Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Mu Gamma Lambda -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: MulhollandDrive who wrote (8242)	9/27/2001 3:20:04 PM
From: Jorj X Mckie	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 10077

I would use the argument "you can't eliminate laws by making more laws". The right answer is to get rid of the disincentives, not provide counter balances to the disincentives to offset the negative effects. So, I agree, eliminate the corporate earnings tax. But, I disagree that we should do something in the interim. Once something is enacted by the government, it is too difficult to rescind.

To: MulhollandDrive who wrote (8242)	9/27/2001 6:38:12 PM
From: Libbyt	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 10077

>>Until we get to the point where we can eliminate "corporate" earnings tax, which is simply yet another layer of tax on shareholders AND consumers, I'm for incentives. I've been suggesting for at least 6 months that we need some type of investment tax credit to help spur capital spending. But I would like to see it across the board, not limited to specific industries.<< Mrs. Peel, we're both "on the same page" with this idea. Normally, I would be against any more government intervention...but IMO these are different times, and we are now fighting a war on terrorism. The acts of these terrorists were directed at our financial markets...and so far, they have won the initial battle. They created a colossal loss of lives of innocent citizens, a loss of numerous jobs in various industries, and the loss of our perception of being safe in our own country. The entire county has felt the effects of these terrorist acts. When you are at war, IMO, "the rules" change. Some type of incentives have to be created to encourage businesses to spend money on broadband or other capital expenditures, something that IMO would benefit every business. Hopefully this business incentive would create a demand for these services, and this demand would lead to the rehiring of many people who have been laid off from their jobs. As a country we will be paying more to help our country recover and fight this new kind of war....and rather than putting that money into unemployment benefits, I would rather see the money go towards a program which encourages businesses to rehire employees they've been forced to lay off during this downturn in our economy.