mcrain
Apr 15, 09:02 AM
Do you think there are any negative consequences to this? If I were starting a business and seeking investors, it would sure be a lot harder to get investors when the capital gains rate is 35% rather than 15%. That business would never materialize. Nobody's going to complain about it though because no one can see what could have been.
No.
Capital gains do NOT stand in the way of investment in business. Why? Because capital gains ONLY apply to the gains realized upon the SALE of the shares or ownership interest in the company. That sale has ZERO effect on the business' profit, capitalization, available resources, etc... That sale ONLY might have an effect on the value of the shares of the company in the hands of other investors. That's what is called the secondary market.
What you are talking about is the initial offering of the shares by the company in which the company is looking to exchange ownership, and everything that goes with it, for capital investment.
One of the things that goes with ownership, and one of the two primary reasons people invest, is a share of profits. If a potential business has a good business plan, a good product and will make money, people will invest in it. When it makes money, that income is taxed as ordinary income when distributed, or if kept without re-investment, as business income. This money is NOT taxed as capital gain!
The second profit motive for investment is the idea that the success of the business will generate demand for ownership, thus increasing the value of ownership on the secondary market. This could lead to capital gains if you choose to sell your ownership interest.
Higher taxes result in businesses that choose to reinvest and increase their operations rather than distributing money to its owners. This causes increases in value, increases in operations, increases in hiring, increases in economic impact, etc...
Higher taxes result in investors choosing businesses that are increasing in value, generating higher income rates, operating in riskier, but higher yield, fields, etc...
Capital gains don't prevent investment, they merely affect how much tax is paid on the sale of an investment you have held for over one year.
No.
Capital gains do NOT stand in the way of investment in business. Why? Because capital gains ONLY apply to the gains realized upon the SALE of the shares or ownership interest in the company. That sale has ZERO effect on the business' profit, capitalization, available resources, etc... That sale ONLY might have an effect on the value of the shares of the company in the hands of other investors. That's what is called the secondary market.
What you are talking about is the initial offering of the shares by the company in which the company is looking to exchange ownership, and everything that goes with it, for capital investment.
One of the things that goes with ownership, and one of the two primary reasons people invest, is a share of profits. If a potential business has a good business plan, a good product and will make money, people will invest in it. When it makes money, that income is taxed as ordinary income when distributed, or if kept without re-investment, as business income. This money is NOT taxed as capital gain!
The second profit motive for investment is the idea that the success of the business will generate demand for ownership, thus increasing the value of ownership on the secondary market. This could lead to capital gains if you choose to sell your ownership interest.
Higher taxes result in businesses that choose to reinvest and increase their operations rather than distributing money to its owners. This causes increases in value, increases in operations, increases in hiring, increases in economic impact, etc...
Higher taxes result in investors choosing businesses that are increasing in value, generating higher income rates, operating in riskier, but higher yield, fields, etc...
Capital gains don't prevent investment, they merely affect how much tax is paid on the sale of an investment you have held for over one year.
maclaptop
Apr 20, 07:00 AM
The nice thing this time around is that everyone seems to have such low expectations that Apple can only meet or exceed them :D
Very well said :)
Very well said :)
Nuvi
Apr 18, 04:08 PM
couldn't Samsung simply get back at Apple by NOT making Apple's stuff? I mean, come on.
Unfortunately they could. At the moment part manufacturers hold lot of power especially when in comes to screens. In all honesty I find it very strange that Apple hasn't found some other way to deal with Samsung.
If Apple wants high resolution AMOLED screens for their future products then Samsung could easily say "No" just because even with their current pace they are working very hard trying to meet the demand. For example HTC was forced to use Sony SLCD screens for some of their products because Samsung couldn't manufacture enough AMOLED screens to meet the demand for all of their customers.
Unfortunately they could. At the moment part manufacturers hold lot of power especially when in comes to screens. In all honesty I find it very strange that Apple hasn't found some other way to deal with Samsung.
If Apple wants high resolution AMOLED screens for their future products then Samsung could easily say "No" just because even with their current pace they are working very hard trying to meet the demand. For example HTC was forced to use Sony SLCD screens for some of their products because Samsung couldn't manufacture enough AMOLED screens to meet the demand for all of their customers.
NoNothing
Apr 7, 11:19 AM
Nothing is stopping RIM from paying MORE than Apple to secure supply for their product.
Its simple supply and demand.
There is a limited supply and massive demand.
What does that do to price?
Not quite but close. You almost repeated what I wrote. Any company can pay more for the piece parts but then you price yourself out of the market. Look at how well that served the Xoom.
But what I am saying is this is not a monopoly power in play but a monopsony. They are really different dynamics in how they are controlled and play out.
Its simple supply and demand.
There is a limited supply and massive demand.
What does that do to price?
Not quite but close. You almost repeated what I wrote. Any company can pay more for the piece parts but then you price yourself out of the market. Look at how well that served the Xoom.
But what I am saying is this is not a monopoly power in play but a monopsony. They are really different dynamics in how they are controlled and play out.
Tyrion
Apr 20, 10:39 AM
So, we aren't allowed to talk about contracts? On the internet? Because you might come by and read about it? Yes, that is what "entitlement" is, get over yourself and skip over the posts that don't apply to you. Christ, esp when it is a positive for you.
You're just screwing with me, right? Because this has nothing to do with what I actually wrote.
You're just screwing with me, right? Because this has nothing to do with what I actually wrote.
Benjy91
May 4, 04:10 PM
Just preferred?
That only means an Option right? Still going to be DVD/USB Stick?
Because if it was App Store only, what about people with Leopard or earlier?
That only means an Option right? Still going to be DVD/USB Stick?
Because if it was App Store only, what about people with Leopard or earlier?
old-school
Apr 25, 05:59 AM
This isn't surprising news considering that Lion will be running on a new 27-inch iMac screen.
vendettabass
Sep 11, 03:56 AM
I'd love that media mac! good work!
elgrecomac
Apr 5, 04:43 PM
Look who is acting like Big Brother...
Jail breaking, as an act, is not illegal. Apple is flexing its influence as a it has a right to do. they are worried/scared that the jail breaking phenomenon is spreading to far and this seems like a desperate act.
AND they are worried about a secondary app market place. Hmmm, I'm no lawyer but is there may be an anti-trust case building against Apple.
And as for the warranty...it is a non-issue. Your fallback is to restore to standard iOS. o big deal.
It too more than 30 years but Apple is acting like Microsoft!
-----
IP4 4.3.1 jailbroken, of course. iPad 2, MBP 17"
Jail breaking, as an act, is not illegal. Apple is flexing its influence as a it has a right to do. they are worried/scared that the jail breaking phenomenon is spreading to far and this seems like a desperate act.
AND they are worried about a secondary app market place. Hmmm, I'm no lawyer but is there may be an anti-trust case building against Apple.
And as for the warranty...it is a non-issue. Your fallback is to restore to standard iOS. o big deal.
It too more than 30 years but Apple is acting like Microsoft!
-----
IP4 4.3.1 jailbroken, of course. iPad 2, MBP 17"
lilo777
Apr 20, 11:12 AM
September is summer.
Only in US. For the rest of the World (the northern part of it) summer starts on June 1st and ends on August 31st :)
Only in US. For the rest of the World (the northern part of it) summer starts on June 1st and ends on August 31st :)
SeaFox
Aug 12, 04:03 PM
This promo isn't to clear out Mac inventory, if anything it is to clear out iPod stock. If they hold back the Merom MBP just so I can't the free iPod I would be pissed and they would hear about it.
You don't think a person is more likely to buy a Mac if they get a free iPod? The promo clears out Mac inventory, although I do agree it's primary purpose is to clear out iPod stock, more than once has Apple done an iPod update after the yearly iPod pomo ends.
The point is they would update a product right in the middle of a promotion its involved in.
You don't think a person is more likely to buy a Mac if they get a free iPod? The promo clears out Mac inventory, although I do agree it's primary purpose is to clear out iPod stock, more than once has Apple done an iPod update after the yearly iPod pomo ends.
The point is they would update a product right in the middle of a promotion its involved in.
dextertangocci
Jul 30, 01:46 AM
my t-mobile contract expires in september..
maybe along with the mac pros, new macbook pros, intel core 2 duo, movies on iTunes, WWDC will bring about the iPhone and no-touch full screen video iPod..
*yeah right*
You forgot to ad in the 13.3" MBP. lol.
maybe along with the mac pros, new macbook pros, intel core 2 duo, movies on iTunes, WWDC will bring about the iPhone and no-touch full screen video iPod..
*yeah right*
You forgot to ad in the 13.3" MBP. lol.
Jason Beck
May 6, 06:55 AM
I want them to go AMD across the board.
I'd like that.
I'd like that.
toddybody
Apr 7, 10:49 AM
Of course not purposeful. They bought what they needed and couldn't care less as long as they got what they needed.
Why would anybody care about competitors getting any components of any kind, if they get what they need?
Don't agree that Apple needs constant pressure.
Any good company gets its pressure from within (to make it's products better, to sell the next generation) and from market research and consumer communications.
I bet they know that MobileMe sucks (I gave it up as there is better stuff for free) and will do a major overhaul.
I think we will see tablets taking a big chunk out of notebooks and become the next note book generation.
The next revolutionary thing. (Dick Tracy watch that works:-)
Could be that we'll all run around with little receivers and get the info out of the cloud via Wifi type "Gas" station network free of specific carriers.
You'd go to such a station and dial yourself into your network as they all have Verizon, ATT , but they'd also have the renegades etc.
These receivers will be able to project anything one would normally watch on a screen onto anything flat (wall , paper , desktop, side of a briefcase, even your hand etc.) so the current panels could become strong projecting lenses.
Lenses can be smaller to project, so development of image sensors is next.
Go RIM , MS and start developing or Apple will.
Ha ha! Im not sure the relevancy of the last part...but I have to disagree (respectfully) with the notion that Apple doesnt require constant pressure or that any good company only listens to internal voices (users included). First of all, without competition Apple could very well become stagnant in it's HW development; a sad example of this is with the legacy use of C2D (and no folks, they could have gone to discrete options and circumvented the nVidia v Intel alley fight). Apple's also behind the curve on the GPU market, and with their aged MBP display res. Now, havent we all complained about these issues to some degree?
Long layered wavy curly hair
Layered Hairstyles Photos
long layered haircut
Short hair has long sense been
Long curls offer you freedom
Why would anybody care about competitors getting any components of any kind, if they get what they need?
Don't agree that Apple needs constant pressure.
Any good company gets its pressure from within (to make it's products better, to sell the next generation) and from market research and consumer communications.
I bet they know that MobileMe sucks (I gave it up as there is better stuff for free) and will do a major overhaul.
I think we will see tablets taking a big chunk out of notebooks and become the next note book generation.
The next revolutionary thing. (Dick Tracy watch that works:-)
Could be that we'll all run around with little receivers and get the info out of the cloud via Wifi type "Gas" station network free of specific carriers.
You'd go to such a station and dial yourself into your network as they all have Verizon, ATT , but they'd also have the renegades etc.
These receivers will be able to project anything one would normally watch on a screen onto anything flat (wall , paper , desktop, side of a briefcase, even your hand etc.) so the current panels could become strong projecting lenses.
Lenses can be smaller to project, so development of image sensors is next.
Go RIM , MS and start developing or Apple will.
Ha ha! Im not sure the relevancy of the last part...but I have to disagree (respectfully) with the notion that Apple doesnt require constant pressure or that any good company only listens to internal voices (users included). First of all, without competition Apple could very well become stagnant in it's HW development; a sad example of this is with the legacy use of C2D (and no folks, they could have gone to discrete options and circumvented the nVidia v Intel alley fight). Apple's also behind the curve on the GPU market, and with their aged MBP display res. Now, havent we all complained about these issues to some degree?
res1233
May 6, 05:37 AM
WOW.
First step to a totally closed system. Pretty soon all our applications we want will have to come through the App store for our Macs. The day I see that is the day I turn my Mac OFF.
I will go back to Windows in a heart beat if I am forced to buy my applications and such through Apple.
First off, why do you care where you get your apps from? Second, I highly doubt Apple is going to make Mac OS as closed as iOS. It just makes no sense. They would have to redesign too much of the OS to make it that closed, and they'd have to take away so many features that it wouldn't be the same OS anymore. I doubt Apple is stupid enough to do that. It's true that Apple wants to have as much control over the entire process as they can get, but I firmly believe that there are limits to it. They wont sabotage their own OS because I don't think i've ever met anyone clueless enough to think that that would be a good idea.
First step to a totally closed system. Pretty soon all our applications we want will have to come through the App store for our Macs. The day I see that is the day I turn my Mac OFF.
I will go back to Windows in a heart beat if I am forced to buy my applications and such through Apple.
First off, why do you care where you get your apps from? Second, I highly doubt Apple is going to make Mac OS as closed as iOS. It just makes no sense. They would have to redesign too much of the OS to make it that closed, and they'd have to take away so many features that it wouldn't be the same OS anymore. I doubt Apple is stupid enough to do that. It's true that Apple wants to have as much control over the entire process as they can get, but I firmly believe that there are limits to it. They wont sabotage their own OS because I don't think i've ever met anyone clueless enough to think that that would be a good idea.
PBF
Mar 30, 08:33 PM
And yes, you can remove Launchpad from the dock.
Without editing code, plist or whatever, correct?
Without editing code, plist or whatever, correct?
spicyapple
Nov 26, 10:22 AM
I see this being used as the interface remote for iTV. As a full-blown PDA device, no.
KnightWRX
May 4, 06:58 PM
It's bootable (the, ahem, pirated versions of Lion are distributed as dmgs.)
That doesn't mean the App Store version is. Only that the "pirated" versions are. They could have been made bootable after the fact.
That doesn't mean the App Store version is. Only that the "pirated" versions are. They could have been made bootable after the fact.
Blakeco123
Apr 23, 04:41 PM
Where are the icons located?
not the icons the wallpaper
and its Macintosh HD/Library/Desktop pictures
icons are located by clicking get info on an application, then clicking the icon in the window and command+c to copy. open up preview and click file, open from clipbord
not the icons the wallpaper
and its Macintosh HD/Library/Desktop pictures
icons are located by clicking get info on an application, then clicking the icon in the window and command+c to copy. open up preview and click file, open from clipbord
floatingspirit
Jul 30, 11:25 PM
i think i'll buy a Macbook instead
Here! Here! I second that! :)
Here! Here! I second that! :)
chrono1081
Apr 7, 01:54 PM
It's sad but it's starting to sound like that's exactly what anti-Apple people want. They're making it sound like Apple regularly colludes with suppliers. Maybe it does, but there's no proof, or at least Apple buying up the supply of touch panels certainly doesn't constitute proof.
Apple legitimately amassed a large cash reserve. Apple is using that massive hoard of cash to secure the best possible deals with component suppliers. If that's called anticompetitive, then I don't know what to say.
+1 its not anticompetitive, its smart. Apple actually MOVES these things and people buy them. It would only be anti-competitive if they bought a ton of them on purpose and never used them.
The amount of anti-apple on mac rumors is sickening anymore. Its like going to engadget.
Apple legitimately amassed a large cash reserve. Apple is using that massive hoard of cash to secure the best possible deals with component suppliers. If that's called anticompetitive, then I don't know what to say.
+1 its not anticompetitive, its smart. Apple actually MOVES these things and people buy them. It would only be anti-competitive if they bought a ton of them on purpose and never used them.
The amount of anti-apple on mac rumors is sickening anymore. Its like going to engadget.
ghostlines
Mar 31, 07:22 AM
Does anyone know if you can now print highlighted text like you can in Windows? Since they're adding the age old full-screen window feature, I think this feature would also be a welcome addition.
ChrisTX
Apr 7, 08:54 PM
The idea here is that NO ONE else was even considering making a tablet until Apple, and the iPad. They didn't want to be left behind like they were with the iPhone, so now everyone's jumping on board. It's RIM'S fault for not coming to market sooner with a tablet. You can thank Apple for creating the current modern day tablet. Everyone says apple needs competition to keep them from getting stagnant as a company, but they didn't need it when producing the iPod, or the iPhone, and they certainly didn't need it for the iPad. No ones fault but their own that they aren't smart enough to innovate like Apple.
toddybody
May 4, 09:21 PM
(yes, my Internet in the 90s on was cable, at something like 8 Mbps).
8Mbps in the 90's? I've got 12 now and think that's wonderful...you're probable one of those Xfinity snobs:rolleyes: jk. Wow, I knew non US ISPs push some serious speed...idk why Amurika can't get none a dat goodnis
8Mbps in the 90's? I've got 12 now and think that's wonderful...you're probable one of those Xfinity snobs:rolleyes: jk. Wow, I knew non US ISPs push some serious speed...idk why Amurika can't get none a dat goodnis
No comments:
Post a Comment