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.

Pastimes : THE SLIGHTLY MODERATED BOXING RING -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Poet who wrote (5318)	3/29/2002 10:34:47 AM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

Poet, I think the near rich, and the slightly rich often hate high taxes. The mega rich like Gates sometimes have less of a problem because they can afford to take advantage of exotic loopholes, and also because many of them have most of their wealth in unrealized and thus untaxed capital gains. For that matter if you take have of it away from them they are still filthy rich... Tim

To: Poet who wrote (5318)	3/29/2002 12:14:47 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21057

"you PP's"? Who are we PP's? PP = ???? Actually, I thought of a much better solution last night. Under the proposal on the table, if a person pays no taxes, they get no vote. Suppose a person pays only $1 in tax. Dp they then get 1 vote, just like some guy who pays $10,000,000? Hardly seems fair. So: T = taxes paid in dollars if T > 0 Then # votes = trunc(log(T)) where log is the base 10 logarithm and trunc() id the round-down function else #votes = 0 so someone paying $0-$9 gets no vote and someone paying $10-$99 gets 1 vote and someone paying $100-$999 gets 2 votes and someone paying $1000-$9999 gets 3 votes and someone paying $10000-$99999 gets 4 votes etc. Good idea, huh? :-)