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: Metacomet who wrote (877884)	8/4/2015 3:57:10 PM
From: nicewatch	1 Recommendation Recommended By FJB Respond to of 1571688

Were you in that 10% before you gambled away your life savings on a single penny stock? How long did it take you to save all that money because it probably didn't take too long to squander it? Oh well... easy come, easy go! But for argument sake let's take the other side, what would you have done had your "investment" idea panned out? Were you gambling for others as a magnanimous altruist or would you have greedily kept those gains for yourself? Better yet, have you or do you donate to charity? What percentage of your total income (pre tax or after tax dollars, whichever you prefer) do you or have you donated to charity? Or do you prefer a powerful centralized bureaucracy to tax and redistribute according to your liberal mores? Always a hoot to read your posts, carry on and good luck!

To: Metacomet who wrote (877884)	8/5/2015 12:28:49 PM
From: one_less	1 Recommendation Recommended By TideGlider Respond to of 1571688

On the surface that seems to make sense. The government is over burdened with debt and spending that is not backed by a budget. So more money for the government from a money rich source seems to make sense, if it would correct that problem. Under scrutiny, however, this solution falls apart on multiple grounds. Government spending is bloated so badly and in so many misguided ways that suggesting more money would be a solution to that problem is wrong. More money does not fix wastefulness, fraud, inefficiency, and such … it sanctions it. It is fair when you ask for money from a bank or some other institution that you prove you are a qualified candidate to receive it. The government is not willing to prove itself to this group of wealth holders. In fact, the spending the government intends violates the principles of handling money well. If it were handled well, then in the future it would not be necessary to ask for more. You, start by calling the very resource you would go to ‘pigs.’ You would tax them in spite of the fact that it is counter to their best interests. That suggests you see them as adversaries in the solution you propose. Basically you are proposing a solution that amounts to taxation without representation...doesn't work.