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.

Technology Stocks : Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Victor Lazlo who wrote (157155)	5/11/2003 3:28:33 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164684

But I will offer one lesson of history.. do you recall the 'luxury tax' that the Dems put through maybe 10 or 12 years ago? Things like pleasure boats and cars costing over $35 or $40k had a extra tax slapped on them.. all it did was put blue coller boat builders out of work, and sharply reduce sales of the high end autos. In fact i know of one boatyard near here that had to shut down altogether. Permanently. That tax caused more damage to the democrats than almost anything else I can think of that they have done. People don't like morality legislation ala Bill Bennett and Dan Quayle but with those guys (so far) its just rhetoric they spout. In the case of this luxury tax the dems enacted, this was some kind of action aimed at legislating lifestyle, the gov't has no business going there. Not to mention the fact that the fur industry was on its knees at the time due to boycotting and Peta. No fan of furs myself but if some industry is going to go down I'd like the gov't to get out of the way.

To: Victor Lazlo who wrote (157155)	5/11/2003 4:21:18 PM
From: John Chen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164684

vic,re:" do you really think ... $6 per week per family". Yes, I do. It's ALL back to the system. While $300K to a rich guy who has really no need for that 'extra' but to 'Jackup the assets' they don't need. The 'tax cut's of BUSH since he's been in the office is really going to have a long term effect of 'liquity trap'. You know his 'circle' and 'friends and families' all benefited handsomely.

To: Victor Lazlo who wrote (157155)	5/12/2003 11:53:01 AM
From: Skeeter Bug	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 164684

victor, we have oversupply conditions. too much stuff. the reason lots of buying hasn't spurred positive economic numbers is b/c the stock shelves are already packed. we need buyers. again, $550 billion is $550 billion regardless of whether one person getting all of it or 250 million getting $2,000 - the economy doesn't care. your argument that putting all the money in the hands of a few is somehow better just doesn't make sense. my argument is simple. ASSUMING tax increases are required to stimulate the economy, we need marginal demand to resolve an oversupply condition. you think we need more supply to pack the shelves even higher. we'll agree to disagree.