Comments (28) | Add a comment
LETTERS
Adelson gifts to Gingrich could have been better spent
Tools
To the editor:
So Las Vegans Sheldon and Miriam Adelson decided to give $10 million to a super PAC that supports Newt Gingrich. I was wondering if anyone else thinks that this huge waste of money would have been better spent by giving 100 Nevada schools $100,000 each?
Where do their priorities lie? Giving a huge sum to someone with no chance of making it to the White House? Why not give to schools that can actually use the money to transform our children into educated adults?
Ashley Warren
Las Vegas
Gains tax
To the editor:
It is a popular belief that investments in business are such an important component of American economic and employment growth that these activities should be rewarded with lower tax rates than other forms of income, including employment income and earned savings interest.
The theory behind such preferential tax treatment is that any investment in businesses will be used to improve productivity, grow the business and hire new employees, all of which contribute to a robust American economy. But the problem with this line of reasoning is that the vast majority of investment transactions do not result in businesses receiving any capital whatsoever.
Rather, most transactions involve a buyer of stock transferring money to a seller, with no money going to the company that originally issued the stock. Furthermore, in most cases the seller is not the original buyer of the stock, thus any profit earned by the seller solely benefits the seller and does not result in any economic benefit to the American economy as a whole.
So when a billionaire purchases common stock at depressed prices during an economic downturn then collects annual dividends and/or sells it for a huge profit a year later, why should that same person get preferential tax treatment? No jobs are created and net economic activity remains unchanged. The only person who benefits is the billionaire -- and it can be argued that it will be at the expense of the seller, who may have had to sell at depressed prices during an economic recession.
If we truly want to encourage investment in America, then we should reward investments that place capital directly into the hands of businesses that will use the money to grow and hire new employees, such as bonds and stock sales by corporations directly to investors. Somehow, our tax laws deem that interest earned by investors on money loaned directly to a corporation to fund its day-to-day operations should be taxed at a higher rate than that earned by the billionaire described previously who benefited nobody but himself.
The U.S. Treasury could collect significantly more tax revenue without jeopardizing our economic recovery if it simply eliminated the preferential tax treatment of capital gains and qualified dividends on all third-party transactions that do not involve the corporation listed on the stock or bond certificate.
Gary Kruskall
Las Vegas
Holistic approach
To the editor:
The Nevada Resort Association applauds Gov. Brian Sandoval's recent reinstatement of the state's Gaming Policy Committee. Though established in 1961, the full committee has not met in nearly three decades.
Clearly, the global gaming industry has undergone dramatic changes in that time, particularly as a result of technology. As members of the gaming industry, we agree that a holistic approach to policy and regulations is essential to ensuring a sound path forward.
During the 2011 legislative session, the issue of Internet gaming came to the forefront in Nevada and on the national stage. Mobile gaming, Internet poker and sports betting kiosks are but a few of the technological advancements on the horizon which need to be assessed and properly regulated.
Accordingly, the Gaming Policy Committee will address many important questions. How will these advancements affect brick-and-mortar gaming operations? How will they affect jobs? How will these changes affect gaming tax collection as well as state and local budgets? How will our state's economic development be affected by this new age in our industry? What are the likely sociological consequences of this new level of access to gaming?
All these questions demand careful consideration and thoughtful solutions.
Nevada has always been the leader of the global gaming industry. We thank Gov. Sandoval for ensuring that ongoing dialogue will preserve that leadership role, and will position our state for continued success in the midst of the evolution of our industry.
Keith Smith
Jim Murren
Las Vegas
Mr. Smith is chairman of the Nevada Resort Association and president and chief executive officer of Boyd Gaming. Mr. Murren is chairman and chief executive officer of MGM Resorts International.
Right to nondisclosure
To the editor:
I have great concern over the fact that members of the public feel they have the right to know so much about public employees. As a retired public employee, I feel I have the right not to disclose what I am paid by the state's pension plan.
I understand all too well that when we are working, the public has the right to know where their money is going. What we do, how we act during our employment, and being scrutinized by the public is part of the job. But when we retire, it would seem that we should expect to be released from the public spotlight.
As a taxpayer, I have no problem with the PERS system being monitored. How much it pays out and its reserves should be a matter of public record.
Where I draw the line is releasing my name. What I receive should be between me, PERS and the IRS.
D.W. Munn
Henderson
Comments
Terms & Conditions
The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The Review-Journal does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please use the Report Abuse button.
Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 24 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
Beentheeredonethat: The Adelsons don't complain about how the poor spend their money except to people they pay to do something about it? Does that mean they pay you to do something about it? How did you hear this? Your brother's wife's sister's boyfriend's cousin said so? All sarcasm aside, it sounds like baseless accusations. Please tell me, as well, how the Adelsons take millions and millions of tax dollar money from the government. I can understand complaining about them using as many tax breaks and loopholes they can get away with using the very best lawyers money can buy to pay as little taxes as they can, but actually take tax money? Please provide facts.
Yes the money could offer scholarships to the poor at a Nevada State school. I will say its his money and his right to spend it. I would guess its because he knows how bad Mitt would be for Gambling.
Lastly, while Ms. Warren was complaining about ways the Adelsons spent their money, and ways she would spend it better, a quick glance on line would have showed the the Adelsons donated $25 million to actually build a high school down there in Las Vegas and $7.5 million to research for Neural Repair and Rehabilitation.
Scotwith1t: As I said, of course you don't hear about the things the Adelmindedsons say because they don't say them here on these boards, they say them to people who actually do stuff about the things they hear from people that are paying them. And, yes, the Adelmindedsons do indeed comment on what the poor have, and what they do with the money they have. And no, its not the Adelmindedsons business any more or less than it is the business of poor folks to inquire into the government subsidies that the Adelmindedsons get from the government and what they do with that money. There is no question, that the Adelsons have taken millions and millions of dollars or your and my tax dollars during the course of their businesses which I don't hear anyone either complaining about or inquiring into how they were spent; do you? Why is that?
I don't know the Adelsons, so I don't really know if they complain about what the poorest of the poor spend their money on. It would be silly.....unless you're talking about them complaining about using food stamps and unemployment checks to buy alcohol, lap dances, gambling, and other such things. In that case, they're complaining about the them getting money from the government by the unscrupulous means of lying (we need money for food and rent) then go out and spend it on the items above. They're not spending THEIR money, they are spending government money taken from taxpayers that was suppose to go to feeding them and their children, not buying alcohol or lapdances.
Yes, the Adelmindedsons complain all the time about how and on what the poorest of the poor spend their money. Unfortunately, when they talk, because of the inappropriate way they have spent their money, the poorest of the poor, never find out that the politicians are listening until its too late. That is why Adelmindedson should do something better with his money. "Fat, drunk, and stupid" is no way to go through life son.
@ Ashley, If it was your money, you could spend it as you wish. I have not seen the Adelsons on here complaining about what you spend your money on. You ask 100 different people how to spend your money and you get 100 different answers from global warming9Liberal), green energy(Liberal), world hunger, abortions homeless, etc etc etc. That is the simple answers.
The main reason is that the Adelsons no doubt feel they most closely associate with the conservative republican platform. Our schools have become so partisan and radical and UNION THUG controlled and ran and God bless the children, but the interest is not on educating the children. So there you have it. Give if ou wish, but it will do nothing to further the education of the children.
Ashley Warren is right. Took a lot of courage but everything she said is true. Adelson should give some money to worthwhile causes instead of to a losing cause.
@ Ashley... So, what do you have to say about the $68 million collected by the Obama campaign so far? Do you propose those donors be as benevolent with their money as the Adelson's? More to the point, throwing money at schools doesn't necessarily make for better educated adults. In your case, I would say it was probably a waste of money.
Ashley, when you earn 10 million dollars you can spend it the way you wish...