raumdeuter:


Create your own tax shelter too if its paining you

Its always easy to know the hypocrite and those who are selfish in their personal lives yet claiming others are selfish

Does this work with all things people complain about?
Ex.
For those complaining about corruption in Nigeria, should they just strive to get into power so they can be corrupt as well?

I hope you realize how ridiculous your point is.

raumdeuter:


You seem to have a problem with American democracy?
SCOTUS say let each state decide, States are deciding you still have a problem with it
Are you just a whiner in life?

If the majority of State A want abortion they should have it, If the majority in state B dont want it they shouldnt be forced to have it

How difficult is that

I have to say you lack basic understanding

Gotta admit, it really seems you don't have any core principles.
You seem to make up sometimes contradictory arguments to suit whatever you're trying to argue that minute.

IjeBos:


Does this work with all things people complain about?
Ex.
For those complaining about corruption in Nigeria, should they just strive to get into power so they can be corrupt as well?

I hope you realize how ridiculous your point is.

Whoever is complaining about corruption and not a hypocrite, I will assume would avoid corruption in his own personal life

You take tax cut but you are bittching endlessly about those who take theirs

Lemme ask, Why are you not paying 90% of your income in taxes? You will probably say you pay what the law state. Yet you have a problem with others doing the same

raumdeuter:


You invest 100k in stocks, your stocks rise to 150K but you have not sold it, why should you pay taxes on gains and profit you havent sold/realized?

And what happens if the 150K portfolio comes down to 50K?

So you leverage your newly acquired value to obtain other positions, why shouldn't your increase not be taxed?

IjeBos:


Gotta admit, it really seems you don't have any core principles.
You seem to make up sometimes contradictory arguments to suit whatever you're trying to argue that minute.

Let every state decide what they want. I will think thats simple enough

I genuinely dont know how to make this simpler to you.

I dont know 2 people who wont understand the sentence "Let each state decide"

LordReed:


So you leverage your newly acquired value to obtain other positions, why shouldn't your increase not be taxed?

You can leverage it till its 10m until you cash it out its still unrealized. and stupidd to tax
Invest 100k in Tesla its now worth 100M. That 100M is not yours until you liquidate and cash it out

raumdeuter:


The majority get their will when its on the ballot and they choose as they want in their different states. The majority in deep red Kansas wanted abortion and they are getting it. That is Democracy

I don't think IjeBos understands what he is saying 😂
Kansas voted for abortion yet he is talking about majority. He thinks the liberals in New York should have a say on what Kansas should do about abortion.

raumdeuter:


Let every state decide what they want. I will think thats simple enough

I genuinely dont know how to make this simpler to you.

I dont know 2 people who wont understand the sentence "Let each state decide"

Why limit it to the state when it comes to personal freedoms?
Why not just let each person decide about their own bodies?

This states rights argument when it comes to Personal freedoms is quite odd to me. You argue that others shouldn't impose their views on a Federal level but are comfortable enforcing your views on Personal freedoms to others on a state level. Why don't you allow each city to decide if they want to allow abortion or better yet each neighborhood. Explain why you stop at the state level.

bemeruca:


I don't think IjeBos understands what he is saying 😂
Kansas voted for abortion yet he is talking about majority. He thinks the liberals in New York should have a say on what Kansas should do about abortion.

If you can find an easier way to explain. I will really appreciate

SCOTUS said individual states should decide. We are diverse as a nation and have different beliefs, personally I dont really care if you abort. I am actually in support of abortion than for you to birth a child you cannot love or care for. I don't want to be burdened to care for bemeruca's child. Selfish me only want to care for my own kids and not the other guys child
But that is my personal belief

I have met people who believe its murder, I don't but I respect their opinion and if majority in their state view it that way, then why should I enforce my views on them?

Good article on the Buy/Borrow/Die strategy.

The United States federal income tax contains a flaw: Because it reaches capital gains only after a “realization” event, it permits owners of highly appreciated assets to defer their tax liability by holding them and refusing to sell. Worse yet, easily available debt allows those owners to consume from their “unrealized” gains while continuing to defer tax. As Professor Edward McCaffery identified in 2012, consumption and deferral through secured borrowing, coupled with the stepped-up basis death benefit from section 1014 of the Internal Revenue Code, create an opportunity for individuals to avoid lifetime income tax and net estate tax. This strategy, known as “buy/borrow/ die,” contributes to consumption inequality and, by extension, America’s growing wealth inequality.
https://nyulawreview.org/issues/volume-99-number-2/taxing-borrow-in-buy-borrow-die/

Quicker read
https://www.dcfpi.org/all/how-wealthy-households-use-a-buy-borrow-die-strategy-to-avoid-taxes-on-their-growing-fortunes/

raumdeuter:


You can leverage it till its 10m until you cash it out its still unrealized. and stupidd to tax
Invest 100k in Tesla its now worth 100M. That 100M is not yours until you liquidate and cash it out

I think if it can be leveraged then it deserves to be taxed. Any asset that can be leveraged should be taxable because you can't be acquiring value and not be taxed.

raumdeuter:


You seem to have a problem with American democracy?
SCOTUS say let each state decide, States are deciding you still have a problem with it
Are you just a whiner in life?

If the majority of State A want abortion they should have it, If the majority in state B dont want it they shouldnt be forced to have it

How difficult is that

I have to say you lack basic understanding

IjeBos, notice the pattern? One day you will have agency (common sense)

IjeBos:


Why limit it to the state when it comes to personal freedoms?
Why not just let each person decide about their own bodies?

This states rights argument when it comes to Personal freedoms is quite odd to me. You argue that others shouldn't impose their views on a Federal level but are comfortable enforcing your views on Personal freedoms to others on a state level. Why don't you allow each city to decide if they want to allow abortion or better yet each neighborhood. Explain why you stop at the state level.

Can you also decide to kill yourself since its your personal freedom
Anti abortion argues that the baby is a separate individual and you cannot decide to kill the baby. The baby is denied that choice on what happens to it

raumdeuter:


Can you also decide to kill yourself since its your personal freedom
Anti abortion argues that the baby is a separate individual and you cannot decide to kill the baby. The baby is denied that choice on what happens to it

You didn't answer my question, let's try again.

This states rights argument when it comes to Personal freedoms is quite odd to me. You argue that others shouldn't impose their views on a Federal level but are comfortable enforcing your views on Personal freedoms to others on a state level. Why don't you allow each city to decide if they want to allow abortion or better yet each neighborhood. Explain why you stop at the state level.

LordReed:


I think if it can be leveraged then it deserves to be taxed. Any asset that can be leveraged should be taxable because you can't be acquiring value and not be taxed.

Then tax the leverage. Not everyone choose to leverage it.

If you have a house for personal use, and your neighbor choose to use his own house as a museum or cinema to generate income. It doesnt make sense to treat both as the same and impose business taxes on you because YOU CAN use your house for business too, what makes sense is to tax you the moment you decide to, not tax what you havent done

IjeBos:


You didn't answer my question, let's try again.

Why dont you let each individual set their own traffic rules, set their own medical laws, set their own tax codes, and abide by their own laws

raumdeuter:


Your own bias won't let you see beyond it, you have been programmed to believe anything Democrats say is good and the other side is bad
You know its true. any position the democrats take whether reasonable or not, you support by default

If Trump gets out tomorrow, you like other Democrats will start hailing him. Its never about the content of his policies its about the hatred for the other side

Thats why people who are benefitting from Trump tax cuts where you can voluntarily choose to pay more are not doing so yet still criticizing it

I give up! Now you wanna change the subject to contents of his policies when I was asking you to defend his personality as a fraudster, felon and an election rigger? So it'd democrats hatred that turned him into those right?

I know you are better than all these when you have facts to defend your arguments and stick to point of view.

You don't know me well to know how I think and make up my mind on issues. Unlike you, I never hold a final stand on any subject, I am always opened to be convinced otherwise with new facts and evidence or sound logic. But I am smart enough to separate shaft from wheat. So don't expect me to accept your merry go round narration against facts. When you explained the issue of unrealized gains Harris is proposing, I agreed with you that it doesn't make common sense... Now don't tell me to accept Trump is just a same of the same politicians when the facts says otherwise, and then blame my refusal to agree on being a programmed robot.

Have a nice day!

raumdeuter:


Then tax the leverage. Not everyone choose to leverage it.

If you have a house for personal use, and your neighbor choose to use his own house as a museum or cinema to generate income. It doesnt make sense to treat both as the same and impose business taxes on you because YOU CAN use your house for business too, what makes sense is to tax you the moment you decide to, not tax what you havent done

If you build a residential building in a commercial zone you should expect commercial level taxes and rates.

IjeBos:


You should ask any of them if they even have unrealized capital gains.
The proposal is to tax unrealized capital gains of people with assets over 100 million.

One of the problems with the current system is that some of these people just borrow money off that unrealized gain. So they are never taxed on it. Someone like me would have to realize that gain (sell the asset), then get taxed if I wanted to use that money.

I don't think a lot of people here understand the depths a lot of wealthy people go to not to pay taxes. My boy was telling me about how his Bank has financial instruments for MD level and above employees to help them pay less taxes. Of of them was "creating losses" to help them offset their taxable income.

I mean isn't it clear? Assets are taxed based on value. If the asset value depreciates then so should the tax and vice versa.

LordReed:
If you build a residential building in a commercial zone you should expect commercial level taxes and rates.

You don't have to build in a commercial area to use it for commercial use. Your car can be for personal use and will be treated as it, YOU CAN also decide to use it to make money and drive it as Uber, Until you do that, you shouldnt be subjected to Uber treatments

It doesn't make sense to treat things based on what they can, but what they are

You can become a billionaire, should I start billing you like a billionaire now? You can also become a criminal, should you be jailed like a criminal now because you can become one

ObaIgwe1:


I give up! Now you wanna change the subject to contents of his policies when I was asking you to defend his personality as a fraudster, felon and an election rigger? So it'd democrats hatred that turned him into those right?

I know you are better than all these when you have facts to defend your arguments and stick to point of view.

You don't know me well to know how I think and make up my mind on issues. Unlike you, I never hold a final stand on any subject, I am always opened to be convinced otherwise with new facts and evidence or sound logic. But I am smart enough to separate shaft from wheat. So don't expect me to accept your merry go round narration against facts. When you explained the issue of unrealized gains Harris is proposing, I agreed with you that it doesn't make common sense... Now don't tell me to accept Trump is just a same of the same politicians when the facts says otherwise, and then blame my refusal to agree on being a programmed robot.

Have a nice day!

What are the Trump policies that you are against? You started with Trump is a liar, a fornicator, a cheat this and that, Things almost everyone does and until I showed you others who lied, divorced, cheated etc then it became he is an election denier, which many politicians have done

You said he is a fraudster, I asked who has he defrauded because there are laws against fraud, an election rigger, which election has he rigged?

To you is there anything good about Trump? whether his personality or policies? No. Because he represent everything bad to you and the media

raumdeuter:


Why dont you let each individual set their own traffic rules, set their own medical laws, set their own tax codes, and abide by their own laws

You are the one arguing Fed. elected officials shouldn't push their views on others when it comes to Personal Freedoms.
But you think state elected officials should be able to push their views on others.

I'm asking you to explain the difference. Esp. why you believe it should stop at states and not cities/towns or even neighborhood councils.
You seem not to be able to answer so you're obfuscating as usual.

raumdeuter:


You don't have to build in a commercial area to use it for commercial use. Your car can be for personal use and will be treated as it, YOU CAN also decide to use it to make money and drive it as Uber, Until you do that, you shouldnt be subjected to Uber treatments

It doesn't make sense to treat things based on what they can, but what they are

You can become a billionaire, should I start billing you like a billionaire now? You can also become a criminal, should you be jailed like a criminal now because you can become one

It is not simple what they can but value. Why shouldn't the increase in value be taxable?

LordReed:


It is not simple what they can but value. Why shouldn't the increase in value be taxable?

Increase in value is only real when you have cashed it out/realized it

That you have 100m in Tesla stocks mean nothing until you sell it. That value when they realize it, then tax it

You then argue they might not cash it but they can leverage it, Then tax it when they leverage it. You don't take action on what one CAN do

IjeBos:


You are the one arguing Fed. elected officials shouldn't push their views on others when it comes to Personal Freedoms.
But you think state elected officials should be able to push their views on others.

I'm asking you to explain the difference. Esp. why you believe it should stop at states and not cities/towns or even neighborhood councils.
You seem not to be able to answer so you're obfuscating as usual.

The United States. States have different traditions and what works in one state will not work in another. They are leaving it to residents of the state to

raumdeuter:


The United States. States have different traditions and what works in one state will not work in another. They are leaving it to residents of the state to

Tradition is usually used to help people in Power rationalize their Power when no other rationale exists. To fall back on tradition is weak.
It's clear you don't really know why you believe it.

IjeBos:


Tradition is usually used to help people in Power rationalize their Power when no other rationale exists. To fall back on tradition is weak.
It's clear you don't really know why you believe it.

Its not my responsibility to dictate or rationalize peoples traditions. They have their belief and traditions and I have mine. Mine does not invalidate theirs. In a few months most families in US will celebrate Thanksgiving, Some will celebrate Hannukah and some will do Diwali. while some wont do any. Because its not part of their traditions

If they want abortion, they are free to do so and if they do not they are also free to choose

raumdeuter:


What are the Trump policies that you are against? You started with Trump is a liar, a fornicator, a cheat this and that, Things almost everyone does and until I showed you others who lied, divorced, cheated etc then it became he is an election denier, which many politicians have done

You said he is a fraudster, I asked who has he defrauded because there are laws against fraud, an election rigger, which election has he rigged?

To you is there anything good about Trump? whether his personality or policies? No. Because he represent everything bad to you and the media

Go back to our conversations from the start, they are there. I have always listed all the wrongs I see in Trump from the start but you always pick the ones you can defend and leave the other ones that are indefensible.

I am not debating Trump or Kamala's policies with you. The 1st most important thing to me, is to ask about the personality or character of the person making the policies. Of what use are policies I agree with when I cannot trust the person making the policy to do it?

No I am not one of those who just accept the message without checking the credibility of the messenger.

BTW, I have not taken time to read Trump's project 2025 beyond those I hear or read from the media. On 2 major issues always on discussion (Economy and abortion right), I have never been a supporter of Trickle-down economics agenda, Not because it's Trump proposing it, it's because I know that the greed at the top doesn't always allow anything to trickle down. While I support the bottom up and building of the middle class idea, I do not subscribe to extreme socialist agenda of the left too.

On Abortion issue, my religious faith doesn't support abortion, same also is LGBTQ, but hey, no one has ever tried to force his faith on me, so why should I define what is right and wrong for others? So yes, let everyone decide what is good for him or her as long as it doesn't disturb or affect my own faith and life. Government should also leave individuals alone to decide on that. But seriously I don't spend my energy or time debating this, I just know where I stand. This is why I focus on the personalities and the unique or interesting things they are proposing. So for me Trump has failed the personality test woefully for me to even consider any unique or interesting policy he is proposing.

NB: I am still not interested in debating their policies, I just want you to have an idea where I stand.

ObaIgwe1:
Go back to our conversations from the start, they are there. I have always listed all the wrongs I see in Trump from the start but you always pick the ones you can defend and leave the other ones that are indefensible.

That is because I don't agree with everything he does or says, Just like with everyone I know, I don't agree with everything they do or say. So I defend the ones that I agree with and leave the ones I do not. Even my own father I don't agree with everything he says or do. So why should it be different for Trump

I am not debating Trump or Kamala's policies with you. The 1st most important thing to me, is to ask about the personality or character of the person making the policies. Of what use are policies I agree with when I cannot trust the person making the policy to do it?

No I am not one of those who just accept the message without checking the credibility of the messenger.

This is another example of what we are talking about. I don't care about the personality but the policies and how it affects me.
In the holy books, God used pagans and sinners to good use, So why should I who has imperfect personality be focused on another persons impersonality to disqualify him, Trump lies, he cheats, he divorces, he is a womanizer, takes advantage of laws to benefit him. LIKE MOST OF US HAVE DONE.
He has never pretended to be otherwise, which is probably why some people like him. So why should I expect more from him than I of myself?

BTW, I have not taken time to read Trump's project 2025 beyond those I hear or read from the media. On 2 major issues always on discussion (Economy and abortion right), I have never been a supporter of Trickle-down economics agenda, Not because it's Trump proposing it, it's because I know that the greed at the top doesn't always allow anything to trickle down. While I support the bottom up and building of the middle class idea, I do not subscribe to extreme socialist agenda of the left too.

Another example in bold, How is Project 2025 attributed t Trump? Do you see it on his campaign website? He even denied it, yet you claimed "Trumps project 2025". This is another example of the media brainwashing

On Abortion issue, my religious faith doesn't support abortion, same also is LGBTQ, but hey, no one has ever tried to force his faith on me, so why should I define what is right and wrong for others? So yes, let everyone decide what is good for him or her as long as it doesn't disturb or affect my own faith and life. Government should also leave individuals alone to decide on that. But seriously I don't spend my energy or time debating this, I just know where I stand. This is why I focus on the personalities and the unique or interesting things they are proposing. So for me Trump has failed the personality test woefully for me to even consider any unique or interesting policy he is proposing.

NB: I am still not interested in debating their policies, I just want you to have an idea where I stand

I am the opposite, I dont care about abortion, I dont care about LGBT as long as its consenting adults.

Policies are what matter to me, Personality matter little to me, As a president personal life does not affect me, if he is born again, a Priest a nun or Hugh Hefner. Its the policies that affect my life not the number of women he sleeps with. He is not my priest nor my moral compass and my own personality is imperfect as well.
Trump said he has never smoked and doesnt drink, I drink. If I have as much money as Trump growing up maybe I would have had more women than him too

Why the hypocrisy of focusing on someones personal life as long as it doesnt break the law

raumdeuter:


Increase in value is only real when you have cashed it out/realized it

That you have 100m in Tesla stocks mean nothing until you sell it. That value when they realize it, then tax it

You then argue they might not cash it but they can leverage it, Then tax it when they leverage it. You don't take action on what one CAN do

OK I think I would agree, if you leverage an unrealized asset then you should be taxed.

raumdeuter:


Its not my responsibility to dictate or rationalize peoples traditions. They have their belief and traditions and I have mine. Mine does not invalidate theirs. In a few months most families in US will celebrate Thanksgiving, Some will celebrate Hannukah and some will do Diwali. while some wont do any. Because its not part of their traditions

If they want abortion, they are free to do so and if they do not they are also free to choose

You don't want to dictate people's traditions but want to dictate what they do with their bodies?
You are all over the place.

raumdeuter:


Why the hypocrisy of focusing on someones personal life as long as it doesnt break the law

You can ignore the messenger and just focus on the message or issues, good luck!. Permit me to also have the freedom to check the messenger (personality) before the message, it's all within our rights.

On the bold, you are the one being hypocritical or choosing to be blinded about it. Trump broke many laws, that is why he is now a felon - Fact and Period.