• 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!

Corporate America to give out Record $1 trillion in stock buy backs

The Republicans AND their rich donors get away with this stuff because for some reason the Republican working class/Middle Class defends the rich and the Corps each and every time. They can see that these policies are not helping them, but they still defend the rich.

The rich and Corps vote for their own interest, hell they pay MILLIONS to politicians to get and keep their interests, but the working class Republican doesn't vote for his own interests. sad..

They all think that someday they will. be in the rich ruling class...
 
Conservatives think rich people are the best people. They believe that in a system of capitalism, the winners represent the best and brightest because they believe in a meritocracy. So when they get a chance to reward these rich people even more, they gladly send their wishes and greetings in the form of more money to their earth bound Gods, the rich. They all believe that if each of them had done this or that, they too could have joined the hallowed ranks of the rich. So, they reinforce their own beliefs by admitting to themselves that they are inferior to the rich.
 
A share buyback is just a tax advantaged special dividend.

A dividend is a payment to shareholders and the shareholder still owns the stock. The stock buyback is a purchase of shares at market prices and you no longer own the shares and have to pay any applicable tax on any growth above your cost basis.

Care to explain further?
 
All the while they plan on taking healthcare away from tens of millions of people....

Obamacare ruled unconstitutional by Texas judge

...and lots of the people who will be losing their healthcare are cheering it on.

Hence my question to them; and I've yet to get an answer. As a conservative you have to actually agree with making life harder for yourself and others, why?

Krickets from the Komrades of Reagan.
 
They all think that someday they will. be in the rich ruling class...

I've heard that a thousand times over the years. I don't buy it. I may be wrong because so many people agree with your opinion. But I know many Republicans in their 60'-70's who will never be the rich ruling class who still defend the rich and vote Republican...
 
Conservatives think rich people are the best people. They believe that in a system of capitalism, the winners represent the best and brightest because they believe in a meritocracy. So when they get a chance to reward these rich people even more, they gladly send their wishes and greetings in the form of more money to their earth bound Gods, the rich. They all believe that if each of them had done this or that, they too could have joined the hallowed ranks of the rich. So, they reinforce their own beliefs by admitting to themselves that they are inferior to the rich.

Can you point out some of these noted Conservative thinkers? I've never seen any group across the spectrum that thought this, or even thought the opposite.
 
A dividend is a payment to shareholders and the shareholder still owns the stock. The stock buyback is a purchase of shares at market prices and you no longer own the shares and have to pay any applicable tax on any growth above your cost basis.

Care to explain further?

A dividend is just a way for corporations to return capital to shareholders. A share buyback is as well. People elect to sell their shares in a buyback to receive a return of capital. Unlike dividends, proceeds from buybacks are considered capital gains and are taxed at a lower rate than a dividend. Companies repurchase shares at a premium to market. If an investor still wants to be in the stock (which they almost always do), they can repurchase the shares, which almost all institutional investors do.
 
The Republicans AND their rich donors get away with this stuff because for some reason the Republican working class/Middle Class defends the rich and the Corps each and every time. They can see that these policies are not helping them, but they still defend the rich.

The rich and Corps vote for their own interest, hell they pay MILLIONS to politicians to get and keep their interests, but the working class Republican doesn't vote for his own interests. sad..
They defend them because by doing so they think some of that filthy rich 1% juju will somehow sprinkle down upon them.
 
I've heard that a thousand times over the years. I don't buy it. I may be wrong because so many people agree with your opinion. But I know many Republicans in their 60'-70's who will never be the rich ruling class who still defend the rich and vote Republican...

They're living vicariously through those a class that they admire and envy.
 
They defend them because by doing so they think some of that filthy rich 1% juju will somehow sprinkle down upon them.

Or that if the government can dictate "share ever more of your income/wealth" terms to the uber rich then they are obviously screwed as well.
 
https://www.wraltechwire.com/2018/1...es-out-a-record-1-trillion-in-stock-buybacks/

So much for "helping the middle class and struggling americans." Seems the bloviating, leaking orange anus and the republican tax plan have done precisely what I said they'd do. Skew the numbers, which show costs are increasing and wages stagnating, yet create economic boom for the 1% with their buyback options.

Bravo, conservatives. You made the rich richer and everyone else can get stuffed.
LOL, job openings AND people working at all time highs. Wages growing, millions of dollars in bonuses and upgraded benefits, minority unemployment at record lows, lower tax rates, over 250,000 new manufacturing jobs, people who had given up EVEN LOOKING for work now have jobs. And YOU whine that Trump has done NOTHING? Didn't the Who write a rock opera about you?
 
A dividend is just a way for corporations to return capital to shareholders. A share buyback is as well. People elect to sell their shares in a buyback to receive a return of capital. Unlike dividends, proceeds from buybacks are considered capital gains and are taxed at a lower rate than a dividend. Companies repurchase shares at a premium to market. If an investor still wants to be in the stock (which they almost always do), they can repurchase the shares, which almost all institutional investors do.

Your statements are absolutist. A share buyback returns capital in exchange for the shares, it is an overgeneralization to call it a return of capital. Some shares are indeed purchased at a premium, but the vast majority of the purchases are on the open market at market prices. Any share sale is only a capital gain if it meets the requirements of a capital gain--it could also be at a loss, but because it is more than likely on the open market, they are just selling as a matter of course. If good stuff happens as a result of the buyback, the person likely wouldn't have sold solely based on the announcement but on how the market is doing for them.

Finally, only ordinary dividends may be taxed at a higher rate than capital gains, some amounts of qualified dividends are taxed at a rate at or below the capital gains rate.

That said, it is not a "give out" as described in the headline.
 
Conservatives think rich people are the best people. They believe that in a system of capitalism, the winners represent the best and brightest because they believe in a meritocracy. So when they get a chance to reward these rich people even more, they gladly send their wishes and greetings in the form of more money to their earth bound Gods, the rich. They all believe that if each of them had done this or that, they too could have joined the hallowed ranks of the rich. So, they reinforce their own beliefs by admitting to themselves that they are inferior to the rich.

So whether or not you are successful isn’t based on a meritocracy? How many rich people do you think inherited their wealth vs. those who went to college and/ or got a useful degree and started businesses and worked their tails off to get to where they are? There are millions of the latter. Why should they be disparaged and criticized for their success? Even if we look at the “old money”, at some point someone worked hard for that. I’m tired of everyone’s whining. “Whaaaaah whaaaaah. They have more than me, it’s not fair and I want some!” It’s like kids playing with toys in kindergarten.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Can you point out some of these noted Conservative thinkers? I've never seen any group across the spectrum that thought this, or even thought the opposite.

The very essence of conservatism is that the markets are the perfect venue to sort the population based upon a system that rewards the winner and punishes the loser. It is at the core of capitalism and free market ideology. This idea is at the core of Ayn Rand's two books and her influence upon modern conservative thinking is still profound. In this battle of wits, the majority will always be losers in comparison to the titans. Tax policy from the right is about rewarding the winners at the expense of everyone else. Estate tax policy reflects this perfectly as it continues this special treatment even after death. When you talk to any conservative about these issues, they will defend their positions by stating that without these giants the economy would collapse under a system of equal outcomes (socialism). In order to accept this idea you must ignore the evidence before you both here and abroad that proves progressive taxation and wealth taxation actually creates a more robust economy with better outcomes for the majority. The recent study of wealth over time by Piketty proves this is true even across centuries yet the orthodoxy of the right continues unabated.

Just look at how we treat various types of income. Income produced by labor or wages is taxed at a higher marginal rate then that of investors and passive income. Capital consolidates in larger and larger fortunes while labor retreats in comparison. This is straight from Marx and our current economy reflects this truth.
 
Conservatives think rich people are the best people. They believe that in a system of capitalism, the winners represent the best and brightest because they believe in a meritocracy. So when they get a chance to reward these rich people even more, they gladly send their wishes and greetings in the form of more money to their earth bound Gods, the rich. They all believe that if each of them had done this or that, they too could have joined the hallowed ranks of the rich. So, they reinforce their own beliefs by admitting to themselves that they are inferior to the rich.

Perhaps they simply don't believe in having someone else decide what they need and/or deserve to keep. I don't think that my efforts to support myself and my dependents by working will make me join the ranks of "the rich" but I don't believe that forcing me to share my income with those who would simply rather not work as hard to do the same is a valid power of government.
 
The very essence of conservatism is that the markets are the perfect venue to sort the population based upon a system that rewards the winner and punishes the loser. It is at the core of capitalism and free market ideology. This idea is at the core of Ayn Rand's two books and her influence upon modern conservative thinking is still profound. In this battle of wits, the majority will always be losers in comparison to the titans. Tax policy from the right is about rewarding the winners at the expense of everyone else. Estate tax policy reflects this perfectly as it continues this special treatment even after death. When you talk to any conservative about these issues, they will defend their positions by stating that without these giants the economy would collapse under a system of equal outcomes (socialism). In order to accept this idea you must ignore the evidence before you both here and abroad that proves progressive taxation and wealth taxation actually creates a more robust economy with better outcomes for the majority. The recent study of wealth over time by Piketty proves this is true even across centuries yet the orthodoxy of the right continues unabated.

Just look at how we treat various types of income. Income produced by labor or wages is taxed at a higher marginal rate then that of investors and passive income. Capital consolidates in larger and larger fortunes while labor retreats in comparison. This is straight from Marx and our current economy reflects this truth.

You've constructed a very impressive strawman to beat up on. There isn't anyone saying that "rich people are the best people", but that is incidental to your wider point.

Other than inheritance taxes, where exactly is wealth taxed?
 
LOL, job openings AND people working at all time highs. Wages growing, millions of dollars in bonuses and upgraded benefits, minority unemployment at record lows, lower tax rates, over 250,000 new manufacturing jobs, people who had given up EVEN LOOKING for work now have jobs. And YOU whine that Trump has done NOTHING? Didn't the Who write a rock opera about you?

Yawn. I tire of the hypocritical rightists who insist when a dem is in office presidents have nothing to do with the economy, but now that a repub is in office, well, praise be to trump.

Moreover. Wages and benefits growing? Please. They haven't grown, they have continued to stagnate and have not come close to the promised panacea the republicans told us it would be.

Wages are stagnant. Prices are high. Everyone is working - the majority of them for corps like walmart, so the welfare state continues to hand out to the Waltons while ****ing the rest of us.

Yah, thanks Trump.
 
You've constructed a very impressive strawman to beat up on. There isn't anyone saying that "rich people are the best people", but that is incidental to your wider point.

Other than inheritance taxes, where exactly is wealth taxed?

We do not yet have a wealth tax, it is an idea that has been floating around as a remedy since Piketty wrote his history of wealth in the Western World. Today, we simply have income taxes and estate taxes. Trump lowered both, I believe the estate tax was repealed in it's entirety giving his children the opportunity to continue the Trump era into the future. In some ways property taxes are a form of wealth tax but there are so many legal tax loopholds that many who own vast real estate holdings pay little to nothing in tax on sizeable incomes.
 
Perhaps they simply don't believe in having someone else decide what they need and/or deserve to keep. I don't think that my efforts to support myself and my dependents by working will make me join the ranks of "the rich" but I don't believe that forcing me to share my income with those who would simply rather not work as hard to do the same is a valid power of government.

Yet another argument based upon the myth of a meritocracy. The argument here is that a tax is actually a transfer of wealth from the deserving to the undeserving. It is a strong meme supported by the right wing and as this poster shows, it is an effective one. I can point out though that arguments like this were once made to counter the movement towards free public education for one and all. Why should a man who earns enough to pay for private school pay taxes to support public schools for the children of the poor? A similar argument was made by non-farmers when farm subsidies were proposed. Why should I pay taxes to keep farmer B in business? In fact, this argument can lead to a host of similar arguments made by someone who makes 100k against someone who makes 10k. One pays more in total taxes then the other, how is that fair using this logic? The debate about progressive taxation continues this argument. Even a flat tax has elements of this argument. Perhaps we should divide the total budget by the number of people, make the division and everyone pays exactly the same amount in taxes. That would solve the unfairness question this poster raises would it not?
 
Yet another argument based upon the myth of a meritocracy. The argument here is that a tax is actually a transfer of wealth from the deserving to the undeserving. It is a strong meme supported by the right wing and as this poster shows, it is an effective one. I can point out though that arguments like this were once made to counter the movement towards free public education for one and all. Why should a man who earns enough to pay for private school pay taxes to support public schools for the children of the poor? A similar argument was made by non-farmers when farm subsidies were proposed. Why should I pay taxes to keep farmer B in business? In fact, this argument can lead to a host of similar arguments made by someone who makes 100k against someone who makes 10k. One pays more in total taxes then the other, how is that fair using this logic? The debate about progressive taxation continues this argument. Even a flat tax has elements of this argument. Perhaps we should divide the total budget by the number of people, make the division and everyone pays exactly the same amount in taxes. That would solve the unfairness question this poster raises would it not?

Nope, my argument is simply that too much of taxation is now used in such a manner with constant calls to do more of it.
 
We do not yet have a wealth tax, it is an idea that has been floating around as a remedy since Piketty wrote his history of wealth in the Western World. Today, we simply have income taxes and estate taxes. Trump lowered both, I believe the estate tax was repealed in it's entirety giving his children the opportunity to continue the Trump era into the future. In some ways property taxes are a form of wealth tax but there are so many legal tax loopholds that many who own vast real estate holdings pay little to nothing in tax on sizeable incomes.

Not really interested in 1 person's idea about one world taxing authority. If there is a wealth tax proposed in this country, I'll look at it, but don't see how practical it would be. Trump signed the Tax Cut and Jobs Act in 2018 which shifted some tax rates and certainly greatly reduced the number of people who have to itemize due to the doubling of the Standard Deduction. They also expire in 2025. The estate tax exception increased to $10M from $5M, and is indexed for inflation. It is also scheduled to go back to $5M in 2025.

No idea what you are talking about regarding property taxes and what you think it has to do with "sizeable incomes." What tax loopholes are you thinking of that apply to those with "vast real estate holdings"?
 
Back
Top Bottom