Re: how to compare living standards
- From: "Jim Blair" <jeb@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 11:53:26 -0500
"tonyp" <tonyp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:eIqdnXXAyYcsZbDZnZ2dnUVZ_t-dnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxx
"Jim Blair" <jeb@xxxxxxxx> wrote
Sounds like you agree with me that money
would be better spent by individuals
than by the current Congress and administration.
Most individuals are not drunken sailors, so yes.
Hi,
Glad we agree ;-)
Now, name a level of taxation _you_ would find so low that it would cause
_you_ to decide that the best thing you can do with _your_ money is
contribute it to the Treasury. No weaseling, just give me a number.
As I have explaine before, there is no universal constant like c or e or
"pi" here.
http://www.geocities.com/capitolhill/4834/lafmax.txt
But for the USA today, I would estimate the top marginal income tax rate to
be in the range of 25-30%. Of course I have been advocating increases in
some taxes. I wanted Ross Perot's 50 cent increase in the gas tax back in
1992, and think it should have been incremented up to several dollars a
gallon by now.
(the ways people avoid the income tax are generally harmful, the ways they
avoid the gas tax are usually beneficial)
(speaking of Ross Perot)
My prediction is that he and his heirs will pay nothing
in estate tax. What do you think?
And if anyone in the Hilton family ever has an estate tax,
they should sue their lawyers for mal-practice.
The estate tax is a "jobs program" for lawyers.
As of 2004, the IRS was collecting about $25billion a year in estate tax.
What fraction of the federal budget is that?
Who do you figure paid _that_?
Mostly people who died "richer than they thought they were", or who on
principle didn't want to pay a lawyer for something of no immediate tangable
benefit to themself.
http://www.geocities.com/capitolhill/4834/estate.txt
Note especially the comments by Grinch.
...If it is soooo easy to avoid the estate tax,
why has God's Own Party fought tooth and nail for years to repeal it?
Same reason the Dems fought tooth and nail to defend it. Because lawyers
support Dems.
(on why foreigners will support US boomers in retirement)
Those young entrepreneurs want capital to implement their
ideas and expand their operations.
And they will pay interest and dividends to get that capital.
Just as they do now. And for the most part, they don't really
care about the nationality or race of the provider.
Their governments, however, have a say in the matter.
You mean those same governments that support US deficits by buying our
treasury bonds?
....And those governments
are (we hope) answerable to _their_ voters, which include a whole lot of
people who will still be living less well than Americans do.
Think they will interfer to break private contracts? I say they will want
to encourage more foreign investment, just as they do now.
You get more investment by rewarding those who have invested in the past.
"Leaders" who break contracts and nationalize companies discover that
foreign and multinational companies stop investing there and move there new
operations somewhere else. Where to the new investments go, India or Cuba?
talking
(on "winners" and "losers" "offsetting" each other)
And as a practical matter, it is only the net gain or loss
that matters to the stock holder of a mutual fund.
What do I care that company A gained and company B lost.
My concern is that the gains more than off-set the loses.
We are talking at cross-purposes: the "winners" and "losers" I was
about are the _investors_, not the companies within a mutual fund.
???? I am talking about the "investors". Those who own shares in mutual
funds. Re-read my paragraph above.
....But,_every_
let's pursue your line of thought for a minute: do you believe that
mutual fund is a "winner" on the timescale of a lifetime?
???? Can you name even one broad based mutual fund that has lost money
during the last 20 years? Or during the last 40 years?
factIf the price reflects the value of the company, what is
the "limit" to the value of a new company?
HP started with two guys in a garage and grew to a
giant international corporation. Didn't Yahoo start
in a dorm room?
Didn't some "investors" once value AOL so highly that it could buy
Time-Warner? (And, were any of those "investors" mutual funds?) Imagine
their surprise when it turned out that there was, in fact, a limit to the
net present value of AOL's future profits, and people caught on to that
rather quickly.
-- TP
Any particular company can lose, even Enron or AOL. And sure lots of mutual
funds included either or both.
But did any mutual fund that included AOL and/or Enron lose money during
the last 20 or 40 years?
Read my "stock broker joke" again. The dumb guy thinks he can pick the
winners. The smart guy does not try to.
,,,,,,,
_______________ooo___(_O O_)___ooo_______________
(_)
jim blair (jeblair@xxxxxxxx) Madison Wisconsin USA.
This message was brought to you using biodegradable
binary bits, and 100% recycled bandwidth. For a good
time call: http://www.geocities.com/capitolhill/4834
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: how to compare living standards
- From: tonyp
- Re: how to compare living standards
- References:
- Re: how to compare living standards
- From: tonyp
- Re: how to compare living standards
- Prev by Date: Re: how to compare living standards
- Next by Date: Re: how to compare living standards
- Previous by thread: Re: how to compare living standards
- Next by thread: Re: how to compare living standards
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading
