2016 Election Thread Part Deux

#2,053
#2,053
SuperDave said:
Exactly.. It's the only thing that matters... and that's a shame.

How much of the company do you and the dishwashers own?
Click to expand...

Have no idea. I do know we are one of the 30 largest employers in the US. And we all have the option to buy shares at a heavily discounted price. Whether you do it or not is on you. Odds are the company you worked for did the same and you chose not to.
 
Last edited:
#2,058
#2,058
tumscalcium said:
That the liberal mantra. Instead of trying to aid and push people to raise themselves up they want to knock people who are responsible and productive down for "equality". They actually think it's a good thing.
Click to expand...


Who are these productive people you speak of? If you mean people who churn investments in companies generating no revenue or jobs to anyone, meh, f--k 'em.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#2,064
#2,064
tumscalcium said:
People who work and pay net taxes. This group get f***** more than anyone.
Click to expand...


I wish we could come up with a scoring system for investments that distinguished between short term non-productive gains versus returns on investment that reasonably creates growth. If we can, then in my opinion, the former should be taxed at a higher rate than the latter.

Who's with me?
 
#2,065
#2,065
SpaceCoastVol said:
they gonna sell property they own at below market value. Yup, that'll show ME. What a bunch of hooey.
Click to expand...

I particularly enjoyed this quote in the article:

“'It’s stunning to think that our government would back the Saudis over its own citizens,' said Mindy Kleinberg, whose husband died in the World Trade Center on Sept. 11 and who is part of a group of victims’ family members pushing for the legislation."

Mindy needs to learn that Congress will screw over any normal citizen in favor anyone or any entity with money - just the highest bidder and we aren't it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#2,066
#2,066
lawgator1 said:
I wish we could come up with a scoring system for investments that distinguished between short term non-productive gains versus returns on investment that reasonably creates growth. If we can, then in my opinion, the former should be taxed at a higher rate than the latter.

Who's with me?
Click to expand...

If I work for a living and Joe invests for a living, Joe and I should be taxed at the same rate. If Joe blows bubbles in the market and generally profits from the instability that he creates, I have no problem with penalizing him. In fact, after the banking crisis, I'd have no problem with shooting him between his beady, lyin' eyes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#2,067
#2,067
AM64 said:
If I work for a living and Joe invests for a living, Joe and I should be taxed at the same rate. If Joe blows bubbles in the market and generally profits from the instability that he creates, I have no problem with penalizing him. In fact, after the banking crisis, I'd have no problem with shooting him between his beady, lyin' eyes.
Click to expand...
Damn, I had better convert to CD's. Would you still hate me if it was in the bank for them to invest?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#2,069
#2,069
AM64 said:
If I work for a living and Joe invests for a living, Joe and I should be taxed at the same rate. If Joe blows bubbles in the market and generally profits from the instability that he creates, I have no problem with penalizing him. In fact, after the banking crisis, I'd have no problem with shooting him between his beady, lyin' eyes.
Click to expand...

Huh, would not have expected this view from you. Totally agree
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#2,071
#2,071
1972 Grad said:
Damn, I had better convert to CD's. Would you still hate me if it was in the bank for them to invest?
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone here is creating bubbles, but some of us might be contributing to them. I'm really talking about the people who can make big ripples in the markets - stocks, currency, commodities. The people who really pervert the market - the ones who leverage what we invest in ways that enrich them and leave big dents on our funds. Too much of the market is simply gambling and none of us is the house.

The original stock concept and trading market was straight forward - you buy stock in the company and if it does well you see a dividend, and hopefully an increase in the stock value. Your intent in investing after all was to provide capital for the company to use to expand, modernize, develop new products, etc because you thought the company had potential; so if the company was run correctly it would be worth more.

Pension and retirement funds created so much demand for stocks that the stock prices rose almost regardless of what a company did - probably no way that a company in great shape could completely sell off assets at a fantastic price and even come close to purchasing all outstanding stock. Before computer trading and new ways of screwing things up, it was somewhat stable even if most stock was overvalued.

That didn't satisfy the craving for investment so people developed things like derivatives - try rationalizing those with the concept of investing to provide corporate capital. Junk bonds, real estate repackaging, and so on would make a con man blush and Las Vegas jealous. Those and the people who use industrial strength computer trades to make the market go nuts are the ones I'm talking about. And the bankers who decided that gambling/"investing" with reserves was sound banking.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#2,072
#2,072
Bump

We need a president that has imaginary conversations with Eleanor Roosevelt and when all else fails, hit a reset button.

Oh wait.....
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top