Your personal investment portfolio would become this nightmare accounting demon.
This is not true - my accounting would become easier since all of my dividend income would become simple income. Currently it is treated differently, depending on how long I hold the stock. Same thing with capital gains - I'm already reporting those and my proposal simply changes the tax treatment.
That's money that wouldn't be subject to taxation under your rules.
It's not subject to taxation today, either. They play games and keep it overseas.
But that's in the weeds stuff. I'd obviously adjust tax rates and brackets so that there was no net loss of revenue to the government.
Describe the loopholes.
Corporate tax rate in the US was 34% or higher last year. Tax paid was around 24%. The delta is what I'm calling loopholes. We can call them "tax breaks" or "corporate welfare" or "incentives"... whatever language you are comfortable with. In 2018 the new tax rate will be a flat 21%... I'm very interested to see what the actual tax paid will be at this new rate. If it is close to 21%, then my proposal probably isn't necessary. I expect it will be more like 11-15% because corporate-financed accounting and lobbying efforts will always win out.
I'd rather we abolished corporate taxes altogether and made all profits pass-through. Eliminate the capital gains and special dividend rates and call it a day. You'd have what you want because high-income owners would pay more. I'd have what I want because the whole ridiculous game of hiding money from the tax man would shift away from corporations with almost unlimited resources to find loopholes in government rules. You'd still have billionaires playing that game, but without corporate tax law the available loopholes are significantly reduced.
From a physician's standpoint it was terrifying, too. The guidance went from "people shouldn't be in pain, go ahead and prescribe opiates" to "you'll lose your license or go to jail if you overprescribe", with no real firm definition of "overprescribe". Along with the dramatic increase in drug-seeking patients (versus patients seeking pain treatment), it chased my wife right out of the pain management field. It's been crazy.
It depends on the demographics, too. If one 20-year-old ODs on heroin, that's statistically going to hurt a lot more than a 45-year-old. And Canada has us beat by 3+ years in any event - and has since at least the 50s.
Regressive simply describes the shape of the plot when you chart tax rate against income. A flat tax is a straight line. A progressive tax trends upward. A regressive tax trends downward. Since the concern here is in bumping the employee to a higher tax bracket, it would actually be an example of a progressive tax.
Incentives cause unintended behaviors
Preaching to the choir.
Oh, and lets increase gas taxes by $.12 a gallon (also not regressive tax).
Well, you are applying income tax terminology to a sales tax. The sales tax in this case would be flat. But converting to percentages to make it look like an income tax, it would actually be regressive since poor people would pay a higher percentage of their income to the gas tax than rich people would. This is a common problem with sales taxes in general, which is why states tend to exempt necessities like unprepared food and basic clothing.
This is what the original Palm Pilots did. Eventually flash technology moved forward and they had to make awkward kludges to support it - but when it was RAM-only it made for a very responsive and easy to use device.
This isn't exactly an example of that. This is an example of an employer following the incentives put into place by the government.... they are doing exactly what the government incentivized them to do. Apparently the government values continuing education more than it values additional tax revenue, so that is what is happening.
Not only that, it attracts ambitious hard working people who view their unskilled Walmart position as a means to an end. That's going to be a big improvement over your current pool of employees who are there for the job itself.
When I asked these question, it was NOT in reference to the penalties applied in 2016, 2017, and early 2018. I am asking in reference to why did Trump REMOVE the sanction.
I agree that it becomes much easier to demonize Trump's actions when you ignore the history and only focus on one isolated incident.
From your own links: 2016: US forbids sale of US tech to ZTE without special exception. The ban was never enforced. 2017: US reaches settlement with ZTE for a $1.19 billion fine (though a later link of yours claims it was $900 million) 2018: US finds ZTE in breach of settlement, imposes total ban on sale of US technology. Company functionally shuts down. This week: New settlement reached, more restrictive than 2017 settlement. New $1.3 billion fine, total turnover of upper management and board.
So if you compare 2019 to 2016 or 2017, the penalties have become more severe.
That we did back in 2016. What we are complaining about is Trump backing down from the 2016 agreement and penalties.
That's a strange recollection of events. The company was not following the 2016 agreement - Trump didn't "back down" from it. The final result is more severe than the original settlement.
. Maybe your company is so dependent that it would go out of business,
You misunderstand my concern. It's not that ZTE is a big customer - it is that all of the other foreign customers will limit their US exposure to avoid the same fate.
But Trump in 2018 backed down.
You either misunderstand the events that transpired or you are being deceptive.
I don't think we're completely past capitalism yet, but I think corporatism has gone too far. I recognize that the corporation is one of those things that has let our industry grow to the point it has - but I also think we've let limited liability get in the way of the natural flow of responsibility. Perhaps more importantly, the idea of corporate personhood has spread from a convenient economic concept into the social and political sphere. This needs to be directly shut down with a constitutional amendment (or equivalent in whatever country you are in), and it needs to happen soon. I don't think we need dramatic change, but we certainly need to correct the course of the metaphorical ship.
What exactly was it that he wanted from ZTE and the Chinese?
To observe the Iranian sanctions.
How is it in the best interests of the USA to look the other way
What about bringing a huge international company to its knees and forcing a settlement with massive fines and firing of upper management seems like "looking the other way" to you?
All this had nothing whatsoever to with benefitting suppliers in the USA, and it is astonishing to think that anyone would believe that.
As someone who works at a company selling semiconductor equipment into the Chinese market, it's astonishing to me that anyone would believe otherwise.
but we're going to let China do that.
Exactly the opposite. We just demonstrated the capacity and will to hit a Chinese company very hard if they don't observe sanctions.
but I've had the lock installed since Christmas and I've only replaced the batteries once
So for comparison, I last changed the battery in November of 2016 - so your experience of two sets in about 6 months with Z Wave enabled roughly jibes with mine. This is our main door, and most of us use the keypad, so it's not like it's just a matter of disuse.
I agree that the uses you list are interesting - they just aren't very compelling. I've never had the occasion to let someone in to my home where I couldn't just give them one of the existing codes (like the one for the babysitter). Worst case I'll just wipe out that code after the fact. As for the lock after 5 minutes, the lock has a built-in timer that will automatically lock it after a set period of time - no ZWave necessary. I can see the value in knowing who unlocked the door, though there is the whole matter of people just using the keyhole:) In my case, I have an alarm so I have a nice log of who has come and gone and when without needing a smart lock on every door.
Agreed on security - my house is mostly "protected" by panes of glass. Hacking my ZWave network would be the idiotic way to break in.
And at the rate this guy is going he's on track to get reelected when the Dems run Hilary Bot 2.0 in 2020...
The establishment does seem to think they can power another regular candidate through. There are signs of hope that the Democrat electorate actually gets it, though. In PA, the lieutenant governor's race was won by John Fetterman, who unseated the incumbent for the first time ever. In Kentucky, they chose Amy McGrath for House rep rather than the establishment candidate Jim Gray.
I know all the cool kids won't invite you to their parties if you praise the idiot-in-chief for anything, but I fail to see the problem here. He played hardball and got what he wanted, and the outcome is in the best interests of the US. If you shut down the company completely, you risk putting other companies off of US suppliers in the long term. That may have been worth it if they hadn't capitulated - but they did capitulate.
My post was sarcasm. The people in Vegas would not have jobs at all if it weren't for past productivity improvements. I understand that the migration to cities was not necessarily a happy move for all involved, but in retrospect it has been great for our society. Similarly, when steel plants automated and went from 70,000 workers to 700, it was a miserable time to be a steelworker. But we're not talking about forcing steel plants to go back to the old, labor intensive process. When some kind of a kitchen machine can replace a guy in the prep area, this is an improvement - not something to fear. It's not like we are banning automatic dishwashers or laundry machines.
Middle-class standard of living has been stagnant for about 50 years now.
This is patently false. Real wages have been stagnant when adjusting naively for inflation. Pick a sector, almost any sector, and the product you get is vastly improved. Sure, cars are the same price that they were in 1968 - but they last 10 years or more instead of 3. Healthcare is so much improved since 1968 that I doubt it would be ethical to provide you with 1968 healthcare, even if you were willing to pass up all of the improvements. People want cancer treatment, MRIs, heart surgeries, surviving 23-week preemies, etc. That shit is expensive. Have there been losers? Sure. I wouldn't have wanted to be a steelworker when they automated that industry. I wouldn't want to be a coal miner now. But do I think that automating the steel industry was a good idea? Absolutely - and I would not go back to the old way, no matter how romantic it is to a portion of the population.
The other thing you need to consider is that not all of that wage stagnation is due to automation. A lot of it is misguided (for me, in retrospect) trade policy. We fucked with the free market when we made it easy for goods and capital to flow without considering labor. A free market needs free movement of all three. Since it is not realistic to expect labor to move around the world (hell, it can be hard to get people to leave their town), our trade policies need to take this into consideration. So we've let goods flow in from outside, we've let capital flow outside, but we have done nothing to account for the relatively immobile labor force. That's not a free market; it's just free trade.
The timer idea is nice, but doesn't really require z-wave. I have door sensors rigged to my alarm panel, but they are all hard-wired. I don't have the garage door sensor alert thing set up - that's a pretty good idea.
Clearly we need a law to prevent the use of productivity enhancing technology. I can't fathom a world where productivity leads to an improved standard of living for everyone. Imagine if farming were mechanized, making food less expensive so that people could pursue a career making things in cities. Then those same people could spend this newfound wealth and free time on vacation at a gambling resort in the middle of the desert, creating thousands of new jobs in the hospitality industry. Stupid, huh? Who the hell would want to go to the desert? We can dream.
Slashdot Mirror
Your personal investment portfolio would become this nightmare accounting demon.
This is not true - my accounting would become easier since all of my dividend income would become simple income. Currently it is treated differently, depending on how long I hold the stock. Same thing with capital gains - I'm already reporting those and my proposal simply changes the tax treatment.
That's money that wouldn't be subject to taxation under your rules.
It's not subject to taxation today, either. They play games and keep it overseas.
But that's in the weeds stuff. I'd obviously adjust tax rates and brackets so that there was no net loss of revenue to the government.
Describe the loopholes.
Corporate tax rate in the US was 34% or higher last year. Tax paid was around 24%. The delta is what I'm calling loopholes. We can call them "tax breaks" or "corporate welfare" or "incentives"... whatever language you are comfortable with. In 2018 the new tax rate will be a flat 21%... I'm very interested to see what the actual tax paid will be at this new rate. If it is close to 21%, then my proposal probably isn't necessary. I expect it will be more like 11-15% because corporate-financed accounting and lobbying efforts will always win out.
A progressive tax rate? We do it with people.
I'd rather we abolished corporate taxes altogether and made all profits pass-through. Eliminate the capital gains and special dividend rates and call it a day. You'd have what you want because high-income owners would pay more. I'd have what I want because the whole ridiculous game of hiding money from the tax man would shift away from corporations with almost unlimited resources to find loopholes in government rules. You'd still have billionaires playing that game, but without corporate tax law the available loopholes are significantly reduced.
From a physician's standpoint it was terrifying, too. The guidance went from "people shouldn't be in pain, go ahead and prescribe opiates" to "you'll lose your license or go to jail if you overprescribe", with no real firm definition of "overprescribe". Along with the dramatic increase in drug-seeking patients (versus patients seeking pain treatment), it chased my wife right out of the pain management field. It's been crazy.
It depends on the demographics, too. If one 20-year-old ODs on heroin, that's statistically going to hurt a lot more than a 45-year-old. And Canada has us beat by 3+ years in any event - and has since at least the 50s.
How is it not an example of regressive taxes?
Regressive simply describes the shape of the plot when you chart tax rate against income. A flat tax is a straight line. A progressive tax trends upward. A regressive tax trends downward. Since the concern here is in bumping the employee to a higher tax bracket, it would actually be an example of a progressive tax.
Incentives cause unintended behaviors
Preaching to the choir.
Oh, and lets increase gas taxes by $.12 a gallon (also not regressive tax).
Well, you are applying income tax terminology to a sales tax. The sales tax in this case would be flat. But converting to percentages to make it look like an income tax, it would actually be regressive since poor people would pay a higher percentage of their income to the gas tax than rich people would. This is a common problem with sales taxes in general, which is why states tend to exempt necessities like unprepared food and basic clothing.
The US figures are at least partially influenced by the opiate crisis.
Yeah, that low dynamic range pop music played through a pringles can speaker into your kitchen really suffers because of the _compression_.
And before that we lived with radio, LPs, and -shiver- tape. Your assumptions about people's need for quality seem erroneous.
This is what the original Palm Pilots did. Eventually flash technology moved forward and they had to make awkward kludges to support it - but when it was RAM-only it made for a very responsive and easy to use device.
This isn't exactly an example of that. This is an example of an employer following the incentives put into place by the government.... they are doing exactly what the government incentivized them to do. Apparently the government values continuing education more than it values additional tax revenue, so that is what is happening.
Not only that, it attracts ambitious hard working people who view their unskilled Walmart position as a means to an end. That's going to be a big improvement over your current pool of employees who are there for the job itself.
When I asked these question, it was NOT in reference to the penalties applied in 2016, 2017, and early 2018.
I am asking in reference to why did Trump REMOVE the sanction.
I agree that it becomes much easier to demonize Trump's actions when you ignore the history and only focus on one isolated incident.
From your own links:
2016: US forbids sale of US tech to ZTE without special exception. The ban was never enforced.
2017: US reaches settlement with ZTE for a $1.19 billion fine (though a later link of yours claims it was $900 million)
2018: US finds ZTE in breach of settlement, imposes total ban on sale of US technology. Company functionally shuts down.
This week: New settlement reached, more restrictive than 2017 settlement. New $1.3 billion fine, total turnover of upper management and board.
So if you compare 2019 to 2016 or 2017, the penalties have become more severe.
That we did back in 2016. What we are complaining about is Trump backing down from the 2016 agreement and penalties.
That's a strange recollection of events. The company was not following the 2016 agreement - Trump didn't "back down" from it. The final result is more severe than the original settlement.
. Maybe your company is so dependent that it would go out of business,
You misunderstand my concern. It's not that ZTE is a big customer - it is that all of the other foreign customers will limit their US exposure to avoid the same fate.
But Trump in 2018 backed down.
You either misunderstand the events that transpired or you are being deceptive.
I don't think we're completely past capitalism yet, but I think corporatism has gone too far. I recognize that the corporation is one of those things that has let our industry grow to the point it has - but I also think we've let limited liability get in the way of the natural flow of responsibility. Perhaps more importantly, the idea of corporate personhood has spread from a convenient economic concept into the social and political sphere. This needs to be directly shut down with a constitutional amendment (or equivalent in whatever country you are in), and it needs to happen soon. I don't think we need dramatic change, but we certainly need to correct the course of the metaphorical ship.
What exactly was it that he wanted from ZTE and the Chinese?
To observe the Iranian sanctions.
How is it in the best interests of the USA to look the other way
What about bringing a huge international company to its knees and forcing a settlement with massive fines and firing of upper management seems like "looking the other way" to you?
All this had nothing whatsoever to with benefitting suppliers in the USA, and it is astonishing to think that anyone would believe that.
As someone who works at a company selling semiconductor equipment into the Chinese market, it's astonishing to me that anyone would believe otherwise.
but we're going to let China do that.
Exactly the opposite. We just demonstrated the capacity and will to hit a Chinese company very hard if they don't observe sanctions.
but I've had the lock installed since Christmas and I've only replaced the batteries once
So for comparison, I last changed the battery in November of 2016 - so your experience of two sets in about 6 months with Z Wave enabled roughly jibes with mine. This is our main door, and most of us use the keypad, so it's not like it's just a matter of disuse.
I agree that the uses you list are interesting - they just aren't very compelling. I've never had the occasion to let someone in to my home where I couldn't just give them one of the existing codes (like the one for the babysitter). Worst case I'll just wipe out that code after the fact. As for the lock after 5 minutes, the lock has a built-in timer that will automatically lock it after a set period of time - no ZWave necessary. I can see the value in knowing who unlocked the door, though there is the whole matter of people just using the keyhole :) In my case, I have an alarm so I have a nice log of who has come and gone and when without needing a smart lock on every door.
Agreed on security - my house is mostly "protected" by panes of glass. Hacking my ZWave network would be the idiotic way to break in.
What is he getting out of it? Everything we wanted! Massive fines and a complete turnover in management.
And at the rate this guy is going he's on track to get reelected when the Dems run Hilary Bot 2.0 in 2020...
The establishment does seem to think they can power another regular candidate through. There are signs of hope that the Democrat electorate actually gets it, though. In PA, the lieutenant governor's race was won by John Fetterman, who unseated the incumbent for the first time ever. In Kentucky, they chose Amy McGrath for House rep rather than the establishment candidate Jim Gray.
I know all the cool kids won't invite you to their parties if you praise the idiot-in-chief for anything, but I fail to see the problem here. He played hardball and got what he wanted, and the outcome is in the best interests of the US. If you shut down the company completely, you risk putting other companies off of US suppliers in the long term. That may have been worth it if they hadn't capitulated - but they did capitulate.
My post was sarcasm. The people in Vegas would not have jobs at all if it weren't for past productivity improvements. I understand that the migration to cities was not necessarily a happy move for all involved, but in retrospect it has been great for our society. Similarly, when steel plants automated and went from 70,000 workers to 700, it was a miserable time to be a steelworker. But we're not talking about forcing steel plants to go back to the old, labor intensive process. When some kind of a kitchen machine can replace a guy in the prep area, this is an improvement - not something to fear. It's not like we are banning automatic dishwashers or laundry machines.
Yes, our trade policy has been far more damaging to many in the middle class than automation.
Income != standard of living. The goods have gotten better. Enjoy your 1968 healthcare and automobiles!
Middle-class standard of living has been stagnant for about 50 years now.
This is patently false. Real wages have been stagnant when adjusting naively for inflation. Pick a sector, almost any sector, and the product you get is vastly improved.
Sure, cars are the same price that they were in 1968 - but they last 10 years or more instead of 3. Healthcare is so much improved since 1968 that I doubt it would be ethical to provide you with 1968 healthcare, even if you were willing to pass up all of the improvements. People want cancer treatment, MRIs, heart surgeries, surviving 23-week preemies, etc. That shit is expensive. Have there been losers? Sure. I wouldn't have wanted to be a steelworker when they automated that industry. I wouldn't want to be a coal miner now. But do I think that automating the steel industry was a good idea? Absolutely - and I would not go back to the old way, no matter how romantic it is to a portion of the population.
The other thing you need to consider is that not all of that wage stagnation is due to automation. A lot of it is misguided (for me, in retrospect) trade policy. We fucked with the free market when we made it easy for goods and capital to flow without considering labor. A free market needs free movement of all three. Since it is not realistic to expect labor to move around the world (hell, it can be hard to get people to leave their town), our trade policies need to take this into consideration. So we've let goods flow in from outside, we've let capital flow outside, but we have done nothing to account for the relatively immobile labor force. That's not a free market; it's just free trade.
The timer idea is nice, but doesn't really require z-wave. I have door sensors rigged to my alarm panel, but they are all hard-wired. I don't have the garage door sensor alert thing set up - that's a pretty good idea.
Please come back with a better solution
Clearly we need a law to prevent the use of productivity enhancing technology. I can't fathom a world where productivity leads to an improved standard of living for everyone. Imagine if farming were mechanized, making food less expensive so that people could pursue a career making things in cities. Then those same people could spend this newfound wealth and free time on vacation at a gambling resort in the middle of the desert, creating thousands of new jobs in the hospitality industry. Stupid, huh? Who the hell would want to go to the desert? We can dream.
I'm married and that's actually my vibrator.