Finally

#26
#26
it also wouldn't regulate an AIG either.

so lets regulate teh banks who have paid off the fed money in full with interest and don't regulate AIG, Fannie, Freddie, GM, and chrysler who have cost the taxpayers hundreds of billions and have little, or in the case of fannie and freddy zero, ability to pay back these loans. i thought this was all about protecting the taxpayers from private losses? guess not.
 
#27
#27
I just heard a bout a little gem included in the new Financial Reform Act. Richard Rahn wrote an article in the Washington Times that gives some details:
Financial Fascism | Richard W. Rahn | Cato Institute: Commentary

Here’s a small excerpt that gives the gist of the regulation:

“…the new financial reform bill will make it illegal to invest in a new venture or start-up company for anyone who does not have a liquid net worth of $2.2 million or an annual income of roughly $450,000 if single or $675,000 if married — which rules out all but fewer than 1 percent of the population. If this passes and is signed into law, Congress and the president will be saying to the American people, "Ninety-nine-plus percent of you are too stupid to know how to invest your own money." (They think the rest of us are as irresponsible as they are.)”

Since Droski works in the financial sector, I’m sure he can speak about this at a much more highly educated level than I. But It seems to me that this bill will either stagnate the growth of new businesses, funnel all investment opportunities to a very small, protected group or both.

This is just another example of the Federal Government promoting growth and equal treatment…
 
#28
#28
say that part the other day and wondered how that was even thought up.

jcwvolfan said:
If this passes and is signed into law, Congress and the president will be saying to the American people, "Ninety-nine-plus percent of you are too stupid to know how to invest your own money." (They think the rest of us are as irresponsible as they are.)”
Click to expand...

Doesn't social security already say that for 100%? :)
 
#29
#29
of course it will stagnate growth. the most laughable part of this is this theory that because you have $2.2 mil you are somehow by default more financially sophisticated than the rest of us. i can tell you from personal experience that that isn't anywhere close to being true.
 
#30
#30
droski said:
of course it will stagnate growth. the most laughable part of this is this theory that because you have $2.2 mil you are somehow by default more financially sophisticated than the rest of us. i can tell you from personal experience that that isn't anywhere close to being true.
Click to expand...

come on, this guy is much smarter than the rest of the population because he has money.
 
#31
#31
apparently this would exclude 71% of people currently in a lot of these deals though i know from personal experience that a lot of people underreport their income and net worth on these forms to just make the minimum requirement.
 
#33
#33
droski said:
of course it will stagnate growth. the most laughable part of this is this theory that because you have $2.2 mil you are somehow by default more financially sophisticated than the rest of us. i can tell you from personal experience that that isn't anywhere close to being true.
Click to expand...

Amen.

Wanna see someone with no finacial sense whatsoever? Look into an average doctor's finances.
 
#34
#34
#35
#35
BigPapaVol said:
Eventually, people are rich enough to no longer care about the tax bill and their current wealth isn't taxed, so they're cool if America becomes a philanthropy with everyone else's money.

It's a bit like Joe Kennedy fighting for insider trading rules after he made fortunes investing his illicitly gained funds via insider trading.
Click to expand...

*cough* buffett *cough*

one of the biggest tax cheats in american history has the balls to suggest the rich don't pay enough in taxes.
 
#36
#36
droski said:
*cough* buffett *cough*

one of the biggest tax cheats in american history has the balls to suggest the rich don't pay enough in taxes.
Click to expand...

I almost put him down as the example, but the Kennedy clan is a better example of both, sleaziness and wealth paying no taxes.
 
#37
#37
BigPapaVol said:
I almost put him down as the example, but the Kennedy clan is a better example of both, sleaziness and wealth paying no taxes.
Click to expand...

agreed.

i particurally like when buffet breaks out the fact his secretary pays a higher % of her income in taxes than he does and ignores that a) she is probably among the higest paid secretaries in the country and b) he structures his compensation at berkshire (and the dividend) specifically to avoid taxes.
 
#38
#38
Cash Vallin said:
you got it! finally more progress!!!
Click to expand...

crackhead2.gif
 
#39
#39
jcwvolfan said:
I just heard a bout a little gem included in the new Financial Reform Act. Richard Rahn wrote an article in the Washington Times that gives some details:
Financial Fascism | Richard W. Rahn | Cato Institute: Commentary

Here’s a small excerpt that gives the gist of the regulation:

“…the new financial reform bill will make it illegal to invest in a new venture or start-up company for anyone who does not have a liquid net worth of $2.2 million or an annual income of roughly $450,000 if single or $675,000 if married — which rules out all but fewer than 1 percent of the population. If this passes and is signed into law, Congress and the president will be saying to the American people, "Ninety-nine-plus percent of you are too stupid to know how to invest your own money." (They think the rest of us are as irresponsible as they are.)”

Since Droski works in the financial sector, I’m sure he can speak about this at a much more highly educated level than I. But It seems to me that this bill will either stagnate the growth of new businesses, funnel all investment opportunities to a very small, protected group or both.

This is just another example of the Federal Government promoting growth and equal treatment…
Click to expand...

Huh? So if the founder of Facebook asked for $2000 from a friend to buy servers when he started it then only high-networth investors could provide this seed capital?

Please tell me this ain't true.

The sad thing is that many high networth individuals get that way by getting ownership stakes in small businesses that take off.
 
#40
#40
volinbham said:
Huh? So if the founder of Facebook asked for $2000 from a friend to buy servers when he started it then only high-networth investors could provide this seed capital?

Please tell me this ain't true.

The sad thing is that many high networth individuals get that way by getting ownership stakes in small businesses that take off.
Click to expand...

Scary isn’t it.
The article doesn’t offer any specifics like which agency will enforce the regulation. (I’m guessing the SEC, with cooperation from the IRS of course). Nor does it say whether it will apply to all new start ups or only ones that meet certain criteria. Regardless it’s still BS!
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top