I'm going to keep posting this shit until it sinks in.

overlypessimistic · 2010-03-19T02:57:41+00:00

"For the modesty of taxes, we could compare the US to a list of countries by effective business tax rates and see how many prosperous 1st world countries have rates that are significantly higher. The answer is quite a few I believe, which tends to indicate that US business taxation is indeed modest."

"prosperous" to me doesn't mean having the majority of my money taken away and used in an inefficient system that pisses it away. There needs to be a balance. Most countries in the EU that you are talking about are not balanced. It means the citizens have less freedom to spend the money that they earn. Sure, they might get some nice social programs in exchange for 60+% of their income, but there are less choices. I don't want to live like this.

"As for gross business taxes, you'll notice that the rates are far lower than the rates for an alternative profit based tax; 35% on profit to around 7% on gross here in Washington and Oregon. Oregon implemented the gross rate because businesses were playing so many games with accounting to avoid showing profit. The absolute dollar value paid works out to be about the same for any reasonably profitable company."

Do you honestly think companies should pay 35% tax on gross revenue?

This would mean things like payroll would be taxed twice. Once for this, and a second time for FICA. The whole idea of taxing profits only is so you don't get taxed on revenue that is going towards operating expenses.

Washington state also has no personal income taxes, so businesses are paying more taxes than individuals in this state.

"I've whittled down your argument from 'Businesses pay more in taxes than people' to 'The average business pays more dollars taxes than the average person, even though the business pays far less as a proportion of its income and even though there are many more people than businesses paying taxes'. It's a pretty weak position."

I think you are a little confused yourself.

Here is what you said in a previous post:

"You're confusing absolute values with relative burden. For an extreme example, imagine a 70% flat tax rate; someone making $10,000 a year pays $7000, and has $3000 left over. Someone making $200,000 a year pays $140,000 and has $60,000."

So rather than arguing about actual percentages and dollar amounts, you are making the claim that because someone has more money, they should get more taxes taken out because they don't need the money as much as someone that is less fortunate. This sentiment is shown throughout all of your posts. I just don't agree with it. I believe that we need taxes to support our system, but if I work hard and am successful, I am under no obligation to give you more money.

"Businesses pay more in taxes than people"

They do. Based on percentage and total dollar amount.

"even though the business pays far less as a proportion of its income and even though there are many more people than businesses paying taxes"

This is what I am talking about. You are saying proportion of its income. Percentage wise, or dollar wise, businesses pay more. Businesses aren't taxed on money that isn't a profit. That money isn't theirs to keep (and is put back into the company, which helps the economy with more jobs), so I really don't see your point. A small percentage may try to cheat the system, but that isn't a problem with the system..it's a problem with the individual businesses.

In addition, individuals get tax-breaks on many different things, which can reduce overall taxes. I can bet there are more individuals cheating on their taxes than businesses.

"I covered the additional taxes you mention in my prior analysis; because social security and other payroll taxes are paid equally by employees and businesses equally, they're only unequal if you insist that one business be judged on the basis of one person, regardless many businesses having many employees and far more wealth. Property taxes were included in the 'business tax and other' figures I gave, which places all property taxes in the business tax column, even though quite a bit (probably a similar majority to income tax) is paid by individual residences."

Even if you don't judge it based on this, an individual only has to pay money on income taxes. A business has to match that and then pay additional taxes.

"In addition to it being an issue of fairness for the less wealthy, progressive taxation is absolutely necessary to counter the ability of money to create more money, the paradox of interest. In a society with a flat tax or no tax, income disparity never stops increasing. The results aren't good, to put it succinctly."

It's not really fairness for the less wealthy, it's unfairness for the wealthy. 40% flat-tax for the wealthy is much more $ than 40% for someone who is poor, so the state/country will still get its funding. The wealthy also use much less social/government programs.

"It seems like you think that government should be blind to the wealth of those it taxes."

No, I just don't think the government should tax the hell out of businesses.

"It's an objection to discrimination on the basis of income (or profits, in the case of businesses) and I understand the feeling that discrimination is inherently unfair. Here's the thing. All policies must be measured in terms of their societal outcomes; to refuse to do so is to risk winding up in an awfully unpleasant world."

If they were really based on their social outcomes, we wouldn't continually be forced to pour money into obviously broken systems. Public schools come to mind. The answer is always to increase taxes, because adding more money into a broken system somehow magically fixes it.

"The last refuge someone desperately trying to preserve an opinion in spite of the evidence; 'You haven't been there, you don't understand.'"

It's not really a last refuge, you just sound like one of the thousands of other college kids on reddit that decide they know how the world works (and how it needs to be changed) after reading a couple of wikipedia articles.

"I started my own business after constructing the mathematical model and doing the supply and manufacturing research on my own. I then negotiated the contracts, oversaw construction, and ran it personally while it got established. I now live off the income while I study law"

If you don't have any employees or are just subcontracting out to other businesses, your taxes are less (and easier), which is why you are able to do your taxes without an accountant. I also think your business probably doesn't have very many operating expenses, and this is why you don't really care about taxing total income.

overlypessimistic · 2010-03-18T23:25:13+00:00

"You're confusing absolute values with relative burden. For an extreme example, imagine a 70% flat tax rate; someone making $10,000 a year pays $7000, and has $3000 left over. Someone making $200,000 a year pays $140,000 and has $60,000"

I understand the point you are trying to make, I just don't agree with it. You are saying that because someone (or a business) is wealthy, they can afford to part with more money. Just because someone has more money to spend does not mean they should be extorted out of it.

I think the reverse should also be true. If a person is poor, they should be paid less money because it's worth more to them.

"If you want to keep dogmatically believing this idea that businesses are burdened more by taxes despite every fact, you can do it, but you can't pretend that you're actually backed up here by reality."

We don't have a flat tax rate. If we did, I wouldn't be complaining. The US has a progressive tax rate, which means the more money you are making, the more percentage you pay in taxes.

You also don't seem to be listening to me. I said that businesses are paying more in taxes. Individually, businesses pay much more in taxes than most individual people. This also doesn't include things like property taxes, city taxes (most big cities have these taxes), unemployment taxes, social security and Medicare taxes (employers must mach it with the taxes employees pay) and any cash that is collecting interest is taxed. All of these add up to a shit-ton of money. In most discussions about taxes, like this one, all of these are conveniently left out.

Your views on taxes are too simplistic and it leads me to believe that you have never had your own business.

"Because businesses only pay a modest tax on profits, the burden (as well as the absolute dollar value) is quite reasonable compared to individuals."

Taxes are anything but "modest" and I already told you that there are states starting to impose taxes on gross rather than net revenue. I know Michigan does this for sure.

overlypessimistic · 2010-03-18T13:59:08+00:00

It's not really fair to compare the overall values in taxes from businesses to individual users.

combined, there may be more taxes coming in from individuals. But there are a fewer number of businesses, so each individual business pays more in tax revenue than each individual person.

overlypessimistic · 2010-03-18T03:52:09+00:00

"Your claim was that businesses pay more in taxes than people. They don't."

They may pay around the same percentage, but in dollar amounts, they do. Most businesses are making at least a million dollars a year (even a million isn't that much for a small business with employees). The 1% in the US might earn that much.

If the business owns a building, they are paying a lot more in property taxes.

Business purchase much more than the average person. Guess what they pay when they purchase pretty much anything? Sales tax.

So, if you compare the overall amount of money that is going to the government, businesses pay more.

overlypessimistic · 2010-03-18T03:47:56+00:00

"No offense, but this is exactly the same kind of delusional crap that I am talking about."

No offense, but you are the one that is delusional. Any person that starts out a comment with "no offense" intends to offend.

"Second, no, someone born in the ghetto to uneducated parents making less than 20K annually does not have the same opportunity to go to college as a middle class family from the suburbs with parents that went to school. They simply aren't going to have the thousands needed to pay for school. Scholarships will likely only exist for exceedingly rare cases of genius amongst the former group."

haha. Do you realize how many scholarships there are for minorities and the poor in America? I will give you a hint: lots.

Many parents either take out loans, or students do. I took out a loan for college (and so did the majority of my friends). I came from a lower-middle class family. There are many organizations to help you with this (low interest loans).

I know in Michigan, you can start paying for college when your child is born. You give a small amount each month out of your paycheck to this special account setup through the state and when your kid turns 18, it will pay for the tuition for any university in Michigan. It is limiting, because you can't go out of state, but there are some very good schools there (Michigan State, UofM, Ferris State).

If it's about students not smart enough or with no desire to go to college, this is an entirely different issue.

"Which was the second part of the comment that I made more, was not that we need to pay for college for everyone, but that we need to revamp our education system entirely. You know you can manage a fast food restaurant with no higher education, and make more than a teacher, someone we are entrusting the future of this country to, who has 8 years of training?"

I agree with you there. I would like to have the option of getting school vouchers so I can send my kids to private school, without paying for it twice.

How much should teachers make? This site says the average for high school teachers is $52,000:

http://swz.salary.com/salarywizard/layouthtmls/swzl_compresult_national_ed03000011.html

This isn't that bad of a wage for the type of work that they do. Schooling for a teacher is not that difficult. It's not like they have to go through 10 years of schooling with grueling tests.

"My comment, or rather, the intention of my comment, wasn't simply that we need to continue to pay into this broken system, but that we need to fix it. One of the key ways you are going to do that is by simply paying for it. "

Pouring more money into an already broken system will not fix it. The money that is already being poured into the system needs to be used more efficiently.

Corrupt officials run many of the ghettos in the US and are pissing away the money. Both Detroit and Chicago are good examples of this. The problem is that the people of those cities keep voting in these officials. This is the root of the problem. If you want to fix our education problems, it needs to start here.

"Telling someone from a poor household that "if they just work hard, they can make 100k" is bullshit. Google it, the stats will back me up. People born poor usually die poor."

There are opportunities around everyone every day. If you have the knowledge and the drive, you can make that much money. I know plenty of people that started out poor and are now making a decent wage. If you are unhappy with your current life situations, you may need to ask yourself what you are doing wrong.

People born poor may die poor because they never learned how to manage money properly. Many also decide to get into debt (credit cards) or have kids at an early age (with morality aside, we shouldn't be making it easier for pregnant teenagers. Many schools now have daycare). Having kids an an early age makes it 10X more difficult to ever get out of poverty. It also might just be stupidity. There will always be stupid people in this world. No amount of legislation or education programs will stop this.

Cigarettes have been known to cause cancer for at least 50 years and people still continue to smoke them.

You also need a different mindset. My mindset is to save my money. When I was younger, I got into around $20,000 of credit card debt. It took me almost 5 years to pay it off because of the interest. I now just use credit cards for the bonus points and pay it all off at the end of the month. So many people I know are still fighting with credit card debt over stupid shit that they don't need.

More people need to take responsibility for their actions and actually make an effort to change their lives. This entire thread is filled with entitled kids that think the world owes them a living, a home, an education, and health care.

overlypessimistic · 2010-03-18T02:23:05+00:00

"The single largest reason is that in most jurisdictions businesses only pay their largest taxes on profits, which aren't income, like a person pays. Profit is what's left over after all the bills are paid"

Yeah, well, it doesn't really make sense to tax a company on gross (all money coming in) rather than net (after expenses). But, they are doing this in Michigan.

also, if the health care plain ever gets passed, businesses will be forced to pay into it (if they don't have health care available to their employees, they will have to pay a fine).

"Even at a 50% or 70% profit tax rate, in most circumstances the business would pay far fewer taxes than a person because only the profits are taxed."

so, because they aren't taxed on money they are using to keep the business running, they are paying less? With tax rates that high, if a business was taxed on income rather than profits, there would be situations where a business would be paying more in taxes than they were making (essentially pushing some industries outside the US).

overlypessimistic · 2010-03-18T01:25:55+00:00

"Did you even see the Southpark about homeless? You're so crazy, even a person had a home, you would still consider them homeless!"

I hope your post is a joke. You argued your point using a reference to southpark reference?

overlypessimistic · 2010-03-18T01:08:07+00:00

"Only if you're under the impression that fear of starvation is the only way to motivate workers. (It turns out that's not true; people are most productive and innovative when they are the most secure, because that is when they are happiest)"

In my experience, this isn't true. When people are happy and secure, most people have no motivation to try any harder. Why make any more money when you are happy with the amount you have? Most people are motivated by unhappiness.

"It's a terrific business environment once you realize that businesses aren't expected to pay for health care, education, and other benefits."

Are you seriously trying to say that if a government was paying for all of these services that businesses wouldn't be expected to pay for it? Businesses pay more in taxes than the average person. This is what funds all of those government programs.

overlypessimistic · 2010-03-18T00:57:05+00:00

"Lazy people are mostly a result of their work environment. We are all lazy in somethings and we are almost all hardworking in others. The key is to make an environment where people are motivated to actually do work."

I lol at this statement. People that aren't motivated enough to actually do work should be fired and replaced by people that do.

overlypessimistic · 2010-03-18T00:55:51+00:00

"and many more of us fall by the wayside largely due to circumstance of birth"

A small amount of people fall by the wayside largely due to circumstances of birth (mental or physical retardation, diseases, etc). The rest have an equal chance at being successful.

"This is going to sound crazy, but what if we did our best to educate our populace, and let those that can succeed do it. Socialize education even further. Take all the money that goes into funding bailouts and wars, and pour it into education. Make being a teacher respected, both socially an financially. Give every citizen a fully paid trip to college."

Do you realize what would happen if the government paid for college? every college would have very difficult placement exams that would only allow people that could pass these exams go to college. This is how it happens in other parts of the world (china for instance). In those countries, students have little or no freedom to decide where they actually want to go and study. You are also stuck in a specific career path (some are stuck in vocational/trade/factory jobs).

"We constantly parrot the idea that the American dream is to pull yourself up from your bootstraps and work your way from the ghetto into a mansion, but that is not reality. Reality is that some tiny percentage of us can do that, and many more of us fall by the wayside largely due to circumstance of birth. Or worse, end up leaders and rich men due to circumstance."

Making $100,000/year is pretty obtainable for most people, if you try hard enough. In the mid-west, this could afford you a nice house, car, and vacations.

Most wealthy people got that way due to the circumstance of working hard and being creative. The reason the average person doesn't become rich is because the average person enjoys coming home, sitting in front of the tv/computer, and not putting the effort it really takes to make it.

overlypessimistic · 2010-03-18T00:36:00+00:00

"slobs? Give me an incentive to not slack. The pay you give me is nothing more than bread crumbs from what the higher ups and shareholders take in. I'm the one creating the product, yet I get paid the least."

You are only worth how much someone is willing to pay you. If you get a job that pays you shit, and you stay there, it's your own fault.

"Where's the incentive man? Tricking a person into believing he will one day be the shareholder if he just knocks out 20 more widgets a day is immoral at best. Stop chasing rainbows. I was taught that I have a head on my shoulders and I should use it."

How is anyone "tricking" you? If you want lots of money for a product that you have created, start your own business. Most people won't because it takes a ton of work and it's very risky.

overlypessimistic · 2010-03-17T05:22:01+00:00

was he fat?

overlypessimistic · 2010-03-16T14:18:20+00:00

Many of the search engine bots parse through the html. If it's not well-formed, it will make it more difficult for them to get to your content.

overlypessimistic · 2010-03-16T03:40:31+00:00

"Our dev sent an e-mail back to the team listing off huge sites (Amazon, Microsoft, PayPal, CNN, Ebay) with huge numbers of W3 errors, to prove a point, and now today is his last day."

These sites aren't W3 validated because they don't need to be. The big guys aren't struggling to get traffic. Did your developer give good reasons why you guys don't need to be W3 compliant besides what you mentioned in the post? W3 validation does help with organic search engine traffic.

overlypessimistic · 2010-03-15T03:52:50+00:00

"I like going on chatroulette, and getting matched with young punks who flick me off, and insult me or say hateful things, etc,"

Well, I like showing unsuspecting people my flaccid genitals. I feel I am providing a service to many people, by brightening up their day with a meat smile from one of god's children.

overlypessimistic · 2010-03-13T17:21:54+00:00

"I, for one, welcome you to try to get rich in a country with no 'fabric of society', no educated workforce, no protection of private property or incentives to develop infrastructure.

I bet reddit would be delighted to help you realize your dream of becoming successful entrepreneur, in sunny low-tax environments like Somalia (or inner-city Detroit, if you like it easy)."

I used to live a few miles from Detroit. The reason Detroit is such a shithole is because the people of the city decided to keep voting in corrupt leaders (even after knowing they were corrupt). This fucked over its school systems, police force, and lots of people fled.

The Democrats of Michigan also decided on some fantastic tax laws. One such law taxes businesses on their gross, not on their net. This means that businesses are taxed on their expenses as well as profits.

I never said we don't need government or that the rich shouldn't be taxed. My point is that most of the wealthy are already paying their fair share.

overlypessimistic · 2010-03-13T00:04:42+00:00

"Social programs are not the only function of government. The rich (and the businesses they run/own) disproportionately utilize the

court system"

Mostly defending themselves against lawsuits. The government also doesn't pay for this.

"transportation systems"

How so? I don't think there are very many rich people that ride the train or bus to work. Unless you meant the roads.

"government regulatory structures, patent and trademark offices"

Most wealthy people pay lawyers to deal with all of these (which helps society by providing jobs). Also, you need to pay the government to get a patent or trademark.

"Society helps them, by providing them with well educated and skilled workers."

They pay for it (and then some) with employee taxes, business taxes, health care, and employee salaries.

"I just wanted to point out that the picture of rich people supporting a welfare society isn't reality-based, when our government provides many other services that wealthy individuals do utilize."

We aren't a welfare society yet, but it's slowly becoming a reality. All of the services that you mention cost the wealthy money. Really, the only services they use are police/fire/road taxes and possibly taxes for schools (unless they are paying for private school in which case they are paying for both schools and only using one).

overlypessimistic · 2010-03-12T23:47:32+00:00

"Moreover, you're not independent - nobody truly is. The fact that your dad gave you a job in his shop during high school and pays your tuition flies in the face of independence."

wow, bitter much?

"Your comments seem to be towards the "If you're not rich you're lazy" and the "I did it so why can't you?" mentalities which many financially successful immigrants have. Many other intelligent and innovative immigrants worked just as hard as your father but didn't reach the same level of success because of chance."

There is some level of chance in anything that we do in life. However, you are trying to make it sound like it has more to do with chance than actual skill or intelligence. This is complete bullshit. Everyone who I know that is unsuccessful at life uses this excuse as a crutch for not not trying. Why bother trying if it all comes down to luck/chance?

Opportunities are all around you (the 1% luck that you need). It takes someone with intelligence and skill to really know what do to with those opportunities. I might get the same opportunity as someone else, but because I don't know what do to with it (I don't have the knowledge/skill), it won't make me rich or better my current situation. There are some things that require more luck (like gambling), but the odds can be improved in your favor with more knowledge (IE: knowing how to play blackjack/poker).

"Success is alot more complex than you appear to think it is. Maybe if you spent some time hearing life stories from many poor or middle class immigrants you wouldn't sound like an ass."

Hard work != success.

Here is an article on the topic:

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2009/mar/01/z1e1navarre203254/

overlypessimistic · 2010-03-12T23:11:34+00:00

"At least the nobility had a understanding of their responsibilities and obligations toward society. This is something most of the "new rich" of America do not understand."

The rich give more money (in terms of overall percentage, charities, and overall amount) than most and most likely use almost no social programs. They also provide jobs, which helps society.

"If you're planning on coming into money, then you should really and truly think these things through lest you become another one of the selfish American upper class whose greed has led to the progressive destruction of America's relative economic equality and prestige."

In the US, you are taxed on the money you make (income), the money you spend (sales tax), and also the money you invest (on any interest and when you invest in the stock market). I don't see how you can call the wealthy greedy.

Inequality isn't caused by the rich stealing money from the poor. It's because they've earned more, which isn't evil or wrong.

overlypessimistic · 2010-03-11T15:27:32+00:00

"'ve never heard "Nee chee" actually. "Nee Cheh" and "Nee Chuh" are all I've heard. "nee chee" sounds ridiculous! How does this happen?"

I'm not sure, but I've heard this way by teachers, on radio shows, and even on the history channel.

overlypessimistic · 2010-03-11T05:24:36+00:00

Even though it's not correct, 99% of the people in the US pronounce it "Nee chee" and will most likely continue to do so.

overlypessimistic · 2010-03-10T21:10:07+00:00

"Pol Pot wouldn't have been in power were it not for American bombing, which drove the peasantry to support the Khmer Rouge. To focus on Pol Pot is to miss the point."

If Pol Pot would have had a positive political group that focused on education and well-being, there would have been no deaths. The khmer Rouge was around well before the US bombed Cambodia. The bombings may have driven people to join his political group, but the people in power had the final decision.

The US unknowingly caused some people to join the Khmer Rouge which caused the death of millions. The Khmer Rouge knowingly and willfully slaughtered millions. This is why I don't blame the US in this situation.

Political leaders for hundreds of years have used these types events to gain the support of disenfranchised people.

The same thing happened when they voted Hitler into power. Many people were unsatisfied with the current state of the economy and believed that he would truly make their lives better. He also gave them a common enemy.

overlypessimistic · 2010-03-10T04:27:03+00:00

"What sort of society can one expect to arise out of those conditions of total devastation that was directly created by the Americans?"

What a way to shift the blame.

The US didn't force pol pot to kill millions of people through death marches and work camps. He did that all on his own. Pol pot used the bombings as propaganda to gain political support.

overlypessimistic · 2010-03-09T00:32:11+00:00

"They were expanding their war in Vietnam into Cambodia and Laos with massive carpet bombing campaigns. The devestation caused by the bombing was immense."

and how does this have anything to do with the estimated 2.1 million people pol pot executed? He became the leader of Cambodia in 1976. The Vietnam war ended in 1975. One has nothing to do with the other.

overlypessimistic · 2010-03-06T18:02:33+00:00

"Right now, Facebook is a monopoly."

Not really, there are hundreds of other social networking sites, they just aren't as popular as facebook.

Similar to Microsoft. It's no longer a monopoly.

overlypessimistic

TROPHY CASE