XPost: can.general, can.politics, ott.general   
   From: rebel@none.com   
      
   On 10/14/2011 01:08 PM, Canuck57 wrote:   
   > On 13/10/2011 3:11 AM, Johnny Rebel wrote:   
   >> On 10/13/2011 12:17 AM, John Fleming wrote:   
   >>> On Wed, 12 Oct 2011 22:14:16 -0400, while chained to a desk   
   >>> in the scriptorium Johnny Rebel  wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>> $Meh, I don't view it as hoarding, there is just no advantage for me.   
   >>>> $May as well have the dollars in my hand to do with what I wish,   
   >>>> than pay   
   >>>> $a corporate rate on it, then a personal one when I do take it..  I   
   >>>> don't   
   >>>> $really do it all for investment purposes, but some certainly, of   
   >>>> course.   
   >>>   
   >>> I can see where you are coming from.  If it is more tax   
   >>> efficient for you to pay yourself as an employee than it is   
   >>> for you to pay yourself as a corporate shareholder, then do   
   >>> it that way.   
   >>>   
   >>> --   
   >>>   
   >>> John Fleming   
   >>> Edmonton, Canada   
   >>>   
   >>>       Old MacDonald had a farm E-I-E-I-O   
   >>>       And on that farm he had a genome E-I-E-I-O   
   >>>       With a SNP SNP here and a SNP SNP there,   
   >>>       Here a SNP, there a SNP, everywhere a SNP SNP   
   >>>       Old MacDonald had a farm E-I-E-I-O   
   >>   
   >> Yep, exactly.  I know quite a few people that do that as a small   
   >> business.  Could be one explanation for why so many corps don't pay.   
   >   
   > Corps are different.  They might have lots of cash for acquisition   
   > planning but like anything else, timing is everything if you want a good   
   > deal.  And unlike a company with one shareholder, big companies have   
   > many shareholders.   
      
   I am a corp, and never said how many shareholders my company has.   
   Shareholders typically have little to do with those kind of decisions,   
   as it is typically a minor share, with no real voting power.   
   >   
   > But when Obama shoots his mouth off, accusing companies of holding cash,   
   > he just makes a flipping ass hole out of himself.  Not everyone   
   > subscribes to frivolous debt worship.   
   >   
   > Debt does NOT generate wealth, it consumes it.  You want wealth, you   
   > need to shed debt be you a company, a person or government.  But too   
   > many fleabaggers deny this fact.  Their envy and greed drive them for   
   > "just more debt".   
      
   You can used debt to generate wealth, just has to be the right kind of debt.   
      
   >   
   > When I invest in a company, I do look at the last 3 years of debt   
   > accumulation or reduction.  Companies reducing debt tend to be more   
   > stable and profitable, wealthier.   
      
   Again, depends on the kind of debt.  A companies debt is typically a   
   better type of debt than a consumers credit card.  You don't seem to be   
   differentiating.   
      
      
      
   --   
      
      
   --> GNU/Linux is user friendly... it's just picky about its friends.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)