BAR wrote:
Boater wrote:
SmallBoats.com wrote:
Eisboch wrote:


If I am correct, then we are witnessing the biggest scam of the
whole election process.

As you know, I founded and operated a business for many years. A
couple of times I nearly went belly-up due to income taxes due.
The income tax structure basically penalizes you for making headway
and actually start producing a profit which can then be re-invested
into the company. Income taxes basically became a cost of doing
business and the better you did, the more you paid.

I didn't pay a cent in "Capital Gains" taxes in all the years I had
the business. I paid through the nose when I sold it though because
at that time the rate was something like 35 percent.

Eisboch


president..


Drool on, Justwaitascotty.

Eisboch...it's not relief on capital gains, it's tax relief on the
investments made in small business. Maybe Obama didn't explain it
properly in the tv appearance you saw. He has explained it in detail
several times.

Why can't Obama explain it properly all of the time?


I'll be sure to ask him for you when I see him.

"Boater" wrote in message
...


Eisboch...it's not relief on capital gains, it's tax relief on the
investments made in small business. Maybe Obama didn't explain it properly
in the tv appearance you saw. He has explained it in detail several times.


You're right. I misunderstood it, as I am sure did many others because he
didn't explain it.

But here's the irony.

Financial investors in a small business are likely to be well off
individuals, venture capitalists or larger companies looking for investment
opportunities that also have significant tax advantages. Obama is
proposing just that, in apparent contradiction to his "tax the rich" and
"share the wealth" rhetoric.

It would be much, much better to minimize regular income taxes on business
if you want to stimulate the economy. Not all small businesses are
desirable investment candidates. Mine wasn't. No one could understand
what we built and when I tried to explain their eyes just glazed over.

Eisboch

Eisboch
Isn't that totally contrary to his

Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...

Eisboch...it's not relief on capital gains, it's tax relief on the
investments made in small business. Maybe Obama didn't explain it properly
in the tv appearance you saw. He has explained it in detail several times.


You're right. I misunderstood it, as I am sure did many others because he
didn't explain it.

But here's the irony.

Financial investors in a small business are likely to be well off
individuals, venture capitalists or larger companies looking for investment
opportunities that also have significant tax advantages. Obama is
proposing just that, in apparent contradiction to his "tax the rich" and
"share the wealth" rhetoric.

It would be much, much better to minimize regular income taxes on business
if you want to stimulate the economy. Not all small businesses are
desirable investment candidates. Mine wasn't. No one could understand
what we built and when I tried to explain their eyes just glazed over.

Eisboch

Eisboch
Isn't that totally contrary to his




My guess is that Obama is targeting the existing or prospective
proprietors who want to invest in their own existing or prospective
businesses.

Here's a giggle for you. Way back when, when I worked for a financial PR
firm in Detroit, one of our clients was an incredibly hard working and
successful family who owned a multistate mortgage banking business and a
few commercial development companies. A large Michigan bank was on the
verge of default. The family made a deal with the FDIC to take the bank
over. This was all done over a weekend. The bank opened Monday under the
ownership of the investor family.

When I talked to the client about this a couple of weeks later, and
commented how it was terrific to have about $100 million in liquid
assets sitting around (that's what the buy in price was), he said, with
a smile..."it's just a small business investment."

A year later, they sold off the mortgage banking business to Citicorp.
Their shares were trading OTC at under $5 and they got $28 a share from
Citicorp.

Of course, this was in the day of honest, legitimate businessmen running
financial institutions...

"Boater" wrote in message
...



My guess is that Obama is targeting the existing or prospective
proprietors who want to invest in their own existing or prospective
businesses.



The average small business owner/entreupeour isn't rich with money to
invest. He/she starts a business in hopes of many someday becoming
successful and maybe even rich.

Most that I know started out by taking loans against their houses, or in my
case, simply growing when you could if you had a decent year.

Eisboch

Eisboch wrote:
"Boater" wrote in message
...


My guess is that Obama is targeting the existing or prospective
proprietors who want to invest in their own existing or prospective
businesses.



The average small business owner/entreupeour isn't rich with money to
invest. He/she starts a business in hopes of many someday becoming
successful and maybe even rich.

Most that I know started out by taking loans against their houses, or in my
case, simply growing when you could if you had a decent year.

Eisboch



What you are saying is not in conflict with what I said. Getting a pass
on capital gains taxes on money you invest in your own business is a
plus, no matter what the amounts involved.

On Tue, 28 Oct 2008 10:41:26 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:

Am I wrong or is this just a bunch of economic doubletalk that sounds good
but has virtually no meat to it?

I know - I saw that too. It's a little bit confusing how he phrased
it.

His idea is to remove capital gains liabilities for small business.
That's what he's proposed anyway.

The problem is in how "small business" is being defined. He and/or
his advisors have not defined exactly what he means by "small
business". As far as I know, the only definition is if the small
business owner makes over $250K/yr in which case his "wealth" will be
redistributed.

Which is an economic disincentive when you think about it. The person
who makes $249K per year isn't peanized for success, the person making
$250,000.01 is. What I don't understand is that his main economic
guy, Austan Goolsbee, is a fairly rightish free market guy and he's
the one proposing all this stuff.

He's a brainy guy - but I honestly don't think he's thought this stuff
through.

On Tue, 28 Oct 2008 12:19:05 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:

It would be much, much better to minimize regular income taxes on business
if you want to stimulate the economy. Not all small businesses are
desirable investment candidates. Mine wasn't. No one could understand
what we built and when I tried to explain their eyes just glazed over.

Flat tax - the only answer.

10%.

On Tue, 28 Oct 2008 12:19:05 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:

You're right. I misunderstood it, as I am sure did many others because he
didn't explain it.

That's a large part of the problem with Obama's proposal - it's not so
much what he says as what he doesn't say. It's like a game of Clue or
playing with Newtonian mathematics on a Quantum level. :)

Obama says only people making more than $250K will have their taxes
raised, but that doesn’t mean that everyone making less than that will
have their taxes cut. There’s a middle segment, between $150K and
$200K for individuals and $200K and $250K for families (as I
understand it and my understanding is by no means complete because of
the ambiguities in how he states it), whose taxes will effectively
stay the same.

It's pretty obvious that Obama throws that $250K figure around
assuming that Joe Sixpack will assume that’s the threshold for tax
cuts. It isn’t. It’s the threshold for tax hikes, and only for
families, not individuals. Or so I deduce.

He's being very slippery - amost out Clintoning Clinton. :)

There is only one thing that we can all say for absolute sure -
capital gains for folks making over $250K per year will go up -
significantly under the Obama plan.

"Tom Francis - SWSports" wrote in
message ...
On Tue, 28 Oct 2008 12:19:05 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:

You're right. I misunderstood it, as I am sure did many others because he
didn't explain it.

That's a large part of the problem with Obama's proposal - it's not so
much what he says as what he doesn't say. It's like a game of Clue or
playing with Newtonian mathematics on a Quantum level. :)

Obama says only people making more than $250K will have their taxes
raised, but that doesn't mean that everyone making less than that will
have their taxes cut. There's a middle segment, between $150K and
$200K for individuals and $200K and $250K for families (as I
understand it and my understanding is by no means complete because of
the ambiguities in how he states it), whose taxes will effectively
stay the same.

It's pretty obvious that Obama throws that $250K figure around
assuming that Joe Sixpack will assume that's the threshold for tax
cuts. It isn't. It's the threshold for tax hikes, and only for
families, not individuals. Or so I deduce.

He's being very slippery - amost out Clintoning Clinton. :)

There is only one thing that we can all say for absolute sure -
capital gains for folks making over $250K per year will go up -
significantly under the Obama plan.

Every time I've heard the $250K *threshold* bandied about it applies to
*workers*. What about retired?

D.Duck wrote:
"Tom Francis - SWSports" wrote in
message ...
On Tue, 28 Oct 2008 12:19:05 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:

You're right. I misunderstood it, as I am sure did many others because he
didn't explain it.
That's a large part of the problem with Obama's proposal - it's not so
much what he says as what he doesn't say. It's like a game of Clue or
playing with Newtonian mathematics on a Quantum level. :)

Obama says only people making more than $250K will have their taxes
raised, but that doesn't mean that everyone making less than that will
have their taxes cut. There's a middle segment, between $150K and
$200K for individuals and $200K and $250K for families (as I
understand it and my understanding is by no means complete because of
the ambiguities in how he states it), whose taxes will effectively
stay the same.

It's pretty obvious that Obama throws that $250K figure around
assuming that Joe Sixpack will assume that's the threshold for tax
cuts. It isn't. It's the threshold for tax hikes, and only for
families, not individuals. Or so I deduce.

He's being very slippery - amost out Clintoning Clinton. :)

There is only one thing that we can all say for absolute sure -
capital gains for folks making over $250K per year will go up -
significantly under the Obama plan.

Every time I've heard the $250K *threshold* bandied about it applies to
*workers*. What about retired?

Going back to Tom's reference to Obama being slicker than Slick Willie.
You haven't heard Obama state that it is income, dividends or interest.
It most likely will be all of the above combined.

Just remember to die in 2010 when there is no federal death tax.