Minimum Wage, Again

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
341

[quote]ZJStrope wrote:
The damage has been done. All you can do is wait for it to unwind and not screw it up next time. There is no solution where some people will suffer.

[/quote]

Pretty much. Almost every step the government took leading up to the meltdown made the pain worse in the meltdown, for decades. (This is a purple problem, no it isn’t 100% Bush’s fault, Reagan’s or the Democrats before people get all worked up.)

Then basically every step they took after the melt down was an effort to “ease the pain”. This has resulted in spreading out the suck, and prolonging it. Yes, the suck is a lessor level of suck had they done nothing, but it is longer.

The private sector has basically set out to clean up their “balance sheets”, and build reserves for the expected upcoming super melt down. People & companies are saving, which is good. Companies cut a lot of dead weight and are leaner and meaner than before, which is good long term. This all hurts the economy at large, yes, particularly in the States. However, after the unprecedented boom in the States after the last 30 years, there is going to be some sort of cool down or lessening. Things work in cycles. Government manipulation can only flatten the peaks and valleys so much…

342

There is no doubt the economy is f**ked beyond all recognition.

Personally I’m with Ayn Rand and think we should have a complete separation of Economy and State, in the same way that we have a separation of Church and State (when I say “we”, I’m actually English but I’m talking about all economies not just the US and UK). I think there can be unequivocally no argument that “the government” has effed up each and every time it has tried to meddle in the economy. Either creating bad situations (such as the crashes in the 1920s and 2007) or making them worse.

People might worry what would happen but I think that one of the definitions of madness (to quote Einstein I think) is to: do the same thing over and over again and expect different results. We’ve tried the “government” intervention route again and again and again. It never works. So let’s try something different for a change. How about a world where “the government” got the hell out of the way and allowed people and companies to make their own decisions.

I also happen to think that taxation is utterly immoral and akin to theft. If it was voluntary I wouldn’t be saying that but since you HAVE to pay no matter what you might disagree with it is theft. Hey, try not paying and see how quickly the IRS are on your case! Literally in many cases knocking down doors with guns in hand. Thieves - much!

Regarding minimum wages, they don’t work either. One can realise how ridiculous they are when you say something along the lines of: “well, if we should make employers pay anything we mandate, why don’t we make them pay $5,000 per hour. Hell, why not $10,000 per hour?!” We know that would be stupid instinctively and would cripple and ultimately destroy any business.

Just because the amounts we are talking about may well be smaller it leads to the same thing - if a business if forced to pay more in a wage than the job role warrants in income for the business then said company will be crippled or simply not employ people. Yes, it may be harsh but so is life sometimes. And actually, without all the regulation and legal compliance costs and tax - if we got the State out of the economy - companies would be able to offer higher wages anyway.

343

[quote]Pushers wrote:
Literally in many cases knocking down doors with guns in hand. Thieves - much!

[/quote]

Does it happen? Sure. “literally in many cases”? No.

The vast, vast majority of taxation issues are resolved through mailings and phone calls.

Then there are audits… Still no guns or kicked down doors.

Then, if there is fraud typically, comes court.

344

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]Pushers wrote:
Literally in many cases knocking down doors with guns in hand. Thieves - much!

[/quote]

Does it happen? Sure. “literally in many cases”? No.

The vast, vast majority of taxation issues are resolved through mailings and phone calls.

Then there are audits… Still no guns or kicked down doors.

Then, if there is fraud typically, comes court. [/quote]

If there was no threat of violence, it would be easy to just not pay.

345

Certainly a threat of violence situation, yes your money is essentially taken at gun point for being successful.

All I’m saying is the line about the IRS kicking down doors with guns is inaccurate at face value. They are much more civilized in their confiscation.

346

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

Large Business loves our tax code [/quote]

You repeatedly like to show you haven’t the slightest clue WTF you are talking about when it comes to taxation. Why is that?

Yes, I’m sure paying ten of thousands of dollars to file what amounts to an information compliance test is what every company loves.

You don’t understand business, the concept of overhead or taxation to any degree that makes your comments on the subjects noteworthy in any manor other than they take people’s time to point out how off the wall and inaccurate they are. [/quote]

Oh I keep forgetting how you explained to me the tax code has no disparities . You got to ask me some time how much credence I give you .

I am surprised you do not support congress controlling all parts of everyone’s lives because they have done such a terrific job on our tax code

347

[quote]BlueCollarTr8n wrote:

The problem lies in the landscape such wisdom is to be practiced. The US is no longer a producer economy, it’s a consumer economy. [/quote]

More short sightedness (AKA SUPPLY SIDE ECONOMICS)for the worst president Ronny Reagan

348

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
You got to ask me some time how much credence I give you .[/quote]

lol, seeing as I have a whole bunch of letters after my name, some of whom directly related to my understanding of the IRC, and you smoke pot and regurgitate talking points about the subject, “you got” to ask me sometime how much you opinion on the subject actually matters to anyone with a functioning brain.

[quote]I am surprised you do not support congress controlling all parts of everyone’s lives because they have done such a terrific job on our tax code
[/quote]

You couldn’t even explain a problem you have with the IRC in plain English if you tried, so please reserve your judgments on the job congress has done for those unconcerned with factual information.

349

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

Oh I keep forgetting how you explained to me the tax code has no disparities . [/quote]

And again, for like the 3,000th time. The code is the code. The IRC is the IRC. For the most part it is people’s situations that have disparities, not the fucking code.

350

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
You got to ask me some time how much credence I give you .[/quote]

lol, seeing as I have a whole bunch of letters after my name, some of whom directly related to my understanding of the IRC, and you smoke pot and regurgitate talking points about the subject, “you got” to ask me sometime how much you opinion on the subject actually matters to anyone with a functioning brain.

[quote]I am surprised you do not support congress controlling all parts of everyone’s lives because they have done such a terrific job on our tax code
[/quote]

I am married to a person with a bunch of letters behind her name . What the fuck you think you are the only one that has an education

You couldn’t even explain a problem you have with the IRC in plain English if you tried, so please reserve your judgments on the job congress has done for those unconcerned with factual information. [/quote]

I employ people with abunch of letters after their name , I am not impressed

351

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
You got to ask me some time how much credence I give you .[/quote]

lol, seeing as I have a whole bunch of letters after my name, some of whom directly related to my understanding of the IRC, and you smoke pot and regurgitate talking points about the subject, “you got” to ask me sometime how much you opinion on the subject actually matters to anyone with a functioning brain.

[quote]I am surprised you do not support congress controlling all parts of everyone’s lives because they have done such a terrific job on our tax code
[/quote]

You couldn’t even explain a problem you have with the IRC in plain English if you tried, so please reserve your judgments on the job congress has done for those unconcerned with factual information. [/quote]

I employ people with abunch of letters after their name , I am not impressed
[/quote]

lol, okay.

352

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

Oh I keep forgetting how you explained to me the tax code has no disparities . [/quote]

And again, for like the 3,000th time. The code is the code. The IRC is the IRC. For the most part it is people’s situations that have disparities, not the fucking code.

[/quote]

While I may not always agree with the CATO Institute it definitely disagrees with you

353

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

Oh I keep forgetting how you explained to me the tax code has no disparities . [/quote]

And again, for like the 3,000th time. The code is the code. The IRC is the IRC. For the most part it is people’s situations that have disparities, not the fucking code.

[/quote]

While I may not always agree with the CATO Institute it definitely disagrees with you

[/quote]

Just lol…

Of course a partisan sensationalist rag of an “article” is something you would hang your hat on.

Just PSA for you, that “article” is very misleading. Either the guy writing knows as little as you and like to just state talking points, or he is doing it on purpose.

354

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

Oh I keep forgetting how you explained to me the tax code has no disparities . [/quote]

And again, for like the 3,000th time. The code is the code. The IRC is the IRC. For the most part it is people’s situations that have disparities, not the fucking code.

[/quote]

While I may not always agree with the CATO Institute it definitely disagrees with you

[/quote]

The IRC certainly has disparities and it’s designed that way. That’s how Government gets things to happen that they want to happen by giving incentives. So what’s good for one business/person is bad for another.

In that senses, it’s equally good and crappy for everyone at some level or another.

The tax code is a POS.

The cost of the tax code to the US economy is staggering.

http://www.infowars.com/irscpa-bureaucracy-cost-tax-payers-431-billion-a-year/

But then that also doesn’t take into account the 1000’s of non-value add jobs it brings in.

The simple fact is, all of this is SO freaking complicated, no one could ever truly measure the cost/benefit of all of this. It’s to hard, and frankly, to expensive, so all we ever get are half-assed statistics and measurements that are structured to support one side or the other.

355

Let’s see:

  1. Okay… 237 million returns filed each year: http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-soi/12rswinbulreturnfilings.pdf

So this “army” is something like 140-150 returns per preparer. I suppose one contractor can build all the houses in the country too?

Lol not only does this have zero to do with disparity, it is a hilariously fucking moronic complaint.

  1. oooohhhh, I like his use of “special interest”. Sure sparks the partisan bong.

Yes the government gives incentives for behavior, yes it does some of this through the tax code. Sorry, but not everything can fit on one form. Oh, someone has to read instructions to know how ot fill it out? booo hooo. have to read instructions on how to put a computer together, or pay a professional to do it.

  1. Valid complaint. It is stupid and has given rise to the S-Corp and LLC.

  2. Oh no, he said the “D” word. lmao at this guy. That isn’t discrimination, that is a) allowing people to pay more for their homes than they otherwise would, b) encouraging people to invest in their homes c) propping up RE markets and so on and so forth.

No disparity in the code, only people’s situations.

  1. … Nothing to do with disparity and not a single detail mentioned. Empty talking point.

  2. Ah AMT. This is a valid complaint. But it hurts more the more money you make. So I assume the lefties like this “disparity”.

AMT is progressive taxation at its finest.

They actually patched it a couple years ago, decent enough fix to make sure it only still hurts higher income individuals.

  1. Valid point… Nothing to do with disparity though.

  2. silly, just silly. They certainly know how to measure income, and this is just a moronic talking point laden way of championing the flat tax…

  3. Retirement saving plans aren’t a mess for 99% of the working population. If one is an owner, more choices open up for you, which is the “complication” this jackass is referring to.

If your employer offers a retirement plan, you IRA contributions are non-deductible. If not, they are. Not a mess, actually pretty straight forward.

  1. waste of bandwidth to round out his figure list.

BTW, the CCH chart he uses is their book, not the IRC.

356

I love it when people argue with a CPA, who is a partner in a Tax firm…about taxes.

357

[quote]ZJStrope wrote:

In that senses, it’s equally good and crappy for everyone at some level or another. [/quote]

This is the entire point.

If someone who typically makes 30k, suddenly makes 300k in one year, that individual has a whole new set of head aches to deal with on his return. However, the rules never change for him. They are always the same rules. It is just the more money you make the more you pay, and the more you do with that money the more rules you need to concern yourself with.

If the person in the above example doesn’t do anything but piss away that 300k on hookers and blow and goes back to making 30k in year 3, nothing changes on his return except he pays more in the year he made 300k. Now if he were to invest the 300k, things change, and he needs to read up on how to account for it or pay someone to do as much.

Sure. So are American made cars…

[quote]The cost of the tax code to the US economy is staggering.

http://www.infowars.com/irscpa-bureaucracy-cost-tax-payers-431-billion-a-year/

But then that also doesn’t take into account the 1000’s of non-value add jobs it brings in.

The simple fact is, all of this is SO freaking complicated, no one could ever truly measure the cost/benefit of all of this. [/quote]

Because iPads really do anything for us as a society?

Do we “need” an income tax? Nah, the government could raise revenues other ways. But we don’t “need” TV sitcoms, Movies, MLB, NFL or any of that shit either. How much do they drain the economy?

[quote]
It’s to hard, and frankly, to expensive, so all we ever get are half-assed statistics and measurements that are structured to support one side or the other.[/quote]

You just descripted every published statistic ever… lol

358

[quote]UtahLama wrote:
I love it when people argue with a CPA, who is a partner in a Tax firm…about taxes.[/quote]

NOt a partner, but working on it.

Thanks though.

359

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]Pushers wrote:
Literally in many cases knocking down doors with guns in hand. Thieves - much!

[/quote]

Does it happen? Sure. “literally in many cases”? No.

The vast, vast majority of taxation issues are resolved through mailings and phone calls.

Then there are audits… Still no guns or kicked down doors.

Then, if there is fraud typically, comes court. [/quote]

Maybe so… but taxation is still theft. At the end of the day you the individual cannot opt out, you cannot say “no”, so in essence it stealing - just by “the authorities” rather than some individual lowlife. No matter if it is “the government” who does it or some thug on the street the act itself is the same - they are taking your money agreement or no.

360

[quote]Pushers wrote:

[quote]countingbeans wrote:

[quote]Pushers wrote:
Literally in many cases knocking down doors with guns in hand. Thieves - much!

[/quote]

Does it happen? Sure. “literally in many cases”? No.

The vast, vast majority of taxation issues are resolved through mailings and phone calls.

Then there are audits… Still no guns or kicked down doors.

Then, if there is fraud typically, comes court. [/quote]

Maybe so… but taxation is still theft. At the end of the day you the individual cannot opt out, you cannot say “no”, so in essence it stealing - just by “the authorities” rather than some individual lowlife. No matter if it is “the government” who does it or some thug on the street the act itself is the same - they are taking your money agreement or no.
[/quote]

Sure you can, just move to Somalia. Enjoy.