surfshoptom

read it again.


I'm still not clear on that. I read it that dividends can qualify for preferred tax treatment as well. If not, my argument fails.


Agreed.

PrairieSeasons Loc: Red River of the North

There are two truths about the lottery. The first is that you can't win if you don't buy a ticket. The second is that your chances are pretty much the same whether or not you buy a ticket.

Samuraiz Loc: Central Florida

I'm done here, when people choose to takes steps to reduce the salary of those that choose to play school house games for living (sports) and wonder why there gym shoes cost so much. Then we can discuss corporations that provide the necessities that we all consume on a daily basis. People who create business take all the risk with a 10% success rate. In retail it's lower. (Check out how many surf shops open and then close $250,000 in unrecoverable debt. The CEO is like the president, he is elected by his constituents. Don't hate the player hate the game. Anyone can become CEO if they have the skills.

PrairieSeasons Loc: Red River of the North

Profound statement. Anyone can become starting quarterback for the Dallas Cowboys if they have the skills. And that's a pretty low bar right now.

Samuraiz Loc: Central Florida

:thumbup: I guess it's how bad does someone want it.

rrforster12 Loc: Leesburg Florida

Speaking of Obama's Vacation in Hawaii he came back to DC on AF1 at a cost of $800K but Michelle decided to stay behind......so whoops there goes another $800K to satisfy her whim.
Incredible how well our resident "Royalty" treats themselves.

Samuraiz Loc: Central Florida

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

hondo812 Loc: Massachusetts

I am not a CPA or Tax code whiz but the things that have zero tax are things like Government bonds. Bonds can have a number of coupons that can be clipped and exchanged for money. If you have the right kind of bonds then those dividends are tax free. Then again bonds are not guaranteed either.

My wife's grandparents gave us a $5k bond from the city of Rawlins, Wyoming that was for the development of a local airport. We were able to collect the dividends however, the city defaulted on the bond so no $5k.

I use that example to illustrate the element of risk. While many will point to enormous success stories like Apple or Google for rocketing skyward stock values there are many many more companies that underperform and eventually get sold or go bust. As an engineer in in the medical device field I can tell you that for every medical start-up company that has an IPO there are dozens that flame out before they reach that phase.

Much was made in the last presidential election of Romney's fortune and annual earnings. It does not take a rocket scientist to determine for him to have $30 odd million in investment earnings he is risking over $300 million. I am sure he manages his portfolio well and minimizes the risk but the fact of the matter is none of that is guaranteed.

Adamj

You are correct about one thing; people are struggling to make ends meet, but you place the blame in the wrong place. It is not religious conservatives who are indifferent to, or who have caused the problem- it is President Obama.

surfshoptom

Really? Things were much better before Obama? Didn't the thing crash before Obama?
This isn't a partisan problem. All of Washington is corrupt. It wasn't better before and it won't be better after. We all have to stand up to the corruption.
We're all on the same team and no one is representing us.

TimS Loc: GA

I've read these posts and are amazed at all the opinions here. In so doing, it struck me that the term "income inequality" is deemed a bad thing as default by some and then they discuss how to solve it.

I suggest that those people first describe how a CEO making $15 mil per year is a bad thing before trying to discuss why it should be changed.

You see, in my mind, income inequality is a good thing. People that work hard and sacrifice a lot should be rewarded with a higher paycheck than those that don't work quite as hard. Therefore, any attempt to convince me why we should force this company or that company to pay their workers more is a fruitless endeavor.

surfshoptom

it's bad because that dude is a greedy, selfish bastard.
it's bad because there's nothing good or right about it. it certainly isn't Christian.
it's bad because his workers need food stamps to feed their families. who pays for that? and if you argue food stamps should be eliminated, then those folks would go hungry. is that bad?
are you arguing that dude is paid $15M because he's worth it or because he works 750 times harder than his employees? I argue he's paid that much because he has control. it's not capitalism - it's cronyism. we're living in a plutocracy and it's getting worse.
have I changed any minds? I didn't think so. these arguments are so pointless. I wish I could stay away and wasn't provoked to respond. I know - so do you.

tom kf4wol

You know Life is a lot like Sports, those with the skill and apply themselves to improve their skill.

Obtain the reimbursement for their skills and get rewarded for theirhard work to hone their skills.

Once heard a Football Coach explain to a so so player about not getting to play more in a game.

The Coach told him no one has entitlement, if you want to play more work harder improve your talent and skill to play, Coach went on and I agree....He said I wish the Word "Entitlement" would be removed from the Vocabulary, it sure is with my Football Team - No one has Entitlement....Our Goal is to win, thus those who work the hardest, prove they are the best play on my Team...

I love it Amen for him...Good Lesson for that kid and all he kids on his team and in fact all of us.

tom

yhtomit Loc: Port Land. Oregon

You obviously are an underachiever.The personal standard I detailed is foreign to people who have never worked hard or met goals.

This of coarse would be implemented by parents.How we make the generational transition would have to be a government program that provides schooling,housing and a supplemental income until the participant is up to speed.

I suggest that you move out of your parents basement,get a job
and take the burden of providing off your parents shoulders.You owe it to them.You don't fool me.

TimS Loc: GA

You did a poor job explaining why income inequality is bad. Saying the CEO is greedy and selfish is irrelevant. Further, the CEO could donate millions to charity which would contradict your assertion that he was selfish and greedy.

Moreover, "greedy" and "selfish" are subjective terms - not quantifiable measurements of some societal variable. Can a poor person not be greedy and selfish?

Food stamps: again, you have to back up a bit to get to the root assumption of your argument. For that to have any basis, we would have to first agree on what the purpose of a business is. If the purpose of a business is to ensure some minimum standard of living of its emoyees then you would have a point. But if I believed the purpose of a business is to provide a product to a customer in exchange for compensation then whether the employees are on good stamps is irrelevant in my mind.

This is actually a good illustration of my whole point. With any problem, if we are debating how to fix a problem, we should step back several times until we get to a mutually agreeable root issue. Then we can work forward. In this case, if we can't agree on what the purpose if a business is then there is absolutely no point even trying to discuss ways in which businesses should be modified in irder to provide for their employees.