TexasCHLforum.com

The Mad Moderate wrote: So because it's his company (publicly traded btw) he should be absolved of taxes because they were already payed? Sorry that logic wouldn't hold water with a first grader.

Have you ever tried explaining taxes to a first grader? Tell one you will pay him $5 for raking leaves and then only give them $3 or $4 dollars and tell them the $1 or $2 dollars you kept are a tax for maintenance and upkeep or replacement of the rake they used and see if they think any tax is fair.

Now, as adults we realize that a tax of some kind is necessary. However, it is no concern of anyone how much money I am capable of earning for my family. This question of how much does someone need is ridiculous.

The Mad Moderate wrote:So because it's his company (publicly traded btw) he should be absolved of taxes because they were already payed? Sorry that logic wouldn't hold water with a first grader.

You're absolutely correct that some of us know more about business and accounting and taxes than a first grader.

Here's a proposal. If dividends are to be taxed like wage income to the individual, then dividends should be an expense that's treated the same as wages to the company. On the other hand, if dividends are paid from after tax corporate profits, as they are now, then the stockholder should pay the same income tax on her share of the already taxed profits that a homemaker pays on after tax wages her spouse gives her to buy groceries.

I think most of the liberal eco-thought stems from the fact that people view wealth as a fixed amount commodity. That's where you get the whole "Look at that guy hoarding all the wealth for himself while there's none left for the rest of us." tirade. It's one of those things simple folks understand well yet it sails over the heads of some of us who should know better.