@franz-znarf but Microsoft is a totally different legal entity. Money moved from one legal entity to another. They get free speech rights just like a human.
To see the fallacy, if I owned $400,000 of Bitcoin for 5 years and sold it, it also is taxed as capitol gains. That Bitcoin has never paid a penny of tax in those 5 years.
The Microsoft stock tax isn't cheap because Microsoft paid tax. If it were the reason, Bitcoin would be taxed as normal income (same for artwork and more). It is taxed like it is because wealthier people hire damn good lobbyists.
There is some logic to the value creation of investing in equity or debt in companies that employ people, make things, etc., vs. speculative assets, but just because capital gains were broadened for administrative reasons isn't a strong argument for changing it in your example of an investment in Microsoft.
You want to encourage people to invest and save. You'd also prefer they save in assets like gold, Bitcoin, art, and etc. It's much better for society than turning a utility like housing into a savings vehicle. If housing goes up 5x quickly, you have a big problem. If Bitcoin or gold does it, who cares.
You also want to promote foreign investment. I like knowing that Dutch pension funds subsidize my drug-fueled sexcations in Amsterdam.
Those are the best kind of Sexcations. How many theater performances did you partake in?
I was there in the late 90's. Was wild. Didn't go to a full on show but did read the menus and partook of the local (and imported) flora.@franz-znarf but Microsoft is a totally different legal entity. Money moved from one legal entity to another. They get free speech rights just like a human.
To see the fallacy, if I owned $400,000 of Bitcoin for 5 years and sold it, it also is taxed as capitol gains. That Bitcoin has never paid a penny of tax in those 5 years.
The Microsoft stock tax isn't cheap because Microsoft paid tax. If it were the reason, Bitcoin would be taxed as normal income (same for artwork and more). It is taxed like it is because wealthier people hire damn good lobbyists.
There is some logic to the value creation of investing in equity or debt in companies that employ people, make things, etc., vs. speculative assets, but just because capital gains were broadened for administrative reasons isn't a strong argument for changing it in your example of an investment in Microsoft.
You want to encourage people to invest and save. You'd also prefer they save in assets like gold, Bitcoin, art, and etc. It's much better for society than turning a utility like housing into a savings vehicle. If housing goes up 5x quickly, you have a big problem. If Bitcoin or gold does it, who cares.
You also want to promote foreign investment. I like knowing that Dutch pension funds subsidize my drug-fueled sexcations in Amsterdam.
Those are the best kind of Sexcations. How many theater performances did you partake in?
I was there in the late 90's. Was wild. Didn't go to a full on show but did read the menus and partook of the local (and imported) flora.@franz-znarf but Microsoft is a totally different legal entity. Money moved from one legal entity to another. They get free speech rights just like a human.
To see the fallacy, if I owned $400,000 of Bitcoin for 5 years and sold it, it also is taxed as capitol gains. That Bitcoin has never paid a penny of tax in those 5 years.
The Microsoft stock tax isn't cheap because Microsoft paid tax. If it were the reason, Bitcoin would be taxed as normal income (same for artwork and more). It is taxed like it is because wealthier people hire damn good lobbyists.
There is some logic to the value creation of investing in equity or debt in companies that employ people, make things, etc., vs. speculative assets, but just because capital gains were broadened for administrative reasons isn't a strong argument for changing it in your example of an investment in Microsoft.
You want to encourage people to invest and save. You'd also prefer they save in assets like gold, Bitcoin, art, and etc. It's much better for society than turning a utility like housing into a savings vehicle. If housing goes up 5x quickly, you have a big problem. If Bitcoin or gold does it, who cares.
You also want to promote foreign investment. I like knowing that Dutch pension funds subsidize my drug-fueled sexcations in Amsterdam.
Those are the best kind of Sexcations. How many theater performances did you partake in?
@franz-znarf but Microsoft is a totally different legal entity. Money moved from one legal entity to another. They get free speech rights just like a human.
To see the fallacy, if I owned $400,000 of Bitcoin for 5 years and sold it, it also is taxed as capitol gains. That Bitcoin has never paid a penny of tax in those 5 years.
The Microsoft stock tax isn't cheap because Microsoft paid tax. If it were the reason, Bitcoin would be taxed as normal income (same for artwork and more). It is taxed like it is because wealthier people hire damn good lobbyists.
There is some logic to the value creation of investing in equity or debt in companies that employ people, make things, etc., vs. speculative assets, but just because capital gains were broadened for administrative reasons isn't a strong argument for changing it in your example of an investment in Microsoft.
You want to encourage people to invest and save. You'd also prefer they save in assets like gold, Bitcoin, art, and etc. It's much better for society than turning a utility like housing into a savings vehicle. If housing goes up 5x quickly, you have a big problem. If Bitcoin or gold does it, who cares.
You also want to promote foreign investment. I like knowing that Dutch pension funds subsidize my drug-fueled sexcations in Amsterdam.
Those are the best kind of Sexcations. How many theater performances did you partake in?
None that I can recall but I do drink too much while on vacation. I also have a problem with falling in love with prostitutes and waitresses. I'm starting to think these two issues are related.
None that I can recall but I do drink too much while on vacation. I also have a problem with falling in love with prostitutes and waitresses. I'm starting to think these two issues are related.
I like this guy.
Franz, were you a Cooler poster on the Rivals site?
I've been on and off the different incarnations of the board since it was OG peegs in the early 2000s. I was probably dialing in via AOL to see if Mike Davis landed Greg Odom. Spoiler alert: he did not. I was never really a regular poster on the WC.
Why should you owe taxes to employees who Microsoft is already paying tax on and income tax, to which your investment has already been paying tax on?
Right, they shouldn't owe employee taxes.
Look at what we now value over a wage. We value investment because we think it drives investment. Now we value tips over wages. Why? That's what started this. Why are wage earners bottom dwellers who need to be punished compared to investors and those who make tips?
Just because I love quoting the noted socialist Abe Lincoln, "Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration. Capital has its rights, which are as worthy of protection as any other rights."
Now I really don't go as far as Lincoln at all. I don't mind corporate investment being taxed lower for long-term assets. I think it is good. But so much investment is in crap that really doesn't create wealth, not in the societal sense. This is something Ed (Greetree/Ironworks) and I discussed in a thread long ago. As conservative as he was, he was the one who pointed out that production was important in generating wealth. Be it food, natural resources, movies, engines, etc. So let's reward people who buy stock in companies that produce something. Not in artwork from artists dead for 160 years. The more money invested there, the more people are hired, and the more money flows throughout the economy.
So many investment opportunities today seem to be, "buy an NFT, and we'll make sure nothing flows down to anyone who has ever worked a day."
And back to the original point, what is the reason for telling a couple making $300,000 they can deduct $25,000 in tips but the straight wage person cannot? It seems we are sending a message the opposite of Mr Lincoln, better to have gambled on Bitcoin for a year than to work. Work is inferior.
@franz-znarf but Microsoft is a totally different legal entity. Money moved from one legal entity to another. They get free speech rights just like a human.
To see the fallacy, if I owned $400,000 of Bitcoin for 5 years and sold it, it also is taxed as capitol gains. That Bitcoin has never paid a penny of tax in those 5 years.
The Microsoft stock tax isn't cheap because Microsoft paid tax. If it were the reason, Bitcoin would be taxed as normal income (same for artwork and more). It is taxed like it is because wealthier people hire damn good lobbyists.
There is some logic to the value creation of investing in equity or debt in companies that employ people, make things, etc., vs. speculative assets, but just because capital gains were broadened for administrative reasons isn't a strong argument for changing it in your example of an investment in Microsoft.
You want to encourage people to invest and save. You'd also prefer they save in assets like gold, Bitcoin, art, and etc. It's much better for society than turning a utility like housing into a savings vehicle. If housing goes up 5x quickly, you have a big problem. If Bitcoin or gold does it, who cares.
You also want to promote foreign investment. I like knowing that Dutch pension funds subsidize my drug-fueled sexcations in Amsterdam.
Those are the best kind of Sexcations. How many theater performances did you partake in?
None that I can recall but I do drink too much while on vacation. I also have a problem with falling in love with prostitutes and waitresses. I'm starting to think these two issues are related.
What some call a problem, others consider a gift.
Why should you owe taxes to employees who Microsoft is already paying tax on and income tax, to which your investment has already been paying tax on?
Right, they shouldn't owe employee taxes.
Look at what we now value over a wage. We value investment because we think it drives investment. Now we value tips over wages. Why? That's what started this. Why are wage earners bottom dwellers who need to be punished compared to investors and those who make tips?
Just because I love quoting the noted socialist Abe Lincoln, "Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the higher consideration. Capital has its rights, which are as worthy of protection as any other rights."
Now I really don't go as far as Lincoln at all. I don't mind corporate investment being taxed lower for long-term assets. I think it is good. But so much investment is in crap that really doesn't create wealth, not in the societal sense. This is something Ed (Greetree/Ironworks) and I discussed in a thread long ago. As conservative as he was, he was the one who pointed out that production was important in generating wealth. Be it food, natural resources, movies, engines, etc. So let's reward people who buy stock in companies that produce something. Not in artwork from artists dead for 160 years. The more money invested there, the more people are hired, and the more money flows throughout the economy.
So many investment opportunities today seem to be, "buy an NFT, and we'll make sure nothing flows down to anyone who has ever worked a day."
And back to the original point, what is the reason for telling a couple making $300,000 they can deduct $25,000 in tips but the straight wage person cannot? It seems we are sending a message the opposite of Mr Lincoln, better to have gambled on Bitcoin for a year than to work. Work is inferior.
People are just reacting to the monetary system. The reason labor is being devalued is because the money supply expands around 8% annually. Most people are lucky to get a 3-4% raise, which means if productivity growth isn't 5% annually people are falling behind. Your examples of NFT or Bitcoin are poor examples because their market caps are small. A better example is the U.S. stock market. The total value of the U.S. stock markets are around 70 trillion. They were around 35 trillion at the end of 2019. Somehow the stock markets doubled in 5 years while having a global pandemic 🙄 Or it doubled because they greatly expanded the money supply and people who are closest to the money and own scarce assets benefit the most. Labor of course gets destroyed. Bitcoin is an innovation trying to fix the problem you're complaining about.
We value investment because we think it drives investment
We value investment because we think it drives growth and creation.
. Now we value tips over wages.
Tipping culture is out of control, but I see two benefits: 1) historically, the government wasn't able to tax tips at all (cash) and given the payment transformation and reporting, those relying upon tipping have been significantly impacted by the taxability of those tips; therefore, 2) it's a way to reduce the federal tax liability for hospitality workers, among others. My guess is that many states still require taxation and there could be payroll tax liability associated with those amounts.
Chat GPT has this to say:
Practical takeaway
- Full benefit = low-to-mid income tipped workers
- Little/no benefit if:
- You earn very little (already pay no income tax)
- Or too much (phaseout kicks in
So this seems designed to help one of the key groups you see as impacted or unfairly treated, no?
But so much investment is in crap that really doesn't create wealth, not in the societal sense.
I follow this logic and can get behind limitations. I think the hardest part is trying to determine what does/doesn't create value as that will be subjective, not objective. Therefore, it becomes politicized, lobbied, etc. For example, I could argue real estate investing doesn't create "value" but I can also argue that it does.
Even things like BTC and NFTs - there are people employed by and who work in those industries. Same with Art work. Don't auction houses employ all sorts of people, even down to janitors, security firms, etc.?
Even things like BTC and NFTs - there are people employed by and who work in those industries. Same with Art work. Don't auction houses employ all sorts of people, even down to janitors, security firms, etc.?
So do casinos. I hit my 20 event parlay tonight for a ton of money, I pay full freight. Admittedly because I can't convert that into long term. Or if I hit the lottery.
But the long term question illustrates the issue. Why reward long term investments. It is to stop instability in the market. Why do we care about instability in Bitcoin or Rembrandts.
Now the catch for Bitcoin and Rembrandt is that for many of us, the gains tax on collectables is higher than our rate. But not at top. Musk et al aee rewarded for collectables. Why?
You also mentioned tips were not always taxed. Well, they were supposed to be. Increased credit card usage forced it. It isn't like we changed the law. The law we need to change is on tipping. Soon your doctor and lawyer will have tip jars.
Someone mentioned flat rates long ago in the thread. I might suggest we decide what it costs for one American adult to live, and one American child. For illustration, $25,000 and $15,000. So a single adult gets a $25,000 exemption, two adults and a child get $65,000. Now apply one simple flat tax on wages, tips, and collectables above that amount. I can be talked into government bonds and long term capital gains being lower. But we have equalized the playing field, everyone is taxed on their profit.
Most people are lucky to get a 3-4% raise, which means if productivity growth isn't 5% annually people are falling behind
They should care about real wage growth, right? If real wages are growing, that means the average increase is more than offsetting inflation. That was one of the positives under the last Trump administration compared to Obama's and that eroded under Biden. It seemed to have reversed course in 2025, but we'll see if it holds this year.
Most people are lucky to get a 3-4% raise, which means if productivity growth isn't 5% annually people are falling behind
They should care about real wage growth, right? If real wages are growing, that means the average increase is more than offsetting inflation. That was one of the positives under the last Trump administration compared to Obama's and that eroded under Biden. It seemed to have reversed course in 2025, but we'll see if it holds this year.