|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
<x-html><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=windows-1252" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META content="MSHTML 5.00.2722.2800" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT face="Century Schoolbook" size=3>How about <STRONG><FONT
color=#ff0000>NO TAXES ON INTERNET TRANSACTIONS</FONT></STRONG>!!??</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Century Schoolbook" size=3>It is absolutely astonishing to me
that people are so down trodden by the 30,000+ taxing authorities in the U.S.
that they cannot stand the idea of <U>not being taxed</U>. How about this idea:
the internet is making the political overclass superfluous. Why not do away with
politicians, and enjoy liberty for a change? I know liberty is terrifying to
dependents of the political culture, but I think that we can do better without
the least productive sector of humanity riding herd on the most productive.
People who love to be taxed should try living in Russia, to get a taste of the
inevitable future of a people who prefer to allow an overclass to steal their
production.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Century Schoolbook">overtaxed,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Century Schoolbook">Michael</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Century Schoolbook" size=3>----- Original Message ----- </FONT>
<DIV><FONT face="Century Schoolbook" size=3>From: "JW" <<A
href="mailto:JW@xxxxxxxxxxxx";>JW@xxxxxxxxxxxx</A>></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Century Schoolbook" size=3>To: <<A
href="mailto:realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx";>realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx</A>></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Century Schoolbook" size=3>Sent: Monday, January 17, 2000
02:28</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Century Schoolbook" size=3>Subject: [RT] RE: Real Estate
Article</FONT></DIV></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV><FONT face="Century Schoolbook" size=3>| There is no question
that the internet will have sales taxes down the road.<BR>| In the USA, sales
taxes are used to fund many services. Should the brick &<BR>| mortar
crown pay taxes and net vendors not? I don't think so.<BR>| <BR>| But
there are two problems:<BR>| <BR>| 1. How do enforce tax collections against
non-U.S. companies? What would<BR>| encourage them to incur the overhead
of collecting, reporting and<BR>| forwarding taxes to the respective
municipalities?<BR>| <BR>| 2. And the incredible variety of tax laws implemented
by every state,<BR>| county, municipality, etc. is certainly a further
deterrent. But there are<BR>| supposedly 7000+ different sales tax rates
throughout the US. One company<BR>| (I forget the name) has said that they
can handle this number of variables<BR>| and would like to act as the clearing
house for either providing software to<BR>| do the job or else collect the
taxes?<BR>| <BR>| It would seem that we first need to have one standardized tax
rate, set on a<BR>| national level before we can consider implementing net
taxation. This still<BR>| doesn't address the issue of off-shore taxation
but I'm sure there are ways<BR>| to address this (maybe make the credit card
companies be the tax collectors?<BR>| They would add the tax to all purchases,
collect it and remit it to a<BR>| central distribution agency). And if we
go with net-money instead of credit<BR>| cards, then they will have to collect
the taxes.<BR>| <BR>| Actually, the more I think about this, the more
complicated the whole issue<BR>| seems. Maybe the only real solution is no
sales taxes and a flat tax on all<BR>| income without deductions at the national
and state level <shrug>?<BR>| <BR>| JW<BR>| <BR>| <BR>| -----Original
Message-----<BR>| From: Jay Mackro [<A
href="mailto:jmackro@xxxxxxxxxxxx";>mailto:jmackro@xxxxxxxxxxxx</A>]<BR>| Sent:
Sunday, January 16, 2000 8:21 AM<BR>| To: <A
href="mailto:JW@xxxxxxxxxxxx";>JW@xxxxxxxxxxxx</A><BR>| Subject: Re: [RT] Real
Estate Article<BR>| <BR>| <BR>| JW:<BR>| <BR>| Good article - thanks for posting
it. But, I believe it is naive in one<BR>| respect:<BR>| <BR>| >The
International Council of Shopping<BR>| >Centers and the National Association
of Real Estate Investment Trusts<BR>| joined<BR>| >the so-called e-Fairness
Coalition to oppose favorable tax treatment for<BR>| >online transactions.
They hope to increase customer costs and slow the<BR>| >growth of e-commerce.
The ploy is completely misdirected. In many cases,<BR>| >buying online is
more convenient – it offers better comparison shopping,<BR>| >provides
greater selection, is less expensive and saves time in comparison<BR>| >to
brick-and-mortar stores. Manipulating the sales tax issue will not force<BR>|
>shoppers back to stores.<BR>| <BR>| <BR>| Oh, everyone knows that, including
The International Council of Shopping<BR>| Centers and the National Association
of Real Estate Investment Trusts.<BR>| But, real estate developers provide a
HUGE source of campaign<BR>| contributions, and sales taxes (obviously) provide
a HUGE source of<BR>| government funds which may be used for patronage, buying
votes through<BR>| entitlement programs, ... So, here's an opportunity for
these two groups -<BR>| developers & politicians - to join forces for the
purpose of increasing<BR>| the proportion of the economy that goes into the
public sector. Wow,<BR>| there is no way this isn't going to happen.
And, as usual, they have a<BR>| "cover" for what they are doing - call it "sales
tax fairness", or "keeping<BR>| business on Main Street instead of Wall Street",
or the ubiquitous<BR>| "Save the Children".<BR>| <BR>| Sorry to come across like
some right wing nut case, but I am<BR>| pessimistic that internet sales taxes
aren't going to become a<BR>| reality.<BR>| <BR>| Jay Mackro<BR>| <BR>| <BR>|
</FONT></BODY></HTML>
</x-html>From ???@??? Mon Jan 17 10:28:20 2000
Return-Path: <listmanager@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Received: from mail.thetrellis.net ([208.179.56.11])
by purebytes.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id HAA12307
for <neal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Mon, 17 Jan 2000 07:47:50 -0800
Received: from REALTRADERS.COM
([208.179.56.198])
by mail.thetrellis.net; Mon, 17 Jan 2000 06:41:54 -0800
Received: from imo28.mx.aol.com by realtraders.com
with SMTP (MDaemon.v2.8.5.0.R)
for <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Mon, 17 Jan 2000 06:37:07 +0000
Received: from Jpilleafe@xxxxxxx
by imo28.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v24.6.) id m.56.2ee749 (3981);
Mon, 17 Jan 2000 09:39:20 -0500 (EST)
From: Jpilleafe@xxxxxxx
Message-ID: <56.2ee749.25b48397@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 09:39:19 EST
Subject: [RT] Re: Bickering Guru's..."Givers" vs. "Takers"
To: <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Windows AOL sub 44
X-MDaemon-Deliver-To: realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
X-Return-Path: Jpilleafe@xxxxxxx
Sender: listmanager@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
X-MDMailing-List: realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
X-MDSend-Notifications-To: listmanager@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Reply-To: Jpilleafe@xxxxxxx
Status: O
In a message dated 1/16/00 8:40:34 PM Pacific Standard Time,
scot.billington@xxxxxxxxxxxxx writes:
Scot B: "This group's mission is the discussion of trading ideas and
philosophies from an individual trade to a trading philosophy. A crucial
part of the mission is that the site remains commercial free. Once a month
the exact same tired debate breaks out between the exact same people. It's
almost like menstration."
Jim P: Scot,.....you are right. I am amazed at the number of emails I
receive from
individuals who have joined the RT group,...but rarely have ever posted
anything themselves. Recently I offered to share a paper I had
written,...received 143 (one hundred and forty three!) requests....several of
the requests actually said ... "I belong to the RT Group but have never
posted." Few of the addresses were recognizable as frequent contributors.
Why are others reluctant to make a post or share a thought??.... Fear of
being belittled by the so-called "experts" (leave out the "t" in stocks and
note the reply you'll recieve)......or receiving no response to what others
perceive as "simplistic".... So why bother to do more than lurk?
The active "gurus" who know everything can belittle anyone's post,....clearly
the gurus' intent is not one of sharing methodology....(otherswise excerpts
from their work ...monthly letter, market perspective, etc,...would be openly
posted),...no their goal is self promotion. In my mind it is like that
great E-trade commercial .....
"If your broker is so smart, ...why does he have to work". (Smile)
And yes I am an optimist,..and can say that there are a number of good solid
types on the RT group who make an effort ...go out of their way....to freely
share their methodology and perspectives. Their posts are useful and
informative and enjoyed by everyone. But in general these individuals are a
very small portion of the RT membership. Several RT members who I respect
alot went to the effort to create websites (free) so that others may benefit
from their nethodology and perspective. "Givers" vs. "Takers". This is
what it comes down to.
***************************************
Scot B: "If you are a guru and you feel the compulsive drive to debate
another one, do it privately. I would suggest that you have your public
debate to increase your business. I would also suggest that it does just the
opposite."
>>
Jim P: I second Scot's post. Clearly the "spirit of contribution"
would be raised a few notches if the self promotion and bickering over who
attacked who could be put aside. A guru's time would be best spent
servicing subscribers who ponied
up the big bucks for their insightful wisdom.
Regards, Jim Pilliod jpilleafe@xxxxxxx
|