Fixing the budget problem

[Bolas 5]

Quote

>Taxes are a funny thing as they impact not just what is collected but also encourage or
>discourage growth as well. Tax too little and while growth flourishes, tax revenue
>suffers. Tax too much and growth is stifled, tax revenue suffers.

True of government spending as well. Spend too little and while the deficit drops temporarily, revenues tend to go down overall because defense contractors lay off workers, solders are discharged, teachers are laid off, companies sell less goods - and that all depresses the economy, which leads to lower tax revenues.

That in and of itself, of course, is not a reason to spend lots of money. Growth is not the goal of either spending or tax cuts - although it is reasonable to consider the effects of both on growth since that indirectly determines future revenues.

On some levels that makes sense but it also needs to be shown.

If cutting $x billion from a program leads to $x + y billion loss in tax revenue, then it definitely should not be cut. Also no point in cutting programs that "break even."

Start with cutting the negative return items.

Additionally certain items could become self funded, such as portions of our military.

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[kallend 2,026]

Quote

Quote

Might sound odd, but I am not necessarily in disagreement with Kallend. Part of the problem is that in order to invest they have to have assets TO invest. For many of us this is difficult. Lowering the tax burden on all can allow some spare cash to be invested.

There is the sense that people earning a living off of capital gains is somewhat unjust. Nevertheless, there is wisdom in encouraging investment and a lower tax rate helps. The debt Commission actually recommended treating capital gains as income and taxing as such, but significantly lowering the income tax rate.

I think it's an idea that deserves some exploring.

Its not so easy to just raise taxes on the rich hedgefund managers. the hedge fund industry is just that. an industry. it employs thousands and thousands of people. very few of which will ever become rich. regular people doing regular jobs you'd find in any office. adjusting the tax rates could have a material impact on that industry and them. this is why in NY its rarely called upon to change that section of the tax code. regular people could lose their jobs.

it seems to me that outside of NY people have this image. they see hedgefund managers as mean old men with top hats and monocles that arrive to work in chauffeur driven cars, throwing coins on the ground and laughing at homeless children chasing them. Picture Mr. Burns from the Simpsons.

In NYC they are just viewed as your boss or somebody elses boss.

NOTHING you wrote justifies hedge fund managers getting special treatment from the tax code. NOTHING.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[billvon 2,990]

>If cutting $x billion from a program leads to $x + y billion loss in tax revenue, then it
>definitely should not be cut.

Generally it leads to $X/N loss in tax revenue, where N>1.

(Same with taxes. Reducing taxes may increase productivity, but it is certainly not true that decreasing taxes by $1 means an increase in taxable revenue of $1.)

[kallend 2,026]

Federal spending

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[DanJohnson 0]

Quote

[Agreed John. I'm sure you understand what cutting the militayr budge by 50% would do to unemployment.

Listen,
If the military budget was cut by 99% the money isn't gone. it's still in the economy.
Maybe freeing up that money and taking it out of government control and leaving it in the private sector where it was earned is the exact stimulus required.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

NOTHING you wrote justifies hedge fund managers getting special treatment from the tax code. NOTHING.

Red herring - they get the same treatment form the tax code as anyone else who invests.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[weekender 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Might sound odd, but I am not necessarily in disagreement with Kallend. Part of the problem is that in order to invest they have to have assets TO invest. For many of us this is difficult. Lowering the tax burden on all can allow some spare cash to be invested.

There is the sense that people earning a living off of capital gains is somewhat unjust. Nevertheless, there is wisdom in encouraging investment and a lower tax rate helps. The debt Commission actually recommended treating capital gains as income and taxing as such, but significantly lowering the income tax rate.

I think it's an idea that deserves some exploring.

Its not so easy to just raise taxes on the rich hedgefund managers. the hedge fund industry is just that. an industry. it employs thousands and thousands of people. very few of which will ever become rich. regular people doing regular jobs you'd find in any office. adjusting the tax rates could have a material impact on that industry and them. this is why in NY its rarely called upon to change that section of the tax code. regular people could lose their jobs.

it seems to me that outside of NY people have this image. they see hedgefund managers as mean old men with top hats and monocles that arrive to work in chauffeur driven cars, throwing coins on the ground and laughing at homeless children chasing them. Picture Mr. Burns from the Simpsons.

In NYC they are just viewed as your boss or somebody elses boss.

NOTHING you wrote justifies hedge fund managers getting special treatment from the tax code. NOTHING.

I cannot argue with you because your entire premise is factually wrong. they dont get special treatment. they are taxed the same as you. income is income and capital gains are capital gains. thats the law. you dont like it, i get that. but your entire premise that they get something special is wrong. all i can suppose is that your anger is making it impossible for you to accept what is a fact of law.

the entire hedge fund industry is based on the current tax code. my point is very clear. adjusting the tax code could negatively impact the lives of regular working people.

"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird."
John Frusciante

[kallend 2,026]

Quote

Quote

NOTHING you wrote justifies hedge fund managers getting special treatment from the tax code. NOTHING.

Red herring - they get the same treatment form the tax code as anyone else who invests.

Nope - they get TREATED as if it is their investment but in fact they are working for other people, using other people's money. It is intellectual dishonesty to say that their income is their capital gain.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[kallend 2,026]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Might sound odd, but I am not necessarily in disagreement with Kallend. Part of the problem is that in order to invest they have to have assets TO invest. For many of us this is difficult. Lowering the tax burden on all can allow some spare cash to be invested.

There is the sense that people earning a living off of capital gains is somewhat unjust. Nevertheless, there is wisdom in encouraging investment and a lower tax rate helps. The debt Commission actually recommended treating capital gains as income and taxing as such, but significantly lowering the income tax rate.

I think it's an idea that deserves some exploring.

Its not so easy to just raise taxes on the rich hedgefund managers. the hedge fund industry is just that. an industry. it employs thousands and thousands of people. very few of which will ever become rich. regular people doing regular jobs you'd find in any office. adjusting the tax rates could have a material impact on that industry and them. this is why in NY its rarely called upon to change that section of the tax code. regular people could lose their jobs.

it seems to me that outside of NY people have this image. they see hedgefund managers as mean old men with top hats and monocles that arrive to work in chauffeur driven cars, throwing coins on the ground and laughing at homeless children chasing them. Picture Mr. Burns from the Simpsons.

In NYC they are just viewed as your boss or somebody elses boss.

NOTHING you wrote justifies hedge fund managers getting special treatment from the tax code. NOTHING.

I cannot argue with you because your entire premise is factually wrong. they dont get special treatment. they are taxed the same as you. income is income and capital gains are capital gains. thats the law. you dont like it, i get that. but your entire premise that they get something special is wrong. all i can suppose is that your anger is making it impossible for you to accept what is a fact of law.

the entire hedge fund industry is based on the current tax code. my point is very clear. adjusting the tax code could negatively impact the lives of regular working people.

That is intellectual dishonesty.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

NOTHING you wrote justifies hedge fund managers getting special treatment from the tax code. NOTHING.

Red herring - they get the same treatment form the tax code as anyone else who invests.

Nope - they get TREATED as if it is their investment but in fact they are working for other people, using other people's money. It is intellectual dishonesty to say that their income is their capital gain.

Class jealousy is *so* petty.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[weekender 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

NOTHING you wrote justifies hedge fund managers getting special treatment from the tax code. NOTHING.

Red herring - they get the same treatment form the tax code as anyone else who invests.

Nope - they get TREATED as if it is their investment but in fact they are working for other people, using other people's money. It is intellectual dishonesty to say that their income is their capital gain.

this is your interpretation of the law. i can respect this is how you feel the law favors them. its your opinion and one shared by many. unfortunately, today, its not how the IRS interpretes the tax codes and they are the ones that matter.

The law is the law. no intent to deceive from me. i find it odd that you feel if i dont agree with your personal interpretation im dishonest somehow. again, all i can suppose is that your just way to angry.

if you read my post i never stated anywhere that the tax law should not be changed. I just pointed out that there will be some unintended circumstances that effect normal working people and it wont be so easy to do. you didnt get that because your way to angry.

"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird."
John Frusciante

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

... income is income and capital gains are capital gains. thats the law. ...

But in this case we're talking about the carried-interest loophole which allows hedge fund managers to consider the money that they receive for their services as capital gains instead of income.

[weekender 0]

Quote

Quote

... income is income and capital gains are capital gains. thats the law. ...

But in this case we're talking about the carried-interest loophole which allows hedge fund managers to consider the money that they receive for their services as capital gains instead of income.

i get that, sorry if that wasnt clear. i think going forward they will find a way to tax the managers pay as regular income. they just need to do it in a way that they dont crush the entire industry and cause massive layoffs.

this spring the hedgefunds, for market reasons, are trading less. banks have laid of alot of people, regular people because of this. my point all along has been that it isnt so easy to just raise the taxes on hedgefund managers. you must consider that the current tax code is benefitting many others. regular people.

"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird."
John Frusciante

[Bolas 5]

Quote

Quote

Quote

... income is income and capital gains are capital gains. thats the law. ...

But in this case we're talking about the carried-interest loophole which allows hedge fund managers to consider the money that they receive for their services as capital gains instead of income.

i get that, sorry if that wasnt clear. i think going forward they will find a way to tax the managers pay as regular income. they just need to do it in a way that they dont crush the entire industry and cause massive layoffs.

hthis spring the hedgefunds, for market reasons, are trading less. banks have laid of alot of people, regular people because of this. my point all along has been that it isnt so easy to just raise the taxes on hedgefund managers. you must consider that the current tax code is benefitting many others. regular people.

Just how much money do hedge funds bring into the economy? They aren't producing a good and in some cases their short positions mean they make huge money when businesses decline or fail.

We need to get past this, "We don't want to destroy an industry/company" that's either been propped up or lived in loopholes. If it's economically viable without gov't assistance or protection, it'll survive. If not, then good riddance. At the same time if an industry/company is no longer viable because it's overregulated than we change the regulations.

If cutting the purse strings, we also have to cut the tethers too.

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[weekender 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

... income is income and capital gains are capital gains. thats the law. ...

But in this case we're talking about the carried-interest loophole which allows hedge fund managers to consider the money that they receive for their services as capital gains instead of income.

i get that, sorry if that wasnt clear. i think going forward they will find a way to tax the managers pay as regular income. they just need to do it in a way that they dont crush the entire industry and cause massive layoffs.

hthis spring the hedgefunds, for market reasons, are trading less. banks have laid of alot of people, regular people because of this. my point all along has been that it isnt so easy to just raise the taxes on hedgefund managers. you must consider that the current tax code is benefitting many others. regular people.

Just how much money do hedge funds bring into the economy? They aren't producing a good and in some cases their short positions mean they make huge money when businesses decline or fail.

We need to get past this, "We don't want to destroy an industry/company" that's either been propped up or lived in loopholes. If it's economically viable without gov't assistance or protection, it'll survive. If not, then good riddance. At the same time if an industry/company is no longer viable because it's overregulated than we change the regulations.

If cutting the purse strings, we also have to cut the tethers too.

your local bank doesnt produce a tangible good either. so by your reasoning we should close them? i know that isnt exactly what you meant but your line of thinking is a bit off. hedgefunds are investors. without investors very little would exist. who do you think buys the bonds that build bridges, tunnels and highways? who do you think buys the equities or directly invest in small companies so they can expand? its not individual investors. its institutions, which include hedgefunds. so you can say they dont produce anything but its not wholly correct. there aren't enough old ladies buying bonds to build a bridge.

your short comment doesnt make any sense to me, no offense. a stock does not go down because someone has a short. do you know how a short sale works? not an insult, a real question. you must first borrow the stock from a long person then sell it to another person. the transaction has no impact to the day to day operations of a company.

"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird."
John Frusciante

[Bolas 5]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

... income is income and capital gains are capital gains. thats the law. ...

But in this case we're talking about the carried-interest loophole which allows hedge fund managers to consider the money that they receive for their services as capital gains instead of income.

i get that, sorry if that wasnt clear. i think going forward they will find a way to tax the managers pay as regular income. they just need to do it in a way that they dont crush the entire industry and cause massive layoffs.

hthis spring the hedgefunds, for market reasons, are trading less. banks have laid of alot of people, regular people because of this. my point all along has been that it isnt so easy to just raise the taxes on hedgefund managers. you must consider that the current tax code is benefitting many others. regular people.

Just how much money do hedge funds bring into the economy? They aren't producing a good and in some cases their short positions mean they make huge money when businesses decline or fail.

We need to get past this, "We don't want to destroy an industry/company" that's either been propped up or lived in loopholes. If it's economically viable without gov't assistance or protection, it'll survive. If not, then good riddance. At the same time if an industry/company is no longer viable because it's overregulated than we change the regulations.

If cutting the purse strings, we also have to cut the tethers too.

your local bank doesnt produce a tangible good either. so by your reasoning we should close them? i know that isnt exactly what you meant but your line of thinking is a bit off. hedgefunds are investors. without investors very little would exist. who do you think buys the bonds that build bridges, tunnels and highways? who do you think buys the equities or directly invest in small companies so they can expand? its not individual investors. its institutions, which include hedgefunds. so you can say they dont produce anything but its not wholly correct. there aren't enough old ladies buying bonds to build a bridge.

your short comment doesnt make any sense to me, no offense. a stock does not go down because someone has a short. do you know how a short sale works? not an insult, a real question. you must first borrow the stock from a long person then sell it to another person. the transaction has no impact to the day to day operations of a company.

Where do you think these companies get their money from? Those same little old ladies and other people producing something but just a lot more of them. It's a volume game.

As companies live and die by their stock prices and ratings, large short sales could very well negatively impact a company. We all know how emotionally driven the economy is and how tied to consumer confidence things are. If people are concerned something is going to fail (like a bank) they are going to react and pull money and basically their reaction is what makes it happen.

I personally think we have too many people that have inserted themselves into too many systems that are offering no real value. Have you ever looked at how many times a barrel of oil is sold from the time it is pumped out to when it goes into your car as gas?

It's past time to treat all equally. No more loopholes and special treatment and definitely no more handouts. Either figure out how to survive or just enjoy the gravy train run you had.

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[weekender 0]

"Where do you think these companies get their money from? Those same little old ladies and other people producing something but just a lot more of them. It's a volume game."

this is where i will respectfully dissagree. individual investors are a negligible part of the primary market. this is where companies raise their money through initial public offerings. they are also negligible in the venture capital markets. dont believe me? call your local broker and ask him for a share of Facebook and let me know how that conversation goes. call a venture capital firm and ask them if you can buy into one of their private equity holdings. i can guess the response. those markets are dominated by the institutions. its a volume game but not made up of little old ladies.

short interest has no bearing on how a company will perform. it can effect how the STOCK will perform but i'm afraid your confusing the two.

fyi, you could have said it can also effect their ability to raise capital because of their poor stock performance thus effecting the day to day operation. But you didnt, so i get credit for that one. hah

i dont think we need to get this granular on the financial markets though. i feel that raising taxes is not always such an easy fix. others dissagree. i try to explain how its not so easy. others dissagree. i get it.

"The point is, I'm weird, but I never felt weird."
John Frusciante

[rushmc 23]

That is intellectual dishonesty.

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

"Thank you for calling the US Military. Please leave a message at the tone with the nature of your situation and you call will be returned within 7-10 business days."

You left out - press 2 for Spanish...

We are all engines of karma