It's different for businesses, because while actually purchasing a capital asset means you can only write off the asset via depreciation, which can take a few years even for a phone
I don't get this....
I have a S-Corp I work through, and I write off my purchase like phones, computers, etc...in full each year in which I purchase them.
You don't have to amortize them over time any more...at least my CPA says I don't.
Sadly, many people feel otherwise, and will sacrifice a lot in order to maintain the "celebrity" status of owning fashionable hardware.
Well, it may not even be that.
There are actually a LOT of people out there with disposable income, where an upper tier smart phone really is not all that expensive to them.
I'm not wealthy by any stretch of the imagination, but every few years a new top of the line smart phone isn't going to break the bank or make me miss a meal.
Then again, I'm the type that doesn't often spend money on trivial shit...I don't buy little stuff all the time. I prefer to save my $$, and 2-3 times a year, I drop a lot of $$$ on something I really enjoy....camera lenses, guns, etc....
But it isn't always the "shiny" or for status, some people like nice things, and have the income and save for them to enjoy.
I find that the upgrades each year...really aren't that groundbreaking or earth shaking....
And as opposed to the article, I don't find my phone trashed in 2 years....I dunno what is with most people, but I tend to try to take care of all my possessions,including my phone.
It is in a case, and I am not careless how I handle it and I rarely if ever drop it.
Right now I'm not in a hurry to trade phones, in that I have some interesting lens attachments that likely wouldn't work on a new phone...so, I'm not in any hurry.
Does everyone else abuse their phones so badly that it requires annual replacement?
Do some people actually still consider XYZ phone to be some sort of status symbol?
To me, a smart phone, no matter the brand is pretty much a commodity item.
If you cannot make enough $ to even buy a fucking box of condoms, then perhaps your time would be better spent trying to get a REAL job that pays money enough to buy rubbers, rather than trying to get laid.
I mean, hell...I worked restaurant jobs when I was a teen and could afford to buy rubbers?!?!?!
If you are that poor, you should not be fucking and risking having a kid.
Good Lord, that should be common sense...?
Being poor doesn't necessarily mean you also are stupid....
Your parents made sacrifices for you just like everyone else's parents.
And people that choose to have children today, should also be VERY prepared to sacrifice for those kids too. Trouble is, we're seeing less of that in today's parents.
What I do object to is....ME, that has chosen to not have kids, being asked to sacrifice for OTHER people's children.
I should not be asked to work later than parents with kids, I should not get penalized and have to work late when they take time off for "kids" problems.
I also am not sure about tax breaks for kids. I can debate that I guess...but in general, it feels like I'm having to subsidize their choice to have kids and not sacrifice enough for them by paying higher taxes than they do.
Again on the work issues...they are now getting extra paid vacation time off for kids when they have them. While that sounds great, guess who has to pick up the slack for them? Yep...people without kids. It is not fair they get significant monetary benefits that others don't get, just because they chose not to pull out in time.
Again, I have no problem with folks choosing to have children. But they need to understand they are generally NOT going to have disposable income for luxuries (yes, video games may be a luxury if you need to spend that money on your kids). They have to understand they will likely not get vacations away from home, they cannot afford to go out and eat very often, that they need to stay home and cook.
They may need to understand that they might have to choose one parent that has to give up or put on hold, their professional desires, in that it might be more economically sound to have a parent be a stay at home parent. Children to seem to benefit from this, at least in the early impressionable years.
Maybe they need to realize it is it the childs best interest to tighten the belt and not have a two income working family, at least...until the child is in grade school full time.
But much of this, the same sacrifices mine and other parents of previous generations made, is not being made today, and it is affecting those without kids, who should not be made to pay for it.
Every single study done by doctors and healthcare researchers says that being heavy, curvy, fat, or "voluptuous" is bad for your health, leads to a menagerie of diseases, and is the largest impactor of life expectancy, more so than income level.
So, the "body positive" movement is really a "health - negative" movement. Sorry, but facts are facts.
And besides...who wants to spend their hard earned money to watch ugly fat people sweat on the big screen?
Movies are supposed to be about escapism to a large extent, so, why would one want to pay good $$$ when they already stare and deal with fat, average/ugly people on a daily basis.
The fact that you can still have statues of the likes of Robert E Lee and Jefferson Davis a century and a half after the Confederacy was beaten into the ground astonishes me.
I take it you are not from the south and do not live in any of the southern states.
If that is the case, then you really don't have any ground to say anything about it.
It is fully up to the people of each of these states.
The only thing wrong here is many of these cases, is...that a few politicians are making the decisions rather than putting this to the vote of the people in those cities/states.
But you are not part of the state populations in question, and really don't have shit to say about it.
...like the folks that are all bent out of shape for taking down a statue of a bigot.
This is just revisionist history in the making.
No one had a problem with these statues and flags until the left started making it an issue in the past year or so.....
Remember, 1984 was supposed to be s story, not a blueprint. Where does the statue taking down stop? Should we just take down, and wipe out most of D.C.s monuments? I mean, Jefferson, Washington, etc...all slave owners. You have to get it through your head, these people were people of their times and you can't really judge them based on today's views as far as social issues go. The wrongs were corrected, but these figures are historic and no reason to remove their markers in history.
If nothing else, these staying in place promotes discussion of where the US has been, where it is now and where it is going....
Hey, when you assholes enact a "marijuana registry" don't forget to do the same with your fucking guns.
Hmm...never heard of that one before.
I think pot should be legalized....and there is no reason for the govt to have ANY registries of private property...guns, pot or otherwise.
I would predict that if you could get Alexa to give a good phone sex experience, they'd have the winner developer there.
Depending on how good the app was, the length of time of engagement might be short, but I"m guessing that would be made up by increased repeat business.
Things had been just dandy to date, until the left started pushing diversity for diversity's sake and demonizing anyone or any entity that dare think otherwise.
Well, all except the extreme dearth of short white guys playing in the NBA which I don't understand, since everyone is born equal, you know?
Because people who are poor (of any race) are more likely to get caught committing crimes, and black people are more likely to be poor. So if you want to support the hypothesis that black people are inherently more crime-prone, then you need to take away the skew that economic effects introduce.
So, you're saying that poor black people can't help themselves committing crime, and therefore a fudge factor needs to be put in....???
Seriously?
Crime is CRIME....it is a very easy number to attribute.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't get this....
I have a S-Corp I work through, and I write off my purchase like phones, computers, etc...in full each year in which I purchase them.
You don't have to amortize them over time any more...at least my CPA says I don't.
Hmm...I've never had many problems with "loose" money. It I were too loose with my money, I'd risk losing it.
Well, it may not even be that.
There are actually a LOT of people out there with disposable income, where an upper tier smart phone really is not all that expensive to them.
I'm not wealthy by any stretch of the imagination, but every few years a new top of the line smart phone isn't going to break the bank or make me miss a meal.
Then again, I'm the type that doesn't often spend money on trivial shit...I don't buy little stuff all the time. I prefer to save my $$, and 2-3 times a year, I drop a lot of $$$ on something I really enjoy....camera lenses, guns, etc....
But it isn't always the "shiny" or for status, some people like nice things, and have the income and save for them to enjoy.
And as opposed to the article, I don't find my phone trashed in 2 years....I dunno what is with most people, but I tend to try to take care of all my possessions,including my phone.
It is in a case, and I am not careless how I handle it and I rarely if ever drop it.
Right now I'm not in a hurry to trade phones, in that I have some interesting lens attachments that likely wouldn't work on a new phone...so, I'm not in any hurry.
Does everyone else abuse their phones so badly that it requires annual replacement?
Do some people actually still consider XYZ phone to be some sort of status symbol?
To me, a smart phone, no matter the brand is pretty much a commodity item.
Hmm..well, whatever this AI comes up with...has to be better than what's being put out by Taylor Swift or Beyonce.....
I don't wish to voluntarily give the corporates this type of information.
I also pretty much avoid chain restaurants where I guess this type of tech is the most prevalent.
I prefer the local restaurants...and living in New Orleans, you can go forever and not even see a chain restaurant which is nice.
I'm more interested in the coming iMac Pro....I really would like that 5K screen combined with some actual GPU muscle behind it....
Well, where's the fun with that? I mean, hell...a strip club gets boring really quick because just looking isn't really very fulfilling.
I mean, the old joke really does have some basis in fact....as in:
"You know why God gave women breasts?
They're not???
When did this happen?
I mean, if you can't have sex with them...what's their use?
If you cannot make enough $ to even buy a fucking box of condoms, then perhaps your time would be better spent trying to get a REAL job that pays money enough to buy rubbers, rather than trying to get laid.
I mean, hell...I worked restaurant jobs when I was a teen and could afford to buy rubbers?!?!?!
If you are that poor, you should not be fucking and risking having a kid.
Good Lord, that should be common sense...?
Being poor doesn't necessarily mean you also are stupid....
And people that choose to have children today, should also be VERY prepared to sacrifice for those kids too. Trouble is, we're seeing less of that in today's parents.
What I do object to is....ME, that has chosen to not have kids, being asked to sacrifice for OTHER people's children.
I should not be asked to work later than parents with kids, I should not get penalized and have to work late when they take time off for "kids" problems.
I also am not sure about tax breaks for kids. I can debate that I guess...but in general, it feels like I'm having to subsidize their choice to have kids and not sacrifice enough for them by paying higher taxes than they do.
Again on the work issues...they are now getting extra paid vacation time off for kids when they have them. While that sounds great, guess who has to pick up the slack for them? Yep...people without kids. It is not fair they get significant monetary benefits that others don't get, just because they chose not to pull out in time.
Again, I have no problem with folks choosing to have children. But they need to understand they are generally NOT going to have disposable income for luxuries (yes, video games may be a luxury if you need to spend that money on your kids). They have to understand they will likely not get vacations away from home, they cannot afford to go out and eat very often, that they need to stay home and cook.
They may need to understand that they might have to choose one parent that has to give up or put on hold, their professional desires, in that it might be more economically sound to have a parent be a stay at home parent. Children to seem to benefit from this, at least in the early impressionable years.
Maybe they need to realize it is it the childs best interest to tighten the belt and not have a two income working family, at least...until the child is in grade school full time.
But much of this, the same sacrifices mine and other parents of previous generations made, is not being made today, and it is affecting those without kids, who should not be made to pay for it.
And besides...who wants to spend their hard earned money to watch ugly fat people sweat on the big screen?
Movies are supposed to be about escapism to a large extent, so, why would one want to pay good $$$ when they already stare and deal with fat, average/ugly people on a daily basis.
I take it you are not from the south and do not live in any of the southern states.
If that is the case, then you really don't have any ground to say anything about it.
It is fully up to the people of each of these states.
The only thing wrong here is many of these cases, is...that a few politicians are making the decisions rather than putting this to the vote of the people in those cities/states.
But you are not part of the state populations in question, and really don't have shit to say about it.
If you're not from there, you don't understand.
This is just revisionist history in the making.
No one had a problem with these statues and flags until the left started making it an issue in the past year or so.....
Remember, 1984 was supposed to be s story, not a blueprint. Where does the statue taking down stop? Should we just take down, and wipe out most of D.C.s monuments? I mean, Jefferson, Washington, etc...all slave owners. You have to get it through your head, these people were people of their times and you can't really judge them based on today's views as far as social issues go. The wrongs were corrected, but these figures are historic and no reason to remove their markers in history.
If nothing else, these staying in place promotes discussion of where the US has been, where it is now and where it is going....
Hmm...never heard of that one before.
I think pot should be legalized....and there is no reason for the govt to have ANY registries of private property...guns, pot or otherwise.
Depending on how good the app was, the length of time of engagement might be short, but I"m guessing that would be made up by increased repeat business.
Yep.
Things had been just dandy to date, until the left started pushing diversity for diversity's sake and demonizing anyone or any entity that dare think otherwise.
Well, all except the extreme dearth of short white guys playing in the NBA which I don't understand, since everyone is born equal, you know?
Well...that IS the most important aspect of running a successful business, isn't it???
[/sarcasm]
So, you're saying that poor black people can't help themselves committing crime, and therefore a fudge factor needs to be put in....???
Seriously?
Crime is CRIME....it is a very easy number to attribute.
So, let' see, if energy drinks are "gateway drugs", shouldn't they too be classified as Schedule I drugs, like heroin, and marijuana?
Hell, like pot, shouldn't mothers milk be also schedule 1, as that it really leads to all other substances and possible abuse of them...?
[/sarcasm]
Err...why?
Crime is crime, no matter if you're poor or rich.
Robbing someone at gunpoint is never justified, not even a little.
Hmm...you might need to brush up on your civics classes.
Not only is there no laws against "hate speech"...but in fact, it is very much protected speech under the constitution.
Play Stairway to FreeBird!!!!
"Hey...can you play Stairway.....?"
Yep, nothing spices up a dungeon or first person shooter game like having an in depth conversation about "feelings".
They are using the Jesse Jackson Rainbow Coalition model....seems it is still effective to squeeze companies, sadly.
Throw in a little Al Sharpton, and you've got a perfect storm to threaten any entity.