Look at Buffet who admits he should pay more he is plenty productive, he is also honest
If Buffet thinks he's not paying enough in taxes, he can volunteer to pay more. Nobody's stopping him.
He's also disingenuous when he suggests that he's paying a lower tax rate than his secretary. The money he receives has already been taxed as corporate profits, and is then taxed again as capital gains. Add the two together and it's considerably higher than the income tax rate his secretary pays.
Just like the 7-11 in Texas collects different taxes then the one in California.
That raises a very good point. If I purchase something from a 7-11, I pay the sales tax of the seller's place of business, regardless of where I am from.
What you are proposing is that the 7-11 should determine where I am from, and charge me the appropriate sales tax from wherever I live.
About 20 years ago, the city of Chicago tried to collect sales taxes on gas stations just outside of the city limits. They claimed that since residents of Chicago would leave the city to buy cheaper gasoline (cheaper because the suburban gas stations didn't have to pay the extra Chicago city gasoline tax), that they somehow had the right to collect tax on any purchases made by Chicago residents.
Leveling the playing field would require local retailers to find out in which city, county and state each customer lives, and then charging them the appropriate sales tax. I'm sure the local donut shop would appreciate having to keep track of hundreds or thousands of different tax rates and applying and distributing them all correctly every time someone buys a donut.
Should the corner store have to collect different sales taxes for the home state, home county and home city of every visitor who walks in and buys something from the store?
I could take notes on my Palm Pilot about as well as I could take notes in a pocket-sized notebook. None of the devices I've had since then have been as functional for taking notes. If Palm were still making their PDAs, I would still be using one, even if I also carried a smart phone for everything other than PDA functionality.
As a fifty year atheist, I can tell you that it would take a discussion with God to convince me.
forty-year atheist here (I was raised Catholic, but it didn't take).
Actually, even a "discussion with God" wouldn't convince me (since a more reasonable explanation is that I was hallucinating).
I don't want to spoil it for those who haven't read it yet, but "Contact" by Carl Sagan has plot that covers this in a (IMHO) brilliant way. Again, the movie minimized this particular plot line, and it ignored the dramatic climax of the book, so don't base your opinion on the movie.
What would they accept as "proof" of the existence of God?
Anyone who is interested in this topic should read "Cosmos" by Carl Sagan. (For that matter, anyone who loves a good science fiction book should read it.)
Note that the movie barely touched on this subplot, nor did the movie include the dramatic climax of the book.
ABC News did a story on May 24th, which discusses how the Obama Administration "bypassed procedural steps meant to protect taxpayers as it hurried to approve an energy loan guarantee to a politically-connected California solar power startup", and how the loan
"benefited a company whose prime financial backers include Oklahoma oil billionaire George Kaiser, a "bundler" of campaign donations. Kaiser raised at least $50,000 for the president's 2008 election effort."
OK, so they need the Soyuz to return cosmonauts from the ISS. Is there a compelling reason why they have to land them in Kazakhstan?
Since the Soyuz lands on solid ground, I would think there are numerous places with nicer climates where they could land instead. Does it really make more sense to abandon the ISS for the winter instead of temporarily picking a landing spot in a nicer climate?
And, I suspect your prediction will turn out to be correct.
SpaceX is currently planning to launch a cargo vehicle to the ISS this November. Perhaps that will alleviate the situation.
Is it a requirement that they land their ships where they do? Couldn't they, at least as a limited emergency measure, land them in a more temperate climate? I'm sure the United States would be happy to provide whatever assistance needed to land them at some appropriate location here (assuming there isn't a more reasonable location in Europe or Asia).
In addition to Lord Kelvin, there were Hermann von Helmholtz and Simon Newcomb who believed the same theory and came up with similar values for the age of the Sun. Wikipedia.org
Darwin was fully aware of this problem. In a letter to a friend, he wrote that, “Thomson’s views of the recent age of the world have been for some time one of my sorest troubles”.
This doesn't sound like a reaction to one "opinionated and difficult to argue with" scientist.
The fact is that Kelvin and the others were wrong, but it was impossible to know that at the time.
Now, we have physicists insisting that their theory is correct, even though they have to keep adding "fudge factors" to it to make it fit the facts. Dark matter and dark energy may really exist, but they sure smell like the epicycles of Ptolemy.
Scientists have a reasonably complete understanding of the subject we're using to categorize them.
Scientific history is full of examples of scientists being smug about understanding a field and being completely wrong at the same time.
My favorite example was how just over 100 years ago, physicists were confident that they understood how the Sun worked. They knew that the heat and light were generated by gravitational contraction. They didn't have a clue about nuclear fusion, but they thought they understood everything.
Slashdot Mirror
Actually that's not true: IRS
If Buffet thinks he's not paying enough in taxes, he can volunteer to pay more. Nobody's stopping him.
He's also disingenuous when he suggests that he's paying a lower tax rate than his secretary. The money he receives has already been taxed as corporate profits, and is then taxed again as capital gains. Add the two together and it's considerably higher than the income tax rate his secretary pays.
That raises a very good point. If I purchase something from a 7-11, I pay the sales tax of the seller's place of business, regardless of where I am from.
What you are proposing is that the 7-11 should determine where I am from, and charge me the appropriate sales tax from wherever I live.
About 20 years ago, the city of Chicago tried to collect sales taxes on gas stations just outside of the city limits. They claimed that since residents of Chicago would leave the city to buy cheaper gasoline (cheaper because the suburban gas stations didn't have to pay the extra Chicago city gasoline tax), that they somehow had the right to collect tax on any purchases made by Chicago residents.
As I recall, they got laughed out of court.
Leveling the playing field would require local retailers to find out in which city, county and state each customer lives, and then charging them the appropriate sales tax. I'm sure the local donut shop would appreciate having to keep track of hundreds or thousands of different tax rates and applying and distributing them all correctly every time someone buys a donut.
Should the corner store have to collect different sales taxes for the home state, home county and home city of every visitor who walks in and buys something from the store?
I have a stylus that works well with modern capacitive touch screens. It is of limited use because so few apps are designed to use with a stylus.
Agreed!
I could take notes on my Palm Pilot about as well as I could take notes in a pocket-sized notebook. None of the devices I've had since then have been as functional for taking notes. If Palm were still making their PDAs, I would still be using one, even if I also carried a smart phone for everything other than PDA functionality.
forty-year atheist here (I was raised Catholic, but it didn't take).
Actually, even a "discussion with God" wouldn't convince me (since a more reasonable explanation is that I was hallucinating).
I don't want to spoil it for those who haven't read it yet, but "Contact" by Carl Sagan has plot that covers this in a (IMHO) brilliant way. Again, the movie minimized this particular plot line, and it ignored the dramatic climax of the book, so don't base your opinion on the movie.
Oops! You're right! I did mean "Contact"
Anyone who is interested in this topic should read "Cosmos" by Carl Sagan. (For that matter, anyone who loves a good science fiction book should read it.)
Note that the movie barely touched on this subplot, nor did the movie include the dramatic climax of the book.
ABC News did a story on May 24th, which discusses how the Obama Administration "bypassed procedural steps meant to protect taxpayers as it hurried to approve an energy loan guarantee to a politically-connected California solar power startup", and how the loan "benefited a company whose prime financial backers include Oklahoma oil billionaire George Kaiser, a "bundler" of campaign donations. Kaiser raised at least $50,000 for the president's 2008 election effort."
We gave them a half-billion dollars! How is that not supporting them?!?
You're right about this being a symbol of how well this administration's policies are working out, though.
Why aren't they using Slashdot for their social networking needs?
Because of the security bugs mentioned above, of course!
And if my non-technical friends and family put their entire lives on Slashdot, I would be more concerned about Slashdot's security bugs.
OK, so they need the Soyuz to return cosmonauts from the ISS. Is there a compelling reason why they have to land them in Kazakhstan?
Since the Soyuz lands on solid ground, I would think there are numerous places with nicer climates where they could land instead. Does it really make more sense to abandon the ISS for the winter instead of temporarily picking a landing spot in a nicer climate?
And, I suspect your prediction will turn out to be correct.
Is it a requirement that they land their ships where they do? Couldn't they, at least as a limited emergency measure, land them in a more temperate climate? I'm sure the United States would be happy to provide whatever assistance needed to land them at some appropriate location here (assuming there isn't a more reasonable location in Europe or Asia).
Too bad I will never take advantage of it, because I despise TicketMaster. Also, I don't have any Facebook friends.
But at least paper manuals can be substituted for toilet paper.
I'm willing to outlaw birthdays if that's what it takes to eliminate this problem!
I have three words for you:
Anger Management Class
I suspect this goes beyond that point.
From Universe Today:
This doesn't sound like a reaction to one "opinionated and difficult to argue with" scientist.
The fact is that Kelvin and the others were wrong, but it was impossible to know that at the time.
Now, we have physicists insisting that their theory is correct, even though they have to keep adding "fudge factors" to it to make it fit the facts. Dark matter and dark energy may really exist, but they sure smell like the epicycles of Ptolemy.
Scientific history is full of examples of scientists being smug about understanding a field and being completely wrong at the same time.
My favorite example was how just over 100 years ago, physicists were confident that they understood how the Sun worked. They knew that the heat and light were generated by gravitational contraction. They didn't have a clue about nuclear fusion, but they thought they understood everything.
I wish I had some mod points to give your post. Sometimes, +5 just isn't enough.
Actually, VBA is back in Office 2011. Just in time to be deprecated, I guess.