State Budgets: Day of Reckoning

[briansd1]

[quote=surveyor] Many investors may be in negative cash flow territory (they are in deficit, or in debt).

[/quote]

The easiest way to fix this is for those real estate investors to lose their properties to foreclosure so that new investors can have lower costs basis.

[Anonymous]

Last Christmas my cousin was telling me that he was a PAW. As a professor in a small technical college, he didn’t make much, but his net worth was one tenth his age times his annual income. A bona-fide PAW.

This year he took a job in industry that more than doubled his salary. Ran the numbers again and now he’s just a lowly UAW.

I guess he should not have taken the raise.

[Anonymous]

Last Christmas my cousin was telling me that he was a PAW. As a professor in a small technical college, he didn’t make much, but his net worth was one tenth his age times his annual income. A bona-fide PAW.

This year he took a job in industry that more than doubled his salary. Ran the numbers again and now he’s just a lowly UAW.

I guess he should not have taken the raise.

[Anonymous]

Last Christmas my cousin was telling me that he was a PAW. As a professor in a small technical college, he didn’t make much, but his net worth was one tenth his age times his annual income. A bona-fide PAW.

This year he took a job in industry that more than doubled his salary. Ran the numbers again and now he’s just a lowly UAW.

I guess he should not have taken the raise.

[Anonymous]

Last Christmas my cousin was telling me that he was a PAW. As a professor in a small technical college, he didn’t make much, but his net worth was one tenth his age times his annual income. A bona-fide PAW.

This year he took a job in industry that more than doubled his salary. Ran the numbers again and now he’s just a lowly UAW.

I guess he should not have taken the raise.

[Anonymous]

Last Christmas my cousin was telling me that he was a PAW. As a professor in a small technical college, he didn’t make much, but his net worth was one tenth his age times his annual income. A bona-fide PAW.

This year he took a job in industry that more than doubled his salary. Ran the numbers again and now he’s just a lowly UAW.

I guess he should not have taken the raise.

[Hobie]

[quote=pri_dk]
Wow! So we can maximize revenue by reducing the rate to zero!?!?
[/quote]

Suppose you are looking at the Sunday ads. Your favorite store is offering a 40% off coupon. Are you going to take the discount? You bet.

Now ask yourself: Why is the shop offering the deal? Simple: to gain more traffic. Higher volume=higher profit.

He is not going to give away his product, but at a discount, he will gain volume thus more profit.

It is really a no brainer. Same concept with taxes. C=mon Pri_dk

The problem with libs is that very few actually have to produce something somebody will pay for to earn a paycheck. Once you do, you will see the light;)

[Hobie]

[quote=pri_dk]
Wow! So we can maximize revenue by reducing the rate to zero!?!?
[/quote]

Suppose you are looking at the Sunday ads. Your favorite store is offering a 40% off coupon. Are you going to take the discount? You bet.

Now ask yourself: Why is the shop offering the deal? Simple: to gain more traffic. Higher volume=higher profit.

He is not going to give away his product, but at a discount, he will gain volume thus more profit.

It is really a no brainer. Same concept with taxes. C=mon Pri_dk

The problem with libs is that very few actually have to produce something somebody will pay for to earn a paycheck. Once you do, you will see the light;)

[Hobie]

[quote=pri_dk]
Wow! So we can maximize revenue by reducing the rate to zero!?!?
[/quote]

Suppose you are looking at the Sunday ads. Your favorite store is offering a 40% off coupon. Are you going to take the discount? You bet.

Now ask yourself: Why is the shop offering the deal? Simple: to gain more traffic. Higher volume=higher profit.

He is not going to give away his product, but at a discount, he will gain volume thus more profit.

It is really a no brainer. Same concept with taxes. C=mon Pri_dk

The problem with libs is that very few actually have to produce something somebody will pay for to earn a paycheck. Once you do, you will see the light;)

[Hobie]

[quote=pri_dk]
Wow! So we can maximize revenue by reducing the rate to zero!?!?
[/quote]

Suppose you are looking at the Sunday ads. Your favorite store is offering a 40% off coupon. Are you going to take the discount? You bet.

Now ask yourself: Why is the shop offering the deal? Simple: to gain more traffic. Higher volume=higher profit.

He is not going to give away his product, but at a discount, he will gain volume thus more profit.

It is really a no brainer. Same concept with taxes. C=mon Pri_dk

The problem with libs is that very few actually have to produce something somebody will pay for to earn a paycheck. Once you do, you will see the light;)

[Hobie]

[quote=pri_dk]
Wow! So we can maximize revenue by reducing the rate to zero!?!?
[/quote]

Suppose you are looking at the Sunday ads. Your favorite store is offering a 40% off coupon. Are you going to take the discount? You bet.

Now ask yourself: Why is the shop offering the deal? Simple: to gain more traffic. Higher volume=higher profit.

He is not going to give away his product, but at a discount, he will gain volume thus more profit.

It is really a no brainer. Same concept with taxes. C=mon Pri_dk

The problem with libs is that very few actually have to produce something somebody will pay for to earn a paycheck. Once you do, you will see the light;)

[briansd1]

Economists agree that there is a optimal point where revenue is maximized, but there disagree on where that optimal point is.

Porsche is the most profitable car maker not because they charge less, but because they charge more.

Often times charging more a premium product is better than charging less for junk.

[briansd1]

Economists agree that there is a optimal point where revenue is maximized, but there disagree on where that optimal point is.

Porsche is the most profitable car maker not because they charge less, but because they charge more.

Often times charging more a premium product is better than charging less for junk.

[briansd1]

Economists agree that there is a optimal point where revenue is maximized, but there disagree on where that optimal point is.

Porsche is the most profitable car maker not because they charge less, but because they charge more.

Often times charging more a premium product is better than charging less for junk.

[briansd1]

Economists agree that there is a optimal point where revenue is maximized, but there disagree on where that optimal point is.

Porsche is the most profitable car maker not because they charge less, but because they charge more.

Often times charging more a premium product is better than charging less for junk.

[Author]

Posts