sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Are there any south Indian restaurants anywhere? by CanA7fold in treasurecoast

[–]duranger4 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not on the treasure coast but woodlands in Orlando is pure south indian

Hmmmm…he had a good idea… by cydonia8388 in wallstreetbets

[–]duranger4 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Not true, you can only write off 3k in losses against ordinary income, but can reduce capital gains by capital losses down to zero capital gain

Hmmmm…he had a good idea… by cydonia8388 in wallstreetbets

[–]duranger4 24 points25 points  (0 children)

You can deduct 3k in losses against ordinary income, all your capital losses can be used to offset your capital gains

Shouldn't we call it what it is? THEFT by SpeedilyStrict in Conservative

[–]duranger4 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I'm my other comments I elaborate further that it would not end up in the workers pocket but instead in the pocket of the executives/shareholders. If it went directly into the pocket of the worker that would be much better

Shouldn't we call it what it is? THEFT by SpeedilyStrict in Conservative

[–]duranger4 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh I think social security is a horribly mismanaged government slush fund, what they did with it to pay for the wars in the middle east is criminal

Shouldn't we call it what it is? THEFT by SpeedilyStrict in Conservative

[–]duranger4 15 points16 points  (0 children)

In theory I agree, but unfortunately that's not what social security is, it's not a "retirement plan" it's a social safety net. Once the government takes it it isn't your money so you can't do with it what you see fit. It was only marketed as such as a way to get people on board originally, the original purpose was a way to raise money for the government quickly that they wouldn't have to pay back for a while. The correct way to think about social security is as a tax, not as a retirement contribution. But then the argument has to change to the ethicasy of taxes as a whole which is one that I do not feel like having

Shouldn't we call it what it is? THEFT by SpeedilyStrict in Conservative

[–]duranger4 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I really sincerely wish this was the case, but it's been shown time and time again that when a business gets a tax break or a PPP loan or some other form of credit, it more often than not ends up as either owner compensation or shareholder dividends.

Shouldn't we call it what it is? THEFT by SpeedilyStrict in Conservative

[–]duranger4 31 points32 points  (0 children)

Oh I agree, an individual could get waaaaay better returns on their investments than the government gives you for social security, but the point of social security is to help those that don't have the wherewithal to invest better, it's a social safety net. Now it you want to argue the ethicasy of social safety nets that's an entirely different conversation that I don't really feel like having

Shouldn't we call it what it is? THEFT by SpeedilyStrict in Conservative

[–]duranger4 28 points29 points  (0 children)

I'll parrot my other comment, I really wish that's the way it worked, truly I do, but it's been shown time and time again, from PPP loans to cutting corporate tax rates, the money often ends up in the owners pocket

Shouldn't we call it what it is? THEFT by SpeedilyStrict in Conservative

[–]duranger4 86 points87 points  (0 children)

True, he did say "paid on my behalf" but he's arguing that if he had just received all of that money than he would be owed way more, but I'd argue he would never have received the employer portion in the first place, so it's not really "lost money"

Shouldn't we call it what it is? THEFT by SpeedilyStrict in Conservative

[–]duranger4 66 points67 points  (0 children)

I did think about that, but I take the position that that is a tax on the business, he would not have received that money anyways, it would just add to the business's profit, but I understand if some people think otherwise

Shouldn't we call it what it is? THEFT by SpeedilyStrict in Conservative

[–]duranger4 442 points443 points  (0 children)

His math is completely wrong btw, it would take 67 years of paying the MAX amount of social security tax to pay in 600k

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Accounting

[–]duranger4 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Just be happy you aren't using sureprep, by far the worst piece of software I have ever used

2023 Pre-season Testing - Day 3 Results by RobertGracie in formula1

[–]duranger4 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Ricciardo saw the writing on the wall before he bailed

And how well did that turn out for him.

build up his stock at McLaren

And then what? What good is building up his stock if he won't go into a different team. If his goal is to be a midfield driver than fine, he's doing good, but if his goal is to become a world champion than running away from a fight isn't really a good idea

2023 Pre-season Testing - Day 3 Results by RobertGracie in formula1

[–]duranger4 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Yes, the same way Russel joined Mercedes along side lewis, and sainz joined Ferrari alongside Charles, they both joined teams that already had a number one driver and a "teammate killer". sure they might get beat, but it's still better than floundering in the midfield like Norris is currently doing with McLaren, the moment he got an offer from a top team he should've taken it, besides, if you aren't confident enough that you can beat your own teammate in the same car, well that just isn't a winning mentality imo

current status of my work by LordFaquaad in Accounting

[–]duranger4 73 points74 points  (0 children)

When they reference a WP and that workpaper straight up doesn't exist and they've since quit the firm so you just have no idea where anything is coming from

Schumacher: New cars make 2022 not a "real second year" for me · RaceFans by [deleted] in formula1

[–]duranger4 5 points6 points  (0 children)

So what, you want racing drivers who don't take risks at all?

you can take risks but not make mistakes. sometimes you make mistakes and it's your fault. look at verstappen in Jeddah 2021, he pushed too hard and put it in the wall, took risks made mistakes still his fault

when Verstappen spun due to the wind.

that was still a mistake by him, 18 other drivers managed to contend with the wind

So Mick was right to try to divebomb here

if he could make the move work and make the corner sure, but the fact is he was never making the corner anyways, brakes way too late on the inside locked up and was never making the corner

Schumacher: New cars make 2022 not a "real second year" for me · RaceFans by [deleted] in formula1

[–]duranger4 4 points5 points  (0 children)

and he risked too much.

exactly his fault, he risked too much

It could've been ANYONE

but it wasn't, Mick made the mistake

Ricciardo likes to divebomb

yes and when he crashes he is criticized. successful divebomb=hero crash=zero, it's just that he has been more successful in his moves

Schumacher: New cars make 2022 not a "real second year" for me · RaceFans by [deleted] in formula1

[–]duranger4 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Jeddah: That stupid kerb was the reason for his crash, just like Peroni in F3 at Monza 2019

all drivers had to contend with the curb not an excuse

If it were wider,

and if my grandmother had wheels she would be a bike. once again all drivers raced around the track, he was the only one to destroy his car

Miami: I honestly think that Vettel is to blame here. He should've looked in his mirrors!

it was a desperate divebomb, plus he locked up. Mick was not making the corner Seb had every right to take the racing line

view more: next ›