• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

A fair tax would be to require capital gains be paid each year just like income tax and at the same rate.

bave said:
Don't you understand what that means? It means vast numbers of customers who think the service his company offers is superior to anything else. That saves them money, it makes marketplaces for merchants to sell through amazon, it creates entire new ways of creating marketplaces.

If it wasn't worth $2T, it wouldn't be worth $2T. People are paying for what they see value in. It is no different than people paying $300 for a pair of sneakers. You and I might not see the value in that, but who are we to argue with the market?
Click to expand...
He had nothing to do with any of that. Are you seriously arguing that someone is solely responsible for the creation of a 196 billion dollar fortune?
 
bave said:
Don't you understand what that means? It means vast numbers of customers who think the service his company offers is superior to anything else. That saves them money, it makes marketplaces for merchants to sell through amazon, it creates entire new ways of creating marketplaces.

If it wasn't worth $2T, it wouldn't be worth $2T. People are paying for what they see value in. It is no different than people paying $300 for a pair of sneakers. You and I might not see the value in that, but who are we to argue with the market?
Click to expand...
It is a perversion of the market. Show me any algorithm that calculates the creation of a 196 billion dollars of wealth owned by a single man. It is obscene.
 
jaeger19 said:
You are federally taxed on income that you actually receive in rent (actually the profit).
You are not taxed as federal income.. on the money the federal government says your rental property has increased in value
Click to expand...
Am not sure I understand your point. As the assessed value of the property has increased, the taxes have risen.
 
craig said:
He had nothing to do with any of that. Are you seriously arguing that someone is solely responsible for the creation of a 196 billion dollar fortune?
Click to expand...

If Jeff Bezos at ten years old, would Amazon be around? Is he solely responsible? Of course not, his investors, his customers, a thousand other things aligned to allow Amazon to become what is has become. However none of those things happen without him either.

craig said:
It is a perversion of the market. Show me any algorithm that calculates the creation of a 196 billion dollars of wealth owned by a single man. It is obscene.
Click to expand...

Show me the algorithm that calculates what you pay Lebron James or Tom Hanks? The only difference is that Amazon, and thus Bezos's, value are being determined by a global community in an active free market. That is pretty much the definition of determination of value. When you have millions of people actively bidding against one another, with nearly equal information sharing, and thus determine a price. That is literally the econ-101 definition of the determination of value.
 
bave said:
Don't you understand what that means? It means vast numbers of customers who think the service his company offers is superior to anything else. That saves them money, it makes marketplaces for merchants to sell through amazon, it creates entire new ways of creating marketplaces.

If it wasn't worth $2T, it wouldn't be worth $2T. People are paying for what they see value in. It is no different than people paying $300 for a pair of sneakers. You and I might not see the value in that, but who are we to argue with the market?
Click to expand...
You forgot aws. That is the big money maker for amazon.
 
99percenter said:
You forgot aws. That is the big money maker for amazon.
Click to expand...

AWS is the *only* money maker for AMZN. It doesn't change the narrative, AWS has customers because they see the value. Whether you are talking about shoes or web hosting, it is all the same effectively. It is a commoditized product with consumer valuation.
 
bave said:
AWS is the *only* money maker for AMZN. It doesn't change the narrative, AWS has customers because they see the value. Whether you are talking about shoes or web hosting, it is all the same effectively. It is a commoditized product with consumer valuation.
Click to expand...
I am not a huge fan of their ecommerce store. It's mostly fake chinese knock off products and most of them have tons of fake reviews. I see myself using brick and mortar stores more now that the no tax gravy train has ended.
 
craig said:
This is the hyperbole that points out how ridiculous 196 billion dollar's is.
Click to expand...
Why? Why is that ridiculous? That's why you have no credibility... .
Basically because YOU think its too much money.. then its ridiculous. You aren't legitimately talking about taxes, or merit.. or even in redistribution... you really just don't like the number.
 
craig said:
He had nothing to do with any of that. Are you seriously arguing that someone is solely responsible for the creation of a 196 billion dollar fortune?
Click to expand...
Well.. did start Amazon in his garage in 1994. How is he NOT responsible? Please explain.
Tell me at what dollar figure does he go from being responsible.. to not responsible?
 
Nickyjo said:
Am not sure I understand your point. As the assessed value of the property has increased, the taxes have risen.
Click to expand...
Your federal income taxes have not risen because of that assessment which is what we are talking about here.
 
jaeger19 said:
Your federal income taxes have not risen because of that assessment which is what we are talking about here.
Click to expand...
Ok, sorry. But doesn’t the same principle apply, just a different taxing agency? And do you object to the tax, and if so on what grounds.
 
Nickyjo said:
Ok, sorry. But doesn’t the same principle apply, just a different taxing agency? And do you object to the tax, and if so on what grounds.
Click to expand...
No not really. 1. First and foremost because the tax is not considered part of income tax. You are not taxed on it as if its income. 2. Its a local assessment based on actual sales data for the area.. 2. You have the opportunity to dispute the assessment 3. Your taxation is under more local control by you. You have much better representation by your elected officials than a national system. and...
4. You have already been assessed and taxed on that property. So why should it be assessed by some nebulous federal agency and then taxed again as if its income.? The OP makes the argument that you are not taxed on that property.. so that a national income tax should include any growth in value as subject to income tax.".
 
jaeger19 said:
No not really. 1. First and foremost because the tax is not considered part of income tax. You are not taxed on it as if its income. 2. Its a local assessment based on actual sales data for the area.. 2. You have the opportunity to dispute the assessment 3. Your taxation is under more local control by you. You have much better representation by your elected officials than a national system. and...
4. You have already been assessed and taxed on that property. So why should it be assessed by some nebulous federal agency and then taxed again as if its income.? The OP makes the argument that you are not taxed on that property.. so that a national income tax should include any growth in value as subject to income tax.".
Click to expand...
Thanks for the explanation.
 
Nickyjo said:
Thanks for the explanation.
Click to expand...
No worries. I would add too.. that hopefully your property tax assessment is in relation to the services that your county provides you. Ie. More units in the rental means more services needed for fire, ambulance, school, etc.

An income tax based on the assessment of your property valuation would not be in relation to that.
 
jaeger19 said:
No worries. I would add too.. that hopefully your property tax assessment is in relation to the services that your county provides you. Ie. More units in the rental means more services needed for fire, ambulance, school, etc.

An income tax based on the assessment of your property valuation would not be in relation to that.
Click to expand...
Oh yes, the city, Berkeley, and the county, Alameda let us know where the taxes go. Great libraries, some branches open on Sunday, even a tool lending library.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom