• 01 Oct 2008 at 7:00 PM

You Guys Like Taxes, Right?

According to a tipster, the following is a proposed amendment to the Patriot Act Bailout Bill being voted on tonight.
Amendment [PDF]

Comments (33)

  1. Posted by guest | October 1, 2008 at 6:44 PM

    Oh heeeeelllll no, I can’t believe the gubmint is against high-earning, hedge fund ballers like me.
    - Tim Sykes

  2. Posted by StupidEquityGuy | October 1, 2008 at 6:45 PM

    Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., pressed for passage, with the alarming news that one of the country’s premier insurance companies was about to go bankrupt if the crisis was not quickly resolved.
    “We don’t have a lot of leeway on time,” Reid told reporters in the Capitol. “One of the individuals in the caucus today talked about a major insurance company — a major insurance company — one with a name that everyone knows that’s on the verge of going bankrupt. That’s what this is all about.”

  3. Posted by RAW DOG | October 1, 2008 at 6:46 PM

    10%??!!! They cannot be serious. This is ridonkulous. I guess the good news it that I’m sure it won’t affect the majority of DB readers since they probably don’t fall into the high earners category.

  4. Posted by guest | October 1, 2008 at 6:46 PM

    Arrest that fucker for spreading negative market rumors.
    It is Geico. That is the only one with a name everyone knows.

  5. Posted by guest | October 1, 2008 at 6:49 PM

    wow that’s fucked up. expires in 5 years though, i wont be in that bracket until then anyway

  6. Posted by guest | October 1, 2008 at 7:07 PM

    #2: either AIG or HIG. either way, totally irresponsible, like Schumer’s bank run on Indymac. Send ‘em to jail.

  7. Posted by guest | October 1, 2008 at 7:08 PM

    No way it’s Geico, that’s a Berkshire Hathaway company. Buffett wouldn’t be bailing out GS and GE if one of his own needed help.

  8. Posted by BSD | October 1, 2008 at 7:08 PM

    Wow, between this and the SEC rumors I can see how we’re accelerating America’s descent into a socialist state.

  9. Posted by guest | October 1, 2008 at 7:08 PM

    At least Dealbreaker readers are safe. Maybe O’bama will give them additional unemployment weeks.

  10. Posted by Master of None | October 1, 2008 at 7:10 PM

    If the government wants to write me a $700 bn check, I will gladly give back another 10% of it in taxes.

  11. Posted by guest | October 1, 2008 at 7:20 PM

    in 5 years time: “A company is about to announce quarterly earnings that fall short of expectations! We need to pass this bailout legislation before something terrible happens”

  12. Posted by guest | October 1, 2008 at 7:20 PM

    @5
    You probably won’t exceed $1 million in income ever. Such a surcharge will put the cabash on investment, small business owners will cut back on spending (including employees) or won’t grow their business as much and you’ll be lucky to have a job at all.
    A congress of dimwits

  13. Posted by guest | October 1, 2008 at 7:21 PM

    My understanding is it starts with T, and hates Citi. A poet and I almost didn’t know it.

  14. Posted by guest | October 1, 2008 at 7:21 PM

    @12 Don’t be so quick to judge, especially considering the current rate of inflation.

  15. Posted by guest | October 1, 2008 at 7:23 PM

    @14
    Good point.

  16. Posted by guest | October 1, 2008 at 7:25 PM

    @14
    Of course, you have to have a job first.

  17. Posted by guest | October 1, 2008 at 7:26 PM

    Bess….why don’t you wrap this up and go home?

  18. Posted by guest | October 1, 2008 at 7:26 PM

    Nice Poison Pill. Anyone see the House passing this?

  19. Posted by guest | October 1, 2008 at 7:27 PM

    Anyone know who proposed this Amendment? I know the Dems in the house have been proposing something similar (like 4%) since may: http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN1445794720080514

  20. Posted by Investorcluzo | October 1, 2008 at 7:33 PM

    oh helz no! is this what they meant when they said they needed time to make the bill better? wtf!

  21. Posted by guest | October 1, 2008 at 7:37 PM

    It’s a hoax.
    WSJ has full bill here:
    http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/senatebillAYO08C32_xml.pdf
    Sec. 304 is “New Energy Efficient Home Credit”.

  22. Posted by guest | October 1, 2008 at 7:40 PM

    @21– it’s not in the bill, it an amendment.

  23. Posted by guest | October 1, 2008 at 7:43 PM

    @21it’s a proposed amendment to the bill. if bill passes they then vote on this provision. it is not in the body of the bill.

  24. Posted by guest | October 1, 2008 at 7:50 PM

    k-i-b-o-s-h

  25. Posted by guest | October 1, 2008 at 8:18 PM

    @morons – Not 21, but the amendment refers to section 304 of the bill as “surtax on high income earners” when section 304 of the bill is actually “new energy efficient home credit” thus the rumored amendment is fake as section 304 has nothing to do with income earnings and actually about environment/energy credits.

  26. Posted by guest | October 1, 2008 at 8:25 PM

    I hope its true.
    Someone has got to pay for this.
    The whole “no one can invest” is a crock of shit. I have financed high growth small business for years and most of them bootstrap and have plenty of cash flow from earnings to finance growth (if it is a good business model).
    I’d rather it be the baby boomers who put us in our current state rather than me in the future.

  27. Posted by guest | October 1, 2008 at 8:27 PM

    this was an amendment to an earlier version of hr3997 before it became a vehicle for the bailout bill…search H.R.3997.EAS on thomas.

  28. Posted by guest | October 1, 2008 at 8:40 PM

    This is why this bailout shouldn’t pass…Congress found an emergency and realized they can stick any shit they want on this bill and it’ll get passed because the ORIGINAL PURPOSE of the bill is so important – BUYING BAD ASSETS.
    Fucking wooden arrows and tax credits have no fucking business being attached to this.
    Congress has just hijacked this.
    EP said this would become the kitchen sink. Didn’t realize it’s a toilet now too.

  29. Posted by guest | October 1, 2008 at 8:49 PM

    Actually – bernie sanders proposed this amendment. Just saw him talking about it.

  30. Posted by guest | October 1, 2008 at 9:11 PM

    @22,23… I understand that it’s an amendment, dipshits, but the “full bill” includes amendments, and there can only be one “Sec. 304″.

  31. Posted by guest | October 1, 2008 at 9:21 PM

    @25
    I hope you’re right. I wouldn’t normally believe something like this, but then I wouldn’t have believed the SEC would ban short selling and we’d be voting for government slackers to run the largest distressed debt hedge fund in the world either.

  32. Posted by guest | October 1, 2008 at 10:21 PM

    as grandma used to say…….
    gone to hell in a hand basket

  33. Posted by guest | October 2, 2008 at 12:54 AM

    I’d give my heart to ford right now if they would unfreeze the loans.

Leave a comment

You can log in with your account or comment as a guest below.