Economic "Stimulus"

edited January 2003 in General Discussion

Comments

  • edited December 1969
    set off quite the debate on CPHL the other day -- does this forum still have a pulse?

    Can't you just HEAR the economy SCREAMING back into the stratosphere after that tax cut on DIVIDENDS?!

    WOOHOO!!!

    _/ C

  • axx
    edited December 1969
    Re: Economic "Stimulus"

    set off quite the debate on CPHL the other day -- does this
    forum still have a pulse?

    no

    Can't you just HEAR the economy SCREAMING back into the
    stratosphere after that tax cut on DIVIDENDS?!

    mabye

    -ax

  • edited December 1969
    Hey, they could not use "trickle down" again

    There is a belief among some circles that any money you give back to the upper 10% of the financial curve somehow is good for everyone.

    If you believe this, you are going to back this whole idea.

    If on the other hand you believe that this means that the fat cats portfolios will swell while doing diddly squat for anyone else, you agree with me that this is yet another way to line the pockets of the people with already fairly well lined pockets.

    If the people getting this tax break actually increased the amount of money they put into the economy rather than into their brokerage accounts, the argument might almost have a leg to stand upon, but the Reagan years pretty well showed that this is not the case.

    This bit of bad proposal is not as bad as it could have been in that it actually prevents companies who have paid no taxes from then paying tax free dividends, which explains why wall street has reacted in a decidedly lukewarm manner. Without that bit of protection, I figured we were going to see a lot of closely held corporations paying out huge dividends and they going bankrupt fairly quickly. It will still happen if this law comes into play, but perhaps limited to a small fraction of what it would have been otherwise.

    The fun part is the question of how much money this is going to suck out of the corporate sectors as the shareholders demand this tax free benefit. Businesses will have a lot less ability to respond to short term downturns, meaning that they will have to resort to the classic method of reducing costs a lot sooner (can you say 'layoff') instead of having a couple of months of reserves to weather bad months.


  • edited December 1969
    Re: Hey, they could not use "trickle down" again

    what I find pretty humorous is using 'double taxation' as a reason to not tax dividends. The reasoning is that dividends comes from company profits (which are taxed) so why double tax them when they are paid to people? Well, if you ignore the fact that the first taxation is on a corporation and the second one on an individual and buy that argument, then you better start repealing a lot of other double taxations - they're all over the place. I get paid a salary, take my taxed income and go out and buy gasoline - which is TAXED!?! OMG - I personally am being double taxed every time I fill up, or buy anything with sales tax for that matter. Then the cash I spend on that gas goes to a big oil company - which is taxed on the profit! NO! That money has now been triple taxed! Then, they pay out dividends, and that gets taxed again!?! Where does it end!
    :
    ::cough::

    Conner


Sign In or Register to comment.