Re:Uh...it's still there, you know
on
The Web We Lost
·
· Score: 1
There is definitely some truth to this, but to be fair usenet text is still available through services like Google Groups for free. Usenet binaries were never very well-retained by the ISPs.
Wow, our circles are different. I was the last household that I know without a tablet - even my mother has one. I don't find them useful, and I already have an e-reader, but my wife wanted a Kindle Fire so now we are in the club. I have to admit it is fine for checking IMDB while watching TV and some of the games are fun.
Capital gains are a tax on money that you have already earned and reinvested.
Not if you eliminate the corporate tax. Then it is money that has never been taxed. If your home grows in value and you sell it, you have never been taxed on that gain in value. If you buy a stock and the corporation pays no tax on profits, then any increase in the stock price has never been taxed.
Sorry but, sticking it to the "rich" only will make your life more expensive.
The rich are getting a pretty sweet deal right now, and I advocate bringing things back to earth a bit.
Re:Uh...it's still there, you know
on
The Web We Lost
·
· Score: 4, Insightful
You are right - I just checked and my server in the basement is still serving up the same photo album it did 10 years ago. Phew!:)
The existence of Facebook or Twitter in no way diminishes my ability to put up a crappy website or to fire up a usenet client. IRC is even still around.
I think we should tax corporations like we tax all other "people": tax INCOME, not PROFITS, and at the same tax rates. (I don't get to deduct the cost of my rent, why does a corporation?)
You are misinformed. I'm a sole proprietor (meaning I don't have a corporation). I fill out a Schedule C and definitely am not taxed on revenue, only profits.
Then, make sure to tax UNEARNED INCOME (dividends, capital gains, investment income) at a minimum of double the rate of EARNED income.
Well, then you certainly can't quibble with me for wanting to raise it from 15%, even if my proposal doesn't land it as high as yours?
Businesses ARE individuals. The rich ones should pay more, the poor ones less. I'm even on board with progressive taxation. Why are you trying to make me out like some kind of a demon? Corporate taxes are not a terribly big part of revenue in the US, and could easily be made up for by taxing the owners of those corporations directly.
I'm trying to make the tax structure more progressive and reduce the gap between rich and poor. Mitt Romney and Warren Buffet should not have a lower tax rate than me (or their secretaries).
If there is no corporate tax, why wouldn't I and everyone else who would benefit only margionally under the current sytem by settign up a shell corp and moving everything there?
You tax benefits as income. You will have cheating, just like you have today. Today if you want to buy a car you can do it in your C corp and your use of the car won't get taxed. It's cheating, but it happens. It will continue to happen - no better, no worse.
Leasing yourself a yacht for $1/decade? Probably won't pass under the radar. Corporate jet? Company car? Yeah, that will still be common.
I'm a bit biased though as I'm strongly libertarian.
If you were really strongly Libertarian, you'd probably be anti-corporation... Corporations screw with the free market, but that's not what really messes up Libertarian ideology - far worse is the limited liability. If a person can screw up your property and hide behind a corporation, then the basic principles of Libertarianism cannot function.
My ideological leanings are towards the Libertarian side, but I'm far too pragmatic to call myself a Libertarian. I do have a growing dissatisfaction with these mechanisms that government has invented to screw with the free market: copyright, patents, corporations (and by extension unions).
Only because of the tax structure. Part of the reason I bought a house was to take advantage of the zero capital gains and the mortgage deduction. I might have put my money into a different type of investment otherwise. Sure, when I'm old and start selling off assets, I will have to pay capital gains. Thing is, most old people aren't rich. The vast majority are paying less than 25% on their federal taxes. And if it really seems like it will be a big problem, we can grandfather people with existing property, have income limits, or take other steps to ease the burden.
Does Google benefit from this? LIKE HELL YES.
"Google" is a piece of paper. The people who benefit from the schools, roads, military, police, etc. are the employees and stockholders of Google. Tax them.
So why shouldn't corps pay taxes too if they also utilize the public goods as much as the private man?
I have a couple of reasons: 1. Pragmatism. We have these incredibly powerful instruments called corporations, and they have corrupted our political system to the extent that they barely pay any taxes. I contend that this flaw is inherent, so just go back to taxing people and let the huge accounting nightmare that is corporate taxes just die. 2. Onshore that offshore money. Maybe even attract money from other countries. 3. End "corporate welfare". Without "tax incentives", politicians have one less tool to abuse. 4. End howls of "double taxation" that keep the dividend tax rate low.
Yes, simply raising "rates" achieves little. Romney paid 15% of his income to taxes - because almost none of his "income" was considered income. This is typical and insane.
Rid yourself of capital gains and corporate taxes, and it will force Romney to either pay more taxes or "hide" his income by keeping it inside the corporation. While the latter would not help federal revenue, it would still be a positive income since it would be encouraging reinvestment.
Obama raised plenty of business money. The two parties are very similar except on a few (mostly emotional) wedge issues. The big fight between Romney and Obama on revenue? They were arguing about 6% of our revenue - and thus about 3% of the federal budget.
But taxing capital gains at ordinary income levels? The whole point of the capital gains tax incentive is to encourage people to invest for the long term. Corporate governance would be even more short-sighted if the capital gains tax incentive was removed.
Remember that I proposed removing corporate taxes, so corporations would not care about the capital gains rate.
it is really, really difficult to define income in such a way that it closes all potential loopholes
Agreed. I'm saying don't try. Only tax individuals. Sure, they can play games with getting things like company cars and not count them as income, but they already play such games and my proposal won't make this any better or worse.
Umm, then companies will stop paying dividends and companies can avoid paying taxes by avoiding realizing capital gains.
Companies paid dividends before the special dividend rate - stockholders will want to get paid, whether they pay more tax or not.
Companies would have no reason to fear capital gains, because they wouldn't be taxed on them.
Why pick on the GOP? They are certainly not alone. The Democrat's current position is focused on "rates", which is clearly anti-reform. As long as the tax code is complex, it will favor those with the resources to exploit the complexity.
My personal opinion is that we should eliminate the corporate tax rate, removing the shenanigans altogether. Make up for this by making dividends and capital gains taxable as income.
For future projects on Android consider SlideMe, which is free. There are other App stores as well (Amazon, getjar, upload/download.com, etc), but not sure what is available in India.
Slashdot Mirror
There is definitely some truth to this, but to be fair usenet text is still available through services like Google Groups for free. Usenet binaries were never very well-retained by the ISPs.
Wow, our circles are different. I was the last household that I know without a tablet - even my mother has one. I don't find them useful, and I already have an e-reader, but my wife wanted a Kindle Fire so now we are in the club. I have to admit it is fine for checking IMDB while watching TV and some of the games are fun.
I fear that might be harder to get past congress.
It was a mixed blessing... some ISPs had terrible coverage, and not just for binaries.
LOL? I think?
Giganews is still up.
"Like"
You obviously haven't done your own taxes. Dividends are regular income
Not in the past 10 years. I hope, if you do your own taxes, that you have not been overpaying.
Capital gains are a tax on money that you have already earned and reinvested.
Not if you eliminate the corporate tax. Then it is money that has never been taxed. If your home grows in value and you sell it, you have never been taxed on that gain in value. If you buy a stock and the corporation pays no tax on profits, then any increase in the stock price has never been taxed.
Sorry but, sticking it to the "rich" only will make your life more expensive.
The rich are getting a pretty sweet deal right now, and I advocate bringing things back to earth a bit.
You are right - I just checked and my server in the basement is still serving up the same photo album it did 10 years ago. Phew! :)
The existence of Facebook or Twitter in no way diminishes my ability to put up a crappy website or to fire up a usenet client. IRC is even still around.
I think we should tax corporations like we tax all other "people": tax INCOME, not PROFITS, and at the same tax rates. (I don't get to deduct the cost of my rent, why does a corporation?)
You are misinformed. I'm a sole proprietor (meaning I don't have a corporation). I fill out a Schedule C and definitely am not taxed on revenue, only profits.
Then, make sure to tax UNEARNED INCOME (dividends, capital gains, investment income) at a minimum of double the rate of EARNED income.
Well, then you certainly can't quibble with me for wanting to raise it from 15%, even if my proposal doesn't land it as high as yours?
and businesses should get to use that for free?
Businesses ARE individuals. The rich ones should pay more, the poor ones less. I'm even on board with progressive taxation. Why are you trying to make me out like some kind of a demon? Corporate taxes are not a terribly big part of revenue in the US, and could easily be made up for by taxing the owners of those corporations directly.
I'm trying to make the tax structure more progressive and reduce the gap between rich and poor. Mitt Romney and Warren Buffet should not have a lower tax rate than me (or their secretaries).
If there is no corporate tax, why wouldn't I and everyone else who would benefit only margionally under the current sytem by settign up a shell corp and moving everything there?
You tax benefits as income. You will have cheating, just like you have today. Today if you want to buy a car you can do it in your C corp and your use of the car won't get taxed. It's cheating, but it happens. It will continue to happen - no better, no worse.
Leasing yourself a yacht for $1/decade? Probably won't pass under the radar. Corporate jet? Company car? Yeah, that will still be common.
I'm a bit biased though as I'm strongly libertarian.
If you were really strongly Libertarian, you'd probably be anti-corporation... Corporations screw with the free market, but that's not what really messes up Libertarian ideology - far worse is the limited liability. If a person can screw up your property and hide behind a corporation, then the basic principles of Libertarianism cannot function.
My ideological leanings are towards the Libertarian side, but I'm far too pragmatic to call myself a Libertarian. I do have a growing dissatisfaction with these mechanisms that government has invented to screw with the free market: copyright, patents, corporations (and by extension unions).
Taxed at a lower rate. I'm advocating taxing them as income.
The answer is capital gains.
Only because of the tax structure. Part of the reason I bought a house was to take advantage of the zero capital gains and the mortgage deduction. I might have put my money into a different type of investment otherwise. Sure, when I'm old and start selling off assets, I will have to pay capital gains. Thing is, most old people aren't rich. The vast majority are paying less than 25% on their federal taxes. And if it really seems like it will be a big problem, we can grandfather people with existing property, have income limits, or take other steps to ease the burden.
Does Google benefit from this? LIKE HELL YES.
"Google" is a piece of paper. The people who benefit from the schools, roads, military, police, etc. are the employees and stockholders of Google. Tax them.
So why shouldn't corps pay taxes too if they also utilize the public goods as much as the private man?
I have a couple of reasons:
1. Pragmatism. We have these incredibly powerful instruments called corporations, and they have corrupted our political system to the extent that they barely pay any taxes. I contend that this flaw is inherent, so just go back to taxing people and let the huge accounting nightmare that is corporate taxes just die.
2. Onshore that offshore money. Maybe even attract money from other countries.
3. End "corporate welfare". Without "tax incentives", politicians have one less tool to abuse.
4. End howls of "double taxation" that keep the dividend tax rate low.
Yeah. Allow those companies to build cash reserves and hide it in Bermuda
Why would they "hide" it? It's tax-free.
Capital gains, or profit on non-ordinary sales, is taxed directly or indirectly in most countries as well.
In the US, it is taxed at a rate lower than ordinary income.
Yes, simply raising "rates" achieves little. Romney paid 15% of his income to taxes - because almost none of his "income" was considered income. This is typical and insane.
Rid yourself of capital gains and corporate taxes, and it will force Romney to either pay more taxes or "hide" his income by keeping it inside the corporation. While the latter would not help federal revenue, it would still be a positive income since it would be encouraging reinvestment.
Setting up a chain of debts between dummy subsidiaries located in offshore jurisdictions. Insta debt, zero capital gains.
Why would a company do such a thing when they are not subject to taxes?
I mention dividends because you can't let them be a tax dodge anymore if you zero out corporate taxes.
Obama raised plenty of business money. The two parties are very similar except on a few (mostly emotional) wedge issues. The big fight between Romney and Obama on revenue? They were arguing about 6% of our revenue - and thus about 3% of the federal budget.
But taxing capital gains at ordinary income levels? The whole point of the capital gains tax incentive is to encourage people to invest for the long term. Corporate governance would be even more short-sighted if the capital gains tax incentive was removed.
Remember that I proposed removing corporate taxes, so corporations would not care about the capital gains rate.
it is really, really difficult to define income in such a way that it closes all potential loopholes
Agreed. I'm saying don't try. Only tax individuals. Sure, they can play games with getting things like company cars and not count them as income, but they already play such games and my proposal won't make this any better or worse.
Umm, then companies will stop paying dividends and companies can avoid paying taxes by avoiding realizing capital gains.
Companies paid dividends before the special dividend rate - stockholders will want to get paid, whether they pay more tax or not.
Companies would have no reason to fear capital gains, because they wouldn't be taxed on them.
Why pick on the GOP? They are certainly not alone. The Democrat's current position is focused on "rates", which is clearly anti-reform. As long as the tax code is complex, it will favor those with the resources to exploit the complexity.
My personal opinion is that we should eliminate the corporate tax rate, removing the shenanigans altogether. Make up for this by making dividends and capital gains taxable as income.
For future projects on Android consider SlideMe, which is free. There are other App stores as well (Amazon, getjar, upload/download.com, etc), but not sure what is available in India.
I meant that he would have to be charged in order to be extradited from the US.
Which would be a relevant comment if McAfee were in the UK.