[rogers3]

Assume that in 2002, I socked away 5000.00 and I can now cash it in for 63000.00 or roll it into another investment. Not being a day trader or into markets that much, would you all say that was a good investment?

[LUconn]

I don't know if this is a trick question or not but getting over 10 times your original investment in 10 years seems pretty exceptional. Not having my fancy pants financial calculator on me, isn't that like 30-40% per year?

[adam42381]

Assume that in 2002, I socked away 5000.00 and I can now cash it in for 63000.00 or roll it into another investment. Not being a day trader or into markets that much, would you all say that was a good investment?

Yes. You averaged just under a 30% return per year. Pretty incredible.

http://www.moneychimp.com/calculator/co ... ulator.htm

[rogers3]

I don't know if this is a trick question or not but getting over 10 times your original investment in 10 years seems pretty exceptional. Not having my fancy pants financial calculator on me, isn't that like 30-40% per year?

Yes. You averaged just under a 30% return per year. Pretty incredible.

http://www.moneychimp.com/calculator/co ... ulator.htm

Not a money expert, but I did stay in a Holiday Inn... Really, just put that out there in that way because if I talked about my investment philosophy, I'd get laughed at!
I've got some traditional stuff, but in light of today's world, I have little hope of it being what it should be in the future. My cynical philosophy based on the state of the economy today, you may ask?

High Growth- Rental Properties that cash flow well with a relatively short pay-off
Moderate Growth- Property acquired at below market
Low Growth/Safe- Guns and ammo

Needless to say, I would like those sides of my portfolio to grow faster than they are. A wise man once said (I think it was Buffett) that it is good to have some investments that really produce- guns and land both will do that when TSHTF!

[jbock13]

Let's take a look at it this way 09. If you're a professional athlete living or working in California who makes over 1 million dollars, you will at that rate begin paying 39.6% in Fed taxes, and 13.3% in state taxes. That equals 52.9%. And we haven't even got to property taxes, personal property taxes, environmental fees which are still taxes (mandatory smog checks, etc.) It also doesn't take into effect state taxes in states that you play in, for example, you'll pay 4 games worth of paychecks in NY taxes.

Now you can say two things. One, they're rich enough they can pay it! Or two, you can see that any point at which a human being works for less than half of what they have labored, they cease to be a human being.

The third thing that happens at that tax level, is that companies and individuals decide to move offshore. As the Beatles and the Rolling Stones proved when Britain passed the millionaires tax, this can and will occur when we finally get to that breaking point. This is what the Laffer curve shows us. Who would have thought Canada would have lower taxes than us? But it's about to happen.

[LUconn]

Or two, you can see that any point at which a human being works for less than half of what they have labored, they cease to be a human being.

yowza. Talk about upping the hyperbole 100 notches. Now being over taxed is making you not human. Should we be able to keep these creatures as pets or are would I need some sort of agricultural zoning? Because I have that.

[jbock13]

Or two, you can see that any point at which a human being works for less than half of what they have labored, they cease to be a human being.

yowza. Talk about upping the hyperbole 100 notches. Now being over taxed is making you not human. Should we be able to keep these creatures as pets or are would I need some sort of agricultural zoning? Because I have that.

If you get to keep 46 percent of what you earn, you are no longer working to supply your own needs.

[From the class of 09]

Let's take a look at it this way 09. If you're a professional athlete living or working in California who makes over 1 million dollars, you will at that rate begin paying 39.6% in Fed taxes, and 13.3% in state taxes. That equals 52.9%. And we haven't even got to property taxes, personal property taxes, environmental fees which are still taxes (mandatory smog checks, etc.) It also doesn't take into effect state taxes in states that you play in, for example, you'll pay 4 games worth of paychecks in NY taxes.

Now you can say two things. One, they're rich enough they can pay it! Or two, you can see that any point at which a human being works for less than half of what they have labored, they cease to be a human being.

The third thing that happens at that tax level, is that companies and individuals decide to move offshore. As the Beatles and the Rolling Stones proved when Britain passed the millionaires tax, this can and will occur when we finally get to that breaking point. This is what the Laffer curve shows us. Who would have thought Canada would have lower taxes than us? But it's about to happen.

Again you totally ignored any type of deduction or credit, which are currently a very big piece of the tax code. If any NBA player is paying over 50% effective tax rate he should fire his whole financial team. So while it's theoretically possible it's very improbable that one would have an effective rate over 50%.
Look at your own return. You're what in the 25% marginal tax bracket and probably pay 5-10% effective federal rate? You probably find that many deductions just doing it yourself with TurboTax, now if you're one of these 1% they have ways to deduct and credit well beyond whatever you and I do on our return.

PS. Probably want to rethink your second paragraph.

[Yacht Rock]

Or two, you can see that any point at which a human being works for less than half of what they have labored, they cease to be a human being.

yowza. Talk about upping the hyperbole 100 notches. Now being over taxed is making you not human. Should we be able to keep these creatures as pets or are would I need some sort of agricultural zoning? Because I have that.

I don't think it's hyperbole. jbock13 is exactly right. And I think the argument of "well they can afford it" is silly because I think the argument is more about whether it is right for the government to lay first claim to a large portion of what you earn.

09, Yes, through write offs, many times people end up paying less than the maximum rate, but they surely pay a higher dollar amount. I have liberal friends who complain about what the rich write off for taxes but they themselves write off their home interest, charitable donations, etc. What's the difference between a rich person writing something off on their taxes and a middle class individual writing something off on my taxes?

What some folks don't get is that the rich already pay way more in taxes than the majority of taxpayers. It's already way out of balance. In addition, in states where you have income and sales tax you pay tax to receive your money and you have to pay tax to receive your money. Then you have the estate tax where you have to pay tax to receive your inheritance.

In the end, taxes should be focusing on funding that which we cannot pay for on the open market ourselves. Things like national defense, protection of widows and orphans, etc.

Instead, government has spread itself too thin.

[jbock13]

I didn't mean to attack 09. I shouldn't have approached it in that manner. My apologies.

[LUconn]

I'm not for high levels of taxation on anybody. I understand that it's stupid to take half of somebody's earnings. But to say that if that occurs, that person ceases to be a human being doesn't make any logical sense. It's unfair. It's ineffective. It's a million negative adjectives but it does not turn a person into a nonperson. I thought maybe he was trying to give a shout out to slavery but I guess you mean literally they cease to be human? I don't know.

[jbock13]

Let's say you buy a cheeseburger. And the government takes 54 percent of it. Was that your cheeseburger?

[LUconn]

You bought it so yes.

[Purple Haize]

You bought it so yes.

Yes but he didn't build that cheeseburger. Someone built that for him!

[ALUmnus]

It's your income, not your personhood. Still, why is everyone so upset about the statement, it wasn't that bad.

[Purple Haize]

It's your income, not your personhood. Still, why is everyone so upset about the statement, it wasn't that bad.

The 'You didn't build it.." comment? Really? It goes to the heart of the matter. Are we for equal opportunity or equal outcomes?

[jbock13]

Your income is your personhood. It's the fruits of your labor. An employer doesn't pay someone $8.00 an hour to fix cheeseburgers. Who's to say he would sell any? Actually, he hires an employee to fill a demand for cheeseburgers, and he's willing to pay $8.00 an hour to get that labor. You provide a profit line for him, and your share of what you sell is reflected in the $8.00 wage. That's what you work for. And then the government takes half of it? But you worked for it!

We all agree we need taxation to fund government. But at 54%, you're now working for the State, not yourself.

[LUconn]

Your income is your personhood.

jbock. Seriously. What are you talking about? So instead of personhood beginning at conception, it begins with your first dollar made? We all understand economics and are generally in agreement with you. But you keep talking about nonsensical philosophies of what constitutes a person and it having a direct relation with income/taxation.

People all over the world have NO income. They could be retarded, lazy, or disabled. They are still people.

[jbock13]

Fine, your income is part of your personhood.

[Yacht Rock]

I think I understand what jbock is trying to say and I think that many of us would agree with the point that, when the government takes an increasingly large share of what you have and calls it their own, it rejects many of the ideas of individual property rights. Even things that people have worked for, bought, and earned, are not theirs without government approval.

While taxes at some level are necessary for an organized society, they can become excessive and, with each increase, take power away from individuals and give it to a collective. As individual property and power is reduced, that can be equated, from some perspectives, as a reduction of humanity.

That being said, if anything, it reminds us to put our faith in God who has authority over all things and with who we can accomplish much.

[logic]

So....back to the markets...


Someone check out CLF and tell me what you think.

[Yacht Rock]

Heh, you're right. This topic did go down a rathole. Just go to Vegas and bet it all on black.

[jbock13]

Well, there is a correlation between taxation and markets. After all our investments are double taxed.

[Yacht Rock]

Well, there is a correlation between taxation and markets. After all our investments are double taxed.

And if you die...triple taxed...

[logic]

So....back to the markets...


Someone check out CLF and tell me what you think.

And while you guys debate taxes you have no control over, CLF is up 2 dollars and 6% on the day. Anyone with a sharp eye want to value the price? Currently trading at 34. I've seen some market estimates at 46 dollars.