News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


Jim Eder

Re: The White House will soon make golf/country clubs extinct if
« Reply #250 on: October 29, 2010, 03:13:26 PM »
I haven't really followed this thread as I spend my day looking at macroeconomics and the markets (equity, credit etc). Some interesting questions etc on the posts. It is funny as I come here to this site to "escape" the markets (not at all a knock on this thread or the posters) especially when volatility is low. Maybe some day we should get a group together and talk economics/markets etc and play some great golf courses and discuss strategy, architecture etc. A Bandon offsite or a Scottish Highlands offsite or something. The best of both worlds for some of us I would guess. I am sure there are a few more people like me who spend their days looking at these markets, pair off a market person or 2 with non-market people in each group.  Just kind of thinking seeing 8 pages of posts on this thread.

David_Tepper

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The White House will soon make golf/country clubs extinct if
« Reply #251 on: October 29, 2010, 03:20:13 PM »
"A Bandon offsite or a Scottish Highlands offsite or something."

Jim Eder -

I spend every working day looking at the markets myself. I will be in Dornoch next May 7 to June 4, playing a lot of golf AND looking at the markets daily. You are welcome to come join me for a dialogue! 

DT

Bill_McBride

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The White House will soon make golf/country clubs extinct if
« Reply #252 on: October 29, 2010, 03:29:39 PM »
Jim S. -

I posted this back on page 4:

"From today's San Francisco Chronicle: Most Americans don't even realize their taxes went down since Obama became president. In a New York Times/CBS News Poll last month, only 8 percent of respondents said they thought the Obama administration has decreased taxes for most Americans."

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/10/26/BU4O1G1OP9.DTL#ixzz13VaIAzWZ

DT

David, please don't confuse (or bait  ;D ) the Tea Partiers with facts!

Jim Eder

Re: The White House will soon make golf/country clubs extinct if
« Reply #253 on: October 29, 2010, 03:31:22 PM »
David,

Thank you, I think that sounds like an excellent plan!!! One of my fav places on earth especially that time of the year. I would very much enjoy that, let's keep in touch.  Thanks again.

Jim

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The White House will soon make golf/country clubs extinct if
« Reply #254 on: October 29, 2010, 03:36:42 PM »
Bill McB,

Let's be honest, does Obama's agenda carry with it higher or lower taxes?

Bill_McBride

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The White House will soon make golf/country clubs extinct if
« Reply #255 on: October 29, 2010, 03:43:45 PM »
Bill McB,

Let's be honest, does Obama's agenda carry with it higher or lower taxes?

Overall? 

Obama's agenda?  How well did W's agenda work out for us?

Best way to dramatically increase tax revenues would be to significantly increase business activity.  What's the best way to do that, lay off school teachers?  A larger and more effective stimulus plan would have been a lot better than what they did.

Nobody seems to care much about Old JM Keynes any more.  He was all the rage in my school days!

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The White House will soon make golf/country clubs extinct if
« Reply #256 on: October 29, 2010, 03:46:21 PM »
Is it fair for me to take that as - Higher?

Jud_T

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The White House will soon make golf/country clubs extinct if
« Reply #257 on: October 29, 2010, 03:48:30 PM »
I don't know about you guys, but I play golf in part to get away from the markets.  Nothing worse than a guy pulling out his Bloomberg or calling the office during the entire round....The best reason to belong to some private clubs is the very strict no cell phone policy....
Golf is a game. We play it. Somewhere along the way we took the fun out of it and charged a premium to be punished.- - Ron Sirak

David_Tepper

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The White House will soon make golf/country clubs extinct if
« Reply #258 on: October 29, 2010, 03:57:49 PM »
"It doesn't matter whether he's lowered taxes for some and raised them for others.  The point is that government shouldn't do that!   

It's just as wrong to tax a man a greater percentage because he made a few more bucks than somebody else as it is to tax a man a greater percentage because he has a little more dark colored pigment in his skin than somebody else  - and who on God's green earth would ever believe the latter to be OK, unless they run around at night with a white hood over their head?" 


Shivas -

If you don't think it is fair that some incomes are taxed at a higher rate than others, why is it fair that the tax-loophole of mortgage deduction is available to someone who buys a home, but someone who chooses to rent is discriminated against and gets no benefit at all? What makes home ownership so sacred?

At least be consistent in your hyperbole! ;)   

DT

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The White House will soon make golf/country clubs extinct if
« Reply #259 on: October 29, 2010, 04:01:54 PM »
Isn't it because ownership is better for developing a stable population than non-ownership.

Jim Eder

Re: The White House will soon make golf/country clubs extinct if
« Reply #260 on: October 29, 2010, 04:07:10 PM »
Jud,

I agree with you on the no blackberry no cell phone. I was thinking of an "investor retreat" specifically for those interested, realizing it is not for many.  I am happy to never mention it on the golf course and happy to answer if asked. And there is plenty of time at dinner to discuss the markets and of course the golf and the golf course. I stopped golfing with the sellside because of the issues you mentioned. Maybe I am just looking for a good excuse to go on another golf trip!!!   :)

Tim Pitner

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The White House will soon make golf/country clubs extinct if
« Reply #261 on: October 29, 2010, 04:18:04 PM »
I am consistent.   The tax code should not be engineered to favor or disfavor anybody.  In this case, one would not exist without the other.

Your question, Dave, is just a nifty way of avoiding the primary issue:  On what basis would it be just or equitable to have a progressive pigment tax?   And how is a progressive income tax any different?

The theoretical basis for a progressive income tax is the declining marginal utility of income.  You can agree or disagree, but it isn't wantonly discriminatory. 

Checking out now . . .

David_Tepper

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The White House will soon make golf/country clubs extinct if
« Reply #262 on: October 29, 2010, 04:18:56 PM »
"Isn't it because ownership is better for developing a stable population than non-ownership."

Jim Sullivan -

Yes, I would tend to agree with you about that. I am also sure the lobbying over the years of the home-building/home-mortgage lending/real estate industry had some influence on all of us coming to that conclusion. But not all countries in the Western world subsidize home ownership thru the deduction of mortgage of mortgage interest like we do.

One of the negatives of a "stable population" created by home ownership currently is that people in various parts of the country, who have lost their jobs and own homes that are under water with their lenders, are very reluctant/cannot afford to sell their homes at a loss and move to other parts of the country where their job prospects might be better. The "stability" of our population in this case might be hurting the economy.

The bigger point is that our society, thru our elected representatives, makes decisions about all these issues. Some of the decisions that get made work out better than others. That is what our democracy is all about.

One could argue (and I am one who would) that graduated tax rates help to create a more stable population and society. Shivas might disagree.

DT      

    

David_Tepper

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The White House will soon make golf/country clubs extinct if
« Reply #263 on: October 29, 2010, 04:22:28 PM »
Shivas -

See my response to Jim S. above.

Can you deny that the deduction of mortgage interest is an enormous tax break granted to a certain segment of society?

DT   

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The White House will soon make golf/country clubs extinct if
« Reply #264 on: October 29, 2010, 04:29:19 PM »
David,

I received an IM from a friend with the same "problem" with stability you just outlined. It's understandable, but if you looked at each of these people currently under water and trying to move for better prospects and charted their experinces owning versus renting over a long term they (and by conection, all of us) would be better off through ownership with the deduction.

If the deduction goes away in an effort to capture revue, fine. Everyting will adjust to its new norm, I just can't see how it can be argued to be better...necessary, maybe...

Bill_McBride

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The White House will soon make golf/country clubs extinct if
« Reply #265 on: October 29, 2010, 04:30:28 PM »
Is it fair for me to take that as - Higher?

Sorry, all these issues are too complex to answer in one word sound bites!

David_Tepper

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The White House will soon make golf/country clubs extinct if
« Reply #266 on: October 29, 2010, 04:35:37 PM »
"A tax break?  There is no such thing as a tax break.  There is only degrees of excess taxation.  Lest we forget, Robin Hood was a criminal..."

Shivas -

I have asked you several specific questions and you have not answered any.

Like I said, don't let the facts get in the way of your rhetoric and opinions.

DT

JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The White House will soon make golf/country clubs extinct if
« Reply #267 on: October 29, 2010, 04:36:20 PM »
Ask PeterPallotta, my brain only works for 6, maybe 8 words...

David_Tepper

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The White House will soon make golf/country clubs extinct if
« Reply #268 on: October 29, 2010, 05:02:39 PM »
Shivas -

Taking your rather twisted logic and rhetoric a little bit further, why does someone who is renting a house have to suffer the consequence of having their whole residence burgled, while someone who owns a home only has suffer having one floor burgled?

And tell us please, what is your vision of the perfect tax code?

DT

Rob Bice

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The White House will soon make golf/country clubs extinct if
« Reply #269 on: October 29, 2010, 05:45:35 PM »
A little dated to say the least, but a pretty interesting piece if you have the time:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/05/magazine/305deduction.1.html?_r=1&pagewanted=print

A few interesting highlights for those not inclined to read the entire article:

1.  First modern income tax was created in 1894 although the Supreme Court quickly ruled it unconstitutional
2.  Constitution was amended in 1913 and a new income tax was enacted - all interest expense was deductible
3.  All interest (including interest on credit card debt) was deductible until 1986
4.  Homeownership jumped from the mid 40% range in the first half of the century to the low 60% range by 1960 - most likely impacted much more by the availability of mortgages due to the creation of the Federal Housing Administration than due to the mortgage interest deduction
5.  Home ownership in the US is roughly the same as it is in Canada, Australia and England where mortgage interest is not deductible
6.  Just over 2/3 of all taxpayers, including most renters, don't itemize deductions so the mortgage deduction would have no benefit

Unquestionably the mortgage interest deduction favors wealthier Americans.

The real quesiton is whether or not our current tax system is fair.  A few questions:

1.  Is it fair that the top 10% of income earners who represent 46% of total AGI pay 70% of total income taxes?
2.  Is it fair that the bottom 50% of income earners who represent 13% of total AGI pay 3% of total income taxes?

Your answers to the above two questions probably impacts your view of the Mortgage Interest Deduction debate.

How scary is this:

2010 projected total tax receipts    $2,162 billion

2010 project expenditures
Defense  $667
Social Security  $696
Medicare  $450
Medicaid  $273
Net interest on debt  $228

Total  $2,314 billion

Not much room for anything else.  Forget unemployment benefits, forget all of your departments, forget everything.
"medio tutissimus ibis" - Ovid

Dan Herrmann

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The White House will soon make golf/country clubs extinct if
« Reply #270 on: October 29, 2010, 05:54:31 PM »
Ironically, lower tax receipts are due, in large part, to low employment rates.  You don't pay tax on money you don't earn.

Rob Bice

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: The White House will soon make golf/country clubs extinct if
« Reply #271 on: October 29, 2010, 06:01:15 PM »
Not sure I would say it is ironic that "lower tax receipts are due, in large part, to lower employment rates".  I would just say it is factual.

The income tax distribution statistics I included are for income earners so the unemployed would not be included unless they are receiving unemployment benefits that are considered income.  The statistics are for the 2008 tax year.  Statistics aren't available yet for the 2009 figures.
"medio tutissimus ibis" - Ovid

Patrick_Mucci

Re: The White House will soon make golf/country clubs extinct if
« Reply #272 on: October 29, 2010, 06:10:51 PM »
Jim S. -

I posted this back on page 4:

"From today's San Francisco Chronicle: Most Americans don't even realize their taxes went down since Obama became president. In a New York Times/CBS News Poll last month, only 8 percent of respondents said they thought the Obama administration has decreased taxes for most Americans."

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/10/26/BU4O1G1OP9.DTL#ixzz13VaIAzWZ

David,

Obama didn't come into office until January of 2009.

The Federal tax rates for calendar years 2008, 2009 and 2010 haven't changed, they're, 10, 15, 25, 28, 33 and 35 %

Effective in 2011, Obama/Reid/Pelosi have increased the taxes and the tax rates as follows

1 - The lowest bracket for the personal income tax is going to increase from 10 percent to 15 percent.

2 - The next lowest bracket for the personal income tax is going to increase from 25 percent to 28 percent.

3 - The 28 percent tax bracket is going to increase to 31 percent.

4 - The 33 percent tax bracket is going to increase to 36 percent.

5 - The 35 percent tax bracket is going to increase to 39.6 percent.

6 - In 2011, the death tax is scheduled to return.  So instead of paying zero percent, estates of $1 million or more are going to be taxed at a rate of 55 percent.

7 - The capital gains tax is going to increase from 15 percent to 20 percent.

8 - The tax on dividends is going to increase from 15 percent to 39.6 percent.

9 - The "marriage penalty" is also scheduled to be reinstated in 2011.

10  Section 9001 of the health care bill contains an excise tax on "Cadillac" health insurance plans.  In other words, if you have provided your family with the very best in health insurance coverage you get to be taxed extra.  This tax is particularly harsh.  It imposes a 40 percent tax rate on the portion of insurance premiums exceeding $8,500 a year for individuals and $23,000 a year for family plans.

11  Section 9004 taxes on money in a health savings account not used for qualified medical expenses will increase from 10% to 20%.  For "Archer" medical savings accounts, taxes on money not used for qualified medical expenses will increase from 15% to 20%.

12  Section 9008 of the health care bill imposes a $2.3 billion excise tax on the pharmaceutical industry.  This tax is distributed throughout the entire pharmaceutical industry and it is not based on the income of the individual firms.  Instead, the tax will solely be based on market share.  So even if a pharmaceutical company is losing hundreds of millions of dollars it will still have to pay this tax.

13  Section 9009 of the health care bill imposes an "annual fee" on medical device manufacturers and importers.  Just like the tax imposed on the pharmaceutical industry, this tax on medical device manufacturers and importers will be based on market share and not on income.

14  Section 9010 of the health care bill imposes an "annual fee" on health insurance providers.  This $6.7 billion tax would also be allocated based on market share.

15  Section 9015 of the health care bill imposes an extra 0.5% tax on wages over $200,000 for those who file a single return and on wages over $250,000 for those who file a joint return.

16  Section 9017 of the health care bill imposes an excise tax on elective cosmetic medical procedures.  Any voluntary cosmetic procedures will now be subjected to a 5 percent tax.

17  In  H.R. 4872 A 2.5% income tax on anyone who does not purchase health care insurance.  This tax will be limited to an amount less than the average national health care insurance premium.

A 1% tax increase on those making between $350,000 and $500,000.

 1.5% tax increase on those making between $500,000 and $1 million.

A 5.4% tax increase on those making more than $1 million per year.

For firms that do not provide health insurance for their employees, and yet do not qualify for exclusions, an 8% tax on wages will be applied.









Patrick_Mucci

Re: The White House will soon make golf/country clubs extinct if
« Reply #273 on: October 29, 2010, 06:16:38 PM »
Mike,

Do you think their "sitting on cash" to control credit risk is the significant contributor to the long term bear market?


Jim,

The position that all companies are sitting on cash is absurd.

Most private companies are struggling.
They've had to lay people off, cut benefits and control expenses like never before.
Revenues are down substantially.

Companies that have cash have it because they DON'T know what to do, due to the uncertainty in Washington and in the economy.
They're not hiring, they're not spending, they're not buying because it's too risky

Patrick_Mucci

Re: The White House will soon make golf/country clubs extinct if
« Reply #274 on: October 29, 2010, 06:29:45 PM »
Shivas -

If you don't think it is fair that some incomes are taxed at a higher rate than others, why is it fair that the tax-loophole of mortgage deduction is available to someone who buys a home, but someone who chooses to rent is discriminated against and gets no benefit at all? What makes home ownership so sacred?

At least be consistent in your hyperbole! ;)   


David,

You don't get it.
Please look at the bigger picture.
It's not a tax-loophole, it's a sound business practice, just like you get to deduct the wages you pay an employee.

The interest deduction is just that, a business expense associated with using capital and creating value.

Borrowing, for better or worse is part of the foundation of business and creating value.

The renter doesn't get an interest deduction because he didn't put himself at risk by borrowing money to own property and create value.
But, the developer who owns the apartment building gets an interest deduction because he did just that.
He took his own capital along with borrowed capital and built an apartment complex.
A complex which pays taxes., real estate and income.
He also gets an interest deduction on the mortgage.
If he didn't the rent would be a lot higher

Don't forget, that until Dood and Frank strong armed lenders to lend without particpation, homeowners had to plunk down 20 % of the value of the property in order to get a mortgage, in other words, they had to risk their capital as well, in the hope that they could create value ;D


Tags:
Tags: