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.
Technology and innovation remain, it is how they are implemented.
No they don’t.
Technology and innovation are the result of risk vs reward. You take away all the reward, innovation drops off a cliff.
Again, let’s go back to the dark ages. Those were great times to live... or get off your lazy rear end and go make something of yourself instead of whining about others doing so on the internet.
Guess what the first thing that would happen in the event of 90% tax!? This is really challenging I know... massive exodus of resources and people to intelligent parts of the world! The US would be a third world ****hole overnight.
Technology and innovation are the result of risk vs reward. You take away all the reward, innovation drops off a cliff.
Again, let’s go back to the dark ages. Those were great times to live... or get off your lazy rear end and go make something of yourself instead of whining about others doing so on the internet.
Guess what the first thing that would happen in the event of 90% tax!? This is really challenging I know... massive exodus of resources and people to intelligent parts of the world! The US would be a third world ****hole overnight.
Derka durr award goes to...
This is not true, if scientist have the time and capital, they will still innovate without any direct reward.
That is why for-profit organizations don't fund new sciences, but they are funded through public money.
This is not true, if scientist have the time and capital, they will still innovate without any direct reward.
That is why for-profit organizations don't fund new sciences, but they are funded through public money.
Welcome to a world that does not exist. As luck would have it several friends and acquaintances plus three relatives are in various areas of medical research.
Not one of them would invest the soul crushing hours or life shortening stress much less endure the key barrier to entry which is an MD and or Ph.D education without any direct reward.
And for the record in case anyone is tempted to buy your last line of nonsense, for profit corporations fund all kinds of new scientific endeavours.
Big Pharma and related invests tens of billions per year in R&D.
Exxon spends ~$1 billion per in direct R&D. In fact dozens of US companies spent at least $1 billion on R&D last year.
Essentially all of that goes into new sciences like space, boundary pushing medicine, green energy. Some into quantum computing etc.
Welcome to a world that does not exist. As luck would have it several friends and acquaintances plus three relatives are in various areas of medical research.
Not one of them would invest the soul crushing hours or life shortening stress much less endure the key barrier to entry which is an MD and or Ph.D education without any direct reward.
And for the record in case anyone is tempted to buy your last line of nonsense, for profit corporations fund all kinds of new scientific endeavours.
Big Pharma and related invests tens of billions per year in R&D.
Exxon spends ~$1 billion per in direct R&D. In fact dozens of US companies spent at least $1 billion on R&D last year.
Essentially all of that goes into new sciences like space, boundary pushing medicine, green energy. Some into quantum computing etc.
I know all about this, and you’re wrong.
For profit medical companies like Johnson and Johnson that are responsible for these advancements cut funding and focus only on immediate benefit. That is why public funding is needed to find new inventions/discoveries, not applying old technology in new ways which is what Apple R&D and other forms of corporate research practice in.
J&J for example cut funding on Alzheimer research which medical experts were counting on.
And companies like spaceX that look to the future of technology, not just the market, are heavily subsidized.
Even solar energy had to be subsidized by the government, as well as research into semiconductors.
New technology will never come from the private industry, because they can’t measure the cost/benefit risk for their shareholders.
Pentagon funding has been the largest driver of new technology, and it is scientists like Tesla who drive this progress without doing to try and squeeze out a profit.
Ok, I already answered TaxPhd’s question about the tax by pointing our CGT won’t affect profits made from selling personal goods, or items from a vendor. So far, no response.
For lieqiang I have already offered multiple links to prove my point about housing prices in big cities. There is no side-step on my part.
Quit trying to change what you said.
You said that your cgt would prevent speculation. Examples of speculation were shown that your cgt doesn’t address, and then you try to to change your narrative to vendors selling water (which wasn’t at all what was being discussed).
The sad results of a community college education, full of SJW classes, taught by a bunch of Saul Alinsky wannabe instructors.
For profit medical companies like Johnson and Johnson that are responsible for these advancements cut funding and focus only on immediate benefit. That is why public funding is needed to find new inventions/discoveries, not applying old technology in new ways which is what Apple R&D and other forms of corporate research practice in.
J&J for example cut funding on Alzheimer research which medical experts were counting on.
And companies like spaceX that look to the future of technology, not just the market, are heavily subsidized.
Even solar energy had to be subsidized by the government, as well as research into semiconductors.
New technology will never come from the private industry, because they can’t measure the cost/benefit risk for their shareholders.
Pentagon funding has been the largest driver of new technology, and it is scientists like Tesla who drive this progress without doing to try and squeeze out a profit.
You said that your cgt would prevent speculation. Examples of speculation were shown that your cgt doesn’t address, and then you try to to change your narrative to vendors selling water (which wasn’t at all what was being discussed).
The sad results of a community college education, full of SJW classes, taught by a bunch of Saul Alinsky wannabe instructors.
lol, you can't invest in water bottling companies, nor can you invest in the water bottle market in expectation of a drought.
But the proposition was someone selling their own supply of water bottles for an increased price, which is fine.
If I store water bottles in my house, and then sell them for $2 a piece for a profit, the CGT won't take that $1 profit margin away.
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.
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.
