XPost: can.general, can.politics, ott.general
From: Canuck57@nospam.com
On 14/10/2011 4:44 PM, Johnny Rebel wrote:
> 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.
Ok, your right, I should have been more detailed. Big corps also have
near term commitments in wages, advances, loans due, suppliers,
receivables, finance arrangements and more....which single proprietors
do not have. This is best accomplished with a on hand cash float.
It is good a larger corporation has cash on hand. It isn't a crime, it
is good business. So what if Apple has more cash than the US Treasury,
just means the government is broke and mismanaged. Not surprising for a
inept government.
>> 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.
That is how banks do it. As a private person, BoC has shorted the
lenders market with fraud low interest rates. Only a fool would lend
government money at these low rates with locked in terms and no
inflation protection.
>> 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.
Yes you do need to be fully aware of debt, government, banks, the stock
you ar looking at, the whole picture.
I bought TCK.B at $3.50 as they were having debt renewal problems right
at the bottom of the market. But I did so after reviewing every part of
their debt. So I dove in and watched it climb to $38 in 12 months where
I sold out. My guess is Chinese wanted a piece and bought 17% for debt
reduction. Nice ROI for me.
Another I bought, the exact opposite. <1% debt to NAV. So sweet, as it
was takeout target as a leveraged buy out for taxes, picked the shares
up at 75 cents and got $3.50 back in 8 months as they too were bought
out. UTS, Total SA got it.
Make a kill on Ford too, $2.50 a share and was out at $8 in no time, I
figured GM was bankrupt and counted on Marxist corrupt government to
bail them out. Just noticed Ford was depressed due to possible supplier
bankruptcies and let GM do the pioneering dirty work and watch Ford come
out better. Paid off. High risk, but what do you expect for a 12 month
ROI like that.
You bet you need to understand debt. This includes government ponzi
fraud debt and the Bernanke Doctrine of inflation for debt.
As for consumer and government debt, I don't touch it at all. I would
rather let money sit idle as it is liquid for the right opportunities.
Hey, I would love to lend to government for a *fair* rate of interest
that reflects properly the cost of money, risk, plus inflation + taxes +
reward. But no such value exists today with the new ponzi fraud money
print for debt and inflation crap going on.
Government knows why we savvy investors don't lend them money, that is
why they fraud print it for their debt. And we investors also know this
is a major unsustainable source of economic instability.
So if government announces a transaction tax for January 1st, I can
transfer money out of Canada in hours. That has value to me as a
Canadian investor.
Notice the heavy weight in government BS, well, look at how many got
burned on the Ottawa Trust greed fiasco. Ottawa screwed themselves,
government ended up with less revenue, ticked off Canadian investors and
more foreign ownership. Retirees to this day get more OAS because of
capital losses on that dig. Or Newfoundland with Abitibi. You have to
watch government like a hawk and know when to get out.
--
Eat the rich, screw the companies and wonder why there are no jobs or
investors. But we have big huge government we can't afford...
-- Obama and the lefty fleabagger attitude
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
