Interesting Interview with Phil Mickelson

[drjeff]

Sports Illustrated says he makes about $60 million per year in endorsements and winnings. He has an estimated net worth pushing $200 million. Mitt Romney managed to show $14 million of capital gains income off of a similar net worth. So yeah, Mickelson's income is mostly taxed as regular income. Once he's paid the tax, that wealth then generates income that's taxed at a much lower rate FOR NOW ATLEAST. You seemed to be claiming otherwise.

Fixed in for 'ya

 

[Puck it]

What was I claiming? His regular income is taxed at the higher rate not his invesment income. I am quite sure he has investment income too, who wouldn't with a net income like that. BTW, capital gains is not just for rich people, there are quite a few regular folk taking advantage of it in their retiremnet years.

I am just tired of people complaining that rich people don't pay enough. Yes, a multimillionaire can afford to pay more but a well off wage earner is taking on the cheek with these comments. This income bracket extends down someone making in the low six figure range. And 50% of that is alot less then his 50%.

I am also tired of hearing people say that they would be happy paying that much if they made that much money. I say "bull$hit"!!!!!!

Okay, I am ranting now, especiallay after what I heard on the radio about Worcester Sttate adding a new fee, pedestrain access fee. A f'ing fee to walk on campus!!!!! When is this going to end. Next stop Greece!!!!!


Just a little theory on increasing taxes on society. See graph below. There comes a point were it does not help.

 

[drjeff]

What was I claiming? His regular income is taxed at the higher rate not his invesment income. I am quite sure he has investment income too, who wouldn't with a net income like that. BTW, capital gains is not just for rich people, there are quite a few regular folk taking advantage of it in their retiremnet years.

I am just tired of people complaining that rich people don't pay enough. Yes, a multimillionaire can afford to pay more but a well off wage earner is taking on the cheek with these comments. This income bracket extends down someone making in the low six figure range. And 50% of that is alot less then his 50%.

I am also tired of hearing people say that they would be happy paying that much if they made that much money. I say "bull$hit"!!!!!!

Okay, I am ranting now, especiallay after what I heard on the radio about Worcester Sttate adding a new fee, pedestrain access fee. A f'ing fee to walk on campus!!!!! When is this going to end. Next stop Greece!!!!!


Just a little theory on increasing taxes on society. See graph below. There comes a point were it does not help.

+1!!!

Everyone seems to enjoy bitching about what they'd feel like they'd do if it was their $$. The problem is, it's not their money. If the person making more is paying what they're legally required to pay, then great.

If one really want's to talk about "fairness" and taxes, then let's scrap the entire existing tax code (all however many million pages it's grown to) and either implement a flat tax or a VAT style consumption tax. Otherwise all that's being talked about is "Robin Hood style" tactics

 

[RootDKJ]

Income taxes are immoral. Nobody but me and people I voluntarily designate should benefit from my labor.

 

[mattchuck2]

I'm pretty sure we're on the left side of the Laffer curve and have been for quite awhile. Tax rates, especially the rates on rich people, are at historic lows. The top bracket was 90% under Eisenhower and 70% under Reagan. People who complain about this are generally just Scrooge-like figures who love to hoard money, and think that they should be able to keep every penny they earn.

Problem is, the people who have the most money usually benefit most from the use of the commons. Take Phil, for instance. Every tournament he plays is protected by police. All of the fans who basically pay his salary get to the event on public roads. His sponsors can afford to pay him because they benefit from patents enforced by the government (in addition to any tax breaks those companies receive). When he flies all over the country, air traffic controllers keep his plane safe. Hell, at least one of the courses he plays (Bethpage) is straight up owned by the government.

People like to think that the government is just some money pit that you pay a bunch of money to and never get anything in return, but that's just not the case (which is the reason that nobody ever advocates specific spending cuts). The government is there to help people (regardless of what Reagan said), and a rich person like Phil gets a lot more help than someone living in the Bronx or Appalachia. It's only fair that he pays a little more in taxes.

[/politics]

 

[Warp Daddy]

Blahblahblah, Phil gets paid hansomely for PLAYING A DAMN GAME !!! shaddup or go try some other nation where u think u can do better !

Tax codes as Matt has claimed have actually been substantially lowered in favor of the extremely wealthy over the last 5 decades .

Quit yer bitchin , the US is still the greatest country in the world and OUR individual largesse results notonlyfrom our own effortBUT more importantly from an accident of birth, being here in the US


Pay up , shut up or move on to some other country .

End of rant , putting soapbox away and ducking for cover

 

[Warp Daddy]

Blahblahblah, Phil gets paid hansomely for PLAYING A DAMN GAME !!! shaddup or go try some other nation where u think u can do better !

Tax codes as Matt has claimed have actually been substantially lowered in favor of the extremely wealthy over the last 5 decades .

Quit yer bitchin , the US is still the greatest country in the world and OUR individual largesse results notonlyfrom our own effortBUT more importantly from an accident of birth, being here in the US


Pay up , shut up or move on to some other country .

End of rant , putting soapbox away and ducking for cover

 

[drjeff]

Last year the federal government spent just over 29k per taxpaying household

Unless your household paid more than 29k in federal income taxes last year, your household was a liability to the federal government in terms of spending and you should be thanking folks like Phil Mickelson for paying far more to the federal treasury than the government spent on your household. Basically, using this "fairshare" talking point that's popular amongst some viewpoints these days, he's paying in actual dollars far more than his fairshare.

Using Geoff's Sports Illustrated numbers of Phil's estimated annual earnings of 60,000,000 via endorsements and prize money, NOT investment income, he'd be looking at a tax bill outright of about 24,000,000 - now i'm going to guess that he's got some good accountants and financial planners, so lets say that they get his federal tax bill down to 12,000,000 (20%)- based on per capita household spending by the government, Phil is paying enough so that about 415 other households don't have to pay any federal income taxes. One can argue all they want about the morality of paying one's fairshare and what exactly one's "fairshare" should be, but the facts are that unless a household is paying 29k in federal taxes right now, and there are millions that aren't these days, they are a financial liability right now. And how many of these households will over their entire adult lifetime end up as a literal financial ability to the federal government vs. actually paying their "fairshare" interms of covering their costs to the government??

I say let Phil keep the money that he's legally entitled too. Having seen and read about what him and his wife Amy do for many charitable foundations across the country, I'm guessing that those extra dollars will end up making a bigger impact when used by those charitable foundations than by the federal gov't

 

[Puck it]

Last year the federal government spent just over 29k per taxpaying household

Unless your household paid more than 29k in federal income taxes last year, your household was a liability to the federal government in terms of spending and you should be thanking folks like Phil Mickelson for paying far more to the federal treasury than the government spent on your household. Basically, using this "fairshare" talking point that's popular amongst some viewpoints these days, he's paying in actual dollars far more than his fairshare.

Using Geoff's Sports Illustrated numbers of Phil's estimated annual earnings of 60,000,000 via endorsements and prize money, NOT investment income, he'd be looking at a tax bill outright of about 24,000,000 - now i'm going to guess that he's got some good accountants and financial planners, so lets say that they get his federal tax bill down to 12,000,000 (20%)- based on per capita household spending by the government, Phil is paying enough so that about 415 other households don't have to pay any federal income taxes. One can argue all they want about the morality of paying one's fairshare and what exactly one's "fairshare" should be, but the facts are that unless a household is paying 29k in federal taxes right now, and there are millions that aren't these days, they are a financial liability right now. And how many of these households will over their entire adult lifetime end up as a literal financial ability to the federal government vs. actually paying their "fairshare" interms of covering their costs to the government??

I say let Phil keep the money that he's legally entitled too. Having seen and read about what him and his wife Amy do for many charitable foundations across the country, I'm guessing that those extra dollars will end up making a bigger impact when used by those charitable foundations than by the federal gov't

+1

 

[Puck it]

I'm pretty sure we're on the left side of the Laffer curve and have been for quite awhile. Tax rates, especially the rates on rich people, are at historic lows. The top bracket was 90% under Eisenhower and 70% under Reagan. People who complain about this are generally just Scrooge-like figures who love to hoard money, and think that they should be able to keep every penny they earn.

Problem is, the people who have the most money usually benefit most from the use of the commons. Take Phil, for instance. Every tournament he plays is protected by police. All of the fans who basically pay his salary get to the event on public roads. His sponsors can afford to pay him because they benefit from patents enforced by the government (in addition to any tax breaks those companies receive). When he flies all over the country, air traffic controllers keep his plane safe. Hell, at least one of the courses he plays (Bethpage) is straight up owned by the government.

People like to think that the government is just some money pit that you pay a bunch of money to and never get anything in return, but that's just not the case (which is the reason that nobody ever advocates specific spending cuts). The government is there to help people (regardless of what Reagan said), and a rich person like Phil gets a lot more help than someone living in the Bronx or Appalachia. It's only fair that he pays a little more in taxes.

[/politics]

I don't complain about paying taxes. It is how it is used by the entitlees. Cut the f'ing budget just like we all have to do when our income goes down. Take the friggin' credit card away from the gov't.

 

[Puck it]

Blahblahblah, Phil gets paid hansomely for PLAYING A DAMN GAME !!! shaddup or go try some other nation where u think u can do better !

Tax codes as Matt has claimed have actually been substantially lowered in favor of the extremely wealthy over the last 5 decades .

Quit yer bitchin , the US is still the greatest country in the world and OUR individual largesse results notonlyfrom our own effortBUT more importantly from an accident of birth, being here in the US


Pay up , shut up or move on to some other country .

End of rant , putting soapbox away and ducking for cover

Careful, I will take you into the trees at Titus!


BTW, it is not the greastest country in the world anymore. It used to be though. My father would be ashamed if he were alive still.

 

[RootDKJ]

I'm pretty sure we're on the left side of the Laffer curve and have been for quite awhile. Tax rates, especially the rates on rich people, are at historic lows. The top bracket was 90% under Eisenhower and 70% under Reagan. People who complain about this are generally just Scrooge-like figures who love to hoard money, and think that they should be able to keep every penny they earn.

Exactly how much of what I earn should I be allowed to keep?

 

[ctenidae]

I don't complain about paying taxes. It is how it is used by the entitlees. Cut the f'ing budget just like we all have to do when our income goes down. Take the friggin' credit card away from the gov't.

+1/2- there are a lot of things the government spends a lot of money on that I'd rather they didn't. Entitlements are a problem, but not all of them are bad. I don't like paying taxes any more than anyone else, but I really don't like how they're spent a lot of the time.

 

[AdironRider]

Can we stop arguing that the majority of his income is from capital gains.

Dude made like 40+ million last year, top ten athlete in terms of income in the world, thats all taxed at the top federal rate, not capital gains. Were talking sponsorship deals, tourney wins, etc. Athletes arent exactly big rollers like hedge fund guys working on carried interest.

Im sure some of it was taxed at that rate, but unlike Buffett, Romney, etc its a much smaller percentage, or effectively a drop in the bucket.

And who cares that he makes money playing golf, or as the voice on the other end of a sex line, he earned the money. If playing a game was so easy wed all be Phil Mickelson. Any argument otherwise just reeks of jealousy.

 

[JimG.]

We are treading a fine line of politics but we are all playing nice.

Just a reminder, carry on.

 

[ScottySkis]

All I know is grandfather opened a pharmacy in the 60s in the Bronx, and gave a lot back to the community and his employees, now my boss who is rich gives nothing back and loves it. It is business but if you give back people are more productive, any good ones stay, no retirement pay for any one and most people in the office work 70 an average a week, not me just comparison.

 

[Warp Daddy]

Ok mods i guess we ALL have to Agree to Disagree and thats OK with me cuz i KNOW im Right :wink:

 

[mattchuck2]

Exactly how much of what I earn should I be allowed to keep?

The amount that's determined by tax rates set by the elected officials in your city/state/country. And if you don't like that amount, then you can vote in people that will set a lower rate.

 

[ScottySkis]

The amount that's determined by tax rates set by the elected officials in your city/state/country. And if you don't like that amount, then you can vote in people that will set a lower rate.

Okay I vote for Ron Paul but republicans stopped that from happening.

 

[mattchuck2]

Okay I vote for Ron Paul but republicans stopped that from happening.

Don't feel bad. Most of the people I vote for don't get elected either.