patrick.net

AlfonsoM says

I know several illegal alien families who get wellfare, one of these families needed more money, so their 17 year old daughter got pregnant twice from 2 different men! just for the increase in government aid!

Every institution or program can and will be abused to an extent, after all not all people are good.

If however the institution or program on balance, despite some who will abuse it for personal gain, is beneficial to the whole of society in terms of money spent, social effects, and morality then it should still be supported right?

If you want to argue the opposite then fine, I guess we should get rid of the police and military and hospitals, hell all governments too right?

They replied that they would easily be able to escape the revolution, and again urged me to just take advantage of their prejudices and anger to lower my own tax rate, make them into my slaves, etc etc.

Those "friends" are real scumbags.

jerrypap says

My biggest challenge every step of the way has all been related to onerous and typically nonsensical government restrictions - regulations, taxes, and a thousand other government policies that sometimes make it near impossible to get ANYTHING done.

I'm coming to the conclusion that much government regulation is the way that the 1% prevents you from competing with them.

All in the name of the public interest, of course. See this for some examples

But likewise its perhaps more true that a lot of those regulations keep you, me, and others safe from any number of harmful or potentially harmful materials and situations. We live in a world that is absolutely chok-full of man-made chemicals and substances. Organizations like the EPA and OSHA constantly monitor and re-classify the zillions of things we're around all day everyday.

Think about it this way: It wasn't too long ago that asbestos, PCBs, lead in both paint and gasoline, and 1000's of other everyday chemicals and materials were used extensively and are now either regulated, banned, or re-classified with proper handling and exposure guidelines, none of which would have existed without forms of regulations.

thomas.wong1986 says

Right off, since when would strangers you spoke with know what Steve Jobs and his lawyers did in private ? Sounds like all conspiracy talk..

Second, he had no stock options, he gave it all back

Actually, Steve Jobs did not give it all back, and those guys were right about the reset in cost basis:

"David S. Miller writes that when Facebook goes public later this year, Mark Zuckerberg plans to exercise stock options worth $5 billion of the $28 billion that his ownership stake will be worth and since the $5 billion he will receive will be treated as salary, Zuckerberg will have a tax bill of more than $2 billion making him, quite possibly, the largest taxpayer in history. But how much income tax will Zuckerberg pay on the rest of his stock that he won't immediately sell? Nothing, nada, zilch. He can simply use his stock as collateral to borrow against his tremendous wealth and avoid all tax. That's what Lawrence J. Ellison, the chief executive of Oracle, did, reportedly borrowing more than a billion dollars against his Oracle shares to buy one of the most expensive yachts in the world. Or consider the case of Steven P. Jobs who never sold a single share of Apple after he rejoined the company in 1997, and therefore never paying a penny of tax on the over $2 billion of Apple stock he held at his death. Now Jobs' widow can sell those shares without paying any income tax on the appreciation before his death — only on the increase in value from the time of his death to the time of the sale — because our tax system is based on the concept of "realization." Individuals are not taxed until they actually sell property and realize their gains and the solution to the problem is called mark-to-market taxation. According to Miller, mark-to-market would only affect individuals who were undeniably, extraordinarily rich, only publicly traded stock would be marked to market, and a mark-to-market system of taxation on the top one-tenth of 1 percent would raise hundreds of billions of dollars of new revenue over the next 10 years."

http://news.slashdot.org/story/12/02/08/2310218/the-zuckerberg-tax

tts says

Those "friends" are real scumbags.

You'd probably say they're smart and pleasant people if you met them in person. But I was kind of shocked that it was perfectly fine with them to let angry stupid Republicans screw themselves over so that the rich could enjoy unfairly low tax rates.

tts says

If however the institution or program on balance, despite some who will abuse it for personal gain, is beneficial to the whole of society in terms of money spent, social effects, and morality then it should still be supported right?

who said anything about getting rid of police or hospitals? you take things to the extreme, then I should also! You said that all those people that abuse the system for personal gain benefit our society by spending the money, well hell! lets give all those people double or even triple the amount they take, in that way our society will also benefit a lot more! by your logic this will work! Right!
What i'm saying is that this system can work, if done correctly, by taking the proper measures to prevent fraud! sure it will never be perfect but once fraud is detected then it should be stopped! that is way to logical for our system! we promote fraud by not stopping it!
I really don't care if someone believes me or not! I just don't care, but try searching in youtube for EBT Cards and you will be amazed!
http://www.youtube.com/embed/NzspsovNvII

Thank you patrick for your work on this site!

And then if you still have a loss, you can deduct $3,000 of that loss from regular income forever until it's all deducted away. I know TurboTax has been having me deduct $3K per year for a huge loss I had in the dot-com bubble for, oh, about a decade now.

Ok so now its Capital Stock ... And you have a problem with this ? Was it some stock insanely overvalued like Ariba back in 1999! 150x future earnings... would you buy LinkedIn today at 1000x future earnings.. did you learn anything?

Yes PE does count for something....

Actually, Steve Jobs did not give it all back, and those guys were right about the reset in cost basis:

OK lets say. Jobs Ellison and Z all had vested options, all approved by board of directors to get a loan and disclosed to the SEC (given)

My comments: So what ? They secured the loan with the options to the lendor.

Eventually in order to pay the loan off, they will have to sell stock along with the taxes...

But here is the catch from your linked article... the new game to increase govt revenue upfront taxes...That is, the govt couldnt wait until taxpayer sell the shares to pay for the loan. In this case stock only, but the reality is stocks go up one year and down the next.. but the IRS gets their cut of the action as your holding it and saving it for the future. Would you apply the same rule on homes even during a housing bubble mania. Clearly not..

"According to Miller, mark-to-market would only affect individuals who were undeniably, extraordinarily rich, only publicly traded stock would be marked to market, and a mark-to-market system of taxation on the top one-tenth of 1 percent would raise hundreds of billions of dollars of new revenue over the next 10 years."

If your asking about Mort Z.. i say he may "off himself" if he borrows and his stock tanks ... wouldnt be the first time that happened with rich to rags story..

Or consider the case of Steven P. Jobs who never sold a single share of Apple after he rejoined the company in 1997, and therefore never paying a penny of tax on the over $2 billion of Apple stock he held at his death. Now Jobs' widow can sell those shares without paying any income tax on the appreciation before his death — only on the increase in value from the time of his death to the time of the sale — because our tax system is based on the concept of "realization."

Again, his assets and all the claims to his assets including any lendor who provided a loan secured by stock will get valued by the excutor of the trust (independent party). They will value the assets including the stock and report that to the IRS. The trust later distributes the income and corpus. After that estate tax rules kick in.. i dont recall if its 30-40% tax.

The sum of the story is this: our tax code is ridiculously biased in favor of unearned income, at the expense of working people.

Invest wisely.. or dont invest at all... it has nothing to do with tax code..

Or are you going to be the first person to buy Facebook stock at $ xxxxxxxxx/share and a Price Earning multiple of 100,000 times future earnings.

This Thread is about senseless left wing politics rather than facts...

Throw some meat to the masses.. they want their 10 lbs of flesh.

The guy on the left (get it, the left?) is most likely a unionized government employee.

The guy on the left is not even remotely like any government employee I ever met. But he is exactly like most hard-core Republicans in the 99%.

I have to admit that Honest Abe's complaints about everyone except the people who are killing his American Dream make Abe seem exactly like the guy on the left.

They are in your way Abe! They are killing your dream. They prevent competition by using regulation and and skew the rewards in favor of themselves by using the tax code. You don't really have a chance in America to profit from your own labor until the playing field gets leveled out.

You're your own worst enemy Abe. I'd like for you to have a good life, but you have to free your mind first. Leave your hates behind and look at the facts: unearned income is taxed at such a low rate that no matter how hard you work you will never catch up to the very rich, not in 100 lifetimes, and you will have to bid against them for housing, education, and every other thing you want. And they have to do no work except keep the tax code corrupted in their favor.

tts says

sack says

But the dividends have already been taxed once as corporate tax, taxing it again is probably netting the government more than your 35% (which I doubt many of us are paying).

This is pure pro-rich meme horseshit.

Yeah, when shown a fact/logic for which people have no answer, make a claim that it is fecal matter of some animal. Classic.

The non rich wage earners get their income quadruple mega taxed by this logic. After all they pay a sales tax, gas tax, state tax, property tax, federal income tax, etc. all on the same salary.

Sales tax and gas taxes are consumption tax, and even the rich pay the same. More you consume, more you pay.

State and federal taxes are applicable on corporate profits too... If I
make a corporate as a sole proprietorship, I get taxed only once... all my earnings are considered to be my wages and taxes accordingly.

Instead if I invest in a company, the company gets taxed at corporate rates (which I believe is higher than personal taxes, but I am no tax expert), and then when I take my earnings out (dividends), I get taxed again -- on both state and federal level.

So don't you tell me that only the poor (btw: really poor

tts says

This is pure pro-rich meme horseshit.

Yeah, when shown the fact logic for which people have no answer, make a claim that it is fecal matter of some pasture animal. Classic.

Sales tax and gas taxes are consumption tax, and even the rich pay the same. More you consume, more you pay.

State and federal taxes are applicable on corporate profits too... If I
make a corporate as a sole proprietorship, I get taxed only once... all my earnings are considered to be my wages and taxes accordingly.

Instead if I invest in a company, the company gets taxed at corporate rates (which I believe is higher than personal taxes, but I am no tax expert), and then when I take my earnings out (dividends), I get taxed again -- on both state and federal level. So don't you tell me that only the poor pay 4 times the taxes (btw: really poor i.e people with less than 50K hardly pay any state/fed taxes) pay -- even the rich pay that (and no, I am not rich).

The second thing is every one talks about the rich paying just 15%, but if you are really honest and you are making around 100-150K, I doubt you will be paying much more than 15-16% either ( effective tax rate for married filing jointly without any other deduction like mortgage etc. If used, it reduces the income tax paid much much lesser than the 15%).

I can understand taxing more on capital gains, but to say dividends needs to be taxed further is something I dont agree with. Furthermore, with Obamacare, there is already another 4% that will be taxed on earnings above 250K, add the expiring tax breaks that will make the rates 20% (or 18% if held for more than 5 years). Effectively, the rich will be paying close to 25% of their earnings.. If you are not rich and you claim to be paying more than the rich, i.e. 25% federal tax (effective rate), then you need better tax professional.

Patrick, that's idiotic. No one's killing his dream or yours other than the guy in the White House and possibly the people running the EPA.

Have you not heard what Steve Wynn has had to say about this administration's economic policies? He's a Nevada Democrat, for God's sake. Harry Reid wouldn't be Senate Majority Leader (or even a Senator) without him.

Do you really understand this, or do you have only the frame of reference of the bureaucrats who educated you?

You need to get out more. Go to the suburbs of Atlanta for a weekend. Go to Cary, NC for a few days to see all the relocated Yankees there. Go to Leesburg, VA and see all the people moving in from the northeast and midwest. I don't think I'd move to Loudoun today. It's getting too big.

One of the finest automotive radio shows in existence is Wheels with Ed Wallace on KLIF. I was streaming it while doing a little work this morning. He said what people there have known for awhile (now confirmed), that Dallas' north suburbs have the highest population growth rate of anywhere else in the nation. That happened before, in the mid nineties when we moved there from Ohio. Why? Because Texas doesn't allow bearded academics, unstable personalities and liberal dickheads to run anything important! When someone wants to come in and create a few jobs, they get out of the way!

Just how long do you think you'd last down there? We lived there eight years. I would have stayed for a lifetime had it not been for the allergy problem, which anyone raised in a northern state would have in a southern state. The doctors told us move and we did...but I haven't changed and I can guarantee you I won't.

Honest Abe should stick to his guns. No one's oppressing him...but I sense you're trying to mindscrew him. That's another one of those California high school, narcissistic, everyone-run-in-the-same-direction-and-make-fun-of-those-who-don't culture things. I can't tell you how much money I've saved (and made) by ignoring those folks.

sack says

But the dividends have already been taxed once as corporate tax, taxing it again is probably netting the government more than your 35% (which I doubt many of us are paying). And you discount the fact that investments is what finances others to be "productive".

I could see that money distributed as dividends should probably be deductible from corporate earnings since it is going to be someone else's income. But it should be taxed at the same rate as ordinary income at the maximum marginal rate then. None of this 15% bullshit which is a forced gift to billionaires from working people.

OTOH, you could say that the corporate income tax is simply the cost of incorporation. If the legal benefits of incorporation (no liability for shareholders) are not worthwhile with the corporate income tax taken into account, then don't incorporate.

rootvg says

No one's killing his dream or yours other than the guy in the White House and possibly the people running the EPA.

At least you agree that the 1% is using EPA regulations to prevent competition from Honest Abe, you, and me.

Corruption of government by corporate interest is the one and only problem. Nothing else is significant.

Obama's just a Republican in Democratic clothing. He voted for the bailouts (but so did McCain), he kept the unfairly low capital gains and dividend rates without objection, he sold out health care reform to the insurers by ditching the public option, and worst of all, he signed the NDAA, which is the Republican wet dream of imprisoning anyone, any time, for no reason at all, forever.

We don't really have any choice in elections, since both parties are funded by the same 1%.

Did you see Bulworth?

Watch replies by email

Patrick, how is it that I'm VERY sure I could bring you my buddy in Dallas who's a retired full bird Army Colonel (and Vietnam era Green Beret) with a PhD, who would cut your and your friend's arguments to pieces? I should get him up here and have us all meet at a restaurant. God, that would be FUN.

We are TWO separate nations in many ways...and you can obviously believe what you want (as I do) but there are only 55 Electoral votes here and there are at least 160 in the so called values states and that's before we get to Ohio, Pennsylvania and Missouri.

You're not in control. You'll never be in control!

This is why Democrats have served so few years in the White House since the end of World War II. This is what happened to Carter and is about to happen to Obama. It's a familiar pattern: something bad happens, we elect Democrats to the White House and Congress, they go in there and show us how bad they really are, the Republicans get religion and we put them back in for another 15-20 years. Over and over and over...that's how it goes.

We don't live in the United States of California, where the wine and food and climate make us all feel like we can do anything we want and not pay the price!

It's a center right nation, California and Massachusetts be damned.

The whole left-right thing is a deliberately cultivated distraction from the main issue, which Teddy Roosevelt put perfectly:

"To destroy this invisible Government, to dissolve the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of the day."

Nomograph says

rootvg says

Patrick, how is it that I'm VERY sure I could bring you my buddy in Dallas who's a retired full bird Army Colonel (and Vietnam era Green Beret) with a PhD

Wow. Did you meet him on Usenet?

No, I met him when he was a database consultant for a retailer.

My main concern is simply this: Big Money (whether extremely wealthy individuals or large businesses) buying our politicians. That's not democracy, that's a de-facto aristocracy.

I'm not sure how that could be reduced. But some countries are better at it than others:

Data is from "Transparency International." I don't know how they come up with their data.

sack says

Yeah, when shown a fact/logic for which people have no answer, make a claim that it is fecal matter of some animal. Classic.

You posted nothing at all to support your claim and I easily showed how your logic can be defeated in the same post so you're blatantly lying when you say "I have no answer".

sack says

Sales tax and gas taxes are consumption tax, and even the rich pay the same. More you consume, more you pay.

No duh. The thing is the rich get a leg up on the rest of us since their income is taxed as capital gains instead of "wages" at a lower rate. There is also such a thing as marginal utility of the dollar at work here, which I won't bother to source since that sort of thing is econ 101 stuff which no one sane even tries to dispute, and the fact that the rich need only a tiny fragment of their income to live on while the non-rich have to spend a much higher amount.

That has always been true but now the situation is even more out of whack now then during the 70's.

sack says

the company gets taxed at corporate rates (which I believe is higher than personal taxes, but I am no tax expert)

The nominal tax rate is decently high but the effective tax rate is very low.

Note that pic is a few years old now IIRC. There have been cases of very large corps paying effectively zero taxes or even getting billions back at the end of year due to loop hole abuse. A fair number of them have been doing that for years: http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/11/03/360185/30-corporations-no-taxes/?mobile=nc

sack says

So don't you tell me that only the poor pay 4 times the taxes

You need to re-read what I said because that isn't what I claimed. What do you think the phrase, "by this logic" even meant in that case?

rootvg says

It's a center right nation, California and Massachusetts be damned.

I dunno about Mass. but CA sure as hell isn't a Liberal state. The parts that trend left are San Diego, SF Bay area, and some of the northern part of the state. The rest of the state is very very far right and has more people too.

Others already gave you a good break down of some of the far right legislation and policies that have passed in CA. You don't seem to be considering that info. at all, why?

tts says

Note that pic is a few years old now IIRC. There have been cases of very large corps paying effectively zero taxes or even getting billions back at the end of year due to loop hole abuse. A fair number of them have been doing that for years:

Difference between published SEC financial statements vs IRS tax return.

Temp and perm tax differences.. Book and Tax Depreciation is one of these differences... take upfront depreciation MACRS plus Bonus Depreciation.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deferred_tax

They are not loop holes, if you claim a loss this year and had a profit prior years year you carry back the losses 2 years and claim a refund under the IRS code for prior years. As clear as black and white in the tax code.

They turned a profit though. Profits are what are supposed to get taxed.

tts says

They turned a profit though. Profits are what are supposed to get taxed.

What you see published/disclosed to public are the GAAP based Financial Statements. Audited by the Accounting Firms.

What is filed out on their tax return, undisclosed to the public, prepared by internal or external tax accountants, is based on IRS tax rules.

They are different... Salary & other cash compensation over $1M paid to officers are disqualifed expenses as is 50% of Meals and Ent. Even though both were actually paid and expensed..Disallow for accrual bad debt reserves, fines and penalties, Fed Tax payable/expense. Therefore these make Actual Net taxable profit higher...

Factor in Higher Tax depreciation ( per tax vs gaap), AMT, carry over losses and credits.. may well be in a lower tax or loss situation.

Plus you only tax US net income... ( which is often half of total global income). International income was already taxed and paid to foreign govt.

May not be as clear and simple... yet the liberals in Congress who make these laws seem to forget that when they talk about corporate tax rates being unfair. Odd isnt it..

marquismark says

The nominal tax rate is decently high but the effective tax rate is very low

Any corporation you can pick back in the 50s (Ford, GE, or Coke) only sold products in the US. Over the next 50-60 years they grow internationally, Today having only 50% net profits being US only and applied to US tax). Yes, your effective tax rate based on global net income has dropped.

So what about the Foreign Companies doing business in the US. Toyota, Siemens, BMW, Nestle, Tata... dont they pay US Corporate Income Tax ?... has their share of US TAX BILL grown?

Yes it has !!!

Why dont the Demos in Congress tell you this ?

thomas.wong1986 says

International income was already taxed and paid to foreign govt.

Its funny, as an American individual working over seas you're required to pay whatever foreign taxes necessary and still pay your US taxes as well. For some reason though its unreasonable to expect the same out of the corps.

Your logic re: US corp taxation rates in the 50's vs today is faulty too. They often don't pay taxes over seas either by opening head quarters in countries that allow them to pay no taxes, like Ireland for instance.

This is why corporate profits are through the roof, even higher now than before the credit bubble burst.

tts says

Its funny, as an American individual working over seas you're required to pay whatever foreign taxes necessary and still pay your US taxes as well. For some reason though its unreasonable to expect the same out of the corps.

Individual Tax Code ?

The maximum foreign earned income exclusion is adjusted annually for inflation. For 2011, the maximum exclusion has increased to $92,900. Couple married -- $185,800.

http://www.irs.gov/publications/p54/ar01.html

tts says

Your logic re: US corp taxation rates in the 50's vs today is faulty too. They often don't pay taxes over seas either by opening head quarters in countries that allow them to pay no taxes, like Ireland for instance.

Oh yes they do! .. they want a piece of the action as well.. not only Income Tax... Payroll Tax, Pensions, and other taxes...

Ireland is more recent item, it has limited application. Certainly UK, Gremany, France, and the others arent too happy about it. Doesnt work well when dealing with Asian tax authorities.

You can also say the same about State Income Taxes... why are many registered in Delaware like Google, Apple, Intel and not in California.

Lower Taxes... Do you hear the Democrats complaining about that ?

Incorporation in Delaware

Over 50% of U.S. publicly traded corporations and 60% of the Fortune 500 companies are incorporated in Delaware;[38] the state's attractiveness as a corporate haven is largely because of its business-friendly corporation law. Franchise taxes on Delaware corporations supply about one-fifth of its state revenue.[39] Although Delaware is ranked first tax haven in the world by Tax Justice Network,[40] it is not listed on the OECD's 2009 "Black List", despite objections of Luxembourg's and Switzerland's authorities.

tts says

This is why corporate profits are through the roof, even higher now than before the credit bubble burst.

Well higher revenues due to global markets does translate to higher bottom line... its called growth! Crap happens!

Dude you not even really responding at this point not to me or Patrick, just spamming the thread with your incorrect "knowledge" and talking points. What the hell is point of that anyways?

The problem is this: too much SPENDING...not on needs, but on wants.

Dumnocrats = tax and spend. Repubs = borrow and spend. The major part of the problem? Excess spending. Another major part = politicians (sociopaths with political power).

One potential solution? Power to the people, not the government, but thats what the constitution was for - before it got shredded.

Honest Abe says

One potential solution? Power to the people, not the government

I do agree with you that it would help if the people had more direct power, so that the corporate 1% could not simply write our laws in their favor.

What's the best way to do that? Petitions probably won't work well, because it costs a lot of money to gather signatures, and the 1% are the only people with the budget.

Maybe online signatures somehow?

thomas.wong1986 says

This Thread is about senseless left wing politics rather than facts...

Throw some meat to the masses.. they want their 10 lbs of flesh.

There's a place downtown Danville called the Tower Grille (has great food), and on a Friday night about half of the patrons look like the guy on the right hand side of your photo.

I think a lot of the tax stuff is a "shell game."

Maybe corporate taxes could be reduced, but capital gains & dividend taxes could be increased? Either way, you're taxing corporate profits (directly or indirectly).

thomas.wong1986 says

Salary & other cash compensation over $1M paid to officers are disqualifed expenses as is 50% of Meals and Ent. Even though both were actually paid and expensed..

Stop saying this - it is disingenuous at best and plain untrue at worst. Here is section C of the actual tax code:

"C) Other performance-based compensation
The term “applicable employee remuneration” shall not include any remuneration payable solely on account of the attainment of one or more performance goals, but only if—

(i) the performance goals are determined by a compensation committee of the board of directors of the taxpayer which is comprised solely of 2 or more outside directors,
(ii) the material terms under which the remuneration is to be paid, including the performance goals, are disclosed to shareholders and approved by a majority of the vote in a separate shareholder vote before the payment of such remuneration, and
(iii) before any payment of such remuneration, the compensation committee referred to in clause (i) certifies that the performance goals and any other material terms were in fact satisfied. "

So, if the renumeration is performance based (which all bonuses in corporate america are) then it is deductable from net income for the corporation. I promise you every public corporation (which the $1M rule applies) meets all requirements of this rule and deducts executive pay over $1M.

One thing is for certain about the above two caricatures: Most leftists pay big bucks for housing and to gas their limos to live next to the above two guys rather than the unwed mothers and minorities of Democrat neighboroods in inner cities such as Oakland, East Los Angeles, or SE DC. LOTS of cheap housing for the left there and quick commute times to those high tech IT jobs too! (While they last before the newest Democrat electorate comprised of semi-legal H1B's takes them away!) Plus, there's gun control so that makes them safe neighborhoods!

At one time in the not too far off past, the bubba type character on the left was the primary voter for the Dixiecrat, Jim Crow era Democrat party and FDR's core base that he was going to "help" by "taxing the rich! Then they were tossed under the bus. Someone else's turn will come next. Soon. Then they can be made fun of too! Hahahaha! Looking forward to it!

rootvg says

Patrick, how is it that I'm VERY sure I could bring you my buddy in Dallas who's a retired full bird Army Colonel (and Vietnam era Green Beret) with a PhD, who would cut your and your friend's arguments to pieces? I should get him up here and have us all meet at a restaurant. God, that would be FUN.

Why bother with the meet-and-greet? Just have your pal post his rebuttal here. After all that is what this forum is for.

leoj707 says

rootvg says

Patrick, how is it that I'm VERY sure I could bring you my buddy in Dallas who's a retired full bird Army Colonel (and Vietnam era Green Beret) with a PhD, who would cut your and your friend's arguments to pieces? I should get him up here and have us all meet at a restaurant. God, that would be FUN.

Why bother with the meet-and-greet? Just have your pal post his rebuttal here. After all that is what this forum is for.

That's a good idea.

I'll see what I can do.