The top 100 stock
market authors
selected for publication
market authors
selected for publication
Friday, December 11 2009 |
05:29 EDT |
DJIA (DIA)
S&P 500 (SPY)
- When millionaires say they won't stand being fleeced by tailor-made rich taxes, they mean it.
Follow Market Currents on
Latest StockTalks
-
28 minutes ago -
32 minutes ago
-
about 1 hour ago -
about 3 hours ago
From our sponsors:
-
The Seeking Alpha 100
See all
Seeking Alpha 100 » -
Fastest Climbers
Authors with the largestSee all
increase in followers
in the last 7 days
Fastest Climbers » -
Top Commenters
Top commenters,See all
as ranked by their peers
Top Commenters » -
Top Instabloggers
The 100 most active
Instabloggers.-
1
David Fry
-
2
TraderMark
-
3
Don Dion
-
4
Cliff Wachtel
-
5
Mike Havrilla
Top Instabloggers » -
1
-
Top StockTalkers
TopSee all
StockTalkers.
Top StockTalkers »
This news story has 41 comments:
On May 28 12:53 PM 2houndz wrote:
> Maybe they just wanted to get the heck out of Baltimore.
On May 28 12:54 PM Rayn wrote:
> Is Obama the governor of Maryland or something cause it seems like
> he keeps raising their state income taxes according to previous comments
In fact, over 2/3 of the jobs that Michigan has lost since 1999 have been to other states with lower taxes. You would think that after a few years they would catch on.
On May 28 12:56 PM Neil459 wrote:
> Maryland is just following the same policy that Obama is championing.
> It won't work in Maryland and it won't work across the US.
>
> On May 28 12:54 PM Rayn wrote:
On May 28 01:00 PM E Thomas St. wrote:
> Raise Federally, Lower Locally. If people want to move away from
> the United States, let the cancerous traitors do so.
On May 28 01:12 PM AnOilMan wrote:
> You really think all these millionaires are going to uproot their
> families and corporate jobs and move half around the world? Really?
>
Or, you can get called a greedy b*stard by the likes of losers like you.
Gee, hard choice.
On May 28 01:12 PM AnOilMan wrote:
> You really think all these millionaires are going to uproot their
> families and corporate jobs and move half around the world? Really?
>
On May 28 01:16 PM user344210 wrote:
> Uh, most people climbing the corporate ladder would kill for a great
> ex-pat posting. Not only are there way more growth opportunities
> than amongst you whiny losers, the housing/car/etc. perks are great
> and with your savings and salary, you can live like a king. The schools
> are probably better, too, since they teach actual subject matter,
> not multidiversiculturalism.
>
> Or, you can get called a greedy b*stard by the likes of losers like
> you.
>
> Gee, hard choice.
On May 28 01:00 PM E Thomas St. wrote:
> Raise Federally, Lower Locally. If people want to move away from
> the United States, let the cancerous traitors do so.
On May 28 01:20 PM bricki wrote:
> I was an expat. Man oh man did it suck. People who think taxes are
> high in the US should try living in Europe for a while.
>
> On May 28 01:16 PM user344210 wrote:
While raising taxes may result in loss revenues because of diaspora, if you make the choice between leaving the country and paying an extra 6.25% nationally, people are going to stay put.
Michigan went wrong by trying to hold on to it's past instead of providing the foundation for a future.
Second, the majority of the ex-pat opportunities will be in Asia for a long time to come.
Democrats who play the "cancerous traitor" card are a bunch of hypocrites. For years, the Left has said that patriotism is a bunch of nonsensical hooey, based on symbolic nonsense like the flag and the Constitution. Now that they've got a chance to milk the American cow for their own benefit, all of a sudden patriotism is something real. Disgusting, yet par for the course.
On May 28 01:20 PM bricki wrote:
> I was an expat. Man oh man did it suck. People who think taxes are
> high in the US should try living in Europe for a while.
>
> On May 28 01:16 PM user344210 wrote:
On May 28 01:16 PM user344210 wrote:
> Uh, most people climbing the corporate ladder would kill for a great
> ex-pat posting. Not only are there way more growth opportunities
> than amongst you whiny losers, the housing/car/etc. perks are great
> and with your savings and salary, you can live like a king. The schools
> are probably better, too, since they teach actual subject matter,
> not multidiversiculturalism.
>
> Or, you can get called a greedy b*stard by the likes of losers like
> you.
>
> Gee, hard choice.
On May 28 01:20 PM gembree wrote:
> Yes, certainly, it's more likely that a third of the very wealthy
> uprooted their families over a 0.75% tax increase than that the number
> of millionaires decreased during the worst recession and bear market
> in memory.
Also, move to Asia? If you don't like civil liberties I suppose you could do that (Singapore, Honk Kong), but then again, most anti-tax-to-the-point-... don't care about those when they vote.
On May 28 01:27 PM user344210 wrote:
> First off, are you factoring the reduced expenses from the perks
> your company provided you, weighed against increased taxes? If they
> didn't provide you any, maybe your company just sucks. Anyone stupid
> enough to put themselves in a worse situation by being asked to do
> an ex-pat stint is probably not going to make it to the top of the
> corporate hierarchy any time in this life. Maybe your company was
> trying to tell you something?
>
> Second, the majority of the ex-pat opportunities will be in Asia
> for a long time to come.
>
> Democrats who play the "cancerous traitor" card are a bunch of hypocrites.
> For years, the Left has said that patriotism is a bunch of nonsensical
> hooey, based on symbolic nonsense like the flag and the Constitution.
> Now that they've got a chance to milk the American cow for their
> own benefit, all of a sudden patriotism is something real. Disgusting,
> yet par for the course.
On May 28 01:26 PM E Thomas St. wrote:
> Neil, raising taxes isn't traitorous based on how we enable representatives
> to raise taxes. If you don't like representative democracy, then
Galt's Gulch is a paradise for these types.
On May 28 01:33 PM AnOilMan wrote:
> Hmmm, I'm an ivy grad in an upper tax bracket. Not sure what you
> inferred. I'm climbing the corporate ladder, one of those you mentioned,
> and will probably be taking a posting abroad for at least a couple
> years, but to think we are going to see some sort of mass exodus
> to third world tax havens by the American elite is just silly. These
> people don't want to leave Greenwich, Arlington, San Fran, etc. Do
> you have some arguments with steps of logic and rationale and you
> want to put forth?
Now, one of the interesting parts is that while you claim it may be Un-American, I'd argue that this isn't surprising at all given that the premise of how capitalism would fall to a soft socialism was outlined by Schumpeter. This transcends what and what isn't American in my mind.
On May 28 01:41 PM Neil459 wrote:
> Point well made. But lying about what you are doing, releasing classified
> info for political gain, ignoring the rule of law, purposefully passing
> laws/rules in violation of the constitution, and the other shenanigans
> going on in Congress and the Administration now are traitorous regardless
> of who was elected. Each elected politician pledged to uphold the
> Constitution. Failure to do this is treason. Failure to support
> our Capitalistic heritage is if not traitorous, is at least un-American.
>
>
> On May 28 01:26 PM E Thomas St. wrote:
I'm serious..............
On May 28 01:41 PM Neil459 wrote:
> Point well made. But lying about what you are doing, releasing classified
> info for political gain, ignoring the rule of law, purposefully passing
> laws/rules in violation of the constitution, and the other shenanigans
> going on in Congress and the Administration now are traitorous regardless
> of who was elected. Each elected politician pledged to uphold the
> Constitution. Failure to do this is treason. Failure to support our
> Capitalistic heritage is if not traitorous, is at least un-American.
>
>
> On May 28 01:26 PM E Thomas St. wrote:
On May 28 01:00 PM E Thomas St. wrote:
> Raise Federally, Lower Locally. If people want to move away from
> the United States, let the cancerous traitors do so.
On May 28 01:48 PM E Thomas St. wrote:
> Now, one of the interesting parts is that while you claim it may
> be Un-American, I'd argue that this isn't surprising at all given
> that the premise of how capitalism would fall to a soft socialism
> was outlined by Schumpeter. This transcends what and what isn't American
> in my mind.
>
> On May 28 01:41 PM Neil459 wrote:
On May 28 01:53 PM Niner wrote:
> I got a question. Is Capitalism mentioned in the Constitution?
> I'm serious..............
On May 28 01:48 PM E Thomas St. wrote:
It's pretty distressing when your options are between a bunch
> of lying sacks of shit who say no to civil liberties and a bunch
> of lying sacks of shit who say no to economic liberties.
On the other hand looking at the states with the lowest tax rates across the board, I'd sooner live poorer than live in those places. The comprises one makes aren't always about money.
On May 28 01:56 PM Just Curious 2 wrote:
> one problem will be-there will be a huge federal government-check
> out the social security office and the local internal revenue service
> office-that is typical to what locals will get from Washington.
> good luck :-)
>
> On May 28 01:00 PM E Thomas St. wrote:
Also, don't forget that at least part of the reason those people didn't want to leave Greenwich et al. was that there was opportunity there. Look at Silicon Valley and some of the struggles it is having, after years of people saying SV was never going to lose its luster.
People who's main focus in life is making money are very adept at cost-benefit analysis, even when applied to place of residence.
On May 28 01:33 PM AnOilMan wrote:
> Hmmm, I'm an ivy grad in an upper tax bracket. Not sure what you
> inferred. I'm climbing the corporate ladder, one of those you mentioned,
> and will probably be taking a posting abroad for at least a couple
> years, but to think we are going to see some sort of mass exodus
> to third world tax havens by the American elite is just silly. These
> people don't want to leave Greenwich, Arlington, San Fran, etc. Do
> you have some arguments with steps of logic and rationale and you
> want to put forth?
I do agree that state with the lowest tax rates may not be the best place for living (thinking about medical care-social programs-and culture centers), and those services are well worth the tax $ paid.
On May 28 02:15 PM E Thomas St. wrote:
> Too true. The problem is that competition between states is a race
> to the bottom in providing generous benefits to companies to set
> up shop there. I'm not a fan of the Federal government for most things
> but the states aren't doing what's best for the constituents in the
> long term and are only focusing on jobs and outlays.
>
> On the other hand looking at the states with the lowest tax rates
> across the board, I'd sooner live poorer than live in those places.
> The comprises one makes aren't always about money.
I'd love to know exactly what skills you think you bring to the global economy, aside from complaining about people who are adept enough to get paid in it.
On May 28 01:50 PM Niner wrote:
> you can kiss my ass...............it's greedy bastards like you we
> need to get rid of!
I came across this article on the wsj website, and found another that talked Britains 50% decrease in millionaires this year due to the recession. Somehow that must be the fault of liberal Democrats as well. This reporter should be fired for making such a specious claim.
blogs.wsj.com/wealth/2.../