You’re wrong. In fact, the entire reason people invest is to maximize their return. Do they not teach economics in your junior high?
I understand that. But that desire is no argument against paying corporate taxes. Do they not teach ethics in your junior high?
No one is arguing against paying corporate taxes. They should be lower, though.
If you had any ethics at all, you wouldn’t be reaching into my pocketbook to begin with.
As I’ve already pointed out. This kind of rhetoric is phony and disingenuous. You’re the one who wants to reach into MY pocket to pay for your war. You have no moral standing to complain about a few cents being scattered to the peasants.
And as I said upthread, I’ll be more than happy to refund your 5 cents to you if it really bothers you that much.
Not lame at all - quite true. Of course, if every corporate tax was lifted, the revenue has to come from somewhere, so the workers would probably have to pay higher taxes anyway. But at least the burdern is shifted to the unemployed as well.
Again, perfectly true, and I don’t see your problem with that reasoning. All of those involve tradeoffs between desirable things and lower prices (and of course unionization has another axis of tradeoff - unemployment). But most of the time, as with environmentalism, individuals are called upon to sacrifice as well, which links burden on corporations with burden to individuals. With the corporate tax, we’re being asked to imagine that nobody but Big Evil Corporations suffers for it.
…which doesn’t mean that we should tax 'em just because “they were asking for it.” Let me put it this way - do you think investors should be taxed twice? If so, what makes them so much more undeserving than noninvestors?
“Deservin’s got nothin’ to do with it.”
Ever heard of a fella called Willie Sutton?
Seems to me like Jesus pretty much said you should die broke 'cause you gave so hard. I think you can render unto Cesar what is Cesar’s here, especially when it goes to those who are less fortunate. Like myself.
No one has presented any convincing argument that corporate taxation amounts to double taxation. It does not.
Everybody wants Jesus on their side. And science. Jesus and science. Yeah, that’s the ticket.
nameless, why do you hate America? A real American would call for his assassination. 
[sub]This is sarcasm. Please don’t hurt me.[/sub]
Robin
I agree, let’s cripple big business. I think putting more restrictions on them, cutting their profits and taking away their tax benefits will cause them to reduce prices, pay their employees more and stay in the country. Spot on!
Sure it does. As I explained above, the tax burden falls on owners, employees, and consumers. Most of us can’t help but be employees and consumers, but we do have a choice about our investing.
No, that is not the “entire” reason people invest. You may have learned economics in junior high, but it is not clear whether you have learned anything since then.
Why else would they? Please disregard if the thread cannot be other than a flame fest.
Regards,
Shodan
It’s pretty much a self-indulgent flame fest. But the question does have a serious answer. One invests to hedge risk, to create future income stream, to protect one’s cash position, and for myriad other reasons that are not, strictly speaking, “maximizing return”. Lumping all of these under the umbrella of maximizing return creates a useless tautology.
When and if I get my check, I’ll be writing another check in the same amount and sending it to:
Bureau of the Public Debt
U.S. Department of the Treasury
799 Ninth St. NW
Washington DC 20239
Just my own little way of countering the drunken-sailor budgetary practices of the Bush Administration. Hope you’ll consider doing the same.
While I agree with your post, Maeglin, I could make an argument that each of these strategies indeed does seek to maximize return. Much might depend on how you define “maximize return”.
For example, if I have $20,000 cash today, and need it for college tuition in 6 months, I might look to put it into a CD maturing in 6 months. Despite the poor rate of return, I am maximizing my return within my risk profile (which in this case is no risk is acceptable). If instead “maximizing returns” simply means earning the greatest return, then I am not maximizing my return with the above strategy.
Some people invest not in order to see a personal return, but to support future development of that industry. I invest in R&D funds that are unlikely to return a profit to me. I have no children, so it will benefit no one in my family, but I hope it will benefit unknown future persons at large.
That’s the definition of “charity”, not “investing”.