$30B over 10 years isn’t “nothing”.
Yea it is. That’s .075% of the annual federal budget.
Second it is a fairness issue.
Fairness is a subjective term. If you can parse away the hedge fund managers without picking up the venture investors, I’m all good.
And it has zero impact on venture capitalists, since the tax is on income, not outlay. They only pay the tax on the profits earned, so it increases their perceived risk exactly zero.
An Insider Perspective On Carried Interest
Public dissection of Mitt Romney's tax returns has put "carried interest" in the spotlight, but many people don't know…
Oh noez! Not the domestic luxury yacht business! Literally tens of jobs wiped away!
We now know what “Ron Carey” cares more about ideology than he does about (not tens, but thousands) of blue collar American workers. Thanks for that.
The vast majority of employees at a car dealer are salespeople, who work on straight commission.
Nope. They’re mechanics, body shop guys, administrative workers, and the like. Which renders the rest of your “thoughts” on the matter moot.
OK, Kady, I’m listening. Because if that’s your argument, you just proved my point. You failed to enumerate any regulations that were passed, which harmed business for no perceivable public good.
So, basically, if you don’t get a list, you’re just going decide that the problem doesn’t exist, and that all the businesses are lying?
Because if they were to single them out, each one would have a specific rationale.
Of course they do. Nobody’s debating that. There is an undebatable public good in, for example, making businesses with over 50 employees pay for health care for anyone working over thirty hours a week. However, it is also undebatable that loading more and more compliance costs on businesses hampers their ability to hire and grow. That’s not ideology, that’s just arithmetic. So, you can be well-meaning about as many regs as you like…….there’s still a ceiling to the total costs that you can toss on a business.
So, suggesting this is a simply cost-benefit analysis is a little disingenuous.
I didn’t suggest it was. In general, however, I would point out that the only way you get back to an utterly pristine environment is to reverse the Industrial Revolution. Reasonable people are looking for a proper balance between environmental concerns and the need for businesses to produce and grow.
But you knew that. You limited your response to ‘minimum wage’ because any other response was ridiculous.
Wrong. Could just have easily have said “lower quintile” which is the primary recipient of the benefits of trickle-up economics. Even people who earn in the 90th percentile have pause at $500 a night.
And noting a dearth of luxury vacation properties compared to the demand, more luxury accommodations would spring up to meet the demand. That’s called growth.
Yes, and the Mexican and Caribbean economies take off.