Long term capital gains are not economically more or less beneficial than incomes derived from entrepreneurs’ steadily nurturing and reinvesting into their enterprises.

I am not opposed to speculators but I’m opposed to using tax policy to favor any business model over others.
Unlike the proponents of the long term capital gains tax loopholes, I prefer our government promote transparent open markets that we all may be able to trust.
 
There was an “income averaging” provision within our income tax regulations that mitigated progressive tax rate’s excesses when applied to the filing’s year’s taxable income.

This tax reduction rewarded but was not limited to wealthy investors or those that sold their homes.  It benefitted lottery or quiz program winners, sport or entertainment figures, inventors or anyone else that hit ANY KIND of financial jackpot within the taxable year for which they were filing an income tax return.

It compensated those who were lucky or daring or devoted years for study or practice of their chosen professions.
It was of no particular benefit to those with comparatively level annual incomes; (such as a Buffett , Romney or your mailman). 

I advocate elimination of the long term capital gains loophole and restoring the income averaging,

Respectfully, Supposn

Nations’ entire production of goods and service products contribute to their GDPs but prices of individual products do not always reflect the entire goods and services that supported the production of those products.  Also individual product prices certainly do not reflect their productions’ inducement of additional goods or services productions.

All production contributes to producing nations’ gross domestic product, (GDP). The production is not statistically lost; but to the extent that production costs of globally traded goods are understated, nations’ global trade imbalances’ affects upon their GDPs are not fully attributed to global trade.

/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

For example governments often induce producers to establish their factories within their jurisdictions by granting them favorable tax considerations or providing infrastructure that’s particularly favorable to targeted enterprises. Governments and other non–profits often co-operate by favoring enterprises with research, loans of equipment, or access to their expertise. These production supports are of lesser or no cost to the favored enterprises and thus those enterprises products are lesser priced.
All of a nation’s production, (including production support that’s not reflected within produced products prices), are included within the producing nations’ GDPs. But domestic production support not included within the supported export products are not to that extent attributed as exports’ contributions to the producing nation’s GDP.

Production of products can support or induce the production of other unrelated products.
For example increasing the production rate of export goods can increase the factory’s payroll and induce increasing revenues for local beauty parlor service products. This is an additional example of exports additionally increasing the nation’s GDP but the addition is not attributed to the nation’s global trade.

[We cannot spend the same money twice. That’s why the GDP calculation formulas are reduced by the amount of the nation’s imports.  When U.S. purchasers perceiving their own individual benefits chose to purchase imported products their transaction reduces their nations’ GDPs.  Trade surpluses increase their nations’ GDPs.]

Trade surpluses ALWAYS contribute and trade deficits are ALWAYS detrimental to their nations’ GDPs.
This is baked into the formula defining and calculating GDP; it is not matters of opinion.
 
Respectfully, Supposn

Balance of trade is a factor of gross domestic product’s calculation.

Trade surpluses ALWAYS contribute and trade deficits are ALWAYS detrimental to their nation’s GDPs;
[i.e. due to a trade surplus, the nation’s GDP is greater and due to a trade deficit the nation’s GDP is less than otherwise.]

Balance of trade has a leveraged affect upon GDP.
The extent of GDP increase is significantly greater or the extent of the GDP reduction is significantly less than the amount of the nation’s trade balance.

GDP has a positive effect upon the median wage.

Refer to topic “Reduce the trade deficit; increase GDP & median wage”.

Respectfully Supposn

Warren Buffett’s concept to significantly reduce USA’s trade deficit.

It is not our global trade but our trade deficits’ that are a significant net detriment to our economy.  Trade deficits’ amount of detriment to their nations’ GDPs are significantly larger than the deficits themselves.
 
I’m a proponent of a proposal to reduce USA’s trade deficit of goods that was first introduced to the Senate in 2006.  The proposal does not favor the goods of any industry.  The market driven proposal does not discriminate between manufactured, agricultural or any other industries’ products.

The basic concept is for exporters who choose to pay the federal fees to acquire TRANSFERABLE IMPORT CERTIFICATES, (ICs) for the assessed value of their goods leaving the USA. Importers would be required to surrender ICs for the assessed value of their goods entering the USA. Surrendered certificates are cancelled.

This may seem as a boon to exporters of USA goods but it’s actually an indirect and effective export subsidy and the trade proposal’s entirely funded by U.S. purchasers of foreign goods.

The version of this trade policy I advocate would exclude values of specifically listed scarce or precious minerals integral to goods from goods assessed values.
This trade policy would significantly decrease USA’s trade deficit of goods and increase the aggregate sum of USA’s imports plus exports and our GDP more than otherwise.  The GDP bolsters the median wage.

Wage earning families benefit from cheaper imported goods but every day of every year they’re dependent upon their U.S. wages.  Regardless of how small the additions to imports’ prices due to Import Certificates, (unlike tariffs) USA’s assessed imports could never exceed that of our exports.  Its desirable U.S. consumers be able to purchase cheap, (but not the absolute cheapest) imported goods.  We cannot afford the absolute cheapest.
 
 Refer to: http://www.USA-Trade-Deficit.Blogspot.com
or Google: “  wikipedia, import certificates “.
 
Respectfully, Supposn