|
 |
Friday, January 17, 2003 |
Best Google Search Ever From my referer log:
David Eggers Horrible Person
8:51:19 PM 
|
|
Oh, for God's sake! Not only the the dividend tax thing a bad idea, it's not even a good bad idea. Just how stupid are these guys?
Is a Dividend Taxable? Investors Can't Tell. The Bush administration's proposal to end the taxation of dividends is confusing and does not encourage investors to value companies that pay dividends. [New York Times: Business]
3:30:22 PM
|
|
Bill and Steve's Excellent Adventure Here is a source for the figures I gave for Gate's and Ballmer's take from the Microsoft announcement today.
Gates' dividend payout: $100 million. Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates, CEO Steve Ballmer and other executives will rake in big gains from the company's newly instated stock dividend program. [CNET News.com]
3:22:58 PM
|
|
Et Tu, Chicago Tribune? Open wound, meet salt.
Mix Master iPod Opens Up A World Of Sound. Having so much music at your fingertips, with the ability to organize and quickly regroup tunes to follow one stylistic path or mix several, actually changes the listening experience. (Chicago Tribune via MyAppleMenu) [Macintosh News]
So, not only did I not take proper care of Bob the iPod while he lived, I wasn't bright enough to fully appreciate his life-changing possibilites. Great. Way to alleviate my grief, Chicago.
3:11:35 PM
|
|
It's a Stimulus Package, Alright. But for Who? I just heard on CNBC (no, I don't know why I was watching it either) that the dividend that microsoft announced today will give Steve Ballmer $40 million and Bill Gates $99 million this year. If Bush's economic plan passes in congress, then all of that money will be tax-free.
I guess the Bush defenders are right. His plan doesn't favor the rich. It favors the ultra-rich. How is someone with a net worth of a mere billion or ten ever going to catch Bill Gates on the richest Americans list if the President opens up a whole new 8 figure, tax-free income stream for him? Yep, those who are merely rich are getting buggered just like you and me.
Is it possible that the President would launch a 670 billion dollar ecomomic plan just to ensure that Bill Gates will never donate another cent to the Democrats? No, of course not. Ebay just announced that they may also give out dividends. So Bush was shooting for Bill Gates, Steve Ballmer, and Meg Whitman.
And it's just a coincidnece that the Republicans want to kill campaign finance reform.
2:47:36 PM
|
|
How iCal Ruined My Marriage Right now, as I post this, my wife is trying to call home, worried that on my day off my neglectful ways will allow our child to go hungry and wet while I surf the internet.
Don't worry, I fed him on schedule, and then we took a nap together and he is now happily playing with his train. The phone line was busy because I was downloading the new version of iCal while I did the parenting thing. Father and son are just fine.
I swear to God that he was happy 30 seconds ago. Gotta go.
10:26:31 AM
|
|
I would like to add just a bit of commentary to the news story below.
Remember, it was the Bush team that recognized the slow down for what it was all the way back in December of 2000 (or they were just talking down the economy for political gain, but either way, they were right). By Auguest of 2001 the tax rebate checks were showing up in mailboxes, thanks to congressional Democrats, not George Bush. As early as December 2001, it was clear that the checks weren't boosting consumption as much as was hoped. Then, it was more than a year before George Bush proposed an economic package, a package that most ecomomists say won't help until at least next year, if at all. The administration still maintains that a short-term stimulus is not needed.
"Rome is burning, Mr. President. Here's your fiddle".
10:18:50 AM
|
|
Bushonomics Nope, no short-term stimulus needed here. Unless, of course, you are one of the non-country-club set who actually works in a factory.
From CBS Marketwatch:
US Dec. industrial production down 0.2% By Rex Nutting
A sharp decline in auto assemblies drove U.S. industrial production down 0.2 percent in December, the fourth decline in the past five months, the Federal Reserve said Friday. Output of the nation's factories, mines and utilities fell 2.2 percent in the fourth quarter and 1 percent in 2002 compared with 2001. Output fell 3.5 percent in 2001. It's the first back-to-back decline in industrial production since 1974-75. Economists were expecting output to rise 0.2 percent in December. Output of manufacturing industries dropped 0.2 percent in December. Utility output fell 1.2 percent, while mining output rose 1.6 percent. The nation's industrial companies were operating at 75.4 percent of capacity, down 0.2 percentage poin
Don't worry, very soon millions of retired ex-waitresses, now living lives of ease thanks to tax-free dividend checks will spend us right out of this slowdown.
9:55:45 AM
|
|
© Copyright 2003 Douglas Anders.
|
|
|
