Posts by Fido L Dido

Re: hmm

So you advocate a race to the bottom where nobody pays tax anywhere?

I would advocate a race to the bottom where there is no corporation tax. I know this flies in the face of popular opinion, so let me explain.

When a company makes a profit, it can do a combination of a few things:

- Sit on the cash indefinitely. This doesn't help the business, its staff or owners. Really the only purpose for a company to stockpile cash is because it hasn't decided what to do with it yet, or that it'll need it during rainy days.

- Reinvest in the business. This could be R&D, upping production, employing more staff. A successful and growing business will generally grow its workforce.

- Pay it out to the workforce by way of bonuses or increased salaries.

- Pay it to the owners by way of dividends.

Paying it out incurs tax bills, whether that's PAYE/NI on bonuses/salaries, or tax on dividends (which would almost certainly be at a higher rate if there was no corporation tax). Reinvesting in the business would not incur any direct taxation, but that money would be spent somehow, and would likely generate tax revenues.

So what is the benefits of no corporation tax? For companies that decide to reinvest in growth, it generates wealth, which in turn increases tax revenue. For companies that decide to spend it on their staff and owners, it generates tax revenues. Pension funds would perform better, as most funds are invested in public companies. The better these companies perform, the more dividends they pay, the bigger your pension pot will be.

Corporation tax is an indirect tax on pensions.

Further, it was seen when Ireland had one of the most competitive rates of Corporation tax in Europe, they attracted lots of business - this was not coincidence. Any country that takes the bold move to reduce corporation tax rates or get rid of them will attract more business because of it. More business means more workers, means more money in the economy means more tax revenues.

It's a long term plan, because the Government would see a short term loss, but a longer term gain. But then why would they want to do something that helps the next Administration once they are no longer in power?

their usual response is "we're crying, sad face"

Yes, they realise the furore that would happen if they posted that sarcasm emoticon at the end to convey the true message.

Re: C

As a former assembler programmer including PIC, Z80, 6502, 65010, 680x0 and MIPS, I don't think I would ever describe any variant of C as being "one step away from the metal". The concepts, even in K&R C and ANSI C are abstracted by many degrees from assembler.

Re: Interesting stuff

In terms of prep, I'd recommend Googling for 'Reid Hoffman ABZ plan'. It basically explains knowing the worst case scenario by which you'll call it a day on your venture and go out and get a job. You can and should define this before you even start, and by doing so makes it easier to do.

Re: Every so often a market develops around something improbable

It's a standard definition Mark, look it up. I've shown the intrinsic value in the items I compared it to, fundamentals that Bitcoins don't have. Others have also shown this earlier in the comments.

I have a mixture of investments, some more risky than others. I feel Bitcoins bear far too much resemblance to a Ponzi scheme for me to go near them (and I do acknowledge there are some differences to traditional Ponzi schemes).

I can't demonstrate here that my 'guess' is any better than yours, and I don't wish to post here my experience with finance, so we'll have to agree to differ. I hope you're right and you don't lose out, because the future value of Bitcoins will have no effect on me.