Your point has zip to do with UBI, but you do realize that the US had the highest corporate tax on the planet until recently. How do you suppose it would work in nations with lower rates?
FWIW (and I'm a fiscal conservative btw), I'm all for doing UBI experiments...there are many different models that should be tried out before wise asses like the AC above spout off.
Not sure why this is marked off-topic...it's certainly not.
This goes back to the whole point that these companies would go out of business, along with many accountants, lawyers, and most of the IRS, if we went to such a system, and it's why it will never happen as long as we have money influencing our politics. We'll need SCOTUS to get rid of the idea that "companies are people too" first.
I was going to suggest people mod you up until you went all left wing on it. You do realize the bill is being pushed by both sides, right? Please don't pretend the Ds are here to help you.
Really, and what country would that be? Again, you can't refute that America has the largest number of immigrants in the world, every single fucking year. Why do you suppose that is? Sure, we had slavery, just like most all of the rest of the globe had back through 1800s. What other "refugees" are you claiming?
I didn't claim we're perfect...we've got a lot wrong with us. That doesn't make us the crapper that I frequently read about here, or in tabloid journalism. FWIW, I've been to ~50 countries (including living in two others for twelve years), and yet to see one that's got it any better.
What you don't seem to get is that media, including social media, loves weirdos, just like they love a train wreck. It's why the media gave Trump $2B in free media during the election. Weirdos capture eyeballs, making revenue for those media companies. It just ain't gonna happen.
Yeah, we're such a shithole. Please don't ever come here and see it for yourself. We only have the largest economy on the planet, backed by the strongest military. And yeah, we've gotten into some stupid shit that we never should have. But maybe you should ask yourself, why does the US have the largest number of immigrants of any nation in the world, with people literally dying to get here? Stop paying attention to tabloid journalism, and look up how well the average American lives.
So, it seems that the question is at what level of impairment will they stop you from driving. No matter what it is, they're going to end up with lawsuits... Say for example that they set the level just a bit above the legally impaired figure in order to reduce false positives. Then, someone just above that level kills someone in an accident...queue the ambulance chasers.
I generally like the idea, but the implementation is going to be interesting. Will I be able to still have the 1-2 drinks that I can now w/o be legally impaired, or am I going to have to hold off when I go out? How about the remote start on vehicles...will it just prevent you from putting it into gear?
Or, as is the case in Virginia, they do so to avoid paying the personal property taxes. My 2012 Dodge is still costing me over $600/year. It used to be more back before we voted in a governor who promised to do away with the tax, but they only got it lowered.
That's $400k before taxes, 4% in NY + 24% Fed if his parents are filing jointly, leaving him ~$288k. Still not a bad start, but if I was his parent, I'd be watching for it to start trailing off, and get him back into school, and I'd be having him tutored while out.
Not that "Bozo" has any authority to cut MIT's (Stanford or Berkley) funding, because if he could have, he would have done so already. But don't let facts interfere with your agenda.
Yeah, we did similar things in WWII. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, and all that. Sure Saudi has serious issues, but there are bigger fish (first) to fry in the middle east.
You also don't have a free ticket to the movie theaters, so you can cut that bullshit right there. The Oscars have included streaming sources, and now that it's cutting into Spielberg's (and others) bottom line, they want to limit competition. That's anti-competitive, and should be stopped. Yes, there are also plenty of other places that the JD should be doing the same, but that's just whataboutism.
Possibly since Hollywood hasn't been kind to the right, it's a bit of payback. But unless you have some evidence of your claim, you're nothing but a tin-foil AC. People taking money in the Justice Department would be risking jail, so until you have a smoking gun, I'm gonna call BS.
Not only that, but in VA we have "personal property tax" on our vehicles. They use the book value of your vehicle to tax it every year. My 2012 is still getting hit for ~$600/year. This encourages people to keep old polluting vehicles much longer than they should. Thankfully, I'm leaving this idiocy in the near future.
Slashdot Mirror
He had no need to define "PovertyLine". Just because you're too lazy to google a standard doesn't make it his job to define it for you.
And, if you think changing the tax code is going to cause people to have fewer kids, you don't know jack about human nature.
Suggesting he's a moron proves you're an AC who can't make a logical argument against it.
Farmers would hate you. As would every retiree.
In 2017, direct corporate taxes accounted for 9% of federal revenue. And another 35% from payroll taxes.
Your point has zip to do with UBI, but you do realize that the US had the highest corporate tax on the planet until recently. How do you suppose it would work in nations with lower rates?
FWIW (and I'm a fiscal conservative btw), I'm all for doing UBI experiments...there are many different models that should be tried out before wise asses like the AC above spout off.
Not sure why this is marked off-topic...it's certainly not.
This goes back to the whole point that these companies would go out of business, along with many accountants, lawyers, and most of the IRS, if we went to such a system, and it's why it will never happen as long as we have money influencing our politics. We'll need SCOTUS to get rid of the idea that "companies are people too" first.
Nothing like a string of foreign ACs trying to influence us.
Oh, the irony. You're looking at regulation here, and crying about those of us against excessive regulation? Moron.
I was going to suggest people mod you up until you went all left wing on it. You do realize the bill is being pushed by both sides, right? Please don't pretend the Ds are here to help you.
I'm guessing you just hate Jews (I'm not one btw). Please support your case with a shred of evidence before trolling again.
Really, and what country would that be? Again, you can't refute that America has the largest number of immigrants in the world, every single fucking year. Why do you suppose that is? Sure, we had slavery, just like most all of the rest of the globe had back through 1800s. What other "refugees" are you claiming?
I didn't claim we're perfect...we've got a lot wrong with us. That doesn't make us the crapper that I frequently read about here, or in tabloid journalism. FWIW, I've been to ~50 countries (including living in two others for twelve years), and yet to see one that's got it any better.
Thanks, and stay out.
Nah, but you do have to say NYC does. It's far from representative of the remainder of the nation.
What you don't seem to get is that media, including social media, loves weirdos, just like they love a train wreck. It's why the media gave Trump $2B in free media during the election. Weirdos capture eyeballs, making revenue for those media companies. It just ain't gonna happen.
Yeah, we're such a shithole. Please don't ever come here and see it for yourself. We only have the largest economy on the planet, backed by the strongest military. And yeah, we've gotten into some stupid shit that we never should have. But maybe you should ask yourself, why does the US have the largest number of immigrants of any nation in the world, with people literally dying to get here? Stop paying attention to tabloid journalism, and look up how well the average American lives.
So, it seems that the question is at what level of impairment will they stop you from driving. No matter what it is, they're going to end up with lawsuits... Say for example that they set the level just a bit above the legally impaired figure in order to reduce false positives. Then, someone just above that level kills someone in an accident...queue the ambulance chasers.
I generally like the idea, but the implementation is going to be interesting. Will I be able to still have the 1-2 drinks that I can now w/o be legally impaired, or am I going to have to hold off when I go out? How about the remote start on vehicles...will it just prevent you from putting it into gear?
Or, as is the case in Virginia, they do so to avoid paying the personal property taxes. My 2012 Dodge is still costing me over $600/year. It used to be more back before we voted in a governor who promised to do away with the tax, but they only got it lowered.
That's $400k before taxes, 4% in NY + 24% Fed if his parents are filing jointly, leaving him ~$288k. Still not a bad start, but if I was his parent, I'd be watching for it to start trailing off, and get him back into school, and I'd be having him tutored while out.
Not that "Bozo" has any authority to cut MIT's (Stanford or Berkley) funding, because if he could have, he would have done so already. But don't let facts interfere with your agenda.
Yeah, we did similar things in WWII. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, and all that. Sure Saudi has serious issues, but there are bigger fish (first) to fry in the middle east.
Let's count how many ACs come to the defense of China now.
Sorry Australia, but you got this one wrong. Your well intentioned emotional response to a tragic event is gonna bite you in the ass.
You also don't have a free ticket to the movie theaters, so you can cut that bullshit right there. The Oscars have included streaming sources, and now that it's cutting into Spielberg's (and others) bottom line, they want to limit competition. That's anti-competitive, and should be stopped. Yes, there are also plenty of other places that the JD should be doing the same, but that's just whataboutism.
Possibly since Hollywood hasn't been kind to the right, it's a bit of payback. But unless you have some evidence of your claim, you're nothing but a tin-foil AC. People taking money in the Justice Department would be risking jail, so until you have a smoking gun, I'm gonna call BS.
Not only that, but in VA we have "personal property tax" on our vehicles. They use the book value of your vehicle to tax it every year. My 2012 is still getting hit for ~$600/year. This encourages people to keep old polluting vehicles much longer than they should. Thankfully, I'm leaving this idiocy in the near future.