I expect this is the case for a lot of Americans, due to the combination:
- relatively low essential expenses (food and fuel) - high incomes (compared to other countries) - large population (lots of complainers!)
When people realize that a large slice of their gross income is an expenditure over which they have no direct control, yeah, they're going to complain about it, regardless of how much tax someone on the other side of the planet is paying.
This is kinda how the AMT works; recalculating tax without some deductions, requiring the taxpayer to pay the higher of the two.
But a lot of rich people paying low or no tax on an annual do so via recording a business loss. If a business makes a profit in 2 out of 3 years, tax is paid in those two years, but the loss for the one year is subtracted from income. That's only fair.... what you're suggesting would only allow for 0 profit in the unprofitable year. That would have a negative impact on a lot of businesses, like startups, who are currently able to make use of their carry-forward losses in their early years of profitability.
The problem is that builders want to make profits, the higher, the better. The highest profits are in buying the cheap rental buildings, ripping them down and building luxury homes that sell at a premium. They make their profit quick and can reinvest in buying up more cheap rental buildings and replacing them with more luxury housing.
This works when the market supports a premium. Think of 2009 Miami... whole lotta luxury places for sale with low demand. Renting out a luxury apartment at budget prices ain't so hot for the landlord.
"Just build more inventory" Really? WHERE?... And the out East building is already so far in swing you have people doing 2-3 hour commutes already to get to work.
- Build vertically (taller buildings) - Replace low-density buildings with high-density buildings (a la Hong Kong) - Build high-speed transit to shorten commutes of the people living out east
I see this more as competition for plant-based meat alternatives, such as the already-existing Impossible Burger. Both are new technology, and assuming both taste good, I think it will come down to price. At least for ground meat, I assuming lab growing a hunk of meat and then grinding it up will not be price competitive.
My usage of it was exclusively in airports. Especially when traveling internationally, Skype Wifi was highly convenient for getting a new minutes of network access. No need to register with Boingo, Bongo, Dingo or whatever the hell operator the airport authority sold their wifi operation to. No need to sign up for "unlimited 7-day access" when I was only going to be in the country for an hour.
Gross margin doesn't include R&D expense. Operating margin is substantially lower (and lower than Apple's). I assume the difference is due to Intel being more vertically-integrated; their gross margin is higher than Apple's since Intel does their own manufacturing. But Intel spends a far higher amount on R&D (both as a percentage and absolute terms), so operating margin is lower.
We are heading in that direction. Early 20th century economists predicted that due technological advancement, we'd all be working 15-hour weeks now. But that didn't happen.... partly because stuff was invented along the way that workers want, and they need money to get. Consumerism really took off post WWII.
But if you just consider basics (food, clothing, shelter), things have gotten a lot cheaper. Clothes are basically free now (not necessarily the ones you want). Considering the huge amount of food waste in the system, that's cheap or free too; lack of $0 distribution is a problem. And there are a lot of cheap places to live too, especially if you live at a higher-density like they did 100 years ago. And if everyone doesn't need to end up in NYC/SF for work. So we might in fact be able to have a very leisurely existence, if it wasn't for the consumerism and lifestyle inflation that's occurred for the last century.
Not that everyone will want a life like that. People will always want more than just the basics.
The total destruction of any type of governmental safety net.
Hrm, "total destruction" is a lot less comprehensive than it used to be.
Medicare - still around (expanded in fact, due to Bush's Part D) SS OASI - still around SS DI - still around UI - still around SNAP - still around EIC - still around
Generous with compensation != generous with hiring
It's true, the average American worker doesn't get as much vacation time as a European worker. Still, half of American workers don't use all of their vacation days as it is. But pay is higher. Perhaps American workers just value cash compensation over other benefits.
On the hiring front (which is the topic IIRC), hiring climate is substantially better in the US. Hiring/firing is easier, and labor mobility is higher. The unemployment rate is more volatile, but also historically lower.
All those tech companies with their famously large cash hoards should have massive investor lawsuits over dividends -- but they don't. Why?
Because it's more tax-efficient and potentially higher return for companies to reinvest their profits into new development or acquisition. Google's purchase of (and further investment in) Android provided much better use of cash than if they had paid out a $50M dividend, which the recipient would then owe tax on. Instead the shares became more valuable due to the cash generating machine getting bigger.
When tech companies start paying out a dividend, it's a sign or surrender: "hey, we don't know how to invest this.... you can have it." See Cisco, Oracle, Apple, etc.
Well, let's think about this one...which one would you rather manufacture? - A high-margin computer, with high end components, requiring a lot of engineering effort to get right and keep supporting over an extended life cycle, or - An even higher-margin, throwaway, replaced every 2 years, locked down device, on which you get a 30% cut of every single thing a user installs on it -- requiring lots less engineering since user interactions are artificially limited
If there was such a choice to be made, surely the latter. But Apple is generating $60B in cash flow annually, with $60B already in the bank. They shouldn't need to make a choice. GM is a much smaller company, but somehow they're able to make cars AND trucks.
I dunno... it certainly seems that way, especially when you consider that Macs (or rather, OSX-running stuff) represent what, 10-20% of their revenue nowadays, when compared to iPads and etc? ... I think it's part and parcel of Apple's response to usage patterns among the general public (not the geeks, but the general public), which makes more sense to them, at least financially.
10% of Apple's revenue is still 20 billion dollars. Not exactly a niche market (or maybe it's a really, really big niche).
If you divest, you are not a stockholder. You have no say in how the companies invest or spend their money. Much wiser to invest and help to steer the company by participating.
Divesting (and refusing to invest) affects demand. Dumping and refusing to buy oil stocks makes future share offerings less lucrative, and therefore increases the cost of doing business. Dumping and refusing to buy bonds of oil companies makes their cost of doing business increase (via paying a higher interest rate).
Will it work? Eh. It's kind of like a boycott, it depends on the participants and the duration.
Sure you can retire at 55 years old without a mega-buck, but the risks that you will either end up broke in a medicaid nursing home or die early due to lack of ability to afford medical treatment goes up dramatically.
And from the other side of it, the longer you wait to retire, the increasing chance that you'll get dead before you hit traditional retirement age.
Best to consult family medical history and actuarial tables first. It'd be a shame to waste good (younger) years of your life toiling away for money that you won't be able or won't care to spend in your later (less-fun) years.
Promoters and venue owners are professionals at selling tickets. Incompetence is not the cause for under-priced tickets. They intentionally set the ticket price below the market-clearing price to: 1) gain free promotion with shows that sell-out in minutes and 2) add an additional performances in the same city.
While it's possible that the initial demand was underestimated, promoters and venue owners largely know what they're doing.
Slashdot Mirror
Taken collectively, my largest expense is tax.
I expect this is the case for a lot of Americans, due to the combination:
- relatively low essential expenses (food and fuel)
- high incomes (compared to other countries)
- large population (lots of complainers!)
When people realize that a large slice of their gross income is an expenditure over which they have no direct control, yeah, they're going to complain about it, regardless of how much tax someone on the other side of the planet is paying.
We have no public health care
Medicare, Medicaid, VA, CHIP....
This is kinda how the AMT works; recalculating tax without some deductions, requiring the taxpayer to pay the higher of the two.
But a lot of rich people paying low or no tax on an annual do so via recording a business loss. If a business makes a profit in 2 out of 3 years, tax is paid in those two years, but the loss for the one year is subtracted from income. That's only fair.... what you're suggesting would only allow for 0 profit in the unprofitable year. That would have a negative impact on a lot of businesses, like startups, who are currently able to make use of their carry-forward losses in their early years of profitability.
Once the market refuses to pay so much to live in The Big Apple, the prices will fall.
And they are
The problem is that builders want to make profits, the higher, the better. The highest profits are in buying the cheap rental buildings, ripping them down and building luxury homes that sell at a premium. They make their profit quick and can reinvest in buying up more cheap rental buildings and replacing them with more luxury housing.
This works when the market supports a premium. Think of 2009 Miami... whole lotta luxury places for sale with low demand. Renting out a luxury apartment at budget prices ain't so hot for the landlord.
"Just build more inventory" Really? WHERE? ... And the out East building is already so far in swing you have people doing 2-3 hour commutes already to get to work.
- Build vertically (taller buildings)
- Replace low-density buildings with high-density buildings (a la Hong Kong)
- Build high-speed transit to shorten commutes of the people living out east
Home computers were the future at some point too... but that didn't make an investment in Commodore a good idea.
Her mom said it.
I see this more as competition for plant-based meat alternatives, such as the already-existing Impossible Burger. Both are new technology, and assuming both taste good, I think it will come down to price. At least for ground meat, I assuming lab growing a hunk of meat and then grinding it up will not be price competitive.
Yeah diesel is pretty bad. Yet the life expectancy in the USA is lower than in the EU. So I guess it didn't turn out to be that bad.
Having high fuel taxes in the EU helps put a damper on fuel use.
A decent comparison can't really be done without adjusting for fuel consumption, population density, and other factors.
My usage of it was exclusively in airports. Especially when traveling internationally, Skype Wifi was highly convenient for getting a new minutes of network access. No need to register with Boingo, Bongo, Dingo or whatever the hell operator the airport authority sold their wifi operation to. No need to sign up for "unlimited 7-day access" when I was only going to be in the country for an hour.
... and another 8% in sales taxes.
Not really fair to take that off the top, since sales tax won't impact grocery spending, utility spending, or savings.
Now you are easily down to 46K and you have not eaten or clothed yourself yet.
You can probably save enough to get 15K in savings.
$80/day for food? Seriously, how many foie gras McMuffin breakfasts can one person eat?
Gross margin doesn't include R&D expense. Operating margin is substantially lower (and lower than Apple's). I assume the difference is due to Intel being more vertically-integrated; their gross margin is higher than Apple's since Intel does their own manufacturing. But Intel spends a far higher amount on R&D (both as a percentage and absolute terms), so operating margin is lower.
Also, now they are charging me $10/mo rental for a modem that was free (not free rental, free I get to keep it)
That's odd. When Spectrum took over in my area, they actually canceled the monthly modem fee that TWC had been assessing.
We are heading in that direction. Early 20th century economists predicted that due technological advancement, we'd all be working 15-hour weeks now. But that didn't happen.... partly because stuff was invented along the way that workers want, and they need money to get. Consumerism really took off post WWII.
But if you just consider basics (food, clothing, shelter), things have gotten a lot cheaper. Clothes are basically free now (not necessarily the ones you want). Considering the huge amount of food waste in the system, that's cheap or free too; lack of $0 distribution is a problem. And there are a lot of cheap places to live too, especially if you live at a higher-density like they did 100 years ago. And if everyone doesn't need to end up in NYC/SF for work. So we might in fact be able to have a very leisurely existence, if it wasn't for the consumerism and lifestyle inflation that's occurred for the last century.
Not that everyone will want a life like that. People will always want more than just the basics.
The total destruction of any type of governmental safety net.
Hrm, "total destruction" is a lot less comprehensive than it used to be.
Medicare - still around (expanded in fact, due to Bush's Part D)
SS OASI - still around
SS DI - still around
UI - still around
SNAP - still around
EIC - still around
Generous with compensation != generous with hiring
It's true, the average American worker doesn't get as much vacation time as a European worker. Still, half of American workers don't use all of their vacation days as it is. But pay is higher. Perhaps American workers just value cash compensation over other benefits.
On the hiring front (which is the topic IIRC), hiring climate is substantially better in the US. Hiring/firing is easier, and labor mobility is higher. The unemployment rate is more volatile, but also historically lower.
There are no possible jokes that can be made about the Holocaust.
Heard of Gilbert Gottfried?
"Yahoo" is still an powerful brand name that's decades old.
Yes... and that's part of the reason why Verizon is buying it.
The remaining company (current Yahoo ex-web properties) needs a new name since Verizon is getting "Yahoo".
All those tech companies with their famously large cash hoards should have massive investor lawsuits over dividends -- but they don't. Why?
Because it's more tax-efficient and potentially higher return for companies to reinvest their profits into new development or acquisition. Google's purchase of (and further investment in) Android provided much better use of cash than if they had paid out a $50M dividend, which the recipient would then owe tax on. Instead the shares became more valuable due to the cash generating machine getting bigger.
When tech companies start paying out a dividend, it's a sign or surrender: "hey, we don't know how to invest this.... you can have it." See Cisco, Oracle, Apple, etc.
Well, let's think about this one...which one would you rather manufacture?
- A high-margin computer, with high end components, requiring a lot of engineering effort to get right and keep supporting over an extended life cycle, or
- An even higher-margin, throwaway, replaced every 2 years, locked down device, on which you get a 30% cut of every single thing a user installs on it -- requiring lots less engineering since user interactions are artificially limited
If there was such a choice to be made, surely the latter. But Apple is generating $60B in cash flow annually, with $60B already in the bank. They shouldn't need to make a choice. GM is a much smaller company, but somehow they're able to make cars AND trucks.
I dunno... it certainly seems that way, especially when you consider that Macs (or rather, OSX-running stuff) represent what, 10-20% of their revenue nowadays, when compared to iPads and etc?
...
I think it's part and parcel of Apple's response to usage patterns among the general public (not the geeks, but the general public), which makes more sense to them, at least financially.
10% of Apple's revenue is still 20 billion dollars. Not exactly a niche market (or maybe it's a really, really big niche).
If you divest, you are not a stockholder. You have no say in how the companies invest or spend their money. Much wiser to invest and help to steer the company by participating.
Divesting (and refusing to invest) affects demand. Dumping and refusing to buy oil stocks makes future share offerings less lucrative, and therefore increases the cost of doing business. Dumping and refusing to buy bonds of oil companies makes their cost of doing business increase (via paying a higher interest rate).
Will it work? Eh. It's kind of like a boycott, it depends on the participants and the duration.
Sure you can retire at 55 years old without a mega-buck, but the risks that you will either end up broke in a medicaid nursing home or die early due to lack of ability to afford medical treatment goes up dramatically.
And from the other side of it, the longer you wait to retire, the increasing chance that you'll get dead before you hit traditional retirement age.
Best to consult family medical history and actuarial tables first. It'd be a shame to waste good (younger) years of your life toiling away for money that you won't be able or won't care to spend in your later (less-fun) years.
Promoters and venue owners are professionals at selling tickets. Incompetence is not the cause for under-priced tickets. They intentionally set the ticket price below the market-clearing price to: 1) gain free promotion with shows that sell-out in minutes and 2) add an additional performances in the same city.
While it's possible that the initial demand was underestimated, promoters and venue owners largely know what they're doing.