Does this article paint an accurate picture of what lies ahead for collectibles?

[packs]

Originally Posted by Mark

Several European countries imposed but later abandoned the wealth tax, in part because it was so difficult to determine someone's genuine wealth. At the same time, there may well be a strong desire in some circles to level things. It has happened before.

It has always been a part of economic recovery. We are doomed if we don't overtax the rich. History is supposed to teach you things. During the 50s and early 60s the top bracket income tax rate was over 90% and the stock market, economy, and middle class all boomed. If you're a boomer, you grew up in your childhood home because of this tax. Now those boomers are in government. You're supposed to learn from what worked.

[Cliff Bowman]

You honestly believe that NP, EW, and all of the other muitimillionaire politicians are going to pass laws that takes THEIR WEALTH and the wealth of their billionaire donors? Wake up.

[mantlefan]

Wealth like real estate holdings, bank accounts, stock portfolios....will be easy to locate and tax. Locating my Mantle stash will take some doing on their part.

[Johnny630]

Originally Posted by mantlefan

Wealth like real estate holdings, bank accounts, stock portfolios....will be easy to locate and tax. Locating my Mantle stash will take some doing on their part.

It will take some time to locate, however they will get you when you sell to turn that Mantle Stash into Returns.

I always say it's never a Gain on your Asset Until You Sell it for a profit, it's also never a loss until you sell it for a loss. Cash is King Always has been Always Will Be.

[Exhibitman]

Well, shit, people, if you are not declaring your profits on your sales you are already committing tax fraud.

Can we leave the politics out of this discussion--just assume that we hate you and you hate us and will never agree on tax policy--and maybe we can discuss a serious issue raised in the OP as to the future of collecting rather than degenerating into a off-topic fight? There's plenty of bandwidth for political trash-talking elsewhere.

[vintagewhitesox]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Well, shit, people, if you are not declaring your profits on your sales you are already committing tax fraud.

Can we leave the politics out of this discussion--just assume that we hate you and you hate us and will never agree on tax policy--and maybe we can discuss a serious issue raised in the OP as to the future of collecting rather than degenerating into a off-topic fight? There's plenty of bandwidth for political trash-talking elsewhere.

Well said.

[Leon]

Everyone should be careful of talking politics please. The thread will be locked if it goes that route. This subject can be talked about with out the political bias, I hope.

[riggs336]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Well, shit, people, if you are not declaring your profits on your sales you are already committing tax fraud.

Can we leave the politics out of this discussion--just assume that we hate you and you hate us and will never agree on tax policy--and maybe we can discuss a serious issue raised in the OP as to the future of collecting rather than degenerating into a off-topic fight? There's plenty of bandwidth for political trash-talking elsewhere.

Me too.

[doug.goodman]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Well, shit, people, if you are not declaring your profits on your sales you are already committing tax fraud.

Can we leave the politics out of this discussion--just assume that we hate you and you hate us and will never agree on tax policy--and maybe we can discuss a serious issue raised in the OP as to the future of collecting rather than degenerating into a off-topic fight? There's plenty of bandwidth for political trash-talking elsewhere.

Exactly, well said Adam.

As for the article, the author lost me when he said :

"As we know, in a neighborhood of 100 homes currently valued at $1 million each, when a desperate seller accepts $500,000, the value of the other 99 homes immediately drops to $500,000."

Not true.

[Stampsfan]

Originally Posted by doug.goodman

Exactly, well said Adam.

As for the article, the author lost me when he said :

"As we know, in a neighborhood of 100 homes currently valued at $1 million each, when a desperate seller accepts $500,000, the value of the other 99 homes immediately drops to $500,000."

Not true.

Exactly. If I sell my PSA 5 Green Cobb for $200, does that mean every other PSA 5 Green Cobb is now worth $200?

[Fuddjcal]

Originally Posted by doug.goodman

Exactly, well said Adam.

As for the article, the author lost me when he said :

"As we know, in a neighborhood of 100 homes currently valued at $1 million each, when a desperate seller accepts $500,000, the value of the other 99 homes immediately drops to $500,000."

Not true.

I agree Doug "$1,000,000 to $500,000" Goodman.

He sounds like a kid who has absolutely nothing and is jealous. He hopes everybody loses everything, so he can buy a million dollar house for 500K.

As a homeowner, I am always more than happy when the values go down. It lowers my property taxes. I fight in arbitration every year or 2 to lower them. If I used that argument, they would laugh me right out of there. I have an 8-0 record with the Property Tax Board over 15 year too saving thousands!

[Mark]

Originally Posted by Exhibitman

Can we leave the politics out of this discussion--just assume that we hate you and you hate us and will never agree on tax policy--and maybe we can discuss a serious issue raised in the OP as to the future of collecting rather than degenerating into a off-topic fight?

The first premise of the article is not only that a very few people are very, very wealthy but also the vast majority of people come into the current crisis in a state of near poverty. “Most of you,” he says, “are aware that the bottom 90% own very little other than their labor (tradeable only in full employment) and modest amounts of home equity that are highly vulnerable to a collapse of the housing bubble.” The second premise is that the corona virus lockdown will result in lasting, widespread unemployment for millions in the service industries, and massive failures of small, start-up businesses, especially in the tech industry. The third premise is that the stock market will tumble, and the wealthy will feel poorer, and more vulnerable. The handful of people who buy luxury items will scale back on their purchases, and the value of “bubble-era” assets like vintage cars, vacation homes, etc. will fall at an accelerating pace. The fourth, implicit, premise is that the recent health of the economy, and the fabulous wealth of the very rich, was only a bubble, and thus was not natural or tenable.

Is all this valid? I think that the first premise overstates the relative poverty of the average American household. According to the Federal Reserve, the median net worth of such a household is $97,300. That may not sound like much, but it is more than Marx thought the average proletarian in the US would have by this stage of world history. The second premise? If the economy recovers gradually, then people gradually return to work, and the stock market doesn't collapse. Of course, if it crashes, then even the wealthy might start pinching pennies when it comes to yachts and Mantle cards. There are a lot of economists who think that the market has been too hopeful about a quick economic recovery, but not very many whom I’ve been reading are as gloomy as the author of this piece. So, I doubt it's accuracy. But time will tell.