From: jfr@RedBrick.COM
Newsgroups: or.politics,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.elections,ba.politics,co.politics,ne.politics,nj.politics,ny.politics,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: VOTE, BABY, VOTE!
Date: 12 Nov 92 02:29:45 GMT
Organization: Red Brick Systems, Los Gatos, CA

In article <1992Nov11.003442.19548@ucsu.Colorado.EDU> fcrary@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Frank Crary) writes:
>In article <1992Nov9.190520.21494@wts.com> jbf@wts.com (Jens B. Fiederer) writes:
>>I think in this case he was repeating something he had taken
>>for granted for a long time, which is why he didn't check it.  
>
>I'm afraid that's more or less the case: I was _very_ sure that regular
>income taxes are paid on capital gains (and I was completely correct in
>thinking this.) I also assumed from what I had read, that the 
>"capital gains tax" was a seperate thing. (For example, I've seen
>editorials calling, in the same breath, for the elimination of the
>capital gains tax and for capital gains to be treated "just like any
>other income." Such argments don't really make any sense if "capital
>gains tax" just means paying normal income tax on capital gains. I
>guess I should have known better than to assume newspaper editorials
>were rational...) To confuse things more, someone posted that you
>did not pay taxes twice on capital gains and that capital gains 
>weren't taxed as normal income (or, at least, that was my understanding
>of the post.) I contradicted this, since I _thought_ the former
>was incorrect and I _knew_ the later was. In any case, I was
>(as has been pointed out in e-mail) in error: There is no 
>double taxation on capital gains.

  Thank you Frank for your retraction.  You have made a lot of 
  statements about taxes and policies, some of which are correct,
  some of which are incorrect and some of which are debatable.
  My only reason for criticizing you so long and so loudly was
  to get you to recognize the importance of trying to be accurate.

  If you are posting an opinion, say so, and no one will flame.
  If you are posting a fact, it had better be factual.  If someone
  contradicts you, take the time to check it out and see if you
  are right.

  My real complaint is that when you responded to my first
  post on this issue, you restated a clearly erroneous
  position and yet you had obviously done no further research
  to find out whether you or I were correct.  If you had, you 
  wouldn't have looked so foolish restating something that was
  simply wrong.  I am sorry you chose to not respond directly
  to my posts.  Maybe the flame level was too high.  However, it
  is good that you have now corrected your misunderstanding, both
  for yourself and for the rest of the world who have been 
  "listening".

  In the past, when articles called for the repeal of the "capital
  gains tax", they meant the special treatment capital gains received.
  Today, repealing the "capital gains tax" would mean reimposing 
  special treatment by eliminating any tax on capital gains.

  My post quite clearly stated that capital gains are not taxed
  twice, they are taxed just like regular income and that's it.

  Jon
Newsgroups: or.politics,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.democrats.d,alt.politics.elections,ba.politics,co.politics,ne.politics,nj.politics,ny.politics,talk.politics.misc