On 4/6/2021 12:54 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:> On Tue, 6 Apr 2021 09:36:46 -0700, John Robertson <spam@flippers.com> > wrote: > >> >> On 2021/04/06 8:38 a.m., jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote: >>> >>> https://theweek.com/articles/975735/janet-yellens-proposal-revolutionize-corporate-taxation >>> >>> My counter-offer to Yellin is zero corporate tax rates. >>> >> >> You want zero corporate taxes, then be willing to lose all legal >> corporate protections. You do realize that a lot of government is >> devoted to supporting the corporations, protecting them with copyrights, >> ensuring the legal fiction of a corporation having a 'person' status, >> trademark protection, import controls, clean up after companies go >> bankrupt and leave a toxic mess behind... >> >> Can't have your cake and all that! >> >> John :-#)# >> PS, my businesses are incorporated > > The greater good of the population should be the goal of government. > Companies create jobs and stuff, but don't consume for pleasure; > people do that. If we had no corp taxes but taxed people, we'd have > more industries and jobs here and *more* tax revenue.Consume for pleasure? No one consumes only for pleasure, consumption is the sine qua non of industrialized society, you must do so. Or you will die.> A national sales tax would be better than a corporate tax. That way, > Chinese products would be taxed the same as domestic ones. > > The Yellin thing is an expression of governments wanting absolute > power over everything, and not wanting to compete for industries and > jobs. I don't think it will work; all the industries would flock to a > few holdouts; and the reactions would be huge tariffs. It would be a > mess. > > > > > > >
OT Tax Rant
Started by ●April 6, 2021
Reply by ●April 6, 20212021-04-06
Reply by ●April 6, 20212021-04-06
On 4/6/2021 11:54 AM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:> On Tue, 6 Apr 2021 09:36:46 -0700, John Robertson <spam@flippers.com> > wrote: > >> On 2021/04/06 8:38 a.m., jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote: >>> https://theweek.com/articles/975735/janet-yellens-proposal-revolutionize-corporate-taxation >>> >>> My counter-offer to Yellin is zero corporate tax rates. >>> >> You want zero corporate taxes, then be willing to lose all legal >> corporate protections. You do realize that a lot of government is >> devoted to supporting the corporations, protecting them with copyrights, >> ensuring the legal fiction of a corporation having a 'person' status, >> trademark protection, import controls, clean up after companies go >> bankrupt and leave a toxic mess behind... >> >> Can't have your cake and all that! >> >> John :-#)# >> PS, my businesses are incorporated > The greater good of the population should be the goal of government. > Companies create jobs and stuff, but don't consume for pleasure; > people do that. If we had no corp taxes but taxed people, we'd have > more industries and jobs here and *more* tax revenue. > > A national sales tax would be better than a corporate tax. That way, > Chinese products would be taxed the same as domestic ones. > > The Yellin thing is an expression of governments wanting absolute > power over everything, and not wanting to compete for industries and > jobs. I don't think it will work; all the industries would flock to a > few holdouts; and the reactions would be huge tariffs. It would be a > mess. > No one has mentioned that the corporation adds the taxes into it's price so when you buy your Clorox. you are the one paying the corporate tax. If corporate taxes were reduced to zero. there would be some huge profits made until competition settled thing down to normal operations. I had a customer that had a business with employees, He paid the 6.2% FICA tax share for the employees. When he retired his argument was that he should get a larger SS check because he paid in over $1M in SS taxes. (his plus his employees 6.2%.) I could never convince him that if he and his competition didn't have to pay that 6.2%, that everyone's prices would have come down and he would have never seen that money. So it was a moot point. Mikek If anyone has a suggestion on how I stop my computer from double spacing, please advise. Only a few programs/forums don't double space. -- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Reply by ●April 6, 20212021-04-06
On 4/6/2021 1:09 PM, amdx wrote:> On 4/6/2021 11:54 AM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote: >> On Tue, 6 Apr 2021 09:36:46 -0700, John Robertson <spam@flippers.com> >> wrote: >> >>> On 2021/04/06 8:38 a.m., jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote: >>>> https://theweek.com/articles/975735/janet-yellens-proposal-revolutionize-corporate-taxation >>>> >>>> >>>> My counter-offer to Yellin is zero corporate tax rates. >>>> >>> You want zero corporate taxes, then be willing to lose all legal >>> corporate protections. You do realize that a lot of government is >>> devoted to supporting the corporations, protecting them with copyrights, >>> ensuring the legal fiction of a corporation having a 'person' status, >>> trademark protection, import controls, clean up after companies go >>> bankrupt and leave a toxic mess behind... >>> >>> Can't have your cake and all that! >>> >>> John :-#)# >>> PS, my businesses are incorporated >> The greater good of the population should be the goal of government. >> Companies create jobs and stuff, but don't consume for pleasure; >> people do that. If we had no corp taxes but taxed people, we'd have >> more industries and jobs here and *more* tax revenue. >> >> A national sales tax would be better than a corporate tax. That way, >> Chinese products would be taxed the same as domestic ones. >> >> The Yellin thing is an expression of governments wanting absolute >> power over everything, and not wanting to compete for industries and >> jobs. I don't think it will work; all the industries would flock to a >> few holdouts; and the reactions would be huge tariffs. It would be a >> mess. >> > No one has mentioned that the corporation adds the taxes into it's > price so when you buy your Clorox. > > you are the one paying the corporate tax. If corporate taxes were > reduced to zero. there would be some > > huge profits made until competition settled thing down to normal > operations. > > I had a customer that had a business with employees, He paid the 6.2% > FICA tax share for the employees. > > When he retired his argument was that he should get a larger SS check > because he paid in over $1M in SS taxes. > > (his plus his employees 6.2%.) > > I could never convince him that if he and his competition didn't have > to pay that 6.2%, that everyone's prices > > would have come down and he would have never seen that money. So it was > a moot point. > > MikekBelief in "self-financing" tax cuts is a lot like believing in perpetual motion-machines.> If anyone has a suggestion on how I stop my computer from double > spacing, please advise. > > Only a few programs/forums don't double space. > > >
Reply by ●April 6, 20212021-04-06
On 06/04/2021 17:38, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:> > https://theweek.com/articles/975735/janet-yellens-proposal-revolutionize-corporate-taxation > > My counter-offer to Yellin is zero corporate tax rates. >Why not start your own religion, like L. Ron Hubbard? He too had lots of fanciful ideas with no grounding in reality, and felt he didn't make enough money from his normal work. Someone suggested he started his own religion - no restrictions on what you can say and do, no taxes, no limits. Tell the tax man you believe electronics works by trapping little pixies inside boxes, and you'll get state subsidies and can start your own university in Alabama.
Reply by ●April 6, 20212021-04-06
On Tue, 6 Apr 2021 13:00:25 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:>On 4/6/2021 12:54 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote: >> On Tue, 6 Apr 2021 09:36:46 -0700, John Robertson <spam@flippers.com> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> On 2021/04/06 8:38 a.m., jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote: >>>> >>>> https://theweek.com/articles/975735/janet-yellens-proposal-revolutionize-corporate-taxation >>>> >>>> My counter-offer to Yellin is zero corporate tax rates. >>>> >>> >>> You want zero corporate taxes, then be willing to lose all legal >>> corporate protections. You do realize that a lot of government is >>> devoted to supporting the corporations, protecting them with copyrights, >>> ensuring the legal fiction of a corporation having a 'person' status, >>> trademark protection, import controls, clean up after companies go >>> bankrupt and leave a toxic mess behind... >>> >>> Can't have your cake and all that! >>> >>> John :-#)# >>> PS, my businesses are incorporated >> >> The greater good of the population should be the goal of government. >> Companies create jobs and stuff, but don't consume for pleasure; >> people do that. If we had no corp taxes but taxed people, we'd have >> more industries and jobs here and *more* tax revenue. > >Consume for pleasure? No one consumes only for pleasure, consumption is >the sine qua non of industrialized society, you must do so. Or you will die.People in pre-industrial societies die of starvation a lot more than we do. So much food in developed countries is unprecedented in history. Our biggest health problem is obesity. It takes communism to create famines. Corporations don't eat much, so don't compete with people for food.
Reply by ●April 6, 20212021-04-06
On 4/6/2021 10:09 AM, amdx wrote:> No one has mentioned that the corporation adds the taxes into it's price so > when you buy your Clorox.Exactly. As property taxes are paid by *renters* (not property owners). And, the property owners usually benefit more from the services that those taxes provide (as their *building* is not likely to get up and move to a different town/state) Duties on Chinese imports come out of US customers' pockets. It rarely moves business onto US companies' ledgers -- cuz they often raise their prices to follow the new "effective" price of their now penalized competitors. And, of course, they run the risk of market losses in other places as their product is now so much more "expensive"!> you are the one paying the corporate tax. If corporate taxes were reduced to > zero. there would be some huge profits made until competition settled thing > down to normal operations. > > I had a customer that had a business with employees, He paid the 6.2% FICA > tax share for the employees. > > When he retired his argument was that he should get a larger SS check > because he paid in over $1M in SS taxes. (his plus his employees 6.2%.)I make a similar argument to clients when they cringe at my hourly rate. They look at it as "salary" and compare it to what they "pay" *their* employees. "OK, and what about your share of their FICA? And, unemployment insurance to cover for 'loss of business' layoffs?" "And, what about the ~10 paid holidays that you likely give them? And another 10+ days (for new hires) of paid vacation? Any 'personal days'?" "What's your contribution to their health insurance? And 401k? Company christmas party? Bonuses?" "What about their share of the rent, liability insurance, utilities?" Suddenly, the ~125K they're paying their employee (salary) looks like $250k! And, their employees are "guaranteed" some work, tomorrow.> I could never convince him that if he and his competition didn't have to pay > that 6.2%, that everyone's prices would have come down and he would have > never seen that money. So it was a moot point.The same can be argued for "universal income". Give everyone a base pay and prices will rise to consume it. <shrug> People see/hear what they want to see/hear. I had a friend who was a staunch advocate for nationalized health care. He lived in an affluent area, had "all the best" doctors, etc. I simply offered: "Of course, then ANYONE willing to drive to this area should be able to avail themselves of these (your!) best doctors! Right? And, there would be no DISincentive for those (your!) doctors to provide their services to these folks; even if it came at the cost of making it harder (less convenient) for YOU to get an appointment to see them!" "No, they should use the doctors in THEIR areas!" "Why? Why wouldn't I want to have access to The Best? After all, my taxes are paying for healthcare regardless of where I *consume* it!"
Reply by ●April 6, 20212021-04-06
On Tue, 6 Apr 2021 12:09:03 -0500, amdx <amdx@knology.net> wrote:>On 4/6/2021 11:54 AM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote: >> On Tue, 6 Apr 2021 09:36:46 -0700, John Robertson <spam@flippers.com> >> wrote: >> >>> On 2021/04/06 8:38 a.m., jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote: >>>> https://theweek.com/articles/975735/janet-yellens-proposal-revolutionize-corporate-taxation >>>> >>>> My counter-offer to Yellin is zero corporate tax rates. >>>> >>> You want zero corporate taxes, then be willing to lose all legal >>> corporate protections. You do realize that a lot of government is >>> devoted to supporting the corporations, protecting them with copyrights, >>> ensuring the legal fiction of a corporation having a 'person' status, >>> trademark protection, import controls, clean up after companies go >>> bankrupt and leave a toxic mess behind... >>> >>> Can't have your cake and all that! >>> >>> John :-#)# >>> PS, my businesses are incorporated >> The greater good of the population should be the goal of government. >> Companies create jobs and stuff, but don't consume for pleasure; >> people do that. If we had no corp taxes but taxed people, we'd have >> more industries and jobs here and *more* tax revenue. >> >> A national sales tax would be better than a corporate tax. That way, >> Chinese products would be taxed the same as domestic ones. >> >> The Yellin thing is an expression of governments wanting absolute >> power over everything, and not wanting to compete for industries and >> jobs. I don't think it will work; all the industries would flock to a >> few holdouts; and the reactions would be huge tariffs. It would be a >> mess. >> > � No one has mentioned that the corporation adds the taxes into it's >price so when you buy your Clorox.If they have to compete with imports, they can't do that. What's easier is to go out of business, or import foreign stuff to resell. Funny: our new basketball place, Chase Stadium, is locally known for its architecture as The Toilet Bowl. They have just announced a collaboration with Clorox!
Reply by ●April 6, 20212021-04-06
On 2021/04/06 11:22 a.m., John Larkin wrote:> On Tue, 6 Apr 2021 13:00:25 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote: > >> On 4/6/2021 12:54 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote: >>> On Tue, 6 Apr 2021 09:36:46 -0700, John Robertson <spam@flippers.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> On 2021/04/06 8:38 a.m., jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote: >>>>> >>>>> https://theweek.com/articles/975735/janet-yellens-proposal-revolutionize-corporate-taxation >>>>> >>>>> My counter-offer to Yellin is zero corporate tax rates. >>>>> >>>> >>>> You want zero corporate taxes, then be willing to lose all legal >>>> corporate protections. You do realize that a lot of government is >>>> devoted to supporting the corporations, protecting them with copyrights, >>>> ensuring the legal fiction of a corporation having a 'person' status, >>>> trademark protection, import controls, clean up after companies go >>>> bankrupt and leave a toxic mess behind... >>>> >>>> Can't have your cake and all that! >>>> >>>> John :-#)# >>>> PS, my businesses are incorporated >>> >>> The greater good of the population should be the goal of government. >>> Companies create jobs and stuff, but don't consume for pleasure; >>> people do that. If we had no corp taxes but taxed people, we'd have >>> more industries and jobs here and *more* tax revenue. >> >> Consume for pleasure? No one consumes only for pleasure, consumption is >> the sine qua non of industrialized society, you must do so. Or you will die. > > People in pre-industrial societies die of starvation a lot more than > we do. So much food in developed countries is unprecedented in > history. Our biggest health problem is obesity. > > It takes communism to create famines. > > Corporations don't eat much, so don't compete with people for food. >Fascists have their share of famines too. Any form of autocracy does not work for the common person. Democracy is the only solution that has fed the planet so well. Corporations that only are concerned about the next quarter are the major danger right now IMHO. They have no plans for the future (much beyond six months) and no desire for being responsible to take care of anyone but their major shareholders. If the shareholders develop a conscience, then the company does too. If not, then rape and pillage is the rule of the day. Corporations are not democratic... John
Reply by ●April 6, 20212021-04-06
On 4/6/2021 10:00 AM, bitrex wrote:> Consume for pleasure? No one consumes only for pleasure, consumption is the > sine qua non of industrialized society, you must do so. Or you will die.In Japan, consumption is effectively *mandated* (well, strongly encouraged as second hand consequences of law: /shaken/) It's seen as "cheaper" to just replace your vehicle rather than deal with a variety of "fines" for various violations and attendant costs to bring the vehicle back into compliance. As your "used" car will cost the dealer to bring *it* back into compliance, he'll likely destroy or export it. Thus, the NEW car market is artificially enlarged! What a clever way of keeping auto production at an elevated level! (and, doing so, under the guise of ensuring public safety!)
Reply by ●April 6, 20212021-04-06
On 2021/04/06 11:24 a.m., Don Y wrote:> On 4/6/2021 10:09 AM, amdx wrote: >> No one has mentioned that the corporation adds the taxes into it's >> price so >> when you buy your Clorox. > > Exactly. As property taxes are paid by *renters* (not property owners). > And, the property owners usually benefit more from the services that those > taxes provide (as their *building* is not likely to get up and move to > a different town/state) > > Duties on Chinese imports come out of US customers' pockets. It rarely > moves business onto US companies' ledgers -- cuz they often raise their > prices to follow the new "effective" price of their now penalized > competitors. > > And, of course, they run the risk of market losses in other places as their > product is now so much more "expensive"! > >> you are the one paying the corporate tax. If corporate taxes were >> reduced to >> zero. there would be some huge profits made until competition settled >> thing >> down to normal operations. >> >> I had a customer that had a business with employees, He paid the 6.2% >> FICA tax share for the employees. >> >> When he retired his argument was that he should get a larger SS check >> because he paid in over $1M in SS taxes. (his plus his employees 6.2%.) > > I make a similar argument to clients when they cringe at my hourly rate. > They look at it as "salary" and compare it to what they "pay" *their* > employees. > > "OK, and what about your share of their FICA? And, unemployment insurance > to cover for 'loss of business' layoffs?" > > "And, what about the ~10 paid holidays that you likely give them? And> another 10+ days (for new hires) of paid vacation? Any 'personal days'?" > > "What's your contribution to their health insurance? And 401k? Company > christmas party? Bonuses?" > > "What about their share of the rent, liability insurance, utilities?" > > Suddenly, the ~125K they're paying their employee (salary) looks like > $250k! And, their employees are "guaranteed" some work, tomorrow. > >> I could never convince him that if he and his competition didn't have >> to pay >> that 6.2%, that everyone's prices would have come down and he would have >> never seen that money. So it was a moot point. > > The same can be argued for "universal income". Give everyone a base pay > and prices will rise to consume it. <shrug> > > People see/hear what they want to see/hear. > > I had a friend who was a staunch advocate for nationalized health care. > He lived in an affluent area, had "all the best" doctors, etc. I simply > offered: > > "Of course, then ANYONE willing to drive to this area should be able > to avail themselves of these (your!) best doctors! Right? And, there > would be no DISincentive for those (your!) doctors to provide their > services to these folks; even if it came at the cost of making it harder > (less convenient) for YOU to get an appointment to see them!" > > "No, they should use the doctors in THEIR areas!" > > "Why? Why wouldn't I want to have access to The Best? Afterall,> my taxes are paying for healthcare regardless of where I *consume* it!" >You don't live in a country with Universal Health Care so don't know what you are talking about. Here in Canada people do not go bankrupt due to medical bills, and have a longer lifespan than you do south of our border. It isn't perfect here, but what is? My ex-wife had no costs associated with the birth of our children back in the 80s. I had open heart surgery last May at no cost to me, other than my regular taxes. Yes, our feds screwed up the Covid vaccination rollout somewhat, but our death toll is less than 5% of yours (23K). More deaths than it should have been even so... John
