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 (157492)	5/29/2003 6:26:42 PM
From: Lizzie Tudor	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 164684

the problem with dividend tax cuts, is there isn't any reason for doing them except to help the rich. There aren't many tax cuts like dividend tax cuts, its almost the most useless tax cut one can think of as far as the stimulative effect. Stocks that pay dividends are those that are favored by investors looking for safety and diversification. So that excludes the young working folks who we know prefer growth. You end up helping the rich (diversification) or the elderly (safety) - the two most affluent economic groups, and (more importantly) the 2 groups LEAST LIKELY to plow any of their gains back into the economy. Additionally, there is the net drag of rich people taking money out of growth stocks (the sector that actually does provide decent job growth for the working folks) and moving their $$ to the slow growing div companies who simply return the cash to the rich people. I think the Bush administration gets their fiscal cues from Kudlow and Cramer, the 2 that originally hatched this div tax cut idea.

To: Victor Lazlo who wrote (157492)	5/29/2003 8:21:14 PM
From: Skeeter Bug	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 164684

o you think a household family income of $63k makes a family rich? in some areas - extremely rich. in others - that's low middle class. A family with two minor, dependent kids and with a household income of $63k will get $1,100 /year off their taxes under the plan. Not bad. buffet could get over $300 million back and pay a 3% tax rate. IS THAT THE TAX SYSTEM YOU DEEM BEST FOR AMERICA? YES OR NO. if yes, we agree with buffet. if no, we disagree. I think you are obsessed with what the 'rich' will get, i think you don't think. at least not too well, anyway. your simplistic approach to my view, which is similar to buffets view, would mean that buffet was obsessed with what the rich will get - which is absurd b/c only a handful of people have more than buffet. so much for clarity of thought. ad hominem sure is happy, though. -lol- although you dont seem to realize that any family earning over $70k is considered rich by Gephart and his Dem clan. it doesn't matter. is a tax system that gives one of the richest men in america a shot at a 3% tax fair. YES OR NO. be a man AND ANSWER. btw, if a family making $70k isn't rich (and in many cases they aren't), just think how "rich" a family making $40k per year will is... who will eventually foot the bill for the buffet style $300 million tax break. i'm obsessed with reasonableness and fairness. buffet's potential 3% tax rate isn't fair. it isn't reasonable. it is bad for america. it may be good for a few greedy folks who only care about themselves, though. america needs to be protected from those types.