Hillary Sucks.

[Schnitzer318is]

Its immoral to take from one person at the point of a gun and then give it to someone else. The way I read what you wrote is that its only immoral to object to being robbed.

The tax rates were massive, but the write offs were massive too. The effective tax rates were much lower than the publicized tax rates. We still have the largest middle class in the world. The problem is that if you consistently change the definition of what the middle class is or what the poverty line is, you will never be able to go back and compare it.

My point was, and you are in dis-agreeance with it is seems, is that just because you CAN save more money by finding more loopholes... doesn't mean you SHOULD from a moral standpoint. Especially when one of your campaign platforms is the national debt. It's a well established fact that the tax law favors the wealthy in terms of write-offs, depreciation, etc. I know my wife and I would have to work VERY hard to come out ahead of the standard deduction should we try. You think (and most Americans do) that every advantage/opportunity should be taken to make as much money as possible. Call me dumb/idealistic (you wouldn't be the first), but I don't spend all my effort and time in search of the almighty dollar. Much of my family thinks I am weird because I am perfectly happy with a sub 6 figure salary in favor of spending a lot more time with my wife and kids.

No one is guaranteed an specific quality of life. Fairness is fairness, either be for it, or be openly against it. Earning $20K and keeping it vs $18K and paying $2K in taxes ain't going to make a damn bit of difference. Every single person needs skin in the game, period. If I pay more taxes than someone else, I should expect more in return and you shouldn't get pissed about that.

You are still paying taxes when you make $20k/yr. Just not federal income tax. They most certainly have skin in the game. This is going to sound very leftist, but I suppose I have more compassion for the kids starting out and the adults with no way of making more than $20k/yr. I'm not a Dem, trust me. Not everyone can rise from the bottom to the top of a company, no matter how hard they work. The meritocracy arguments we have been sold all of our lives just aren't how the world works.

I am not sure you understand how business works. There is no way you can "disallow" taxes from influencing the cost of doing business and thus passing expenses on to the consumer.

Sure I do, and I agree that taxes do influence the cost of doing business, that wasn't my point. I was saying that, with enough competition, the cost of a particular good would be regulated (perhaps "disallowed" was not the right word). Some members of the market would raise prices to pass it on to the consumer, yes. But others would accept lower profit margins in favor of stealing business from those who raised prices.

And you can't blame anyone who uses it to gain advantage. Its there, not using it is actively saying you won't take advantage of an opportunity.

Again, sure I can because it conflicts with my moral compass. Just because an opportunity is there... doesn't mean it should be exploited or taken. I realize I am in the minority on this point... but that's the way it is.

[marshallnoise]

My point was, and you are in dis-agreeance with it is seems, is that just because you CAN save more money by finding more loopholes... doesn't mean you SHOULD from a moral standpoint. Especially when one of your campaign platforms is the national debt. It's a well established fact that the tax law favors the wealthy in terms of write-offs, depreciation, etc. I know my wife and I would have to work VERY hard to come out ahead of the standard deduction should we try. You think (and most Americans do) that every advantage/opportunity should be taken to make as much money as possible. Call me dumb/idealistic (you wouldn't be the first), but I don't spend all my effort and time in search of the almighty dollar. Much of my family thinks I am weird because I am perfectly happy with a sub 6 figure salary in favor of spending a lot more time with my wife and kids.



You are still paying taxes when you make $20k/yr. Just not federal income tax. They most certainly have skin in the game. This is going to sound very leftist, but I suppose I have more compassion for the kids starting out and the adults with no way of making more than $20k/yr. I'm not a Dem, trust me. Not everyone can rise from the bottom to the top of a company, no matter how hard they work. The meritocracy arguments we have been sold all of our lives just aren't how the world works.



Sure I do, and I agree that taxes do influence the cost of doing business, that wasn't my point. I was saying that, with enough competition, the cost of a particular good would be regulated (perhaps "disallowed" was not the right word). Some members of the market would raise prices to pass it on to the consumer, yes. But others would accept lower profit margins in favor of stealing business from those who raised prices.



Again, sure I can because it conflicts with my moral compass. Just because an opportunity is there... doesn't mean it should be exploited or taken. I realize I am in the minority on this point... but that's the way it is.

Fair enough.

[FireFight]

Did anyone catch her towards the end saying
"(DT thinks)women don’t deserve equal pay unless they do as good a job as men"

Yeah no shit, why should a woman make as much as anybody else does just for having a vagina?

[mrsleeve]

^
If can't do the job to the same level why should you get the same pay, it has nothing to do with your plumbing.

Oh and I thought the $1 salary was just a wonderful showing of modesty!



Or how about the one guy who gave all of his employees the same salary.. nice pay too IIRC.. 70k? Be careful what you wish for.. now more in taxes and many of those could have been pushed out of assistance (think child care, school stuff). But that was a rallying cry of the $15/hr burger flippers to start and when it obviously fell to its fiery death, the story lost coverage...

That guy went/is going tits up not long after that stunt.....

The dollar a year thing is a publicity stunt, or to keep capital in the system to run the company, meanwhile they are taking huge amounts of shares in stock, as they make the company grow/take from the brink of failure/innovate what ever they can, to make the stock prices go up the more they actually make. Mr Musk did this with his modest investment into Tesla, and while the govt gave 10's of millions more in a similar risky start up loan only make a few % in interest.

[TimeMachinE30]

Did anyone catch her towards the end saying
"(DT thinks)women don’t deserve equal pay unless they do as good a job as men"

Yeah no shit, why should a woman make as much as anybody else does just for having a vagina?

It was funny to read this and watch your .gif

But yes, very true. No matter the color, age, gender.. perform the job and be compensated commensurate with skills, abilities.

I read some fun things about her paying of her own employees. Men were by far receiving higher pay. Also, 1963 Fair Pay Act. Also, Thomas Sowell is wonderful, and a bombshell video of him speaking with a feminist back in the day on YT. To summarize in my own quick type, thread way:

When you look at the numbers and at first glance say, "see, women don't get paid fairly compared to men"... it neglects those women who are removed from the work force (say, to birth and care for a child) or only working partial hours to maintain the home and family (stay at home or work at home moms), PT earn less than FT. When those women DO return to work, they are older but without the skill set development and receive, of course, lower pay!

There is a reason why. If you don't seek it out, they will simply fill in their narrative. TSowell is a guy who studied this stuff working at the BLS.... he is an evidence based, fact finding, truth speaking powerhouse.

Here is a good article on the topic of this terrible pay gap women suffer:

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/where-are-the-fact-checkers-for-clintons-pay-gap-claims/article/2602910

Thomas Sowell dismantles pay-gap:

https://youtu.be/DUpgoayBPJc

[marshallnoise]

Sowell is amazing. Always has been.

Sent from my XT1575 using Tapatalk

[M-technik-3]

Assange says it's time to release the evidence.

[decay]

That guy went/is going tits up not long after that stunt.....

no. wrong.

sleeve, you've gotta start substantiating, or at least researching, your claims.

But that’s not what happened. Instead, sales skyrocketed after the announcement, and Gravity Payments continues to take on new clients at a rate it never had before. It reports nearly doubling profits in a year, from $3.5 million in 2014 to $6.5 million in 2015. So Price is re-evaluating the metrics, and still trying to decide what his income should look like.

http://www.today.com/money/gravity-payments-70k-minimum-salary-ceo-dan-price-shares-results-t101678

also, WRC cars start with a body-in-white just like DTM cars do, you were wrong about that too :P

[mrsleeve]

^

Fair enough, I swear I remembered reading/seeing an article/news story not too long after that guy "made his announcement" that he was struggling, renting out his house and losing several key employees....

Edit: Here it is.

https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/249313

Edit#2

Seems a lot of the credit for his recent profits, is due to all the free world wide publicly he got in the media, and that his profits are still actually going down thanks partly to high labor costs. Also seems he may have had a much more sinister ulterior motive, he was served with a lawsuit by his brother and minor partner 2 weeks prior to his announcement, that he was greedy and taking "excessive compensation", and this stunt may have been more to tie up profits to avoid having to make a large payout to his brother.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2016/05/26/does-70000-minimum-wage-work/84913242/

[Schnitzer318is]

^

Fair enough, I swear I remembered reading/seeing an article/news story not too long after that guy "made his announcement" that he was struggling, renting out his house and losing several key employees....

Edit: Here it is.

https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/249313

Edit#2

Seems a lot of the credit for his recent profits, is due to all the free world wide publicly he got in the media, and that his profits are still actually going down thanks partly to high labor costs. Also seems he may have had a much more sinister ulterior motive, he was served with a lawsuit by his brother and minor partner 2 weeks prior to his announcement, that he was greedy and taking "excessive compensation", and this stunt may have been more to tie up profits to avoid having to make a large payout to his brother.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/...work/84913242/

The entrepreneur story is not a story, but an opinion piece. Which is fine, the author can voice his opinion... but it in no way means that Mr. Price's plan has failed, or will fail. If he is able to maintain a profit margin to sustain growth, or viability with the new salaries... then by all means. He also only lost 2 employees, and from reading their positions (one in IT, and one in accounting), they were valuable... but not indispensable. They also got raises, and should have been less concerned with what others were making... and focused on their careers (IMO). It seems they did tie their self worth to their salaries, and worse to those of their co-workers. If they had other motives, they did not say that I could find.

The brother said that he had been in disagreement with Price well prior to the new salary announcement and the lawsuit. He is only seeking for Price to buy him out of his 30% share and some "suffering." We don't have enough information about that situation to decidedly say which of the two brothers is being unreasonable or in the wrong.

In the end, this is a case of someone in business trying something that flies in the face of traditional business models (Price says the reasons are altruistic) and is now getting heat from the establishment. Nothing more. If his model is poor... the business will fail. If it is good, it will succeed. Let the experiment run its course.

Lastly, we do NOT live in a meritocracy, as the opinion piece says is the way to promote a good business model. The establishment loves to propagate this belief. I won't argue/justify this point though, because most have already made up their minds that they work harder (or are more important) than the guy next to them and deserve more.

[mrsleeve]

Like I said fair enough, I remember reading in a couple places similar reports from shortly after this went public last year, that things were going south. I had not looked into since, and in search of one of the places to make sure I was not dreaming that I had read it someplace I found the USA today link.

Hes still here, his plan worked he got to stiff his business partner and garner world wide media attention to get a pile of free publicity (aka advertising) to keep him going. Good for him, I wrote it off last year, I am even fairly sure we all discussed this someplace a year ago and this was brought up then. Not a bad plan when you have a few mill in the system earning dividends to help supplement your "generosity" of taking a 93% pay cut.

[decay]

any business strategy that results in almost doubling profit (not revenue... PROFIT) isn't a publicity stunt... it's a good idea.

i bet HR had a fat stack of resumes show up on their desk, too. when word's out that you pay more, the candidates will come to you and you can pick the best. also a solid strategy.

if the IT guy got pissed off and left because he didn't get a raise from $70k... that's probably because someone decided that's what he was worth. i'd have stepped in and done his job- he was probably just admining the local LAN and google apps- but that'd be a pay cut ;)

i don't think his move involved generosity at all. he made a bet on the equity he owns in his company's stock, that if he made this policy change it'd help ramp him up to go public and liquidate. he's still trying to get rich and have the mansion with the lamborghinis.

[Schnitzer318is]

any business strategy that results in almost doubling profit (not revenue... PROFIT) isn't a publicity stunt... it's a good idea.

i bet HR had a fat stack of resumes show up on their desk, too. when word's out that you pay more, the candidates will come to you and you can pick the best. also a solid strategy.

if the IT guy got pissed off and left because he didn't get a raise from $70k... that's probably because someone decided that's what he was worth. i'd have stepped in and done his job- he was probably just admining the local LAN and google apps- but that'd be a pay cut ;)

i don't think his move involved generosity at all. he made a bet on the equity he owns in his company's stock, that if he made this policy change it'd help ramp him up to go public and liquidate. he's still trying to get rich and have the mansion with the lamborghinis.

Agreed with your points.

The IT guy was a web developer with the company. He DID get a raise but was unhappy for the reasons mentioned above.

I also agree it was a calculated business move (albeit unconventional) to increase visibility and profits. We can not say how this affected his business partners as we don't have any information other than that his brother was unhappy with Price's compensation in the past and was suing. If he had done something considered traditional (move production to Mexico, cut employees, evade taxes, etc) to increase profits the establishment would be applauding him and saying to increase his salary to 2 million the following year.

Now, back on topic. Hillary sucks!!! And trump, and Johnson too!!!

[estoguy]

Gotta love the "basement-dwellers" and "baristas" comments. I hope that one really bites her in the ass.

The real shame though is that Sanders is still telling his supporters to vote for her. Pretty much proof positive (as if there wasn't enough before) that he's been bought. Total sell-out.

[gwb72tii]

My point was, and you are in dis-agreeance with it is seems, is that just because you CAN save more money by finding more loopholes... doesn't mean you SHOULD from a moral standpoint. Especially when one of your campaign platforms is the national debt. It's a well established fact that the tax law favors the wealthy in terms of write-offs, depreciation, etc.

2 things

1. by your above post you presume that sending your hard earned wages to the federal government is the best use of your time, effort and hours worked. This is the worst choice. take your deductions like trump does and do something good with the money

2. the "wealthy" get to write off more because they make more money. This is not immoral or unethical, it is current tax law. there is nothing moral or "more" ethical about sending your money to the federal government.
In fact you could argue it is immoral as you can do more good with your tax savings by benefiting a local charity or starting a business and hiring someone.