patrick.net

Wong,

Once again you are completely missing my point. I know English is your second language, but I feel like talking to a deaf.

Obviously, you have never been a business owner, an investor or asked for investment. Oh wait, you claim to be an accountant. Yeah, sure.

I don't invest just, because I can screw 47%. I invest, cause I believe in the company or the person to make profit. That's why i mentoined Steve Jobs. If you continued to ignore what I am writing and make a stupid comment, I will ignore you altogether.

Nobody says

Once again you are completely missing my point. I know English is your second language, but I feel like talking to a deaf.

God do I love using Wong as my handle.... you really cant be this naive in thinking I really am Chinese !

carefull now.. it might be short for Wongstein or Wongucci...

Nobody says

I don't invest just, because I can screw 47%. I invest, cause I believe in the company or the person to make profit. That's why i mentoined Steve Jobs.

I gave you an answer.. not the one you expected..

or lets make it more interesting... no carry forward operational losses or capital losses allowed...... are you still interested making that same investment ?

When you give tax breaks to the rich, they pocket that money. Corporations exist to generate revenues and profit--not to hire more people.

Well, yes, we are all in the business to make money. And there is nothing wrong with that. And some people do very well in our economic system. And that's all good. The problem starts when you start diminishing the opportunities for others to succeed, like a communist country where only a few gets the chance while excluding others from even an opportunity. You say taxation would lead to communism? On the contrary, giving 1% more power leads to communism and dictatorship.

If Romney is elected, he will continue the hard line of further budget cuts or austerity measure. That will reduce our spending on education and inevestment to improve the overall quality of life. More teachers will be laid off, and the tuition will be higher. There will be less police, fire fighters etc. FEMA will not have enough funding to help in time of disaster.

I know Romney will not be elected president, but I am surprised that this many middle income people bought into his bs. That Tells me we have not done a good job with our education. Or 1% did a good job fooling the middle class?

thomaswong.1986 says

Where did VCs like Tom Perkins ever get the money BILLIONS to help start some of the most important tech companies in Silicon Valley?

Your implication is that VCs got their funds from rich people, and that the wealth of rich people thereby created the jobs. Wrong.

The answer is simple:

Most VC money comes from pension funds and university endowments, in particular public pension funds of big states. THAT is were the money comes from.

Very little of VC money is put up by the so-called "Venture Capitalists" themselves. Almost all of it comes from other sources. The people that call themselves "Venture Capitalists" are just glorified managers of a what in legal terms is a limited partnership where the VCs serve as general partners and the institutions that supply the capital are the limited partners.

"Limited" in this context refer to limited liability AND limited management control for the limited partners.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limited_partnership

So Thomas, VC Tom Perkins did not create the jobs. The pension funds of the public unions did. Shocking, isn't it.

The good news is that after the commissions and bonuses get paid on these convoluted scams, when those so called investments fail, the folks who print the money buy up the 'assets', and everybody is happy. Don't look too close or your head might explode.

"Call me Bubbles darling, everybody does"

justme says

Most VC money comes from pension funds and university endowments, in particular public pension funds of big states. THAT is were the money comes from.

Too risky for pension funds, universities and govt funds. If they did, pretty much many went belly up back in 2000.

Nope! its mainly high worth individuals and corporations. They are the only ones who can tolerate the risks.

justme says

Very little of VC money is put up by the so-called "Venture Capitalists" themselves. Almost all of it comes from other sources. The people that call themselves "Venture Capitalists" are just glorified managers of a what in legal terms is a limited partnership where the VCs serve as general partners and the institutions that supply the capital are the limited partners.

Wrong again.. they also run as independent directors in charge of running the entities. Look up the BOD for any local start up...

You like so many Obamatrons really lack understanding and experience in Business and Economics. As a result we had our economy crippled, while BRIC countries are growing far more than the USA.

This is basic first year Finance 101... risk/returns and governance topics.

justme says

So Thomas, VC Tom Perkins did not create the jobs. The pension funds of the public unions did. Shocking, isn't it.

A ridiculous claim since the failure rate of start ups is well over 75%. The pension funds private and public would sustain far too high of losses to ever cover their benefit payouts.

Where do university endowments come from?

Wealth disparity is NOT by itself a problem. The feeling of entitlement is a huge problem. A society is nothing without incentives. A society obsessed with fairness and "economic justice" will only doom itself to obsolescence.

We DO need universal healthcare to free families from jobs. They ought to start small businesses and turn them into big businesses.

thomaswong.1986 says

A ridiculous claim since the failure rate of start ups is well over 75%. The pension funds private and public would sustain far too high of losses to ever cover their benefit payouts.

To be fair, any volatile time series can be tamed by de-leveraging. Lottery has a huge failure rate but most people bet only a buck. :-)

Wong,

Your ignorance and utter refusal to accept the fact convinced me that there is no cure for stupidity. It's very funny when you talk about economy. It ain't Finance 101, moron, it is Macroeconomy 101.

You are wrong, Wong, about economy. You clearly show lack of knowledge in the system of our economy and the motivation for investment. Your command of English is very questionable.

The investment may start a company, but to sustain a company and its growth, the company must consistently grow their profit. That's the only way any company hires, not because you have the money from investment to squander. I think you will be only idiot pretend business owner who hires, only because you the money. Oh, you can deduct the loss from another loss. Stupidity has no boundary for you.

The Professor says

Get rid of all of the middlemen.

We don't need insurance and all of the useless overhead. Money that could be helping people is being sucked up into a growing void. If you have been to a doctor lately you probably see someone whose soul job is inputing billing information into a new insurance computer system.

Healthcare for everyone NOT insurance reform.

Yes, I support a single-payer system with a parallel private system.

Nobody says

The investment may start a company, but to sustain a company and its growth, the company must consistently grow their profit. That's the only way any company hires, not because you have the money from investment to squander. I think you will be only idiot pretend business owner who hires, only because you the money. Oh, you can deduct the loss from another loss. Stupidity has no boundary for you.

You may have the support of conventional wisdom but we live in interesting times. Jobs can also be created by liquidity expansion alone. 10 companies may be willing to operate at a loss if they think one of will become a 10X-er.

I somehow think that the world economy is being sustained by a drastic shift in risk apetite.

Peter,
Sure. Some companies operate at a loss to a degree. But eventually, the company will run out of cash to pay the debt or becomes insolvent, and the company will go out of business like Solyndra. Perhaps, if they could find an idiot investor like Wong, they could have lasted till a miracle turn around. I predicted their demise, when they decided to manufacture in Silicon Valley to compete against state sponsored Chinese manufactures. But that's another story. So is the topic of medical insurance, and I don't agree with Obamacare.

Of course, despite the price difference, if the Solyndra products were in high demand, the outcome would have been different.

Peter P says

You may have the support of conventional wisdom but we live in interesting times. Jobs can also be created by liquidity expansion alone. 10 companies may be willing to operate at a loss if they think one of will become a 10X-er.

That formula is only acceptable to high net worth individuals/corporations, who are willing to accept higher return for higher risk and equally accept complete losses. This is a not a method pensions funds or other entities use to preserve their capital investment. Else you would have seen many pensions gone under over the past decades.

That is why VC funds are highly restricted to certain type of investors.

The Idea that its Pensions, and Governments only show how screwed up the Obamatrons have become...

Nobody says

Perhaps, if they could find an idiot investor like Wong, they could have lasted till a miracle turn around. I predicted their demise, when they decided to manufacture in Silicon Valley to compete against state sponsored Chinese manufactures. But that's another story. So is the topic of medical insurance, and I don't agree with Obamacare.

At our peak year in VC cash funding.. we also sustained the highest losses.
profits are not guaranteed... Its all about risk/return and acceptance of losing all of your investment.

https://www.pwcmoneytree.com/MTPublic/ns/nav.jsp?page=historical

Nobody says

Of course, despite the price difference, if the Solyndra products were in high demand, the outcome would have been different.

There were in demand, quite a bit, but the market prices had plummeted (about 75%)because of China starting up their own companies instead of on a for-hire manufacturing basis, but also because subsidies in various countries ended.

Nobody says

So why do you believe that giving money to the rich will create jobs?

deceptive question.. since places like Silicon Valley and other Tech hubs have in decades past created many jobs locally and later throughout the nation... and the original funding all came from high net worth individuals/corporations.
.
.
today, the Obamatrons want to rewrite history to eliminate private funding from high wealth individuals and substitute govt tax payer funded GREEN projects.

Damn, I just realize Wong is an uneducated moron who has never taken a day of Economy class in college. He has absolutely no idea what demand means.

Nobody says

Damn, I just realize Wong is an uneducated moron who has never taken a day of Economy class in college. He has absolutely no idea what demand means.

You live in San Jose, CA..Santa Clara County aka Silicon Valley... and yet you ignore over the decades how UBER rich and wealthy have poured billions into new ventures... created new industries, companies, jobs and incomes.

You have an agenda.. its pretty clear from the start of your topic... substitute individual high worth investors with government funded and mandated projects... higher taxes for crazy Green projects..

Bottom line.. you believe with zeal only the govt is the solution.

thomaswong.1986 says

You live in San Jose, CA..Santa Clara County aka Silicon Valley... and yet you ignore over the decades how UBER rich and wealthy have poured billions into new ventures... created new industries, companies, jobs and incomes.

No, you didn't read what I wrote. I never said the investment never created jobs. Damn, I know English is not your first language, but how many times I have to say this. This is what the problem is with someone who has never spent a day in college class, especially with someone whose first language is not English.

Nobody says

No, you didn't read what I wrote. I never said the investment never created jobs. Damn, I know English is not your first language, but how many times I have to say this. This is what the problem is with someone who has never spent a day in college class, especially with someone whose first language is not English.

No.. what your getting is opposition to your statement.. and you are failing.

BTW.. im white and native to Santa Clara County as is my family for several generations.

But go ahead with the left wing racial profiling.. I am enjoying it.

Wong,

You are unbelievable. You are quickly losing your credibility. You are a liar and a moron. Ok, I guess you don't need English to live in S.C. County. I don't know in which country, but who cares. In Silicon Valley, a majority has college degree, but obviously, you are the minority.

You must be feeling pretty stupid to be the one of few in Silicon Valley.

By the way it is not "what your getting"; it is "what you're getting."

Nobody says

By the way it is not "what your getting"; it is "what you're getting."

Like so many who have used corporate email since the mid 80s... we all learned that grammer and spelling doesnt matter.

Nobody says

You are unbelievable. You are quickly losing your credibility. You are a liar and a moron. Ok, I guess you don't need English to live in S.C. County. I don't know in which country, but who cares. In Silicon Valley, a majority has college degree, but obviously, you are the minority.

Clearly, you are just another migrant from the east coast with left wing agenda.

"Political Hit Job: What Senate Republicans Don't Want You To See or Know"

http://www.commondreams.org/further/2012/11/01-4

In an astounding, little-reported act of hubris, Senate Republicans apparently killed a study by the non-partisan Congressional Research Service when its findings contradicted their favorite economic myth: that giving tax cuts to the rich helps anyone but themselves. After the study found that lower tax rates for the wealthy "do not appear correlated with economic growth" - though they do increase economic disparities - Senate GOP leaders protested the study's "methodology," tone, and use of terms like "tax cuts for the rich," and removed it from public view. Charging the move had "the hues of a Banana Republic," Democrats have re-published it.

http://www.dpcc.senate.gov/?p=blog&id=193

thomaswong.1986 says

Like so many who have used corporate email since the mid 80s... we all learned that grammer and spelling doesnt matter.

It matters. Just because you are either poorly educated or just lazy does not excuse poor grammar and atrocious spelling.

Peter P says

Wealth disparity is NOT by itself a problem

You have got to be kidding. Wealth disparity is THE problem. All of the rest are symptoms are it. I honestly can't believe that it's so hard for others to see this--it's plain as day and simple to observe through history.

Nobody says

Damn, I just realize Wong is an uneducated moron who has never taken a day of Economy class in college. He has absolutely no idea what demand means.

There is absolutely no way he is a controller at a large high tech company. Zero.

I'd be shocked if he has a business degree.

tatupu70 says

There is absolutely no way he is a controller at a large high tech company. Zero.

I'd be shocked if he has a business degree.

Nope, not large.. I suggest you go work in a SV tech companies for 3 decades.
You wont last long as some left wing Obamatron.. welcome to the real world.

rooemoore says

It matters. Just because you are either poorly educated or just lazy does not excuse poor grammar and atrocious spelling.

where did you say your other home was ?

New York.. maybe! City Slickers !

it really is amazing how arrogant the east coast people can be.

tatupu70 says

Peter P says

Wealth disparity is NOT by itself a problem

You have got to be kidding. Wealth disparity is THE problem. All of the rest are symptoms are it. I honestly can't believe that it's so hard for others to see this--it's plain as day and simple to observe through history.

Wealth disparity is a problem as much as art is a problem. It is actually desirable for wealth NOT to equalize. Why would anyone work if there is no wealth differential? I will just sit on my ass all day and wait to be fed.

That said, the society must not make it harder to achieve. We must build a business-friendly environment:

1. Universal healthcare - no more employer-specific plan to enslave people
2. Abolish minimum wage - this hampers employment and pushes jobs overseas

Remember, Henry Ford made his cars affordable to his workers NOT by imposing a minimum wage across the board - he improved manufacturing by way of innovation.

Peter P says

Wealth disparity is a problem as much as art is a problem. It is actually desirable for wealth NOT to equalize. Why would anyone work if there is no wealth differential? I will just sit on my ass all day and wait to be fed

So there are two choices? Anything goes or communism? It is possible to redistribute wealth in a way that helps level the income imbalance and retains incentive to work hard.

rooemoore says

Peter P says

Wealth disparity is a problem as much as art is a problem. It is actually desirable for wealth NOT to equalize. Why would anyone work if there is no wealth differential? I will just sit on my ass all day and wait to be fed

So there are two choices? Anything goes or communism? It is possible to redistribute wealth in a way that helps level the income imbalance and retains incentive to work hard.

Moderation may be as extreme as the two ends.

It has been said that Capitalism is about men exploiting men and Socialism is the other way around. Any attempt to moderate or redistribute wealth in leads to Capitalism-without-failure. We all know what that means.

Wealth redistribution is always evil. All effort should be made to encourage wealth creation.

I maintain that wealth disparity may be higher than it needs to be only because of efforts to reduce the gap. Bailouts and stimulus programs invariably benefit the rentiers.

The mass is always wrong. Thus any conscious effort by and for the mass to overcome the "elite" will inevitably backfire.

The Professor says

The answer: Education and free communication.

Education is not always the answer. The People must retain its individuality and drive to acquire knowledge.

I seriously think many people should not consider going to college.

Here's the fundamental problem: In theory, socialism is a great idea. Create and empower a middle class (the buzzphrase of the left) via education and mass transit, etc. and everyone benefits.

The problem is the the leftist elite wind up becoming crony capitalists and in order to retain power, throw the middle class under the bus and buy votes via the welfare state (until they don't need votes anymore, then they throw the lower class under the bus too.) That's how it's worked out nearly everywhere since the early 1900's other than Sweden, etc. which are isolated, european ethnic environments or occupied American territories (Japan) (open them up for immigration and see how it goes. Ask the Japanese how tolerant they are of diversity.)

Other than it not working and degenerating into ethnic cleansing and corruption, socialism is a great idea. Toodle loo!

Paraphrasing Margaret Thatcher, socialism is great until you run out of other people's money.

Moreover, regardless of whichever system being followed, the world is always unfair to losers. But one system encourages winning...