• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Preparing for Democrats

backhoeboogie

Well-known member
Hopefully you have already claimed all the capital gains you can. If not, be prepared to fork it all over if you claim any this year. The alternative is to roll it into something else. Keep snow balling it for the next few years. If you sell any land, buy more immediately etc.

The Brady Bill will probably be back with more. If there is a gun you want, you'd best buy it now. If you have any guns that you don't want, hang on to them. Private treaty prices will escalate just like before. Citizens will not want to buy from pawn shops because they can be traced. Private treaty will be percentages higher than used prices at pawn shops.

Bear in mind that double digit inflation will return and things like land value will not necessarily increase proportionally, but the dollar will. This will compound your capital gains problems. Invest accordingly. SS incomes will be worth substantially less buying power. If you are on fixed incomes, start considering self sustaining purchases for yourself and ways to earn a little extra.

If Pelosi starts defining tax laws and things the way the libs on this forum define recession or the Bill defines sex, anything goes.

Start planning for all of it now. You are going to get a democrat no matter what. There are currently three demo candidates in the running and McCain could be the one to get elected. He is the lessor of the three evils.

Pelosi and her supporters will not be able to wipe the blood off of their hands or the smiles off of their faces. Protect yourself every way possible for hard times. Those on fixed incomes are going to need our help.

The inflation will be good for young families just starting out until the interest rates catch up. The increased interest rates will be better for the elderly on fixed incomes.

Junk yards and second hand stores are already in a boon. People will be looking for cheaper alternatives even harder in times ahead.
 

fff

Well-known member
Yep, who would have thought the Democrats would be the fiscally responsible party to get us out of the financial hole the Republicans have driven us into? Now that we know Republicans are not to be trusted with the nation's pocketbook, not to be trusted when it comes to foreign affairs, a record number of them have been sent to jail or resigned under investigation, or caught soliciting sex from members of the same gender, what will the Republican party have to run on in the future? Sob..Sob..
 

hopalong

Well-known member
fff said:
Yep, who would have thought the Democrats would be the fiscally responsible party to get us out of the financial hole the Republicans have driven us into? Now that we know Republicans are not to be trusted with the nation's pocketbook, not to be trusted when it comes to foreign affairs, a record number of them have been sent to jail or resigned under investigation, or caught soliciting sex from members of the same gender, what will the Republican party have to run on in the future? Sob..Sob..

Anyone who has common sense wuold know the LIBERAL party would br the ruin of us all!!!Seems you don't remember BILLY boy and his I DID NOT HAVE SEX WITH THAT WOMAN!!!Talk about a sex scandle! Guess that doesn't count though. Seems to me there was impeachment proceedings!! Or am I wrong???
Come on fff you are falling real short here in your accuastions!!But that is no surprise, you are a half load short anyway :D
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
hopalong said:
fff said:
Yep, who would have thought the Democrats would be the fiscally responsible party to get us out of the financial hole the Republicans have driven us into? Now that we know Republicans are not to be trusted with the nation's pocketbook, not to be trusted when it comes to foreign affairs, a record number of them have been sent to jail or resigned under investigation, or caught soliciting sex from members of the same gender, what will the Republican party have to run on in the future? Sob..Sob..

Anyone who has common sense wuold know the LIBERAL party would br the ruin of us all!!!Seems you don't remember BILLY boy and his I DID NOT HAVE SEX WITH THAT WOMAN!!!Talk about a sex scandle! Guess that doesn't count though. Seems to me there was impeachment proceedings!! Or am I wrong???
Come on fff you are falling real short here in your accuastions!!But that is no surprise, you are a half load short anyway :D

While I couldn't stand Clinton and his ethics- I'd gladly take a little hanky panky in the Oval Office compared to our current $9 Trillion dollar debt (which our grandkids will be paying for) and Bushs ethics.....

U.S. NATIONAL DEBT CLOCK
The Outstanding Public Debt as of 10 May 2008 at 11:44:31 PM GMT is:

$9,367,821,865.976.15

The estimated population of the United States is 303,965,704
so each citizen's share of this debt is $30,818.68.

The National Debt has continued to increase an average of
$1.46 billion per day since September 29, 2006..


http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/
 

fff

Well-known member
hopalong said:
fff said:
Yep, who would have thought the Democrats would be the fiscally responsible party to get us out of the financial hole the Republicans have driven us into? Now that we know Republicans are not to be trusted with the nation's pocketbook, not to be trusted when it comes to foreign affairs, a record number of them have been sent to jail or resigned under investigation, or caught soliciting sex from members of the same gender, what will the Republican party have to run on in the future? Sob..Sob..

Anyone who has common sense wuold know the LIBERAL party would br the ruin of us all!!!Seems you don't remember BILLY boy and his I DID NOT HAVE SEX WITH THAT WOMAN!!!Talk about a sex scandle! Guess that doesn't count though. Seems to me there was impeachment proceedings!! Or am I wrong???
Come on fff you are falling real short here in your accuastions!!But that is no surprise, you are a half load short anyway :D

SEX! SEX! SEX! SEX! SEX! Oh, my God. Someone had SEX! And lied about it! Shocking, Shocking, Shocking. Absolutely shocking. I'm sure there's not a person on this board who has ever done the same thing?

I'm not falling short in anything. Bill Clinton was the first president in years to actually have a balanced budget and pay off some of the Federal debt. George W. Bush took that surplus, gave it to his rich friends, and put us into debt and war. Those are the cold hard facts. And the Republican Party will be paying for it for a very long time.

As for the "family values, God fearing, right wing Republicans who have been outed/investigated/jailed over the last few years, let's talk about Larry Craig and Mark Foley. Or Newt, Vitter, Reynolds, Fossela, Cunningham.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
fff said:
hopalong said:
fff said:
Yep, who would have thought the Democrats would be the fiscally responsible party to get us out of the financial hole the Republicans have driven us into? Now that we know Republicans are not to be trusted with the nation's pocketbook, not to be trusted when it comes to foreign affairs, a record number of them have been sent to jail or resigned under investigation, or caught soliciting sex from members of the same gender, what will the Republican party have to run on in the future? Sob..Sob..

Anyone who has common sense wuold know the LIBERAL party would br the ruin of us all!!!Seems you don't remember BILLY boy and his I DID NOT HAVE SEX WITH THAT WOMAN!!!Talk about a sex scandle! Guess that doesn't count though. Seems to me there was impeachment proceedings!! Or am I wrong???
Come on fff you are falling real short here in your accuastions!!But that is no surprise, you are a half load short anyway :D

SEX! SEX! SEX! SEX! SEX! Oh, my God. Someone had SEX! And lied about it! Shocking, Shocking, Shocking. Absolutely shocking. I'm sure there's not a person on this board who has ever done the same thing?

I'm not falling short in anything. Bill Clinton was the first president in years to actually have a balanced budget and pay off some of the Federal debt. George W. Bush took that surplus, gave it to his rich friends, and put us into debt and war. Those are the cold hard facts. And the Republican Party will be paying for it for a very long time.

As for the "family values, God fearing, right wing Republicans who have been outed/investigated/jailed over the last few years, let's talk about Larry Craig and Mark Foley. Or Newt, Vitter, Reynolds, Fossela, Cunningham.

:lol: :lol: :lol: Yep-- going back thru history even to the Washington/Jefferson days the list of those Presidents not having misstress's/affairs is a lot shorter than those that did......

"Ma, Ma, where's my Pa?"-- "Gone to the White House Ha, Ha, Ha...
1884
But I have to give Grover credit- he fessed up to it altho its a good chance it was his partners kid.....

Don't you folks remember the tv show the Jeffersons- and old George Jefferson who argued with Archie Bunker? DNA testing has shown those could have been true descendents of our 3rd President... :wink:
 

nenmrancher

Well-known member
I dont see why people are getting so worked up about this, it doesnt matter which party wins because in the end it won't matter the voter/tax payer will get screwed. Democrat or Rebulican the poloticians will figure out how to screw us and line their pockets and their cronies. Only difference is that the dems will give everything to the radical envioros and the rebulicans give everything to big business.
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
fff said:
Yep, who would have thought the Democrats would be the fiscally responsible party to get us out of the financial hole the Republicans have driven us into? Now that we know Republicans are not to be trusted with the nation's pocketbook, not to be trusted when it comes to foreign affairs, a record number of them have been sent to jail or resigned under investigation, or caught soliciting sex from members of the same gender, what will the Republican party have to run on in the future? Sob..Sob..

Raising capital gains has been proven to lower tax revenues. Barry got told that face to face and he didn't refute it - he continued to say that he was going to do it. Flipping idiot.

Speaking of trust, how can you trust those two Socialists that have been caught in so many lies?
 

backhoeboogie

Well-known member
nenmrancher said:
I dont see why people are getting so worked up about this, it doesnt matter which party wins because in the end it won't matter the voter/tax payer will get screwed. Democrat or Rebulican the poloticians will figure out how to screw us and line their pockets and their cronies. Only difference is that the dems will give everything to the radical envioros and the rebulicans give everything to big business.

All I am saying is prepare yourself. If anyone else has any ideas, I'd like to hear them. Last time we cycled through this I was on the other end of it. Never been here and gone through this.
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
Boogie:

Now YOU are the one being Chicken Little and screaming " the sky is falling"


I'd say that if the USA is still here after 8 years of Dubya.....we can survive ANYTHING.

Calm down :wink:
 

fff

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
Raising capital gains has been proven to lower tax revenues.

Only in the short term.

During Wednesday’s Democratic presidential debate, Charles Gibson of ABC News made the following statements about capital gains taxes:

“Bill Clinton in 1997 signed legislation that dropped the capital gains tax to 20 percent and George Bush has taken it down to 15 percent and in each instance when the rate dropped, revenues from the tax increased. The government took in more money.”
“So why raise it [the capital gains rate] at all, especially given the fact that 100 million people in this country own stock and would be affected.”
These statements, echoed in a Wall Street Journal editorial today, are seriously misleading, as explained below.

Cutting capital gains rates reduces revenues over the long run. That’s the conclusion of the federal government’s official revenue-estimating agencies, as well as outside experts and the Bush Administration’s own Treasury Department.

The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and the Joint Committee on Taxation have estimated that extending the capital gains tax cut enacted in 2003 would cost $100 billion over the next decade. The Administration’s Office of Management and Budget included a similar estimate in the President’s budget.
After reviewing numerous studies of how investors respond to capital gains tax cuts, the non-partisan Congressional Research Service concluded that cutting capital gains taxes loses revenue over the long run.
The Bush Administration Treasury Department examined the economic effects of extending the capital gains and dividend tax cuts. Even under the Treasury’s most optimistic scenario about the economic effects of these tax cuts, the tax cuts would not generate anywhere close to enough added economic growth to pay for themselves — and would thus lose money.
While a capital gains tax cut can lead investors to rush to “cash in” their capital gains when the lower rate first takes effect, it does not raise revenue over the long run.

Especially when a capital gains cut is temporary, like the 2003 tax cut that Gibson cited, investors have a strong incentive to sell stocks and other assets in order to realize their capital gains before the capital gains tax rate increases. This can cause a short-term increase in capital gains tax revenues, as happened after the 2003 tax cut.
Capital gains revenues also increased after 2003 because the stock market went up. But the stock market increase was not a result of the 2003 tax cut, as a study by Federal Reserve economists found. European stocks, which did not benefit from the U.S. capital gains tax cut, performed as well as stocks in the U.S. market in the period following the tax cut.
To raise revenue over the long run, capital gains tax cuts would need to have extraordinary huge, positive effects on saving, investment, and economic growth that virtually no respected expert or institution believes they have. In fact, experts are not even sure that the long-term economic effects of these capital gains tax cuts are positive rather then negative.

One reason is that preferential tax rates for capital gains encourage tax sheltering, by creating incentives for taxpayers to take often-convoluted steps to reclassify ordinary income as capital gains. This is economically unproductive and wastes resources. The Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center’s director Leonard Burman, one of the nation’s leading tax experts, has explained, “shelter investments are invariably lousy, unproductive ventures that would never exist but for tax benefits.” Burman has concluded that, “capital gains tax cuts are as likely to depress the economy as to stimulate it.”
Middle-income families derive only a miniscule benefit from the 2003 cuts in capital gains and dividends.

Charles Gibson’s second statement — that 100 million Americans own stock and would be affected by a change in the capital gains tax rate — also is mistaken.

Most middle-income Americans own much or all of their stock through 401(k)s, IRAs, or other tax-preferred saving accounts. They do not pay taxes when their stocks within those accounts go up, so a change in the tax rate doesn’t affect them.

----chart here that didn't copy----

Even among the minority of middle-class Americans who do benefit from the capital gains and dividend tax cuts, the benefits are very small. This is because capital gains and dividend income is highly concentrated at the very top of the income scale. The Tax Policy Center estimates that the highest-income 5 percent of U.S. households receive 83 percent of total capital gains income.

According to the Tax Policy Center, the average household in the middle of the income spectrum received $20 from the 2003 capital gains and dividend tax cuts. The average household earning over $1 million received $32,000, or 1,600 times as much.
The myth that tax cuts pay for themselves hinders a debate on the nation’s budget priorities — and its serious long-term budget problems and the tough choices we must make to address them — by creating the illusion of a free lunch. Such free lunches do not exist. Capital gains tax cuts either make the nation’s daunting long-term budget problems even more severe or consume scarce resources (primarily to the benefit of the most well-off) that could otherwise be used for purposes such as moving toward universal health coverage or improving the educational system.

# # #

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities is a nonprofit, nonpartisan research organization and policy institute that conducts research and analysis on a range of government policies and programs. It is supported primarily by foundation grants.

http://www.cbpp.org/press-points.htm
 
Top