Ping Larkin
in [Design]
|
From: krw on 3 Nov 2009 19:35 On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 16:12:30 -0800, John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 20:03:47 -0600, krw <krw(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote: > >>On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 22:22:31 +0000, ChrisQ <meru(a)devnull.com> wrote: >> >>>Jim Thompson wrote: >>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> Shooting politicians and bureaucrats would be more effective ;-) >>>> >>> >>>My sentiment as well, but someone has to run run the country and try to >>>balance the budgets. It would help the west if we all stopped exporting >>>jobs to China, but you can blame global multinationals for that, who >>>have no interest other than shareholder value. We all want free market >>>economics, but business is now too powerfull for the good of nations. >>>Finding the right balance is not a job I would want. >> >>You don't think government has a hand in shipping jobs to China? > >Don't forget unions; they are contributing their share. Sure, but government is complicit in the Union's reign of terror too.
From: Joerg on 3 Nov 2009 21:17 John Larkin wrote: > On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 18:02:38 -0800, Joerg <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> > wrote: > >> John Larkin wrote: >>> On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 22:22:31 +0000, ChrisQ <meru(a)devnull.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Jim Thompson wrote: >>>> >>>>> Shooting politicians and bureaucrats would be more effective ;-) >>>>> >>>> My sentiment as well, but someone has to run run the country and try to >>>> balance the budgets. It would help the west if we all stopped exporting >>>> jobs to China, but you can blame global multinationals for that, who >>>> have no interest other than shareholder value. >>> No business is run as a charity. All businesses do what they have to >>> do to compete and survive. And shareholders hire boards and executives >>> exactly to maximize the value of their stocks; wouldn't you? So, given >>> all that, tax policy should be structured to do the most good, which >>> includes creating jobs so that people have earnings so that they can >>> pay taxes. >>> >> Also, with all the common dissing of shareholder value one must not >> forget one thing: Who started the company and who sunk money into it? >> Right, shareholders. They take risks and, rightfully, they want to be >> rewarded for taking those risks. At least in America. > > That's true for IPOs. But after that, the stocks usually become poker > chips in a big gambling operation that's disconnected from the > company's real performance. Nobody much buys stocks for dividends any > more. > Doesn't really matter why they buy them. In the same way that some people buy real estate for steady rental income while others do so for more speculative reasons. At the end of the day the buyers of stock will have plunked down considerable money and expect something in return. if they think that any upsides will largely be taxed away they walk away and invest somewhere else. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ "gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam. Use another domain or send PM.
From: krw on 3 Nov 2009 22:40 On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 16:10:25 -0800, John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 18:02:38 -0800, Joerg <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> >wrote: > >>John Larkin wrote: >>> On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 22:22:31 +0000, ChrisQ <meru(a)devnull.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Jim Thompson wrote: >>>> >>>>> Shooting politicians and bureaucrats would be more effective ;-) >>>>> >>>> My sentiment as well, but someone has to run run the country and try to >>>> balance the budgets. It would help the west if we all stopped exporting >>>> jobs to China, but you can blame global multinationals for that, who >>>> have no interest other than shareholder value. >>> >>> No business is run as a charity. All businesses do what they have to >>> do to compete and survive. And shareholders hire boards and executives >>> exactly to maximize the value of their stocks; wouldn't you? So, given >>> all that, tax policy should be structured to do the most good, which >>> includes creating jobs so that people have earnings so that they can >>> pay taxes. >>> >> >>Also, with all the common dissing of shareholder value one must not >>forget one thing: Who started the company and who sunk money into it? >>Right, shareholders. They take risks and, rightfully, they want to be >>rewarded for taking those risks. At least in America. > >That's true for IPOs. But after that, the stocks usually become poker >chips in a big gambling operation that's disconnected from the >company's real performance. Nobody much buys stocks for dividends any >more. THe do expect the company to grow. Profits turned back into growth or turned back to the shareholder, either way the shareholder's worth increases. Growth can be taxed on the shareholders schedule, as well. Dividends are taxed in the year they're paid.
From: John Larkin on 3 Nov 2009 22:48 On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 21:40:32 -0600, krw <krw(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote: >On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 16:10:25 -0800, John Larkin ><jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > >>On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 18:02:38 -0800, Joerg <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> >>wrote: >> >>>John Larkin wrote: >>>> On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 22:22:31 +0000, ChrisQ <meru(a)devnull.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Jim Thompson wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Shooting politicians and bureaucrats would be more effective ;-) >>>>>> >>>>> My sentiment as well, but someone has to run run the country and try to >>>>> balance the budgets. It would help the west if we all stopped exporting >>>>> jobs to China, but you can blame global multinationals for that, who >>>>> have no interest other than shareholder value. >>>> >>>> No business is run as a charity. All businesses do what they have to >>>> do to compete and survive. And shareholders hire boards and executives >>>> exactly to maximize the value of their stocks; wouldn't you? So, given >>>> all that, tax policy should be structured to do the most good, which >>>> includes creating jobs so that people have earnings so that they can >>>> pay taxes. >>>> >>> >>>Also, with all the common dissing of shareholder value one must not >>>forget one thing: Who started the company and who sunk money into it? >>>Right, shareholders. They take risks and, rightfully, they want to be >>>rewarded for taking those risks. At least in America. >> >>That's true for IPOs. But after that, the stocks usually become poker >>chips in a big gambling operation that's disconnected from the >>company's real performance. Nobody much buys stocks for dividends any >>more. > >THe do expect the company to grow. Profits turned back into growth or >turned back to the shareholder, either way the shareholder's worth >increases. Most stockholders don't get value from the company's profits. They get it from selling their stock to others. The value of the stock is largely perceptive, sometimes driven only by the positive feedback of its own increase or decrease in the market. When you buy a share of stock on the market, the company gets no investment from that purchase, except for IPOs and new issues. The dot.com boom had lots of cases of stocks increasing wildly in value as the underlying companies had massive losses on absurd business models. The stock market is mostly a gambling pool, with a house cut. John
From: Jim Thompson on 3 Nov 2009 22:51
On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 19:48:55 -0800, John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 21:40:32 -0600, krw <krw(a)att.bizzzzzzzzzzz> wrote: > >>On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 16:10:25 -0800, John Larkin >><jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> >>>On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 18:02:38 -0800, Joerg <invalid(a)invalid.invalid> >>>wrote: >>> >>>>John Larkin wrote: >>>>> On Mon, 02 Nov 2009 22:22:31 +0000, ChrisQ <meru(a)devnull.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Jim Thompson wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Shooting politicians and bureaucrats would be more effective ;-) >>>>>>> >>>>>> My sentiment as well, but someone has to run run the country and try to >>>>>> balance the budgets. It would help the west if we all stopped exporting >>>>>> jobs to China, but you can blame global multinationals for that, who >>>>>> have no interest other than shareholder value. >>>>> >>>>> No business is run as a charity. All businesses do what they have to >>>>> do to compete and survive. And shareholders hire boards and executives >>>>> exactly to maximize the value of their stocks; wouldn't you? So, given >>>>> all that, tax policy should be structured to do the most good, which >>>>> includes creating jobs so that people have earnings so that they can >>>>> pay taxes. >>>>> >>>> >>>>Also, with all the common dissing of shareholder value one must not >>>>forget one thing: Who started the company and who sunk money into it? >>>>Right, shareholders. They take risks and, rightfully, they want to be >>>>rewarded for taking those risks. At least in America. >>> >>>That's true for IPOs. But after that, the stocks usually become poker >>>chips in a big gambling operation that's disconnected from the >>>company's real performance. Nobody much buys stocks for dividends any >>>more. >> >>THe do expect the company to grow. Profits turned back into growth or >>turned back to the shareholder, either way the shareholder's worth >>increases. > >Most stockholders don't get value from the company's profits. They get >it from selling their stock to others. The value of the stock is >largely perceptive, sometimes driven only by the positive feedback of >its own increase or decrease in the market. When you buy a share of >stock on the market, the company gets no investment from that >purchase, except for IPOs and new issues. The dot.com boom had lots of >cases of stocks increasing wildly in value as the underlying companies >had massive losses on absurd business models. > >The stock market is mostly a gambling pool, with a house cut. > >John > Absolutely! Instead of pretending Wall Street has some net value to society, we should regulate it as a gambling entity in the same way that Nevada regulates Las Vegas. ...Jim Thompson -- | James E.Thompson, CTO | mens | | Analog Innovations, Inc. | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | | | Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat | | E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | Obama says, "I AM NOT a cry baby, Fox REALLY IS out to get me!" |