and
vision benefits to Medicare is non-negotiable, as is including a plan to
lower prescription drug costs.
But Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) is balking at the Medicare add-ons and also
at a controversial proposal requiring that banks reveal new information to
the IRS; he claimed that he objected to the measure in a meeting with
Biden, and that the president agreed with his argument.
The truth is that Democrats are battling each other over Biden’s bill
because voters are not on board with spending trillions more, on top of
the $5 trillion already doled out on COVID-19 relief. They are worried
about inflation, and think huge government outlays contribute to the
problem.
In a recent Quinnipiac poll, 40 percent of Americans said “the federal
government should be doing more to help Americans, but shouldn't spend too
much” while 24 percent responded that “the federal government doesn't need
to do more to help Americans.” Only 33 percent thought the feds should be
“doing a lot more to help.”
That is not exactly a resounding cheer for breaking the bank on new
“social infrastructure” programs. In the same poll, though 92 percent of
Democrats back the $3.5 trillion bill, independents are roughly split on
the measure and Republicans are decidedly against it.
It appears that Joe Biden isn’t lying only about taxes and the cost of his
program; he’s also not being truthful about its popularity, either.
Liz Peek is a former partner of major bracket Wall Street firm Wertheim &
Company. Follow her on Twitter @lizpeek.
--
"LOCKDOWN", left-wing COVID fearmongering. 95% of COVID infections
recover with no after effects.
No collusion - Special Counsel Robert Swan Mueller III, March 2019.
Officially made Nancy Pelosi a two-time impeachment loser.
Donald J. Trump, cheated out of a second term by fraudulent "mail-in"
ballots. Report voter fraud: sf.n...@mail.house.gov
Thank you for cleaning up the disaster of the 2008-2017 Obama / Biden
fiasco, President Trump.
Under Barack Obama's leadership, the United States of America became the
The World According To Garp. Obama sold out heterosexuals for Hollywood
queer liberal democrat donors.
President Trump boosted the economy, reduced illegal invasions, appointed
dozens of judges and three SCOTUS justices.
cpt banjo
Dec 9, 2021, 11:13:40 AM12/9/21
to
On Friday, October 29, 2021 at 2:04:44 PM UTC-5, Leroy N. Soetoro wrote:
> https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/578569-biden-and-democrats-lie-about-
> wealth-tax-and-so-much-more?rl=1
While the current tax law generally doesn't tax unrealized gains (there are exceptions for securities dealers and original issue discount), the Supreme Court has held that realization is merely an administrative convenience and not something that's constitutionally required.
> https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/578569-biden-and-democrats-lie-about-
> wealth-tax-and-so-much-more?rl=1
>
>
> Yellen wants us to believe that unrealized capital gains are income. That
> is not true. If you have a stock that doubles in value, plumping up your
> investment portfolio, you feel pretty chipper and indeed wealthier. But
> unless you actually reap that gain by selling your shares and receiving
> the proceeds from the buyer, you can’t buy a ham sandwich.
Not quite. From an economic standpoint unrealized gains are income. A common technique used by the wealthy is to use appreciated assets as collateral for loans. If they hold the assets until death, their tax basis is increased to the date of death value so that the appreciation is never subject to income tax.
>
> Yellen wants us to believe that unrealized capital gains are income. That
> is not true. If you have a stock that doubles in value, plumping up your
> investment portfolio, you feel pretty chipper and indeed wealthier. But
> unless you actually reap that gain by selling your shares and receiving
> the proceeds from the buyer, you can’t buy a ham sandwich.
While the current tax law generally doesn't tax unrealized gains (there are exceptions for securities dealers and original issue discount), the Supreme Court has held that realization is merely an administrative convenience and not something that's constitutionally required.
0 new messages