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.

Politics : Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Kerry -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (4171)	2/25/2004 3:58:56 PM
From: tonto	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 81568

I care for one. You do not care. We wipe out each other's vote. Big deal. Neither one of us speaks for others, or should not believe they do. Who cares, I'm tired of this "double taxed" argument.

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (4171)	2/25/2004 4:10:50 PM
From: American Spirit	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 81568

Bush's huge deficits are a form of taxation and so are his high energy prices. Arnold promised no new taxes so now borrows 15 billion and makes us pay it off instead of taxing us. What's the difference though? The bond measure is just a drawn-out tax. The Republicans don't seem to get the fact that you cannot pay for things with empty coffers. Taxes (or massive borrowing like Bushies do instead) is a fact of life and you either pay now or later. The responsible way is to pay as you go.

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (4171)	2/25/2004 10:01:59 PM
From: brushwud	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 81568

I'm tired of this "double taxed" argument. All right, why should a corporation get a tax deduction for bond interest paid, but not for stock dividends paid? That penalizes equity financing relative to debt financing and leads to a riskier capitalization structure. Also, to the extent that corporations avoid paying dividends due to the "double taxed" argument, they hoard cash and conglomerate, which leads to greater concentration of capital at diminishing returns, instead of putting it back in the hands of owners to reinvest as they see fit. workers are forced to pay almost 15K per year just for the priviledge of employment Workers like yourself making over $100K, you mean, who'll collect the maximum SS benefit when they retire, not a mere "privilege". What would you propose, totally integrating SS with the individual income tax, so workers at the bottom would pay almost nothing while those (workers and nonworkers) at the top have their marginal rates raised to over 40% or something? (Actually, I sort of agree with that.)