It's clear your admiration of the former president clouds your thinking.
There is no "gravy" until you sell your tech company ("go public" or otherwise). When you invest, the money goes in. The expectation is that magic happens inside the overpriced leased office space with overpriced decor and a dozen air hockey tables.
THEN.... later on when the magic gets enough press and interest, you can try to get something from that gravy train. And when you sell your magic-peddling tech company, the proceeds are taxed as what type of income???
Now if you're trying to say that the bubble would still have happened without a low capital gains rate, then you could have just said that and made your point 3 comments ago. But I think you'd be pushing the limits of credulity to say that a huge drop in that rate in 1997 didn't immediately motivate people to seize the opportunity to dump piles of money into specious companies - especially in view of the fact that you pointed out before, clinton raised CG rates earlier... gotta cash in and out before that happened again.
Simple opposite of the inverse rules of logic also apply here: if the rate jumped tomorrow to 50%, few would sell their assets and large investment would slow dramatically. So my opinion is grounded in sound reason/logic while you rest on 'it was a coincidence and incentives don't work' to counter it. Your position is not strong.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost
No comments:
Post a Comment