TSLA Market Action: 2018 Investor Roundtable

[SpaceCash]

Yes it's fundamentally different though they still have to prove it going forward. As always the shorts won't believe it until it happens.

You're giving the shorts too much credit. They don't have to believe anything when they start getting margin calls. It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to know that almost 100% of shorts are already underwater

 

[dmckinstry]

What car would someone who invests part of their savings drive?

And sure, add to that, there's people owning TSLA before owning a Tesla...

It's the only way I could afford my Model S.

 

[PaulusdB]

...
If you're a risk-taker, I suppose you could borrow against your TSLA to buy the car.
...

...or to buy more TSLA and drive your clunker a little longer...
And eventually buy the same spec CPO car for less, or a better spec car for the same price.

 

[scaesare]

This is why shorts ... first and foremost attacked "the man behind the story" with viscous character attacks: Elon.

They really did lay it on thick, didn't they?

 

[Off Shore]

Took me four months to finally catch up with this thread and finally post here.

This is why I rated your post "funny." I would have happily chosen "love+funny.¨

 

[Reciprocity]

What you have stated are Republican party talking points. They're distributed as propaganda for the purpose of fooling people like you. It's sad that you've fallen for them.


Right. So, the US system doesn't do that. This is simply a fact.

Take someone who earns $200,000 a year from working at a job, look at her tax rate.

Then take someone who collects $500,000 a year from qualified dividends, look at his tax rate.

The tax rate on the person collecting $500,000 a year (from qualified dividends) is lower. The tax rate on the person earning $200,000 a year (from a job) is higher. This is easy enough to check. Run it through your favorite tax program. (Including Social Security and Medicare and the standard deduction, for a single person, the overall average tax rate ends up being roughly 28.6% for the salary-earner and 15.7% for the dividend-collector.)

You've fallen for a scam, and it's sad.


It's what's known as a "false statement".

Except that the person in your scenario with the 500,000 was taxed on the income originally, so what your propose is double taxation. The low tax rates on long term capital gains is to incentivize long term and at risk investing, Which leads to stability and growth at companies that hire people. If you just tax every rich person at 50%+ on all income, they will leave and take their ball with them. They will invest their money elsewhere.

 

[JRP3]

Except that the person in your scenario with the 500,000 was taxed on the income originally, so what your propose is double taxation.

How so? The 500K in gains is new income, it didn't exist previously and could not have been taxed.

 

[Intl Professor]

Except that the person in your scenario with the 500,000 was taxed on the income originally, so what your propose is double taxation. The low tax rates on long term capital gains is to incentivize long term and at risk investing, Which leads to stability and growth at companies that hire people. If you just tax every rich person at 50%+ on all income, they will leave and take their ball with them. They will invest their money elsewhere.

The popularity of behavioral research in economics in recent years might cast some doubt on the arguments used to justify zero taxation of capital gains. It depends greatly on what the investment is for. Is it to expand a business like Tesla's which we all care about and applaud, or is it to defend monopolies in pharmaceuticals or deny investment prospects by Tesla through high speed stock/media manipulation and shorting?

Decades ago at a meeting of profs interested in increasing the education budget, one of the engineering professors asked how much does it cost to buy a legislator? We couldn't even agree on $10,000 to do that ourselves. Others can do much more but help may be on the way. Both Bernie and many Dems who were House candidates had a lot of money through small donations and the benefit of crowdsourcing appeals.

 

[lklundin]

Since we are deep into the non-trading week-end I hope it is OK for me to recommend the several years old film 'The Big Short' which I just watched.

To provide a sliver of on-topic-ness, I will add that since I have been long Tesla for several years now I could empathize with the protagonist(s), who were seen as fools for betting against the establishment (but who turned out to be right).

 

[Steve m]

Except that the person in your scenario with the 500,000 was taxed on the income originally, so what your propose is double taxation. The low tax rates on long term capital gains is to incentivize long term and at risk investing, Which leads to stability and growth at companies that hire people. If you just tax every rich person at 50%+ on all income, they will leave and take their ball with them. They will invest their money elsewhere.

Yep like i left California.

 

[Reciprocity]

How so? The 500K in gains is new income, it didn't exist previously and could not have been taxed.

It's at risk. Is your W2 income at risk?

 

[Reciprocity]

Yep like i left California.

Everyone who can has and will leave Illinois as well. Many going to Indiana where there is little or no state income tax and lower property taxes (about 1/2). In Illinois, I pay more in property tax then federal, if you can believe that.

 

[EVNow]

It's at risk. Is your W2 income at risk?

Nice goal post moving there.

Once you made the money it's no longer at risk.

 

[Reciprocity]

Nice goal post moving there.

Once you made the money it's no longer at risk.

You made it putting it at risk, again. W2 income is not. The risk in this case helps generate jobs. You know the kind that the poor need to eat and need to become not poor. Like the lady that now runs Walmart in the US that started as a minimum wage stocker working graveyards.

 

[AWDtsla]

You made it putting it at risk, again. W2 income is not.

It's much more likely I'll be incapacitated, layed off, or fired, than it is a capital investment, like SPY, to become worthless. Sounds like a huge risk to me. If you have enough capital investment relative to your expenditures, then you never have to work again.

The risk in this case helps generate jobs. You know the kind that the poor need to eat and need to become not poor.

That's like saying the slaves would starve if it wasn't for the plantation master. How is it possible for me to create jobs and never lift a finger? Because I've accumulated a bunch of digital IOU's in a computer somewhere?

Like the lady that now runs Walmart in the US that started as a minimum wage stocker working graveyards.

Yeah because that happens to *everyone*. You literally have a better chance of winning the powerball.

 

[Menifeer]

There are a few people who sold all their TSLA recently to buy a Tesla. Yeah, "most expensive car ever" might be accurate....

If you're a risk-taker, I suppose you could borrow against your TSLA to buy the car.

Another approach is to sell Leaps against shares at strikes way above the current share price. Use that money to finance the car and still benefit if the price rises!

 

[Doit]

Mod: I'm not formally trained in logic but the issue here is quite clear. You fail to distinguish between tax rate tables and effective tax rates. Lawmakers are counting on this confusion which is why it is there, as pointed out later in this discussion. I can't imagine a sophisticated investor who is not aware of this and they certainly are missing out on a home ownership deduction in the U.S., just one of many benefits to the propertied classes.

Further posts on this topic will be deleted. Compared to many advanced economies the US makes working for a living very hard and the lucky few easy to control the laws on taxation. Just look at how surprised many Republican members of the House have found campaigning on the recent tax bill. That is waking up our notoriously quiescent population.

How can I thumb up Mod content in a post I want to thumb down?

 

[Carl Raymond]

OK, I like your thoughts, BUT....

.... a lot of previous recessions had nothing to do with the price of oil or energy. In fact, 19th century recessions were generally triggered by other things -- oil wasn't a thing yet, and they *weren't* triggered by coal shortages.

There are different types of recessions. Most of them are triggered by a shortage of money, as John Maynard Keynes explained. Most of these are simply high-interest-rate recessions. But some of these are more severe, "creditworthiness" recessions. This category includes 2008 and 1929, both of which featured critical events in which stuff which people thought of as "money" ("call money" in 1929, "money market funds" in 2008) were suddenly not thought of as "money" any more.

Some are triggered by shortage of a real good, such as oil -- this includes the 1970s stagflation.

A cleantech boom should be very similar to a 19th century industrial-revolution boom. The growth rates in these booms were generally limited by availability of labor. Or more rarely by availability of skilled labor. The latter might be the case again now. Each industry's boom would generally end with market saturation (i.e. everyone's got a washing machine), at which point the industry would become what we now consider a "cyclical" industry

The 19th century recessions were generally caused by a shortage of money; due to the Free Banking system, this happened a *lot*. (It happens less with the Federal Reserve.)

Thanks. I can't talk to previous recessions, I don't have your knowledge of history, but I still feel that in the globalised era economic activity is oil supply limited.

Remove that limitation with solar and batteries and we go gangbusters till finding the next limiter - yes, labour most likely. Even there it's not a rigid wall like the finite oil supply rate, because, robots.

We are entering new territory. Unprecedented GDP growth with less resource use.

 

[Reciprocity]

It's much more likely I'll be incapacitated, layed off, or fired, than it is a capital investment, like SPY, to become worthless. Sounds like a huge risk to me. If you have enough capital investment relative to your expenditures, then you never have to work again.


That's like saying the slaves would starve if it wasn't for the plantation master. How is it possible for me to create jobs and never lift a finger? Because I've accumulated a bunch of digital IOU's in a computer somewhere?

Yeah because that happens to *everyone*. You literally have a better chance of winning the powerball.

Everyone who works hard enough. What makes Elon different then you or I? He risks everything and works harder even anyone else. I posit that anyone could do the same and end up much better off then if they hadn't. Also those hardworking poor people, don't pay any income tax until they are no longer poor.

Love when libs call hard working people slaves. Great way to make sure there is never another Democrat president. Then again, they can just import more voters.

 

[Bet TSLA]

Anyone else get such a call?

I got such a call recently that went to voicemail. I also got a follow-up e-mail, which seemed quite straightforward and polite. I responded to the e-mail, saying simply that I'm waiting for the air suspension on the Model 3 so I won't be ordering right now. I don't have a pending reservation, so getting me off that list did not prompt the contact -- time for a different theory.