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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Canadian REITS, Trusts & Dividend Stocks -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lorne Larson who wrote (3609)	6/28/2002 10:47:10 AM
From: Peter W. Panchyshyn	Respond to of 11633

Ah, yet another two "stupid Peter principle" to add to the ever-growing list. Actually the first one is really a modification to his principle that "unrealized losses are not really losses". The modification being that this only applies to individuals, not corporations. --- Our discussion is about individuals not corporations and not corporations like "trusts" which pay no tax themselves. Again stick to the discussion at hand not your twists with apple to orange comparisons. Your not fooling anyone. ----- The second one is that if Revenue Canada doesn't require that you show an unrealized loss or gain on your tax return, than you haven't really suffered a loss. ---- Thats correct. They are the authority on the matter not you PERIOD. And that ties in with the unrealized losses just disappearing when unit prices recover. Again no matter what your losses will not just disappear. Unless you lie about them like you have been all along. So if your lying about your losses your also lying about your gains which comes as no surprise to anyone here. ------------- FLASH NOTE TO ALL NORTEL HOLDERS: Revenue Canada (and Peter) say you haven't lost a penny, so you can sleep easy tonight. Or maybe this rule only applies to trusts? Peter, can you please clarify this particular "stupid Peter principle" for us? --- Technically speaking that is correct. However many of those Nortel holders will take the real loss so that they can apply it other gains they may have. Or to move along and use that loss against real future gains as RC allows. In line with what RC says. So again it is shown that it all comes down to what RC says as always. And not what you say. That will always be the case. LIKE IT OR NOT. ---------------- Also a modification to the "stupid Peter principle" that switching is always bad. Apparently its not bad if it's done by a trust of trusts that Peter owns and if it's done "for the right reasons". Otherwise it's bad. ---- Key point is that you switched out of PWI because of a management problem which really wasn't there because the unit price recovered just as quickly. And a trust of trust can do it because they can spend more time at than can the individual and they have that track record of how the unit values have been trading. Your track record is a bunch of lies. And it can't be verified with past documentation. Be that documentation the real past trading data or you own postings here ---------- ----- And yet another post from you with no trust data to back yourself up. NOT ONE BIT. Thanks for that confirming evidence -----------