Seriously? They're doing the Dem debate.....in a hockey rink??

[Christians4LessGvt]

SIRS....just think if Trump had been late getting back to the podium
Chuck Todd, Rachel MadCow, and Chris Matthews woulda had a field day!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQ4cGv2I-ds

[Xavier_Onassis]

Just imagine what fun it would have been if Trump had worn a dress to the debate.

Trump is an egomaniacal blowhard.

[Plane]

It is clearly stupid. A Guy like Romney got off with paying 14%. If he were taxed like a worker rather than an investor, he would have paid twice that rate.

You want your savings and investments to be taxed at the same rate they were taxed at when you earned the money the first time?

Should no one ever retire?

[sirs]

Just imagine what fun it would have been if Trump had worn a dress to the debate.

Trump is an egomaniacal blowhard.

There's fantasy.......then there's reality

[Xavier_Onassis]

It did not resemble a hockey rink in any way. You can see this online for yourself.

[sirs]

I did see it....it was a hockey rink regardless of its configuration.  Best return to your fantasy role playing, where Trump wears a dress in your alternate reality

Not only did they have to hand out hand warmers....not only was everyone having to wear jackets and sweaters while INSIDE the venue....not only was it being held on a Saturday night, a consistently NON-primetime TV viewing period.....but it was being held on the last Sat before Christmas, guranteeing the most minimal audience possible, as most everyone else was more focused on shopping and which Christmas party they were going to attend

[Xavier_Onassis]

You want your savings and investments to be taxed at the same rate they were taxed at when you earned the money the first time?

Romneys' millions are not his retirement fund, don't be stupid.

People who want to save for retirement and not have it taxed can invest in a Roth IRA. Money withdrawn after 59½ is not taxed.

[Plane]

You want your savings and investments to be taxed at the same rate they were taxed at when you earned the money the first time?

Romneys' millions are not his retirement fund, don't be stupid.

People who want to save for retirement and not have it taxed can invest in a Roth IRA. Money withdrawn after 59½ is not taxed.

And you don't think that is cheating?

[Xavier_Onassis]

Of course it is not cheating.

Taxes are not a matter of sinning or not sinning. Just as no one says that  selling an item for 65¢ is good and selling it fr 69¢ is evil.
The purpose of all types of IRA , as well as 401(k)'s and 403(b)'s are to allow middle class people to save for their retirement. It is in the interest of society that we do not have a bunch of starving old people who can no longer work  dying before their time.

Tax evasion is cheating, tax avoidance is legal. If sinning is involved, it is because tax cheaters LIE, and the sin is lying.

[Plane]

   There is also a social utility in making fortunes available for investment.

    The rich that stock their vaults with gold employ a few gold miners.

     The rich that look for growth , fund millions of jobs in startups and expansions and bonds and loans that allow new businesses to start up and old businesses to modernize and expand.

     The greater the tax on investment income and the greater tax on capitol gains is anti-capitol , reducing these taxes is pro-employment.

     Would there be any social utility in having no real fortunes in private hands?

       China is an interesting social experiment , they have in very short order converted from a country with no wealthy individuals to the country with the greatest number of millionaires on the planet.
        In which state can one observe more employed persons?
         IN which state can one observe more well paid persons?

      The value of leveling is often overstated , and the social utility of having some wealthy people around is always understated.

[Xavier_Onassis]

Fabulously wealthy people are not necessary for there to be an investment network. People invest for their retirement in IRA's and 401k's.
We would be better off as a society if we had 1000 millionaires than if we had one billionaire. 5000 millionaires would be preferable to one Donald Trump.

[sirs]

In this country, nor you nor the Government get to dictate how many people are allowed to become exponentially successful. 

In this country there can be BOTH 5000 millionaires & 1 Trump

[Plane]

Fabulously wealthy people are not necessary for there to be an investment network. People invest for their retirement in IRA's and 401k's.
We would be better off as a society if we had 1000 millionaires than if we had one billionaire. 5000 millionaires would be preferable to one Donald Trump.

   A wise small investor will devote 5% or so of his earnings to savings and investments . The investments need to be pretty conservative for a nest egg.

    A very wealthy guy would be dumb to place only 5% of his fortune in investments, if he can live off interest he would be better off investing almost all of it.

     A wealthy guy can afford to be an "angel" investor and buy interest in something new and risky without really risking destitution.

     The more Americans are well off , the more Americans have opportunity to be entrepreneurs.

     The more fortunes there are approaching Bezos and Branson level, the more seriously risky new technologies can be tried out ,

[Xavier_Onassis]

What the wealthy guy can do and what he does are different things entirely.

The more mega wealthy people hog all the land, assets and money, the less likely it is that more Americans will become wealthy. That is what is happening now.

[sirs]

The more mega wealthy people hog all the land, assets and money, the less likely it is that more Americans will become wealthy. That is what is happening now.

Not in this country.  There is no finite amount, where wealth ends.  EVERYONE can become as wealthy as they work towards