Subject: Re: a stocks and dividends question
From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <>
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 18:52:50 +0900

>>>>> "Ben" == Benjamin J Tilly <" <>> writes:

    Ben> Sometimes less than more it seems from some of the scandals
    Ben> out there...

Get a copy of the Economic Report of the President and get a real
picture of the economy, instead of depending on news reports that _by
the definition of the word "news"_ _must_ be deliberately selected to
be unrepresentative of the typical case.

    Ben> I cannot speak for Robin or Tom.  But I don't think that my
    Ben> position is at all puzzling or counter to standard economic
    Ben> theory.

My point is that on FSB when we say "executive" we are not talking
about economic theory!  We are talking about representative executives
like Larry and Mike and Tim and Peter and Russ, who have made a go of
FSBs, and the rest of us wannabes who aspire to it.  Even if we wanted
to be as untrustworthy as the Gordon Gecko-style "executives" you so
despise, which we don't, I doubt we'd have the means.

Note that these two different definitions of "representative" (economy
wide and among FSBs) are intimately connected.  FSBs, not being well-
heeled multinationals, are highly likely to be among the "typical"
businesses that contribute $250 billion[1] in corporate income tax and
another $150 billion in personal (self-employment and dividend) income
tax every year.  Thus questions about tax treatment of dividends and
capital gains which FSBs have in common with "generic" businesses are
relevant, as much so as more particular strategic questions of
business models and IP law that FSBs alone face.

[1]  Pretty amazingly large "zero" if you ask me.

Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences
University of Tsukuba                    Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
               Ask not how you can "do" free software business;
              ask what your business can "do for" free software.