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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (608334)	4/21/2011 1:04:27 AM
From: tejek	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1579908

This is sheer insanity. Anyone who believes that American capitalism is the best the human race can do needs to see a shrink. Anybody Wanna Buy a Shopping Mall? In 2009, the America Mall was dying. In 2010, the American Mall was still dying. In 2011: Hey, how'd you like to buy an American Mall? The Wall Street Journal reports there are 40(!) shopping malls for sale in America right now. And why wouldn't you buy one? What would a multibillion-dollar mall holding company know that you don't? Most of the properties on the block are among the lower quality properties owned by the sellers and companies are hoping to sell them at a time that the retail sector is facing changes due to an oversupply of product and competition from Internet shopping. Pish posh! Hanging out at the mall will never go "out of style," if your now-irrelevant adolescence was any indicator! Why not buy some empty OTB parlors, while you're at it? Make it a party! On Monday, the economy was collapsing; today, the Dow is near a three-year high. That's resilience! ca.gawker.com

To: TimF who wrote (608334)	4/21/2011 1:09:02 AM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1579908

The headline was accurate as long as they where trying to impose the tax. If they caved on that idea, then it was no longer accurate, but at the time the article was written they where still pushing the tax. Nonsense. The headline had one, and only one purpose....to get your attention SF, unlike most other cities in Silicon Valley, has many more of the region's poor and an older infrastructure that adds to the cost of running the city. A lot of other cities across the country have poor people, most of them don't try to impose payroll taxes on options. Yes, they do.....or they go broke. Oh wait....there are the red state cities that don't.......they wait for the feds to bail them out aka the blue states. Secondly, its completely unfair to single out one tax and claim the city is anti business. That tax is anti-business, but its obviously not all of what San Francisco does in relation to businesses. To determine whether San Francisco is anti-business, you would have to both define the idea, and consider San Francisco's other actions. Its hardly anti business...except in your own little ideological world. Its a way of generating revenue for the city. There is nothing personal about it. Thirdly, Twitter knew of SF's tax requirements when they first set up business.....that didn't stop them then. Setting up in San Francisco, doesn't require you to stay there. The tax places a large burden on companies in certain situations, they where not in that situation, so it wasn't such a big deal. Now circumstances have changed. Companies do, and should, respond to changing circumstances. You see....Twitter and Zynga wanted to stay in SF because its a cool place and its easier to get good employees. But they wanted it on their own terms........most corps are egocentric in that way.