SI
SI
discoversearch

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.
Strategies & Market Trends : ahhaha's ahs
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Mark Adams who wrote (3340)10/31/2001 3:46:42 PM
From: ahhahaRead Replies (2) of 24758
 
Because it punishes wealth creation whereas the purpose of the AMT for individuals was to prevent abuse of investment and thereby reduce wealth creation even for the wealthy.

Say what?

Because it punishes wealth creation whereas the purpose of the AMT for individuals was to prevent abuse of investment and thereby reduce wealth creation even for the wealthy.

Why would you have a problem understanding that sentence?

You suggest that the AMT punishes wealth creation for Corporate Entities.

Correct.

Then you imply that individuals are more likely to abuse 'investment' in the pursuit of limiting their tax liabilities.

Correct.

Which apparently includes a judgement that this is 'wrong'.

It is wrong because the latter doesn't add to the common good, i.e., total societal wealth. In fact, it reduces the wealth of the individual using tax avoidance schemes.

Then you say that the net effect of the AMT on individuals is to further limit the wealth creation by the wealthy.

The purpose of the AMT is no discourage individuals from abusing their wealth by using it in unprofitable tax avoidance schemes, when it could be used to the benefit of all, especially to themseves.

Or does the act of investing in a manner that reduces invidual tax liability reduce the wealth creation by the wealthy?

It does. You have forgotten opportunity cost lost, but investent in tax shelters is a guaranteed loser, net.

The purpose of AMT was to stop individuals from making poor, wealth destroying investments.

How does this support that the AMT should exist for individuals but not corporate entities?

Because corporations have a different taxing structure which under AMT hurts the common good more than it does so individuals. Individuals operate for their own interest, but corporations operate beyond the interest of principal owners.

<And how do corporate entities differ from individuals?

In their efficiency of capital utilization. Groups of people in a coordinated effort can produce far more than the same group operating individually.

Are they not granted the same rights as "real" citizens?

If they were, why would you be making your allegations that Marriott is enaged in deceptions under the tax code when you don't get the same alleged deceptions?

Should they not bear the same social costs as other citizens?

There it is again. Fairness. You know what is fair and you keep your fairness dowser nearby to tell you. Are you bearing the social costs or are you evading them as you have asserted?

With rights come responsibities...

Which you seek to evade. That's unfair. That makes you a hypocrite.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News