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 : ahhaha's ahs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mark Adams who wrote (3334)	10/31/2001 3:11:09 PM
From: ahhaha	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24758

My concern over eliminating corporate income taxes did include a potential for shifting the tax burden. But not so much wealthy individuals not paying taxes, or not paying their share. Perfectly ambiguous. The intent in the above sentence is the essence of liberal philosophy, fairness, or making others pay their fair share, punishment, revenge. You must be a closet liberal and not even realize. You will have to be punished. I take it for granted that the rules are unfair. Oh you make my case. I really should read down before I read these replies. Even so, any changes in the rules have long term implications likely unforseen (remember the RTC?) and what I really object to is politicians selling a tax cut that favors one group over another to the masses with biased or incomplete info. But that's what you do. That makes you a hypocrite and like them, you can't see it, because your view is clouded by the need to punish. That's why I spoke out that corporate shells are used to reduce tax liability, Why do you assume that they are effective at doing this? I challenge any CPA in the world to show that it works. and that decreasing the corporate tax rates would favor certain sophisticated investors who shelter retained earnings inside corporate shells at the expense of others. Not the hotel thing again. I haven't had the time nor interest to bother, but I believe I can easily refute you out of hand based on say, what you think Marriott is doing. Since I don't make the rules but do try to follow them, if such changes are/were enacted, I'd try to avail myself of the opportunities created by joining the more sophisticated investors. You're at war, aren't you? You don't care anything about the economy or the common good. You are interested in one thing, your own narrow short-sighted self interest. Did you know that such self interest isn't self interest? It reduces your interest. Your self interest will be served when you turn away from what you tyhink is in your interest. Then you will see your true interest. This requires understanding the techniques, pitfalls and implications of tax law changes. You haven't done this in the slightest. You don't know tax law nor do you understand the purpose of it. To you it's a form of punishment and you think it is your duty to make sure others get punished to the extent that you think you do. This warped sense is what's killing us all. You're worse than the liberals and you remind me of rich people who don't want taxes reduced because they fear that it tends to diminish the value of their wealth.