With the Flat Tax, the loopholes are gone. Subtract your personal and dependent deductions from your gross income and pay 17% of what's left, no matter how sharp your accountants are.
Thats not what your website's flat tax does.
Armey/Shelby's HR1040 was introduced in the last (107th) Congress; they don't seem to have gotten around to reintroducing it this year.
The CRS summary from Thomas says
Redefines "taxable income" to mean the amount by which wages, retirement distributions, and unemployment compensation exceed the standard deduction. Increases the basic standard deduction and includes an additional standard deduction for dependents.
So no, you won't need a sharp accountant to shield your dividends, capital gains, rental income, farm income, gambling winnings, stock option income, and imputed income from perks like the company jet. The bill says the only thing we're going to tax are wages, pensions, and unemployement benefits...
The thing that makes taxes complicated is not the graduated rates, it's figuring out how much taxable income you have in the first place.
The flat tax schemes might make that a tad easier for the "average" taxpayer, but their main purpose is to make it a whole lot easier for the above average taxpayer by making much of their income exempt from taxation.
Fair or simple - you only get (at most) one when it comes to tax laws
Suppose I live close enough to the CO to get DSL in the first place. Could I rent a bare copper line (the "alarm" scheme) to the CO and have them tie that into my preferred ISP's DSLAM?
Re:Circling the wagons won't work.
on
Giant Sucking Noise
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
My job is to insure that I can provide more value than the competition
It's hard to provide more value than the competition when the competition is getting $10K/year rather than $50K. *Nobody* is better than 5 FTE...
If there is any possible way for application software to be able to determine with certainty, that an actual hardware TCPA chip is present instead of software emulation, then I smell a rat.
That's what the "endorsement key" the white paper talks about is for.
It is possible (although not currently done on shipping systems due to lack of demand) to install a specific public/private keypair on the chip during manufacture. To prove you're talking to a real TCPA chip, you generate a random nonce and tell the chip to sign it with the private key. Then you verify the signature with the public key. Since the software emulator writer doesn't know the private key installed during manufacture, the software emulator can't do this.
Of course, since the TCPA chip isn't particularly hardened against physical attack the software emulator writer could take one apart and find out the private key. And since the evil DRM client who's asking the question is running on your machine, you can hack the binary so that it doesn't even ask in the first place. (If the OS is checking the hash of the evil DRM client, this won't work...)
Re:Oh, the fees you'll pay!
on
Add-Ons Add Up
·
· Score: 1
Any employer who didn't pass this money along would have a hard time explaining to the employees why he isn't giving them a raise now that the taxes have gone away. Not all the employees are so stupid as you, many of them actually understand economics and know that money's coming to them.
I was referring in particular to the unemployment tax, not FICA, but in any event given the current job market I think there would be much less pressure on employers to pass on the full amount.
Ah, I see- you guys think that the EMPLOYER is the one that pays that money, not you- because it doesn't show up on your paycheck! You're that stupid! It makes sense now-- since you think the EMPLOYER pays the moeny, that they won't have any reason to pass it on to you! So funny! Man, whew. People on slashdot who never went to college at all, huh? Well, that's not how economics work, especially in a market economy.
Went to college. Ivy League. Manga cum laude. Tested out of having to take econ. How 'bout you?
When the feds get a boost, they never pass it on, you're used to that. But emplyoers have to or they loose employees.
Not in this job market, unless, of course, they're looking to cut staff, which is quite popular now...
I actually explained this in the paragraph you quoted, but apparently you didn't read it.
I read it again, and still don't see where you explain it.
Go read some milton friedman or david friedman and see how the world really works.
Live in the real world a bit longer, sonny, and see how the world really works, in spite of the nice academic theories say it should...
Re:Oh, the fees you'll pay!
on
Add-Ons Add Up
·
· Score: 1
(And if you think its not your own money, the employer pays for it, you might be a liberal. This is an absurd distinction- every employer counts all these taxes in the total cost of employing you and so you must be worth more than that to the employer for them to hire you-- that is you have to earn all the money, plus their profit, to make it worth while to hire you. If they didn't have to pay so many fees, you would get more cash, because you'd still earn the same amount of profit for them that you do now.)
If you think that, you might be a dumbshit.
If they didn't have to pay the state that money, they'd damn sure do their level best to keep it all for themselves...
They're based on moving the membrane every time a pixel changes color. Wonder how many times you can do that before the membrane develops stress fractures.
Wonder if fractures would cause a failure, too.
I guess as long as it's at least as long as the expected useful life of an LCD backlight it's still a win.
How can it be possible that an organization whose sole purpose is to make money by supplying consumers with what they want no longer be paying attention to what the consumers want? It baffles me...
Look up the word "monopoly" in your nearest dictionary...
[A negative for working for the government] - Lots of management. As a result, there were reorganizations every 6 months or so. Also new ideas of management, so there was often times more time spent in meetings than actually working (sigh).
Sounds just like the (large) private sector outfit I work for...
Don't upgrade == don't buy a new machine
on
Chained Melodies
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Joe Average out there upgrades his Windows anytime he upgrades his PC, and isn't likely to put in the effort to reload his 2-generations-out-of-date copy of Windows (that doesn't support some of the spiffy new hardware he just bought)...
Representatives, particularly those that are not members of the Congressional leadership (which is most of them, including Boucher), have very little clout.
A single Senator can block a bill (unless 60 other Senators force a vote).
...inasmuch as one of the main deterrents IMHO to more widespread use of smartcards for digital cash and suchlike is the ease with which anything on the card can be cracked. Having power onboard a smartcard would allow it to be much more resistant to physical attack than it is at present (e.g. it could detect intrusion and wipe any sensitive information).
It also makes it much simpler to ensure the integrity of the information on the card and so simplify the programming model. (At present, the card - and any code that it runs or that it interacts with - has to gracefully handle removal of power at any time. Doing that correctly is quite tricky...)
Slashdot Mirror
Thats not what your website's flat tax does.
Armey/Shelby's HR1040 was introduced in the last (107th) Congress; they don't seem to have gotten around to reintroducing it this year.
The CRS summary from Thomas says
Redefines "taxable income" to mean the amount by which wages, retirement distributions, and unemployment compensation exceed the standard deduction. Increases the basic standard deduction and includes an additional standard deduction for dependents.
So no, you won't need a sharp accountant to shield your dividends, capital gains, rental income, farm income, gambling winnings, stock option income, and imputed income from perks like the company jet. The bill says the only thing we're going to tax are wages, pensions, and unemployement benefits...
You again.
The thing that makes taxes complicated is not the graduated rates, it's figuring out how much taxable income you have in the first place.
The flat tax schemes might make that a tad easier for the "average" taxpayer, but their main purpose is to make it a whole lot easier for the above average taxpayer by making much of their income exempt from taxation.
Fair or simple - you only get (at most) one when it comes to tax laws
I am not one to take sides with the spammers, but I have one question? How is e-mail different then snail mail?
The sender pays all costs associated with transmitting and delivering junk mail.
Spammers don't.
Suppose I live close enough to the CO to get DSL in the first place. Could I rent a bare copper line (the "alarm" scheme) to the CO and have them tie that into my preferred ISP's DSLAM?
My job is to insure that I can provide more value than the competition
It's hard to provide more value than the competition when the competition is getting $10K/year rather than $50K. *Nobody* is better than 5 FTE...
When you retire you can sell the land and if you're over 59 you can skip paying the taxes (this is a one-time benefit).
One that the IRS doesn't know about, apparently...
If there is any possible way for application software to be able to determine with certainty, that an actual hardware TCPA chip is present instead of software emulation, then I smell a rat.
That's what the "endorsement key" the white paper talks about is for.
It is possible (although not currently done on shipping systems due to lack of demand) to install a specific public/private keypair on the chip during manufacture. To prove you're talking to a real TCPA chip, you generate a random nonce and tell the chip to sign it with the private key. Then you verify the signature with the public key. Since the software emulator writer doesn't know the private key installed during manufacture, the software emulator can't do this.
Of course, since the TCPA chip isn't particularly hardened against physical attack the software emulator writer could take one apart and find out the private key. And since the evil DRM client who's asking the question is running on your machine, you can hack the binary so that it doesn't even ask in the first place. (If the OS is checking the hash of the evil DRM client, this won't work...)
Any employer who didn't pass this money along would have a hard time explaining to the employees why he isn't giving them a raise now that the taxes have gone away. Not all the employees are so stupid as you, many of them actually understand economics and know that money's coming to them.
I was referring in particular to the unemployment tax, not FICA, but in any event given the current job market I think there would be much less pressure on employers to pass on the full amount.
Ah, I see- you guys think that the EMPLOYER is the one that pays that money, not you- because it doesn't show up on your paycheck! You're that stupid! It makes sense now-- since you think the EMPLOYER pays the moeny, that they won't have any reason to pass it on to you! So funny! Man, whew. People on slashdot who never went to college at all, huh? Well, that's not how economics work, especially in a market economy.
Went to college. Ivy League. Manga cum laude. Tested out of having to take econ. How 'bout you?
When the feds get a boost, they never pass it on, you're used to that. But emplyoers have to or they loose employees.
Not in this job market, unless, of course, they're looking to cut staff, which is quite popular now...
I actually explained this in the paragraph you quoted, but apparently you didn't read it.
I read it again, and still don't see where you explain it.
Go read some milton friedman or david friedman and see how the world really works.
Live in the real world a bit longer, sonny, and see how the world really works, in spite of the nice academic theories say it should...
(And if you think its not your own money, the employer pays for it, you might be a liberal. This is an absurd distinction- every employer counts all these taxes in the total cost of employing you and so you must be worth more than that to the employer for them to hire you-- that is you have to earn all the money, plus their profit, to make it worth while to hire you. If they didn't have to pay so many fees, you would get more cash, because you'd still earn the same amount of profit for them that you do now.)
If you think that, you might be a dumbshit.
If they didn't have to pay the state that money, they'd damn sure do their level best to keep it all for themselves...
They're based on moving the membrane every time a pixel changes color. Wonder how many times you can do that before the membrane develops stress fractures.
Wonder if fractures would cause a failure, too.
I guess as long as it's at least as long as the expected useful life of an LCD backlight it's still a win.
In the long run, wouldn't it be cheaper just to hire a consulting firm to build you a cluster?
IBM does that, and they're not making the kind of money they'd like to at it recently. Neither is anybody else (e.g., EDS).
This appears to be IBM's bid to claim a larger share of a shrinking IT pie.
modern crypto, such as AES, DES, Serpent and others mentioned in Cryptogram are assymetric
AES and DES are symmetric. Serpent probably is too, inasmuch as it was an AES finalist.
that the market will take care of these freedom issues, and slaves just won't work for plantations that get a rep for...
Well, you get the idea. There are good reasons for the existince of fair practice standards in labor laws...
How can it be possible that an organization whose sole purpose is to make money by supplying consumers with what they want no longer be paying attention to what the consumers want? It baffles me...
Look up the word "monopoly" in your nearest dictionary...
You forgot the punctuation:
Fuck you - RIAA
He's a well known and highly competent researcher in the security area (especially smartcards).
He also has a penchant for self-promotion, so the "Marketing Science" suggestion is perhaps not too much of an insult...
since they never leave the card (at least if Iliev has written the program correctly...)
[A negative for working for the government] - Lots of management. As a result, there were reorganizations every 6 months or so. Also new ideas of management, so there was often times more time spent in meetings than actually working (sigh). Sounds just like the (large) private sector outfit I work for...
Most of the people who signed the Declaration of Independence died or were financially ruined during the War
So said Jeff Jacoby, Rush Limbaugh, et al.
Michael Kelley of the Memphis Commerical Register looked into this claim and found it exaggerated, at best.
Sorry, can't find a good link...
so you want to tell your Senators "vote no on S 2048". They'll understand...
for when you contact your Senators...
Joe Average out there upgrades his Windows anytime he upgrades his PC, and isn't likely to put in the effort to reload his 2-generations-out-of-date copy of Windows (that doesn't support some of the spiffy new hardware he just bought)...
Representatives, particularly those that are not members of the Congressional leadership (which is most of them, including Boucher), have very little clout.
A single Senator can block a bill (unless 60 other Senators force a vote).
A single Representative can't do very much...
after escaping from Orthanc?
I didn't think to ask this question (or realize the book doesn't address it) until I saw the movie...
...inasmuch as one of the main deterrents IMHO to more widespread use of smartcards for digital cash and suchlike is the ease with which anything on the card can be cracked. Having power onboard a smartcard would allow it to be much more resistant to physical attack than it is at present (e.g. it could detect intrusion and wipe any sensitive information).
It also makes it much simpler to ensure the integrity of the information on the card and so simplify the programming model. (At present, the card - and any code that it runs or that it interacts with - has to gracefully handle removal of power at any time. Doing that correctly is quite tricky...)