CONSERVATIVES ARE PUSHING FOR A CHANGE TO THE TAX CODE AND YOU
WILL BE SHOCKED TO FIND OUT WHO IT BENEFITS.
IT HAS TO DO WITH
THE CAPITAL GAINS TAX WHICH IS A TAX LEVIED ON THE PROFIT OF
SALES FROM PROPERTY OR AN INVESTMENT.
THERE ARE SOME
INTERESTING THINGS ABOUT CAPITAL GAINS TAXES VERSUS RAIDER TAXES
--
>>WHICH I DON'T THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE REMEMBER, CONVENIENTLY --
>>
>>I MEAN, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A SIGNIFICANTLY LOWER TAX RATE
THAN INCOME TAX, EVEN IF IN EFFECT THAT'S WHERE YOUR INCOME
IS COMING FROM, WHICH FOR MANY RICH PEOPLE IS WHAT IT IS, BUT
THEY DON'T LIKE A CERTAIN THING ABOUT CAPITAL GAINS AND IT HAS
TO DO WITH INFLATION.
SO --
>>
>>WHICH, I MEAN, THAT SELLS COMPLICATED BUT IN EFFECT IT
WOULD SIGNIFICANTLY CUT SOMETHING LIKE, DEPENDING ON
INFLATION, 30 OR 40 OR 50% OF THE TAXES THESE PEOPLE WOULD BE
PAYING, AND FOR MANY RICH INDIVIDUALS THAT IS ALL THE
TAXES THAT THEY PAY.
SO WE CAN BRING UP AN EXAMPLE AS WE TALK
ABOUT THIS, YOU WILL SEE HOW THE NUMBERS WORK OUT, IT IS
COMPLICATED, DON'T WORRY TOO MUCH ABOUT IT.
>>BOTTOM LINE IS IT WILL COST US ANOTHER $100 BILLION.
BECAUSE
THE $2 TRILLION DEFICIT THEY CREATED WITH THE LAST TAX CUTS
FOR THE RICH WASN'T ENOUGH SO THEY WILL THROW IN ANOTHER 100
BILLION.
THAT'S OVER 10 YEARS AND KEEPS ON GOING IF IT PASSES.
SO LET'S BREAK THIS DOWN, FIRST OF ALL RYAN ELLIS, SENIOR TAX
ADVISOR FOR THE FAMILY "BUSINESS" COALITION, SAYS IT
BENEFITS EVERYONE, RICH, MIDDLE-CLASS, EVERYONE.
>>GOOD, WHY HAVEN'T WE DONE IT YET?
>>THAT IS CATEGORICALLY UNTRUE.
DO YOU HAVE CAPITAL GAINS?
CAPITAL GAINS ARE IF YOU HAVE STOCK YOU HAVE HELD FOR A LONG
TIME, SOME OF YOU MIGHT HAVE CAPITAL GAINS, THAT'S
UNDERSTANDABLE, PROBABLY NOT THAT MUCH, A LITTLE BIT, SOME OF
YOU DON'T HAVE IT AT ALL BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE MONEY YOU COULD
PUT INTO THE STOCK MARKET AS AN INVESTMENT AND HOLD FOR A LONG
TIME OR YOU HAVE A BIG PROPERTY YOU SOLD OR BIG BUSINESS YOU
STARTED AND THEN SOLD AND THEN YOU GET CAPITAL GAINS TAXES ON
YOUR REGULAR INCOME.
NO, IT IS ALMOST BY DEFINITION GEARED
TOWARD THE WEALTHY, IT IS BECAUSE IT IS APPLIED TO NOT
YOUR SALARY, WE ALL EARN A SALARY, YOU MIGHT EARN A HIGH
SALARY OR LOW SALARY, THAT'S GOING TO GET THE REGULAR TAX
WHICH IS HIGHER.
THIS IS APPLIED TO WEALTH.
I ALREADY HAVE MONEY,
I DON'T NEED TO DO ANYTHING, I DON'T NEED TO SHOW UP AND PUNCH
A CLOCK OR ANYTHING, IF I'M INVESTING I PRESS A BUTTON AND
THEN THREE YEARS LATER I PRESS ANOTHER BUTTON THAT'S KIND OF
HOW IT WORKS.
AND SO HEY, LOOK, THERE'S NOTHING WRONG WITH THAT,
YOU WANT PEOPLE TO INVEST AND YOU WANT THEM TO BUILD
BUSINESSES, ETC., BUT THERE IS NO LOGICAL REASON WHY THAT
SHOULD BE A LOWER RATE THAN THE REGULAR TAXES THAT YOU PAY FOR
THE ACTUAL WORK THAT YOU DO. AND WARREN BUFFETT HAS TALKED ABOUT
THIS, HE SAID, LOOK, ANY REAL INVESTOR, IF THEY BUY INTO THIS
REPUBLICAN IDEOLOGY -- BECAUSE THE REPUBLICANS SAY NOBODY WILL
INVEST, IF YOU DON'T HAVE LOWER TAXES FOR CAPITAL GAINS NO ONE
WILL INVEST -- WARREN BUFFETT IS LIKE, WHAT KIND OF INVESTOR
DOESN'T INVEST BECAUSE THEY ARE GOING TO MAKE A LITTLE LESS
MONEY WHEN THEY PAY TAXES ON IT?
THEN YOU AREN'T AN INVESTOR.
THEN GO HOME AND BE A PLUMBER.
OF COURSE WE WOULD INVEST
ANYWAY, THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT OF BEING AN INVESTOR.
AND WHAT
KIND OF A LOSER SAYS, WELL, I WAS TO START A BUSINESS, BUT I
HEAR THAT OBAMA ADDED A 3.8% SURTAX TO THE CAPITAL GAINS.
NOW, IT'S STILL MUCH LOWER THAN IF I HAD A JOB, BUT NO, I'M NOT
STARTING THAT BUSINESS ANYMORE.
WELL, THAT LOSER WOULDN'T HAVE
STARTED THE BUSINESS IN THE FIRST PLACE, THAT'S NOT A REAL
ENTREPRENEUR.
SO THE WHOLE THING IS A FICTION, IT DOESN'T HELP
THE POOR AT ALL, IT AFFECTS THE MIDDLE-CLASS ALMOST NOT AT ALL,
IT'S STRICTLY FOR PEOPLE WHO HAVE ACCUMULATED A LOT OF
WEALTH.
AND IN THIS CASE -- TED CRUZ IS IN OFFICE PROPOSING THIS
-- BY THE WAY BACK IN 2007 A COUPLE GUY PROPOSED IT, ONE WAS
A YOUNG CONGRESSMAN NAMED PAUL RYAN, ANOTHER ONE WAS A
CONGRESSMAN NAMED MIKE PENCE.
>>A COUPLE OF WONKS.
>>THEY HAVE BEEN DYING TO GET THIS PARTICULAR TAX CUT TO THE
RICH FOR A LONG TIME.
PART OF THE REASON THEY WANTED TO KILL
OBAMACARE WAS IT BECAUSE IT HAD THAT 3.8% SURCHARGE.
THEY ARE
LIKE, ARGH, THAT'S A LITTLE EXTRA ON OUR WEALTH
ACCUMULATION, HOW DARE YOU?
SO AS USUAL, JUST WHAT THE DOCTOR
ORDERED, ANOTHER TAX CUT FOR THE RICH.
MAYBE MY FAVORITE PART OF
THE STORY THOUGH, JOHN, IS THEY ARE LIKE, THEY MIGHT HAVE TO
WAIT UNTIL AFTER THE MIDTERMS BECAUSE IT MIGHT BE A LITTLE
HARD FOR THE VOTERS TO STOMACH ANOTHER TAX CUT FOR THE RICH.
SO
IN THE MEANWHILE THEY WILL LIE TO YOU ABOUT, OH, WE ARE GOING
TO LOOK OUT FOR YOU. AND IF YOU MAKE THE MISTAKE OF PUTTING THE
REPUBLICANS BACK IN CHARGE, ALL RIGHT, A TAX CUT FOR THE RICH
AGAIN.
OR THEY DON'T EVEN WAIT AND THEY DON'T HAVE THE
CONGRESSMAN DO IT, THEY JUST DO THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH.
JOHN, I
REMEMBER THEM BEING REALLY UPSET WHEN THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH UNDER
OBAMA WOULD DO THINGS UNILATERALLY.
>>NOT IF IT'S TAX CUTS.
>>THEY COULD HAVE THE TREASURY DO IT INSTEAD, AND I THINK WITH
LARRY KUDLOW BEING THE TOP ECONOMIC ADVISOR AND STEVE
MNUCHIN, FORMER GOLDMAN SACHS FINANCIAL SCUMBAG WHO RIPPED
PEOPLE OFF DOING FORECLOSURES, THEY THINK THEY HAVE A GOOD
CHANCE AT THEM GOING, ANOTHER TAX CUT FOR THE RICH?
YEAH.
CHECK, NO PROBLEM.
SO THAT'S HEADED THEIR WAY.
OUR ONLY HOPE
IS THAT THE LAST TAX CUT IS POLLING AT 27%.
>>WHICH IS 26% HIGHER THAN IT SHOULD BE.
IT SHOULD BE AT 1%, I
GRANT YOU, 1% OF THE COUNTRY SHOULD BE LIKE, PLEASE, S'MORE,
BUT THE REST OF YOU, WHAT ARE YOU THINKING?
>>THAT'S A DISASTROUS NUMBER, 27%, SO THAT MIGHT GIVE
THEM SOME PAUSE BEFORE THEY DO MORE TAX CUTS FOR THE RICH.
For more infomation >> For the love of Scotland - Duration: 3:01. 
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét