The Stock Market and Investing

1156157159161162213

Comments

  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,699
    edited November 2012
    >politics thread somewhere for you guys?

    The politics is deeply involved in the markets now. Just watch how things go from here. 2009-2010 all over?

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,699
    > we have 4 more years of him is scary to me.

    What's the campaigning for--the third term.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,699
    > we have 4 more years of him is scary to me.

    What's the campaigning for--the third term. That's going to throw the markets. Look at Egypt.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • ljflxljflx Member Posts: 4,690
    edited November 2012
    I finally bought GOOG a while back, got a nice 15% run-up in a short time and sold it a day before earnings. I bought back in at $663 about 10 days ago. If it gets back to the low-mid $700's, which I think it will if we avoid the fiscal cliff I'll sell it. I sold before earnings because I had gotten burned on IBM's earnings and didn't want it to happen again. The issue I have with GOOG is that for all their actions they are still a search and display advertising company for a high majority of their earnings. They are also reactive to Apple rather than a trend setter.

    See the article I posted last night in response to Rob. Apple may get a run-up because some are expecting a special dividend while tax rates are lower. It's also probably going to exceed earnings expectations. I also am keeping an eye on Microsoft. I still think the Surface can be a player. Microsoft is a lot more B to B than Apple so I don't view store traffic and buying vs Apples stores so seriously. The Surface is more for the corporate world with a trickle down to the consumer as gravy. So I'd give it more time to catch on. interesting that the NY Times did a story on how hot tablets are for Christmas gifts and never mentioned the Surface.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/29/technology/personaltech/tablets-are-hot-holida- - - y-gifts-but-which-one-to-buy-review.html?ref=business&_r=0
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    I think I know why Costco went up. They are paying a $3 billion dividend.

    Reuters reports Costco Wholesale Corp will pay a special $3 billion dividend to investors as the company posted monthly same-store sales that beat forecasts.

    According to CNN, that allows investors to pay the lower 15% tax rate currently in effect on dividends.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    A computer Guru friend was first in line to check out the Surface and Win8. He was very disappointed it would not run all the MS Office software. Have to wait until the pro version comes out next year. Seems MS has always been a wait and see company. Where Apple does not hang out a carrot for months ahead of launch. MS has such a huge market share they don't seem to really care. Though advances in OS like Android and iOS could leave them out some day.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    Costco to spend $3 billion on special $7-a-share dividend

    Retailer rolls out big payout ahead of year-end tax uncertainty


    Costco will spend $3 billion to pay a special dividend of $7 a share next month ahead of higher tax rates that may kick in come January.

    http://seattletimes.com/html/businesstechnology/2019784028_costcodividendxml.htm- l
  • robr2robr2 Member Posts: 8,805
    Costco will spend $3 billion to pay a special dividend of $7 a share next month ahead of higher tax rates that may kick in come January.

    I'll play devil's advocate - from the article you linked:

    Among the biggest beneficiaries of Costco’s special dividend will be co-founders Jim Sinegal and Jeffrey Brotman, and Chief Executive Officer Craig Jelinek...Sinegal, who retired as Costco’s CEO at the end of 2011 but remains on the board, and various related entities together own more than 2 million Costco shares...His payout from the special dividend will be about $14.4 million.

    Brotman, Costco’s chairman, and various family members and related entities together own 734,834 shares, making the special dividend worth $5.1 million to him. Jelinek owns 197,142 shares and will receive $1.4 million.


    This pretty much helps out the biggest shareholders. True we small investors might get a bit of a bonus but this is all about cutting the potential tax bill for the richest shareholders IMHO.

    More devils advocate - from the same article:

    Though Costco had more than $3.5 billion in cash and equivalents as of Sept. 2, it plans to pay for the special dividend by issuing new debt. It sold $3.5 billion of debt Wednesday, its first offering in almost six years.

    So they are borrowing money to pay this special dividend which in the long term will cost the corporation more.

    I'll bet you'd have a coronary if GM did such a thing!! :)
  • ljflxljflx Member Posts: 4,690
    edited November 2012
    A much better use of the money would be a share buyback but that gives them uncertainty on the share price rise and too long a timespan. But this is what I meant when I said large companies can borrow easily and unnecessarily because interest rates are so low. Microsft borrowed at .5% a few years ago to do a share buyback and they had $51bln in cash on hand at the time. That's why we have no trickle down effect on the economy. The big companies borrow just to have more cash on hand or to do things like this rather than put it to work re expansion of business and job creation. Meanwhile small business has little access to money and they would create jobs via expansion if they had it. The whole assumption of providing banks with cash was wrong. All they did was use it to cover their reserves. It would have been much better for the feds to just loan that money directly to the people who needed it. It was a screw-up starting with the Bush admin and continuing with the Obama admin.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    I'll bet you'd have a coronary if GM did such a thing!

    GM has done much worse multiple times. That said I have decided buying COST to take advantage of the Dividend is a no win situation. Their stock has been closer to $95 over the last year. So I buy at the current price of $102 by Dec 5th and collect the $7 dividend then sell the stock. It is likely to be back down around $95. What have I gained. If I had bought in 2009 when it was in the $50s I would be fine.

    I think it is quite clear it is a dividend to benefit the major stockholders before the end of the year. And quite interestingly the CEO is a big bundler for Obama.

    http://washingtonexaminer.com/biden-goes-to-costco-after-executives-cozy-up-to-t- he-white-house/article/2514670#.ULeLg6zAcaA
  • robr2robr2 Member Posts: 8,805
    So I buy at the current price of $102 by Dec 5th and collect the $7 dividend then sell the stock. It is likely to be back down around $95.

    That's what typically happens as dividend dates approach - the price goes up by the amount of the dividend and then drops by that same amount the day the dividend is paid.

    Basically anyone buying now is paying a premium for the dividend.
  • ljflxljflx Member Posts: 4,690
  • robr2robr2 Member Posts: 8,805
    It's the same thing. Technically, the money AAPL has on hand should be built into the share price. If that $128 cash per share dividend is announced, it will drive the share price back up to the $675-700 range - right where it should be.

    But once the dividend is issued, the price will drop by a similar amount because the cash is no longer there and the stock loses that value.

    Of course that's in a perfect market where the fundamental dynamics of the stock market actual apply. In today's market, it seems that fundamentals don't apply and a stock can be beaten down or raised up on a whim.
  • fintailfintail Member Posts: 58,525
    So then it's not so bad, right? You've gotta pay to play ;)

    My area isn't exactly low cost either - but many lower cost areas I have visited simply aren't as nice, whether it be for employment or overall surroundings.
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    I am glad to be out of the market. I know some are optimistic. I think Harry and Barry will go on vacation and leave the train headed for the bridge to nowhere.

    Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, on Thursday rejected a White House plan to avert the so-called fiscal cliff at year’s end that would generate nearly $1.6 trillion in new tax revenue over the next decade and require Republicans to allow Congress to relinquish its control over the nation’s statutory borrowing limits.

    “A complete break from reality,” is how the plan, delivered to Boehner and other congressional leaders by Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner at their Capitol offices, was described by a congressional Republican aide familiar with what was proposed. President Obama’s liaison to Congress, Rob Nabors, also was at the meetings.


    http://www.nationaljournal.com/congress-legacy/white-house-cliff-offer-to-boehne- r-a-break-from-reality--20121129

    Same ignorance sent to the Senate:

    Geithner’s visit to his office left McConnell discouraged about reaching a “balanced” deal on tax hikes and spending reductions designed to prevent a shock to the economy in January. “Nothing good is happening” in the negotiations, McConnell says, because of Obama’s insistence on tax rate hikes for the wealthy but unwillingness to embrace serious spending cuts.

    Geithner suggested $1.6 trillion in tax increases, McConnell says, but showed “minimal or no interest” in spending cuts. When congressional leaders went to the White House three days after the election, Obama talked of possible curbs on the explosive growth of food stamps and Social Security disability payments. But since Geithner didn’t mention them, those reductions appear to be off the table now, McConnell says.


    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/mcconnell-burst-laughter-geithner-outlined-o- bamas-plan_664210.html
  • Kirstie_HKirstie_H Administrator Posts: 11,242
    As long as we keep it relevant to the economy/financial market, and don't get into partisan bickering and bashing, it's OK. Trust us... we'll step in if the conversation gets too off-track!

    MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
    Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
    2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
    Review your vehicle

  • cyclone4cyclone4 Member Posts: 2,302
    edited November 2012
    Please take listen to what this guy (Ben White) from Politico has to say on the link below. I am in total agreement with his analysis as far as the fiscal cliff is concerned. I think he is right on the money. There WILL be a deal done before the end of the year.

    http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daily-ticker/politico-ben-white-ready-market-rall- - - y-because-fiscal-162337883.html
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    So if White is right, we should look for a big sell-off to get LTCG benefits this year. We should also expect a lot of big dividends, like the Costco $7 per share. Well for your sake I hope those cheapskates at Apple break open the treasure chest and give you a big Christmas bonus. You deserve it as a big supporter.
  • houdini1houdini1 Member Posts: 8,356
    I don't think a deal will be reached because I think Obama wants us to go over the cliff in order to get addl. tax revenue and force some spending cuts.

    What does Obama lose if we go over the cliff? Nothing, because he and the media will blame it on Republicans.

    What does Obama gain? A bigger club to hammer the Republicans with, more tax revenue, plus most of the cuts are from the defense dept.

    Never let a crisis go to waste.

    2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460

  • cyclone4cyclone4 Member Posts: 2,302
    So if White is right, we should look for a big sell-off to get LTCG benefits this year. We should also expect a lot of big dividends, like the Costco $7 per share. Well for your sake I hope those cheapskates at Apple break open the treasure chest and give you a big Christmas bonus. You deserve it as a big supporter.

    Unless I totally missed something on the interview, White did not say that there would be a big sell-off in the market going forward. A lot of folks have already sold shares of their stocks in order to avoid a higher tax on LTCG. He said that there would be a deal done before the end of the year and that would result in a stock market rally. The market is in a sort of a limbo right now waiting for a final resolution on the fiscal cliff issue, but I believe that the market in general is leaning toward a resolution as well. Otherwise, we would have seen a big collapse the past week or so.

    As far as Apple paying a special dividend is concerned, this would be gravy, but I am not counting on it.
  • houdini1houdini1 Member Posts: 8,356
    That is just what a special divi is supposed to do. It is partly to reward long time holders of the stock...not to let newcomers make a buck.

    If you already hold the stock BEFORE the divi is announced you should make a little money. If you are buying short term just to make a buck on the dividend you will probably be disappointed.

    2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460

  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    The reason I think sell off is to take advantage of the lower LTCG. White said he was sure it would go from 15% at least to 20%. That is the major reason people would sell at a profit. I think the Apple sell-off was insiders unloading large blocks to take advantage of the lower CG Tax.
  • cdnpinheadcdnpinhead Member Posts: 5,621
    There WILL be a deal done before the end of the year.

    Should be interesting.

    As long as the deal includes anything resembling reductions in spending, it'll be a good thing. I'm thinking either: 1) it won't or 2) there won't be a deal of any kind.

    Going off the so-called "cliff" can advance some agendas, or so I'm told.
    '08 Acura TSX, '17 Subaru Forester
  • cyclone4cyclone4 Member Posts: 2,302
    I don't think a deal will be reached because I think Obama wants us to go over the cliff in order to get addl. tax revenue and force some spending cuts.

    What does Obama lose if we go over the cliff? Nothing, because he and the media will blame it on Republicans.

    What does Obama gain? A bigger club to hammer the Republicans with, more tax revenue, plus most of the cuts are from the defense dept.

    Never let a crisis go to waste.


    Houdini,

    I respect your opinion but I do not agree with it in this case. So, if I read you correctly, you think that there is a conspiracy taking place between Obama/media against the conservative Republicans on this issue. In other words, Obama does not at all care if we go over the fiscal cliff and he says "I am going to get what I want no matter what just to stick it to the other side". Even though most folks here on this Forum cannot stand Obama, I DO NOT believe that he will intentionally allow the economy to go over the fiscal cliff. He is not evil. There are negotiations taking place behind the scenes. The final deal WILL have additional spending cuts than what he proposed yesterday and there will be tax increases period.

    What are you going to say about Obama when there is indeed a compromised deal that goes into effect?
  • houdini1houdini1 Member Posts: 8,356
    edited November 2012
    I don't think Obama is evil. I think he is extremely smart and an excellent politician. I just disagree with his ideas and policies. Apparently, that puts me in the minority.

    I sincerely hope that you are right and I am wrong about this, and that a fair deal can be reached. If that happens I will give Obama kudos.

    2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460

  • cdnpinheadcdnpinhead Member Posts: 5,621
    I DO NOT believe that he will intentionally allow the economy to go over the fiscal cliff. He is not evil.

    This falls into the "hide and watch" category. If whatever happens by the end of the year includes anything resembling actual reduction in spending (not reduction in the rate of increase), then you will have been correct.

    I can hardly wait.
    '08 Acura TSX, '17 Subaru Forester
  • cyclone4cyclone4 Member Posts: 2,302
    I just disagree with his ideas and policies. Apparently, that puts me in the minority.

    That clearly puts you with the majority here on this Forum.

    I sincerely hope that you are right and I am wrong about this, and that a fair deal can be reached. If that happens I will give Obama kudos.

    Fair enough!!
  • ljflxljflx Member Posts: 4,690
    edited November 2012
    I'd give a deal a 1 in 3, maybe 1 in 4 chance of happening. The Dems do not want any part of spending cuts. Obama has outlined $4 for every $1 increase in taxes in the past. But he has severe resistance in his party and the Reps are not passing anything without spending cuts. Obama will not fight his party. He doesn't have it in him. It's the irrestible force vs the immovable object. The only way we get a deal is if the reps cave on spending cuts in exchange for modified tax increases. Thats a deal but hardly a good one.

    Charlie - what exactly are you seeing that is making you so positive unless you are banking on the bad deal I outlined. To me it looks like a widening gulf and I don't think Washington has a clue about what the psychological reaction (and resulting recoil in consumer spending) that higher taxes means. Without spending cuts the dollar will go weaker and prices of oil etc will rise so lower taxes and higher commodities. Great recipe for a recovery LOL. BTW - throw out the 2.7% GDP increase. It looks nice as a headline but it was mostly due to Government spending on fixed assets. Business spending on the same was down. If it was the other way around I'd be thrilled.
  • anthonypanthonyp Member Posts: 1,860
    I agree with you Charlie.....It may be wishful thinking, but we have been down this road before, and all this posturing before the event is a common practice..

    I am sure I will be paying more in taxes.....I hope the Republicans hold out for some meaningful cuts, but cuts in waste and not cuts for the genuinely needy.

    My attitude is that I have paid high taxes pretty much all my life, but I have also prospered......Like Mr Buffet said, `do the deal to make money, and not how you may pay taxes on the gain`or something to that effect.. Frankly I don`t even consider tax consequences ---so maybe that is why I pay so much :)

    As I have sold a house this year, I am surprised at how stringent the accounting for the cost is.....I certainly will pay more attention to that in the future....The only things that make the cost basis go up is money that is spent on replacing tangible things.....I don`t think the cost of insurance is a factor...Put a new roof on is fine, but not repairing one...Strange....Tony
  • cyclone4cyclone4 Member Posts: 2,302
    Charlie - what exactly are you seeing that is making you so positive unless you are banking on the bad deal I outlined.

    Len, I believe that all the snippets from leaders of both sides in recent days is only posturing as Tony said above. There is too much at stake and eventually in the next few weeks there will be a grand compromise and "everyone will live happily ever after". Seriously, this is the way I feel after listening and watching to the various news outlets (excluding Fox). What I believe to be a fair deal will get done. The Republicans will give in to some tax hikes and the Dems will come up with some additional spending cuts.

    You can call me a fortune teller if you want but I honestly believe that I have some ESP/psychic ability. How do you think I was forecasting the weather for almost 40 years? :D I can just smell this deal happening and it is a pleasant smell. Now if I could only use this ability to day trade AAPL. :)
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Member Posts: 27,699
    edited December 2012
    >he is extremely smart and an excellent politician.

    But he's not a good leader. He cannot negotiate and work with Republicans; note how he runs out of Washington to try the populist campaign talks to the little folk rather than staying and being a leader. He had little record as a leader and he was still elected with help of the compliant media.

    I'm not sure he's a good politician because he's only doing what his advisors, Axlerod, and others on his staff, tell him to do. That's why he has no real backbone and is not able to consummate a negotiations with Boehner without going back to his advisors as in the previous deal that fell through.

    I'd rather see him stay and be involved in the negotiations with the Republicans who were elected by the people, in the Senate AND in the House.

    I heard a politician state that the cliff has 1 trillion of cuts over 10 years our of project 9 trillion $ of increase, and those cuts are only in the projected increases rather than cuts in the actual current spending. This is like Obama's past "savings" in budgets (like one that got 0 democrat votes in the Senate) where the "savings" was in spending we wouldn't make on the two "wars" we were going to phase out. Not real cuts.

    I see that fact, if true, as additional reason there's no impetus for Barry to reach an agreement. He will try to isolate himself from being involved to keep his name clean in the MSM's reportage, but try to use it to again paint he Republicans as the bad guys.

    I see this causing the market going down and then getting a rally after the new year and the bad news settles in.

    2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,

  • houdini1houdini1 Member Posts: 8,356
    edited December 2012
    If you will just take a look at what has happened in Chicago, Los Angeles, Washing DC, Detroit, etc. etc. You will see the future of the entire U.S.

    In these cities the Democrats have managed to gain power and stay in power by buying votes, demonizing their opponents, empowering unions, and getting a large portion of the people on the gov. dole.

    By doing this, the Dems win every election, even while the cities are crumbling into ruin and bankruptcy in front of the voters eyes.

    What many people still do not understand is that ALL these people care about is gaining and staying in power...and they will do anything to accomplish this one goal, with no regard what-so-ever about the consequences.

    They have now managed to take the plan national, all while the MSM (read George Soros) cheers and helps them along this path to destruction. Our country has been taken over by no less than a revolution...and most of us are not even aware of it. Out without even a whimper.

    What does all of this mean to the stock market and investors? I have no idea.

    2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460

  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    edited December 2012
    I totally agree with your analysis.

    What does all of this mean to the stock market and investors? I have no idea.

    I don't know so I sold almost all my stocks and Mutual Funds. Until we gain control of our economy again. I am buying more real estate that gives me good ROI. It puts my son to work and we do better as a result. I should be closing a fixer on a little over an acre of beautiful oak trees and Sweet Gum. The house needs a lot of work. Bones are good and the lot is worth my $20k offer. Bank is in TX and will lose about $90k on the foreclosure. There are some good deals. I sure would not buy anything in CA now. We just got tagged as the worst run state 2nd year in a row.

    Notice the 5 best run states are Red. 4 of the 5 worst run states are Blue. I gave Iowa the benefit of the doubt as they don't know what they wannabe.

    http://finance.yahoo.com/news/the-best-and-worst-run-states-in-america-150415625- - .html

    PS
    I am still tracking all my sold investments. So far it was a smart move.
  • houdini1houdini1 Member Posts: 8,356
    I like your plan, mine is similar as I am also into real estate, etc. One other thing I am doing is investing in municipal bonds. If no deal is reached I think their value would increase because of tax consequences of other investments.

    2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460

  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Hillary will be our next President.

    Regards,
    OW
  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    Tax free muni bonds on well run states and cities should be pretty safe. Though about the time I bought them they would become taxable income.

    In 2011, 35,000 taxpayers making more than $200,000 a year paid no federal income tax. As Matthew O’Brien notes at The Atlantic, 61 percent of those avoided tax for the same reason: their income consisted largely of interest on tax-exempt municipal bonds.

    As Washington looks for options to broaden the tax base, and particularly to eliminate tax preferences for the wealthy, why not eliminate this exemption?
  • houdini1houdini1 Member Posts: 8,356
    That would be unprecedented, but it could happen. If it does, I guessed wrong.

    2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460

  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    You are not alone betting on Muni bonds.

    Longest Winning Streak Since ’05 Shows Tax-Rise Bet: Muni Credit

    U.S. state and city debt is set to outpace Treasuries for the longest stretch since 2005 on bets that tax increases will be part of lawmakers’ plans to shrink the nation’s deficit.

    The $3.7 trillion municipal market has rallied each week since the Nov. 6 re-election of President Barack Obama, who wants to make top earners pay higher taxes on ordinary income, capital gains and dividends. Helping fuel the gains, U.S. muni mutual funds added $1.1 billion in the week to Nov. 21, the most since August, Lipper US Fund Flows data show.

    Investors are also set to receive about $21 billion next month from maturing local bonds, funds they will be looking to reinvest, according to Janney Montgomery Scott LLC in Philadelphia.

    “There’s a wall of cash out there right now that’s waiting for debt to come to the market,” said Michael Pietronico, who manages $860 million of munis as chief executive officer of Miller Tabak Asset Management in New York.

    Obama has proposed raising the top federal tax rate on ordinary income to 39.6 percent from 35 percent. His administration is talking with congressional leaders about ways to avert more than $600 billion of spending cuts and tax increases set to start in January, in the so-called fiscal cliff


    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-11-30/longest-winning-streak-since-05-shows-t- ax-rise-bet-muni-credit.html
  • houdini1houdini1 Member Posts: 8,356
    Thanks for that article. Nice to know someone agrees with me.

    2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460

  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    I went into my Scottrade to do a little research. High rated AA1 state bonds are only paying about 6/10ths of a percent. CA bonds pay more, but way too risky for a couple percent. Even if it is tax free. I think I will pursue real estate. It is the only thing that has ever made me any serious money.
  • kyfdxkyfdx Moderator Posts: 267,565
    They interviewed Warren Buffett in the new Businessweek...

    Let's just say that he is a lot more optimistic than most of this group.. (and, he isn't too fond of bonds, right now...)

    Edmunds Price Checker
    Edmunds Lease Calculator
    Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!

    Edmunds Moderator

  • ljflxljflx Member Posts: 4,690
    edited December 2012
    Absolutely great post Houdini. The only thing I'd add is the Dems want more and more immigration because they'll add them to the buffet table of spending and get their votes too. This isn't the early 1900's when immigrants came by boat and looked for work. We don't have manufacturing jobs for them now. We're a service economy in need of highly skilled employees.

    What I'll add to the Wall Street comment is that the street will be OK as long as China and others keep financing us. If they slow down or stop then interest rates rise steeply and the burden on interest to existing debt will alone be a killer. The whole assumption of Dems is that the financing on very low rates will never stop so why worry about a deficit. It's a pipe dream of course and no one is going to want to be around when that bubble bursts. Witness again this column which is pretty much how the whole democratic party thinks and is why the states you noted are sinking fast - especially as highly skilled labor flees them.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/26/opinion/krugman-fighting-fiscal-phantoms.html?- - - _r=0

    Again - I think it's easy to be hopeful on a deal getting done as long as what you want or are saisfied with is a bad deal. I understand Charlie's post but look at a year ago. Same comments that were supposedly posturing by both sides and nothing but a bad deal got done and of course Obama left Washington to hit the campaign trail so the MSM could blame the reps. This stuff is oh so predictible now. For that reason there's little to no chance of getting a good deal done. Plus a good deal upsets the whole democratic strategy for votes.
  • ljflxljflx Member Posts: 4,690
    edited December 2012
    She's the one Dem I'd seriously consider voting for and she'd probably be very good for Wall street but I see her being too strong a person for her party to deal with.
  • robr2robr2 Member Posts: 8,805
    They interviewed Warren Buffett in the new Businessweek...

    I saw in interview with him this past week discussing the issues on with the capital gain tax.

    His take was this: If I come to you with an opportunity to make money, is the first thing you think "Hmm no because of the increase in the capital gain tax?

    Basically those that earn income mainly from capital gains won't stop investing just because they will pay more taxes. They will continue to seek out opportunities as they aren't going to stick in the bank for 1%.
  • ljflxljflx Member Posts: 4,690
    edited December 2012
    He's talking Wall street buying and trading stocks which are mainly short-term anyway. Small Business investments to buy and build business that create jobs with high risk money (most small businesses ultimately fail) which is all long-term is a very different story. I don't group investments like that. I separate out investing which drives your own compensation from investing/gambling in the markets.
  • robr2robr2 Member Posts: 8,805
    He's talking Wall street buying and trading stocks which are mainly short-term anyway.

    AFAIK, Buffet has never been about short term investing.

    Small Business investments to buy and build business that create jobs with high risk money (most small businesses ultimately fail) which is all long-term is a very different story.

    That's right, they are different. But even those should follow the same train of thought. Should I let my money sit in the bank earning me 1% because I'm afraid of potentially paying more taxes sometime in the future? I believe the vast majority of business owners are smart enough to know they can earn more earn a far greater rate of return despite higher CGT than just letting the money sit there.
  • ljflxljflx Member Posts: 4,690
    edited December 2012
    I'm one and pretty successful at it but I'll disagree strongly. Why take a risk when Government is going to take more than 60% of what you make and you have dems who want to go back to 70-90% marginal rates. Small business is taxed at ordinary income tax rates, not cap gains rates. It's only when you sell that you get cap gains treatment. Gotta love a tens of billions rich guy like Buffett who stakes out higher income taxes and taxes on cap gains investments after he's already made his fortune, can lose 90% of it and will still be filthy rich. Plus as I've said so many times - bank loan covenants are very tight now on small business so the chances of failure are greater than ever. And if you can't get a bank loan then you go to a hedge fund and their rates start at 12-14% and their covenants are even tighter with 2% penalties added on if you default on any covenant. Plus you can get guaranteed ROI's much much higher from PE over banks - which we now know are a lot less safe than any of us think.
  • kyfdxkyfdx Moderator Posts: 267,565
    edited December 2012
    Warren Buffett was discussing investing in equities... but, not short term trading of stocks...

    I saw the insipid questions that Matt Lauer was asking him... All about the short term gyrations of the market because of the upcoming fiscal cliff... Talk about not knowing your interview subject... Buffett invests for the long-term.. .he couldn't care less about the fiscal cliff and capital gains taxes...

    But, he did make the same point in the Businessweek article. "If I call you up at Midnight, panting about the best investment I've ever seen, are you going to ask me what the tax is going to be?" (paraphrased)...

    He says make as much money as you can, and taxes will take care of themselves...... I agree with him... That's what he did to get filthy rich.... it's not a strategy for once you get there..

    Edmunds Price Checker
    Edmunds Lease Calculator
    Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!

    Edmunds Moderator

  • gagricegagrice Member Posts: 31,450
    The whole assumption of Dems is that the financing on very low rates will never stop so why worry about a deficit.

    A lot of folks have VERY short memories. I remember well when Treasuries were paying 15-17%. My Uncle was upset when interest on them fell during the Reagan administration.

    There is too much uncertainty to start or expand a business right now. One of these days the Democrats will have to accept the fact that the uncertainty is caused by their policies. Everything Reagan did to kick start the recession he inherited, Obama has done the exact opposite.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444812704577609863412900388.html
  • ljflxljflx Member Posts: 4,690
    edited December 2012
    "If I call you up at Midnight, panting about the best investment I've ever seen, are you going to ask me what the tax is going to be?" (paraphrased)...

    If Warren Buffett called anyone up and stated something like that you'd view it like winning the lottery or an investment with no risk. So of course taxes would never enter the equation. Unfortunately investments like that only work if you have tons of inside info. Starting a new business venture or guessing how to play the market is very very different. Plus Buffett has such a weight on stocks because in effect his business does nothing but buy stocks and accumulates positions that anything he buys will go up. Of course he's also known to have had rights to buy shares in the past at prices that are under market because of his volume buying.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Your Privacy

By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our Visitor Agreement.