Timing of shutdown is no accident!

Regardless of whose fault it is that your gov is going to shut down, the upside of it that a whole bunch of Americans are going to learn a good fucking lesson.

Funny really!
 
monty1 said:
Regardless of whose fault it is that your gov is going to shut down, the upside of it that a whole bunch of Americans are going to learn a good fucking lesson.

Funny really!
Click to expand...

What is the lesson?

BTW, I saw that the govt was going to shut down last week and sold about 50% of my stocks. Im going to get back in Tuesday or Wenesday.
 
Jarod said:
What is the lesson?

BTW, I saw that the govt was going to shut down last week and sold about 50% of my stocks. Im going to get back in Tuesday or Wenesday.
Click to expand...

You've just told me that you think the stock market will be depressed and then you as me what lesson? That's one example. Do you have no notion of how shutting down gov is going to effect the economy? Have a look at the last time when they decided to shut it down on Clinton for an idea of the costs involved.
 
monty1 said:
You've just told me that you think the stock market will be depressed and then you as me what lesson? That's one example. Do you have no notion of how shutting down gov is going to effect the economy? Have a look at the last time when they decided to shut it down on Clinton for an idea of the costs involved.
Click to expand...

I believe the shutdown will last only a few days, a week at the most. If that's the case, the effect on the economy will be short lived.

I know what the negative effect on a shutdown will be, I'm not sure I know what the lesson will be.
 
Jarod said:
I believe the shutdown will last only a few days, a week at the most. If that's the case, the effect on the economy will be short lived.

I know what the negative effect on a shutdown will be, I'm not sure I know what the lesson will be.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you are only thinking of the possible way that you will benefit through the market fluctuation. And then again, perhaps you won't as there are many smart players who will be thinking to manipulate it in other ways. It's never a sure bet when it seems so obvious. But if you know what the negative effects will be then you should know that negative effects by definition will hurt people both financially and also in the loss of services.

If you have sold stocks at a profit then you were already a winner. If not then it has the potential to make you a loser.
 
Dungheap said:
The tax cuts started in 2001 and receipts fell.
Click to expand...

receipts fell because of the recession created by the internet/tech/biotech implosion. If it was due to the tax cuts, then it would have continued, yet the revenues rebounded as the economy did.

also... it was the 2003 act that accelerated the tax cuts of 2001 and made them retroactive to 2003
 
Superfreak said:
receipts fell because of the recession created by the internet/tech/biotech implosion. If it was due to the tax cuts, then it would have continued, yet the revenues rebounded as the economy did.

also... it was the 2003 act that accelerated the tax cuts of 2001 and made them retroactive to 2003
Click to expand...

The recession began and ended in 2001. GDP increased each year from 2000 through 2005. Nevertheless, receipts fell, largely because receipts as a percentage of GDP fell, due to the tax cuts implemented in 2001.
 
Dungheap said:
The recession began and ended in 2001. GDP increased each year from 2000 through 2005. Nevertheless, receipts fell, largely because receipts as a percentage of GDP fell, due to the tax cuts implemented in 2001.
Click to expand...

LMAO... the stock market began its decline in 2000. It did not end until late 2002. Thus impacting tax receipts for those years.

If you look at the tax brackets from 2002-2003 that were posted, you would also notice that the bulk of the income tax brackets were not lowered until 2003.

so please explain how the tax cuts in 2001 lowered receipts.
 
Superfreak said:
LMAO... the stock market began its decline in 2000. It did not end until late 2002. Thus impacting tax receipts for those years.

If you look at the tax brackets from 2002-2003 that were posted, you would also notice that the bulk of the income tax brackets were not lowered until 2003.
Click to expand...


Again, the recession began and ended in 2001. GDP increased each year from 2000 through 2005. Nevertheless, receipts fell from 2000 to 2001, 2001 to 2002 and 2003 (and didn't reach 2000 levels in real dollars until 2005!) because of the tax cuts first implemented in 2001.

I guess you could argue that revenues in 2004 were lower than revenues in 2000 despite higher GDP of almost $2 Trillion in 2004 because of a recession that ended in 2001, but it's not a very good argument.
 
Dungheap said:
Again, the recession began and ended in 2001. GDP increased each year from 2000 through 2005. Nevertheless, receipts fell from 2000 to 2001, 2001 to 2002 and 2003 (and didn't reach 2000 levels in real dollars until 2005!) because of the tax cuts first implemented in 2001.

I guess you could argue that revenues in 2004 were lower than revenues in 2000 despite higher GDP of almost $2 Trillion in 2004 because of a recession that ended in 2001, but it's not a very good argument.
Click to expand...

Again... capital losses affected the tax receipts. Capital losses that resulted from the stock market tanking from 2000-2002.

Again... the income tax brackets were most affected after the 2003, not 2001, tax cuts. I posted the brackets from 2002-2003... you should be able to read them. Instead you choose to ignore them. Why is that Dung?
 
Superfreak said:
Again... capital losses affected the tax receipts. Capital losses that resulted from the stock market tanking from 2000-2002.

Again... the income tax brackets were most affected after the 2003, not 2001, tax cuts. I posted the brackets from 2002-2003... you should be able to read them. Instead you choose to ignore them. Why is that Dung?
Click to expand...


I read them. They don't change anything I've said. Taxes were cut from 2000 to 2001, cut further from 2001 to 2002 and cut further again from 2002 to 2003, which just so happens to coincide with decreased revenues from 2000 to 2001, 2001 to 2002 and 2002 to 2003. There was no further cutting of taxes, and in 2004 revenues increased slightly from 2003 due to increased GDP, but remained below 2000 revenue levels, notwithstanding a substantially larger economy. So . . .
 
Dungheap said:
I read them. They don't change anything I've said. Taxes were cut from 2000 to 2001, cut further from 2001 to 2002 and cut further again from 2002 to 2003, which just so happens to coincide with decreased revenues from 2000 to 2001, 2001 to 2002 and 2002 to 2003. There was no further cutting of taxes, and in 2004 revenues increased slightly from 2003 due to increased GDP, but remained below 2000 revenue levels, notwithstanding a substantially larger economy. So . . .
Click to expand...

LMAO... so you ignore the effects of the market crash on cap gains taxes, you ignore the bulk of the tax bracket changes were done in 2003... what bracket cuts happened prior to 2003... link us up. What tax cuts made the receipts go down?
 
monty1 said:
Perhaps you are only thinking of the possible way that you will benefit through the market fluctuation. And then again, perhaps you won't as there are many smart players who will be thinking to manipulate it in other ways. It's never a sure bet when it seems so obvious. But if you know what the negative effects will be then you should know that negative effects by definition will hurt people both financially and also in the loss of services.

If you have sold stocks at a profit then you were already a winner. If not then it has the potential to make you a loser.
Click to expand...

I agree nobody is a sure winner until the stock is sold.

But, again, what is the lesson?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top