SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : A Neutral Corner -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Lane3 who wrote (205)9/17/2005 12:00:40 PM
From: Constant Reader  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 2253
 
I'm happy to see all sorts of new ideas being considered and tried. People tend to forget that it was not just New Orleans that was devastated and that the area involved is one of the poorest in the country. While I agree with you in principal, I'll go along with tax incentives if that will make it easier to sell some of the other ideas being floated, like sweat equity housing, the cash incentives to get off unemployment. That said, if it is an either/or on tax incentives, I'd rather see the quicker write-offs for equipment than buildings because I think the incentive for equipment purchases would lead to more jobs sooner.



To: Lane3 who wrote (205)9/17/2005 1:21:24 PM
From: MulhollandDrive  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 2253
 
My initial reaction on the tax write-offs for building buildings is negative, though

i think it is a very good idea....

by accelerating the depreciation on the buildings (new and re-habbed) it puts money back more quickly into the pocket of the builder/investor

it's not a 'gimme', these people are assuming risk by putting up their money by borrowing to build...

obviously the intent is to create more value, building revenue producing real estate, allowing the developer to recapture their investment more quickly, thus wealth...

i see it as a win/win/win for the developer/builder, home/business buyer/renter, and the government