Investing General Discussion

TJT

TJT

Mr. Poopybutthole
<Gold Donor>
46,552
127,188
Cad said:
In your scenario, if I understand it right, you start with $100k. It goes up 300% in one year, you end up with a $400k value. You'd have a $300k capital gain, so you'd pay 36% of that in tax, right? You sell $108k of the security to cover the taxes (I guess you could pay this out of pocket and then the security crashes in value, is this your scenario?) so you are left with $298k. The security in the next year then crashes to 20% of its original value, or $58,400. You also now have $233k in loss carry-forwards that never expire.

If you paid the taxes out of pocket and did not sell the security, you could end up negative, although you do have a huge tax benefit waiting for you on future gains to offset it. It really depends on how those loss-carryforwards are applied.

Man. Thinking this through, investing and actually getting gains comes with huge risks because you need to sell to lock in your gains or you risk paying tax on a gain you never actually had. It's just counter-productive, it's going to guarantee nobody actually invests there because the stories of people getting turbo-fucked like in your scenario WILL happen, and people WILL spread it far and wide.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I can't hear you over the year 1 and year 2 tax revenue windfall.

-Some Dutch bureaucrat faggot
 
  • 2Worf
Reactions: 1 users
M Power

M Power

6
1
Tirant said:
There’s probably 30% of the US population that would vote for this, thinking it would have no impact on them since they don’t own stocks. Totally ignorant of all the benefits that come from living adjacent to rich people. The hatred on the left for anyone they feel has it better than them shouldn’t be underestimated.
Pretty depressing tbh
Click to expand...
You say 30% would vote for it but over 40% don't even own any equities so it's probably higher.
 
Borzak

Borzak

<Bronze Donator>
28,007
37,871
I'm sure a significant number would vote for it just because it would mean it would screw someone else, even if it screwed them as well. Just not as much as someone else.
 
Cad

Sheriff Cad

scientia potentia est
<Nazi Janitors>
31,316
74,385
Borzak said:
I'm sure a significant number would vote for it just because it would mean it would screw someone else, even if it screwed them as well. Just not as much as someone else.
Click to expand...
You would be surprised I guess at how bitter people can be at other people's holdings. Look how salty people are when anybody talks about boomer's 401k's or 401k's in general. "Oh everyone is poor and can't afford a thing but 401k's are up! KILL THEM ALL"

Nothing motivates people quite like the chance to take a swipe at those above them in status.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.