Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Question for the economic aces
"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 |
#2
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Question for the economic aces
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... |
#3
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Question for the economic aces
"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 |
#4
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Question for the economic aces
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. |
#5
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Question for the economic aces
Boater wrote:
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. You have no idea what you are talking about (again). You DO know the difference between capital gains and profits, right? Ever heard of a Subchapter S Corp? Look it up. |
#6
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Question for the economic aces
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 That's how I did it. Hopefully the Fed will save me a few bucks tomorrow... |
#7
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Question for the economic aces
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%. |
#8
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Question for the economic aces
On Tue, 28 Oct 2008 19:52:41 GMT, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote: 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%. A National sales tax is also an answer. The more you buy, the more you pay. With a flat tax folks can still keep income undeclared and not subject to tax (e.g. drug dealers). Those same folks will have to pay tax when they make purchases. Makes to much sense to ensure it will never be enacted. |
#9
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Question for the economic aces
"Tom Francis - SWSports" wrote in message ... 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%. We do not have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem. And a flat tax will never, ever pass! Government these days is control. And taxation is the ultimate control. You want to dissuade an action, raise taxes on that action. Want to help a donation giver, lower taxes for that segment. |
#10
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Question for the economic aces
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. |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Economic collapse | ASA | |||
Economic Indicator? | General | |||
Think this has anything to do with the economic problems? | General | |||
US Aces High Narragansett RI b | Tall Ship Photos | |||
US Aces High Narragansett RI a | Tall Ship Photos |