Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-28-2010, 03:15 PM
 
14,993 posts, read 23,881,675 times
Reputation: 26523

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimhcom View Post
http://www.taxfoundation.org/files/fed_individual_rate_history-june2010.pdf (broken link)
That's good information but it's simply marginal tax rate once again, not average tax rate. And it has nothing about gross income, but only taxable income. You understand the difference right? I thought I explained.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-28-2010, 03:28 PM
 
Location: 'Murica
1,302 posts, read 2,947,838 times
Reputation: 833
Quote:
Originally Posted by wheelsup View Post
Econ 102:

The VAST majority of stock is bought from other investors, not newly issued stock.
The principle is still the same; you're putting your money into the equity of a company. One investor once owned a piece of the company, and you're now buying that piece from him.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2010, 03:36 PM
 
Location: San Diego California
6,795 posts, read 7,286,310 times
Reputation: 5194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vinsanity View Post
The principle is still the same; you're putting your money into the equity of a company. One investor once owned a piece of the company, and you're now buying that piece from him.
No it isn't. The only time a company derives funds to invest in their business is when stock is issued. The original argument was that when someone invests in stock they are creating jobs, which is not true unless they are buying new shares.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2010, 03:53 PM
 
14,993 posts, read 23,881,675 times
Reputation: 26523
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimhcom View Post
No it isn't. The only time a company derives funds to invest in their business is when stock is issued. The original argument was that when someone invests in stock they are creating jobs, which is not true unless they are buying new shares.
Well, true, market price doesn't effect equity. But indirectly when people are buying more shares, it will mean they are buying it at a higher cost than originally, and the value of a company is increased. Increased value in turn increases the ability for a company to borrow.
Company owned stock also becomes it's own currency - for capital purposes (i.e. for other company buyouts).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2010, 04:07 PM
 
Location: San Diego California
6,795 posts, read 7,286,310 times
Reputation: 5194
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dd714 View Post
Well, true, market price doesn't effect equity. But indirectly when people are buying more shares, it will mean they are buying it at a higher cost than originally, and the value of a company is increased. Increased value in turn increases the ability for a company to borrow.
Company owned stock also becomes it's own currency - for capital purposes (i.e. for other company buyouts).
Where is it written that when they are buying more shares it will mean they are buying it at higher cost? They could just as easily be buying at lower cost. At any rate this discussion has gotten completely off topic, and to reiterate my original position, the best way to stabilize the economy and create jobs would be to raise taxes on the rich, and at the same time lower taxes on the lower and middle class. It is not only the most feasible solution it is the moral thing to do.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2010, 04:13 PM
 
Location: South Jordan, Utah
8,182 posts, read 9,209,993 times
Reputation: 3632
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimhcom View Post
Where is it written that when they are buying more shares it will mean they are buying it at higher cost? They could just as easily be buying at lower cost. At any rate this discussion has gotten completely off topic, and to reiterate my original position, the best way to stabilize the economy and create jobs would be to raise taxes on the rich, and at the same time lower taxes on the lower and middle class. It is not only the most feasible solution it is the moral thing to do.
Wow, they have done a good job on you. Stealing is now moral.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2010, 06:47 PM
 
13,811 posts, read 27,440,930 times
Reputation: 14250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vinsanity View Post
The principle is still the same; you're putting your money into the equity of a company. One investor once owned a piece of the company, and you're now buying that piece from him.
Money was invested once into a company upon the initial offering, investors can buy and sell tens, hundreds, even thousands of times over and over again.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2010, 06:54 PM
 
13,811 posts, read 27,440,930 times
Reputation: 14250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dd714 View Post
Well, true, market price doesn't effect equity. But indirectly when people are buying more shares, it will mean they are buying it at a higher cost than originally, and the value of a company is increased. Increased value in turn increases the ability for a company to borrow.
Company owned stock also becomes it's own currency - for capital purposes (i.e. for other company buyouts).
BAC, Bank of America, has ranged in price over the past two years from $36 to $3.

And more people were buying, 6 times as many people in fact, when it was $3/share than it was $36.

Last edited by wheelsup; 07-28-2010 at 07:09 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2010, 07:09 PM
 
13,811 posts, read 27,440,930 times
Reputation: 14250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dd714 View Post
Unearned income tax varies - not sure where you got 15% from.
The qualified dividend rate, for folks who hold dividend stocks long term.

Quote:
That is assuming most of their income is unearned. I wouldn't make that conclusion. Business owners and some high in demand fields certainly get earned income. All depends on how we define "the rich". Clearly those making in the 250k to 500k range aren't "the filthy rich", most are professional working people, in a high demand field, or succesful small/medium sized business owners.
Right. We've kinda swayed here but if you can back to the second page, my first post in the thread mentions the more you earn the more you save. The more you save the less impact on the economy you have. People at the lower end of the pay scale put all their money back into the economy.

Quote:
And, as the previous poster pointed out, obviously investing includes putting money in banks, funds, stocks, bonds. Companies issue stocks and bonds to obtain capital, which in turn is used to buy inventory, plants, etc. That is pretty much the definitive financial definition of "expanding wealth" in a nutshell. That's really economy 101 and no further explanation should be needed.
Money isn't invested in banks, it's parked there until a better use can be found.

Buying funds and stocks doesn't increase the companies capital unless you are buying newly issued shares. How often are new shares issued to the public? Not very often.

Bonds I can definitely see as investment however.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-28-2010, 07:52 PM
 
Location: 'Murica
1,302 posts, read 2,947,838 times
Reputation: 833
Quote:
Originally Posted by wheelsup View Post
Money was invested once into a company upon the initial offering, investors can buy and sell tens, hundreds, even thousands of times over and over again.
you can't deny, though, that more people buying stocks is generally beneficial to a company (larger sustained market cap = more valuable company)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top