Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Road Walker who wrote (340248)	6/13/2007 12:59:21 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) of 1574761

It wouldn't be a pure subsidy, it would be close (+/-) to revenue neutral. Revenue neutral might be an important concern, but it doesn't make the subsidy part any less of a subsidy, nor does it make the penalty part less of a penalty. They add to each other when your determining the size of the intervention, they don't cancel each other out. To put it another way you add the absolute values. +X and -X are in this context 2X not zero. And as a percentage of purchase price, it would be right there with taxes on cigarettes, liquor and other "sin taxes". As a percentage of the economy, or in terms of its impact on peoples decision making it would be larger. Much larger. You have about 7 and a half million passenger cars sold per year in the US. Plus trucks and SUVs (couldn't find a good sales number for them). Anyway over 10million a year total. If the average intervention is $5000, that's over $50bil a year combination of subsidies and penalties, impacting a (assuming the average car price is $25000) over $250 bil a year of sales.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next